Ingram85 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 32 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: This has to be satire? The plum has a bird on his head. It can’t be real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted January 15, 2018 Moderator Share Posted January 15, 2018 9 minutes ago, Ingram85 said: This has to be satire? The plum has a bird on his head. It can’t be real? Nah, it was a regular feature until one viewer told him in the comments to ditch the bird. Now you can just hear it in the background. He's fighting a battle and leading an army towards revolution. Some of these videos have had 9 views!!! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCohc84Gam1vKcdqa1cYcAtw/videos Quote UK and Worldwide Truth Channel 12 subscribers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 1 hour ago, NurembergVillan said: You can also hear his African grey parrot getting involved in the messaging too. I'm finding the parrot's running commentary a little more lucid than his speech. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 That parrot is clearly ripping the piss out of him in the first vid, I had no intention of watching all of it but the bird had me chuckling away with every tut, beep and raspberry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 I was hoping it would shit in his mouth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 20 hours ago, NurembergVillan said: My favourite bit is the decorative dustpan in the background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 I see people are pressing the Article 50 legal advice issue. Quote Pro-EU MPs will attempt to force the government to reveal its legal advice on whether article 50 could be reversed, allowing the UK to potentially withdraw from the Brexit process. A cross-party group of about 20 backbenchers will try to pass an amendment to force the government to reveal its advice when the EU withdrawal bill returns for debate in the House of Commons on Tuesday. The MPs, supporters of the Open Britain campaign, led by Labour’s Chris Leslie and Chuka Umunna, said there had been a number of legal opinions so far showing that article 50 could be overturned. The government refuses to say what its lawyers believe, but maintains that article 50 will not be revoked as a matter of policy... ... Lord Kerr, the architect of article 50, which sparks the two-year formal process for leaving the EU, has previously said the UK has the right to withdraw notification should it choose to do so. The Lords’ European Union committee has also produced a report on the legal advice around article 50 and concluded that “a member state could legally reverse a decision to withdraw from the EU”. However, the government has so far refused to confirm it holds any legal advice on the matter. I wonder if there is any conclusion we could reasonably draw other than that the government has been given legal advice that A50 can be revoked unilaterally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 Oh, look. It's almost as though these things were co-ordinated. Quote European council president Donald Tusk suggests not too late for UK to change its mind about Brexit But it’s not too late for the UK to change its mind about Brexit, Donald Tusk, president of the European council suggests in a tweet this morning. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 22 hours ago, NurembergVillan said: To be fair, I'd hate Muslims if I lived in that absolute shit hole and that existence became my reality. I'd hate just about everyone, but why not start with a race of people first? He must be a fan of mould though, he's even got a painting of it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 55 minutes ago, peterms said: I see a people are pressing but .. why would we legally want to revoke article 50 ? the majority that voted asked for it and until they are asked to vote again( and the decision changes ) then there is no reason to revoke it ? If Politicians revoke it without gaining approval then there is going to be no end of trouble surely ? , ok the great unwashed that are usually quick to be anti government will probably go very silent and statues of Churchill and McDonald's restaurants in surrounding areas might avoid being vandalised , but the 17m people presumably aren't going to shrug their shoulders and say , oh well that's that then I'm going to get a <<insert country>> here passport and leave the country as I'm so disgusted with my fellow citizens ... so really that only leaves another vote ..and I think as others have said , we don't really have time for that before Exit day Article 50 itself from my limited understanding , doesn't have any provision for revoking withdrawal , it could be argued that as it isn't specifically mentioned in the article that you can't revoke , there is nothing to stop you , but I dunno that seems a flimsy legal argument (to me at least) ..... so it would then fall under the ECJ to rule on it ? and would require unilateral consent Interestingly the Vienna convention on Treaties isn't / wasn't covered as part of EU law , had it been then there is already a clause in place to allow for notification to be withdrawn ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 16, 2018 Moderator Share Posted January 16, 2018 36 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: To be fair, I'd hate Muslims if I lived in that absolute shit hole and that existence became my reality. I'd hate just about everyone, but why not start with a race of people first? He must be a fan of mould though, he's even got a painting of it. I like his everyday object hung as art, it must be art, mustn't it? I mean no one in their right mind would hang a dustpan that high on a wall... ah... