Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
The Countdown begins. 23:28 - Nov 10 with 134704 viewspikeypaul



https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20190329T23&p0=1336&msg=Democr

1:19 pm today was the exact mid point from when the result that the Great British public had decided to leave the EU and the time 11pm March 29th 2019 that Democracy will be delivered.

Happy days.
[Post edited 25 Jun 17:01]

Poll: Next major war involving UK against a super power ?

0

The Countdown begins. on 17:24 - Jul 4 with 513 viewsKilkennyjack

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/04/vot

Cheat, cheat, cheat ,.....

‘Beware of the risen people’ ........🍀🇮🇪 💚 YesCymru 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

0

The Countdown begins. on 17:30 - Jul 4 with 501 viewssherpajacob

Here we go guys.

Looks like EEA is favourite. Brexit means Brexit.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1014434240329670657

Poll: Your favourite ever Swans shirt sponsor?

0
The Countdown begins. on 17:46 - Jul 4 with 472 viewspeenemunde

The Countdown begins. on 17:15 - Jul 4 by sherpajacob

Let's try this one.

Is Norway in the EU?


Norway is like a little whore and even pay into the Frankenstein project.
That’s not what i or millions others voted for.
1
The Countdown begins. on 17:58 - Jul 4 with 461 viewsLeonWasGod

The Countdown begins. on 17:30 - Jul 4 by sherpajacob

Here we go guys.

Looks like EEA is favourite. Brexit means Brexit.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1014434240329670657


The conversations under that tweet are hilarious and worrying in equal measure. People still don’t realise we voted to leave the EU or remain in the EU. That’s it, nothing more, nothing less. We didn’t vote for the Norway model, or the Canadian model, or WTO rules only. And therein lies the problem with all of this.

And now with the Withdrawl Bill we’re even stopping our own elected MPs from scrutinising what May comes up with. So if you’re a hardline Brexiter you need to suck it up. If you’re a hardline Remainer you need to suck it up. The only winners are effectively the cabinet who have been given an opportunity to do what they want outside of the sovereign parliament.

Quite scarey really. Both sides should be worried about this erosion of democracy and civil liberties. We’re a long way from a dictatorship of course, but May wants to behave as one as one whilst she holds the keys to Number 10.
1
The Countdown begins. on 19:36 - Jul 4 with 414 viewscwm02

The Countdown begins. on 17:58 - Jul 4 by LeonWasGod

The conversations under that tweet are hilarious and worrying in equal measure. People still don’t realise we voted to leave the EU or remain in the EU. That’s it, nothing more, nothing less. We didn’t vote for the Norway model, or the Canadian model, or WTO rules only. And therein lies the problem with all of this.

And now with the Withdrawl Bill we’re even stopping our own elected MPs from scrutinising what May comes up with. So if you’re a hardline Brexiter you need to suck it up. If you’re a hardline Remainer you need to suck it up. The only winners are effectively the cabinet who have been given an opportunity to do what they want outside of the sovereign parliament.

Quite scarey really. Both sides should be worried about this erosion of democracy and civil liberties. We’re a long way from a dictatorship of course, but May wants to behave as one as one whilst she holds the keys to Number 10.


Amazing how complicated the government is making a simple issue. What's even more amazing is that David Cameron a Remainer stepped down to allow...Another Remainer in May into office. Wouldn't it make sense for a Brexiteer to be PM or at least be in the fore front of Brexit negotations?
2
The Countdown begins. on 19:45 - Jul 4 with 397 viewspikeypaul

The Countdown begins. on 19:36 - Jul 4 by cwm02

Amazing how complicated the government is making a simple issue. What's even more amazing is that David Cameron a Remainer stepped down to allow...Another Remainer in May into office. Wouldn't it make sense for a Brexiteer to be PM or at least be in the fore front of Brexit negotations?


Of course it would but the remoaners would be throwing their toys out of their peaks at an even faster rate if it were.

268 AFLI

HARDER THE BETTER

Poll: Next major war involving UK against a super power ?

1

The Countdown begins. on 19:46 - Jul 4 with 395 viewsKerouac

The EU’s demands on Northern Ireland violate its people’s human rights



Written by Briefings For Brexit


"The EU’s insistence that Northern Ireland remain within the Customs Union violates the rights of citizens in that Province as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, namely the right to vote. Arguments to date have considered the effect of EU demands from the perspective of international relations, that is, does the United Kingdom have a say. What has been lacking is the more fundamental perspective of voters’ human right to participate in legislative decisions governing them. This right was recognised in respect of EU legislation in the European Court of Human Rights’ decision of Matthews v United Kingdom (1999) 28 EHRR 361, which held that Gibraltar could not be inside a large part of the European Union while being without a right to vote in the European Parliament.

The Matthews Case concerned not the rights of states or territories, but those of their citizens. Article 3 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention guarantees the right to vote in legislative elections. Gibraltar is part of the European Union, although not subject (among other matters) to free movement of goods, the common commercial policy and VAT. Gibraltar is subject to EU law on such matters as free movement of persons, services and capital, health, the environment and consumer protection. However, Gibraltarians could not vote in European elections. Denise Matthews argued in 1999 that this denied her human rights, in that she was entitled to vote for a legislature that set a significant part of her laws.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled in Mrs Matthew’s favour: if the EU has significant legislative power, those subject to its legislation must have a vote. Given the casual approach shown by many to the democratic implications of “rule-taker not rule-maker” solutions to Brexit, the Matthews Case is important in taking such issues away from international relations, and translating them into the more powerful terms of human rights, the values of which the EU claims to champion.

In the EU’s proposed Northern Irish arrangements, Northern Ireland would be in the Customs Union, much of the Single Market for Costs, and other matters considered by the EU to be necessary for North-South cooperation. This would give the EU considerable legislative presence, but Northern Ireland would be unrepresented in the European Parliament, nor would it be represented in the Council of Ministers by a government it elects. Gibraltar of course does not vote for the UK government, but this is a necessary consequence of the considerable political independence it enjoys as a non-metropolitan territory. Denise Matthews made no objection to lacking a vote relevant to the Council of Ministers – and Gibraltar itself would object to the obvious solution. By contrast, Northern Ireland does vote for the government of its sovereign state, but that state would be excluded from any influence.

The EU, of course, has already established itself as a rule-giver to third countries in respect of the European Economic Area [EEA]. Despite the EEA treaty including various processes to preserve the forms of ordinary international relations, the EU is able, de facto, to legislate for the citizens of Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein without them having a vote. The existence of the EEA appears to have led to the assumption that it is unexceptional and unobjectionable for the EU to gain a rule-making power over non-members – but it is important to understand why this wholly exceptional position has been acceptable in the case of the EEA.

The key point about the EEA is that its non-EU member states wanted Single Market membership, but not the rest of the EU package such as trade policy and fisheries. Compliance with Single Market rules is the very nature of Single Market membership. Adherence to a common rule book is what makes goods and services automatically acceptable throughout. However profoundly undemocratic the rule-taking arrangements of the EEA might be – “fax democracy” it is often called – the EU did not make any demands contrary to democratic principle that did not flow directly from Norway and the others’ own positions. This is very important from a European Convention point of view. The right to vote cannot be restricted beyond what is required to achieve a legitimate aim – and the EU cannot (and, with the EEA, conspicuously did not) exact the price of an unnecessary sacrifice of democracy. The EU could not (and did not) demand legislative control of Norway’s fishing waters as an extra price – to have added a wish-list of policy areas unrelated to the Single Market would have been unnecessary to the shared legitimate aim, and thus disproportionate. In short, Norway’s legitimate aim of “single market membership only”, once accepted by the EU, necessarily involved the diminution of Convention-protected voting rights. To employ an overused metaphor, compliance with the rules were the indissoluble ingredients of the Single Market cake.
But with Northern Ireland, it is quite different. Northern Ireland will not have representation in the European Parliament. Whilst Gibraltar did not vote for its representatives in the Council of Ministers (the UK government), there was an objective justification for this in that Gibraltar itself did not want the loss of its non-metropolitan position. In the case of Northern Ireland, the Province would not be represented by any national government that it helped elect – but this time it would be because the EU insisted on such a solution. In short, the people of Northern Ireland would have no right to vote in respect of the EU legislature – Parliament and Council – that would be making much of its law. This would flow from the design choices of the EU, and not, as with the EEA, be inherent in the choices made by the rule-taking country. Just as importantly, unlike with the rule-taking members of the EEA, the position for Northern Irish citizens would not result from an ongoing acceptance of such a bargain by those citizens themselves, but rather their rights would have been traded between the EU and the United Kingdom, and Northern Ireland would not be free to reconsider.
For such restrictions of human rights to be justified, several conditions are necessary:


Firstly, the state of affairs must be freely agreed by the democratic unit concerned, as was the case with the EEA. In short, it must be Northern Ireland’s choice to agree to a restriction of its own democracy. It is not for the EU and United Kingdom to trade the rights of the people of Northern Ireland – guaranteed by the Convention — for mutual convenience.

Secondly, as with the EEA, the rule-taking territory must be entitled to remove itself from the position. The EU can have no right to impose its rules: it can have no legitimate authority strong enough to bind another into such a subordinate position.

Thirdly, the EU must have no more jurisdiction than is necessary to meet the shared aims, which means that both in the creation of the arrangements and in their application, the EU must consider alternatives so as to identify what is genuinely justified. It must consider in good faith whether there are solutions which would be less restrictive of Northern Ireland’s Convention-guaranteed voting rights. In other words, the EU must negotiate.

Fourthly, the EU must enfranchise Northern Ireland as far as is possible.

Fifthly, the EU must — as all states must when a Convention right is in issue — ask if its demands are disproportionate in the ordinary sense of the word: are they asking for a great sacrifice for a limited gain? Are they asking for a great deficit in democratic voting rights by reason (for example) of an unquantified smuggling risk posed by alternative solutions?

In short, the EU must consider alternatives and not just dismiss them out of hand as “magical thinking”.

At present there is no sign of democratic consultation with the people of Northern Ireland on the diminution of their Convention right to vote. There is no sign of enfranchisement in respect of the rules. There is no sign of the EU being willing to negotiate alternative solutions – other than ones which would make the reduction of citizens voting rights a general UK problem and not just an NI problem. The EU certainly has not addressed whether they are asking for a great sacrifice for limited gain – their attitude appears to be that, as Brexit was not created by them, they need not even address this issue. If the UK cannot design a solution that deals with all their issues entirely, then the EU seems to believe that it need not worry about the onerousness of its own demands.

In short...
The EU proposals on Northern Ireland would diminish the voting rights of its citizens. There has been no attempt to consider whether this prima facie violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the Convention on Human Rights is proportionate. Moreover, if the UK government introduced legislation to give effect to the EU proposals, British courts would have the power to declare it “incompatible” with the European Convention on Human Rights."

Poll: Who would you most like to see banned?

1

The Countdown begins. on 20:09 - Jul 4 with 369 viewsPegojack

Hey Pikey, how do you feel about the fact the Vote Leave Campaign committed electoral fraud?

Do you think, as I do, there is a case for declaring the result null and void, and running the referendum again, given that the Brexit camp have cheated?

If not, why not? Do you not believe in the rule of law?
1
Login to get fewer ads


The Countdown begins. on 20:16 - Jul 4 with 366 viewsKerouac

electoral fraud

desperate, desperate, losers.

Poll: Who would you most like to see banned?

1

The Countdown begins. on 20:34 - Jul 4 with 356 viewspikeypaul

Was the £9.3 million of tax payers money spent on sending every household in Great Britain the leaflet by the Remain campaign ever declared? Oh no I thought not.

Remainers getting very desperate with this totally one sided "investigation" they wil not even listen to or take evidence from the group they are trying to discredit,total farce and everyone' knows it.

Never mind lads we will soon be out of the EU and I will be fecking loving it.

268 AFLI

Poll: Next major war involving UK against a super power ?

1
The Countdown begins. on 20:45 - Jul 4 with 348 viewsPegojack

The Countdown begins. on 20:34 - Jul 4 by pikeypaul

Was the £9.3 million of tax payers money spent on sending every household in Great Britain the leaflet by the Remain campaign ever declared? Oh no I thought not.

Remainers getting very desperate with this totally one sided "investigation" they wil not even listen to or take evidence from the group they are trying to discredit,total farce and everyone' knows it.

Never mind lads we will soon be out of the EU and I will be fecking loving it.

268 AFLI


You haven't answered my question. The Electoral Commision has said they commited fraud. They broke the law. What's your view of that?
0
The Countdown begins. on 21:00 - Jul 4 with 333 viewsJango

The Countdown begins. on 20:45 - Jul 4 by Pegojack

You haven't answered my question. The Electoral Commision has said they commited fraud. They broke the law. What's your view of that?


You haven’t answered his.
1
The Countdown begins. on 21:05 - Jul 4 with 316 viewssherpajacob

The Countdown begins. on 17:46 - Jul 4 by peenemunde

Norway is like a little whore and even pay into the Frankenstein project.
That’s not what i or millions others voted for.


are you saying the Norway whore is a little bit pregnant.?

Are they in the EU or not?

It's a simple question.

Poll: Your favourite ever Swans shirt sponsor?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:07 - Jul 4 with 308 viewspikeypaul

The Countdown begins. on 20:45 - Jul 4 by Pegojack

You haven't answered my question. The Electoral Commision has said they commited fraud. They broke the law. What's your view of that?


The electoral commission have totally refused to listen to any defence and since they are made up of 100% bitter remoaner loser I will take everything they say with a pinch of salt.

Now do you agree that the £9.3 million of tax payers money given and spunked by the remain campaign was fair and if so why was the leave campaign not given the same?

268 AFLI

SIUYRL
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:09]

Poll: Next major war involving UK against a super power ?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:10 - Jul 4 with 301 viewsvetchonian

The Countdown begins. on 21:07 - Jul 4 by pikeypaul

The electoral commission have totally refused to listen to any defence and since they are made up of 100% bitter remoaner loser I will take everything they say with a pinch of salt.

Now do you agree that the £9.3 million of tax payers money given and spunked by the remain campaign was fair and if so why was the leave campaign not given the same?

268 AFLI

SIUYRL
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:09]


It was obviously a huge waste of money!

Poll: Do you think Ash will lead the team out tomorrow?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:11 - Jul 4 with 301 viewsLeonWasGod

The Countdown begins. on 20:34 - Jul 4 by pikeypaul

Was the £9.3 million of tax payers money spent on sending every household in Great Britain the leaflet by the Remain campaign ever declared? Oh no I thought not.

Remainers getting very desperate with this totally one sided "investigation" they wil not even listen to or take evidence from the group they are trying to discredit,total farce and everyone' knows it.

Never mind lads we will soon be out of the EU and I will be fecking loving it.

268 AFLI


If you’d paid any attention to that leaflet you would understand that the terms of Brexit were not part of the referendum. That leaving could mean anything from a completely clean break to paying a contribution to access the single market and EU programmes.

It was all in there in black and white.

It wasn’t from the Leave campaign either. Even though the Tory government at the time made their preferred position very clear. No arguments there.
0
The Countdown begins. on 21:20 - Jul 4 with 290 viewsLeonWasGod

The Countdown begins. on 19:36 - Jul 4 by cwm02

Amazing how complicated the government is making a simple issue. What's even more amazing is that David Cameron a Remainer stepped down to allow...Another Remainer in May into office. Wouldn't it make sense for a Brexiteer to be PM or at least be in the fore front of Brexit negotations?


The guy in charge of Brexit, David Davis, is a Brexiteer. Just by his own admission he’s not a bery bright one, which could be part of the problem. May’s a complete disaster though, I’ll give you that. She’s managed to piss everyone off
1
The Countdown begins. on 21:27 - Jul 4 with 278 viewscwm02

The Countdown begins. on 21:20 - Jul 4 by LeonWasGod

The guy in charge of Brexit, David Davis, is a Brexiteer. Just by his own admission he’s not a bery bright one, which could be part of the problem. May’s a complete disaster though, I’ll give you that. She’s managed to piss everyone off


Yep she has been a complete disaster. In 1992, David Davis was a government whip who worked on pushing through the Maastricht treaty, which led to the euro and greater integration of the European Union (of course the government voted against joining the Eurozone).
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:28]
0
The Countdown begins. on 21:29 - Jul 4 with 267 viewsvetchonian

The Countdown begins. on 21:27 - Jul 4 by cwm02

Yep she has been a complete disaster. In 1992, David Davis was a government whip who worked on pushing through the Maastricht treaty, which led to the euro and greater integration of the European Union (of course the government voted against joining the Eurozone).
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:28]


Are you saying he is an undercover remoaner?

Poll: Do you think Ash will lead the team out tomorrow?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:30 - Jul 4 with 265 viewscwm02

The Countdown begins. on 21:29 - Jul 4 by vetchonian

Are you saying he is an undercover remoaner?


No I was stating he's not the best guy to handle Brexit negotiations so I was agreeing with LeonWasGod on the fact that he's not a bright berry.
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:33]
0
The Countdown begins. on 21:38 - Jul 4 with 241 viewsvetchonian

The Countdown begins. on 21:30 - Jul 4 by cwm02

No I was stating he's not the best guy to handle Brexit negotiations so I was agreeing with LeonWasGod on the fact that he's not a bright berry.
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:33]


Like most politicians

Poll: Do you think Ash will lead the team out tomorrow?

0
The Countdown begins. on 21:39 - Jul 4 with 239 viewscwm02

The Countdown begins. on 21:38 - Jul 4 by vetchonian

Like most politicians


Pretty much
0
The Countdown begins. on 22:17 - Jul 4 with 212 viewsKilkennyjack

The Countdown begins. on 21:07 - Jul 4 by pikeypaul

The electoral commission have totally refused to listen to any defence and since they are made up of 100% bitter remoaner loser I will take everything they say with a pinch of salt.

Now do you agree that the £9.3 million of tax payers money given and spunked by the remain campaign was fair and if so why was the leave campaign not given the same?

268 AFLI

SIUYRL
[Post edited 4 Jul 21:09]


Its a fact, you clown.

They have been found guilty.
Its no longer a debate.

The only debate is - not whataboutism’s - what should the punishment be ?

As the vote was so close, then holding a people’s vote is clearly appropriate.
Be a huge majority for Remain now, obviously.

Only a right tw@t would think differently.

‘Beware of the risen people’ ........🍀🇮🇪 💚 YesCymru 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

0

The Countdown begins. on 22:53 - Jul 4 with 187 viewslonglostjack

They bang on about the referendum being about the will of the people oblivious of the fact that a referendum is only advisory and that we have a parliamentary democracy. For a very good reason too. In a recent poll 24% of people confessed to not knowing what a customs union actually meant FFS. Now we have dodgy Russian connections and the Leave campaign breaking the electoral law. Democracy? - they don’t know the meaning of the word.

Poll: Who would you rather win? England or Sweden?

0
The Countdown begins. on 23:20 - Jul 4 with 173 viewsKerouac

The Countdown begins. on 22:53 - Jul 4 by longlostjack

They bang on about the referendum being about the will of the people oblivious of the fact that a referendum is only advisory and that we have a parliamentary democracy. For a very good reason too. In a recent poll 24% of people confessed to not knowing what a customs union actually meant FFS. Now we have dodgy Russian connections and the Leave campaign breaking the electoral law. Democracy? - they don’t know the meaning of the word.


The People’s Vote Demonstration on June 23rd by Dr Ian Moody



Written by Ian Moody
In his article ‘Visceral Emotions and Irrationality: the People’s Vote Demonstration on June 23rd, 2018’, Dr Ian Moody argues that while Project Fear was a disaster for the Remain campaign in 2016, the People’s Vote campaign has not only resurrected Project Fear, it has added Project Absurdity.



"The absurdity of Project Fear during the 2016 Brexit referendum campaign has been more than amply shown up for what it was.
Indeed, it is very likely that it actually caused more people to vote for Brexit than would have been the case if the Remain campaign had presented the public with a set of rational arguments and supporting evidence.
However, it is abundantly clear that the Remain campaign has learnt nothing from its disastrous miscalculation because the People’s Vote demonstration in London, on June 23rd, (supported, so they claim, by 100,000 people), provided the public with an even more explicit use of visceral emotion, absurdly unfounded claims, and delusional thinking, characteristics which are so often apparent when individuals abandon their commitment to the use of reason and evidence.

Caroline Lucas, the Green Party co-leader told the crowd that Brexit “will be a disaster for this country”. There is zero evidence to support this statement. It is an assumption about the future which is driven by fear.
Rational people know perfectly well there will be various kinds of disruption when we leave the EU, as there always is when any major change takes place, but a disaster? Lucas provided no evidence to support this claim, but of course “disaster” is a word which has a powerful capacity to stir up fear in people. Lucas would command rather more respect if she stopped trying to replay Project Fear and engaged with the evidence.

According to the Huffington Post, the actor Tony Robinson said he attended the demonstration because he had a “deep and abiding love for my country”. That’s fair enough. There is nothing wrong with patriotism.
Indeed it is a very brave statement to make given the fashionable sneering which such a concept so often provokes.
Unfortunately, what he then said was absolutely extraordinary:

“I am deeply offended that the world has been hijacked by a few reactionary colonialists….who pedal the fantasy of a UK that never existed, except perhaps in the imaginations of their nannies and parlour-maids”.

Hijacked? That word means taken by force, usually accompanied by threats of, or actual use of, extreme violence.
Where is the evidence of the Brexit vote being the result of the use of force and violence?
Reactionary colonialists? Who are they, and what are they?
Are Brexiteers reactionary?
Is that the word Robinson would use to describe anybody who disagrees with him about anything?
Is there a shred of evidence that they are colonialists?
Would most of them even know what a colonialist is, or was?
Indeed does anybody have a rational definition of what a colonialist is?

But of course, “reactionary” and “colonialist” are typical of the language used to frighten people. They may well not know what the words really mean, but they know somebody is telling them that they should be afraid of the sorts of people such words are used to describe. This is absurd rhetoric, and as for the nannies and parlour-maids, who are they, and where are they? This is the 21st century.

Gina Miller, who used the legal system to require parliamentary approval for Brexit negotiations to begin, (which parliament duly voted for), told the crowds that the country needed to be able to demonstrate to future generations that it;

“stood up and shouted for a country that’s together, kinder, tolerant”.

But what, exactly do any of these words actually mean?
What can she conceivably have in mind about Brexit which she believes is making the country more unkind and less tolerant?
After all, much of the abuse and intolerance has actually been directed at Brexiteers, by many Remainers, as we can see from Tony Robinson’s comments.
Miller went on to say that;

“it is time to take this back to the streets and lanes, the towns and villages, the meadows and the squares of this country. It is time for you to decide, to take back control”.

But what is it that she wants taken back to the streets?
Brexit was a referendum about taking back control.
The majority voted that parliament should do just that.
Miller went on to accuse parliament of being “simply dishonest” in believing that “the will of the people is the same as it was two years ago”.
But all the polls show that the will of the people is much the same, and in any case accusing parliament of acting dishonestly is absurd, not least because there are 650 MP’s.
Does she think there is some kind of conspiracy to lie to the electorate?
By some of them?
By all of them?
Calling into question the integrity of other people, purely on the basis of a subjective assumption, and without any evidence, is regrettable to say the least, and at worst it is a lamentable form of demagoguery designed to cynically manipulate the perceptions of a crowd.

The London Evening Standard reported that a demonstrator who was born in the UK, and who had gone to the Netherlands to work, had come back to take part in the demonstration to “show what a European looks like”.

What does this mean?
Europeans don’t look any different from citizens of the UK.
The paper went on to report a university academic as saying that younger people;

“want jobs, they don’t want to sing Elgar”.

What does this mean?
The proportion of the population who even know who Elgar was, or what he did, is likely to be very small, given that he died in 1934.
Is there any evidence of more Brexiteers than Remainers singing Elgar?
A poll at the Last Night of the Proms on 8th September will tell us quite clearly how many Brexiteers and how many Remainers did, or did not, sing Land of Hope and Glory, the music of which is indeed by Elgar, though the lyrics are by A.C Benson.
Here is a golden opportunity for People’s Vote to provide us with some convincing evidence of one of their arguments. They need to be aware, though, that surveys can sometimes produce very unexpected outcomes.

Amongst some of the most absurd comments about the demonstration were those made by Tessa Milligan in the Independent.
The title of her article was “the march for a people’s vote shows just how many of us are disillusioned with Brexit”.
Well, yes 100,000.

This is a somewhat insignificant figure when set against a vote in favour of Brexit by 17,410,742 people in the 2016 referendum.

Milligan reported that “people sang, chanted and whistled in a demonstration of solidarity”.
But people always do that on demonstrations: it’s all part of the theatre and a good day out.
So what about reason and evidence?
According to Milligan;

“over the past two years, people have become increasingly disillusioned with Brexit”.

What the evidence actually shows is that people are not disillusioned with Brexit itself, but with how long the process is taking, as a result of the endless shenanigans being played out, and that what most people really want is the government and the EU to get on with it.
Milligan believes “a people’s vote is about reality versus mythology”.
Indeed it is.
It is about the reality of the EU now openly heading towards becoming a super-state, as detailed by French President Macron, in a desperate attempt to save itself from the dysfunctional state of affairs it has got itself into.
The mythology lies in the assertion that if we stay in the EU it won’t make any difference to our sovereignty.
Milligan also claims that “it has dawned on young people like me that we will be paying for Brexit our entire working lives, since it is estimated that the divorce bill alone will not be paid off until at least 2064, and the Brexit dividend has proved to be non-existent”.
Where is the evidence for these two absurd claims?
And how can something which is going to happen in the future be “non-existent”?

Apparently “the British people took back control of the Brexit debate” by staging this demonstration, and it is “pivoting Brexit towards a democratic vote on the final deal”.

Wishful thinking? Evidence?
As somebody writing for a serious newspaper Milligan should understand the difference between subjective assumptions and empirical evidence, but on the basis of these statements it is tempting to wonder whether she does.

Open Britain claims that several polls have shown a swing towards a majority who would now vote to Remain, but in one of their own poll results they stated that “63% of people supported the public having a vote on the final Brexit deal”, followed by the damning qualifier “once the don’t-knows were stripped out of the results”.

That is a kind of statistical manipulation which is quite reprehensible, because the actual figures were 52% in favour, 31% against and 17% don’t-knows.
The evidence is that the majority of people oppose a second referendum, but of course the People’s Vote campaign has been playing semantic games for months now, denying that they are calling for a second referendum, and claiming instead that they just want a “vote” on the Brexit outcome.
What is the difference between a referendum and a vote?  

All in all this is a truly lamentable commentary, not just on the way the Brexit debate is being conducted publicly, but on the overall state of public debate in the UK.
When the language used in a debate is designed to instil fear in supporters, to insult and denigrate opponents, and when such language is supported by absurd and unsupported claims, one can only assume that people who behave in such a way have abandoned reason and evidence in favour of the use of fear and abuse, in a desperate attempt to win public support.
Project Fear was a disaster for the Remain campaign in 2016: the People’s Vote campaign has not only resurrected Project Fear, it has added Project Absurdity."


Dr Ian Moody








Sums up some of the behaviour on this here thread to me
[Post edited 4 Jul 23:21]

Poll: Who would you most like to see banned?

1
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2018