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 16, 2018 Moderator Share Posted January 16, 2018 3 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: but .. why would we legally want to revoke article 50 ? the majority that voted asked for it and until they are asked to vote again( and the decision changes ) then there is no reason to revoke it ? If Politicians revoke it without gaining approval then there is going to be no end of trouble surely ? , ok the great unwashed that are usually quick to be anti government will probably go very silent and statues of Churchill and McDonald's restaurants in surrounding areas might avoid being vandalised , but the 17m people presumably aren't going to shrug their shoulders and say , oh well that's that then I'm going to get a <<insert country>> here passport and leave the country as I'm so disgusted with my fellow citizens ... so really that only leaves another vote ..and I think as others have said , we don't really have time for that before Exit day Article 50 itself from my limited understanding , doesn't have any provision for revoking withdrawal , it could be argued that as it isn't specifically mentioned in the article that you can't revoke , there is nothing to stop you , but I dunno that seems a flimsy legal argument (to me at least) ..... so it would then fall under the ECJ to rule on it ? and would require unilateral consent Interestingly the Vienna convention on Treaties isn't / wasn't covered as part of EU law , had it been then there is already a clause in place to allow for notification to be withdrawn ... I think most governments might be able to organise a referendum in 14 months, this one, however, you're right, they are that incompetent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 4 minutes ago, bickster said: I like his everyday object hung as art, it must be art, mustn't it? I mean no one in their right mind would hang a dustpan that high on a wall... ah... I refused to watch the video ,anyone that hangs a World map on the wall where 2/3rds of it isn't pink is clearly a leftie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 29 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: but .. why would we legally want to revoke article 50 ? the majority that voted asked for it and until they are asked to vote again( and the decision changes ) then there is no reason to revoke it ? If Politicians revoke it without gaining approval then there is going to be no end of trouble surely ? The fact of knowing that it can be revoked changes perceptions of what is possible. If people think it can't be revoked, they won't ask for it to be revoked. If they think it can, then the option of revoking it if our strong and stable master negotiators fail to secure a good deal, becomes more attractive. In that context, calls for a second referendum would be seen to have far more point and purpose than if we are on a one-way track with no options. Which is why the regime wishes to conceal the legal advice they have received, in order to stifle debate, mislead people, and close down discussion, with the aim of avoiding a generation-lasting split in the tory party. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 Verhofstadt and Juncker have reinforced Tusk's comments about the UK being able to change its mind. Alongside the legal advice on withdrawing A50, which will shortly come out despite Mrs May's best endeavours, and the recognition from Elder Statesperson Falange that a second referendum may be necessary, perceptions will alter. Which is one of the requirements for Labour to change its position, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, peterms said: Verhofstadt and Juncker have reinforced Tusk's comments about the UK being able to change its mind. it isn't their choice though (is it ?) ... they can of course offer an opinion, as can other people , but they don't carry any legal authority on the matter even if our (suppressed) legal advice is that we can revoke , there are 27 other countries that could block it .. arguably they wouldn't , but all the legal views for revoking appear ambiguous and easily challenged ... there is a good in depth read here if anyone is interested Quote This in-depth analysis examines the issue of the possible revocation of a withdrawal notification under article 50 TEU. In light of the ongoing negotiations on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, the possibility for the UK to revoke its withdrawal notification has become a significant political and legal/institutional issue. The analysis examines the case of revocation of a withdrawal notification under international law and under the EU law and assesses the various positions expressed so far on the matter. I just don't see how revoking could solve anything , (other than allowing Labour to change it's position yet again ) ... All I could offer as a "clean " option would be a scenario where we leave and then reapply through Article 49 .. though arguably we'd be declined on the grounds in Article 2 ( respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights ) Edited January 16, 2018 by tonyh29 missed a word out 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 In general, when what the politicians want and what that the lawyers say is completely contradictory, it's sensible to bet on the politicians. I'm very sure that this would be a political process rather than a legal one*. *None of which should be taken to mean that I think a revoke is even slightly likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, tonyh29 said: it isn't their choice though (is it ?) ... they can of course offer an opinion, as can other people , but they don't carry any legal authority on the matter even if our (suppressed) legal advice is that we can revoke , there are 27 other countries that could block it .. arguably they wouldn't , but all the legal views for revoking appear ambiguous and easily challenged ... there is a good in depth read here if anyone is interested Yes, they are giving a political signal. The article you link ends up saying the EU Court of Justice would need to determine the legal arguments. This is why some politicians in the UK are proposing to request the court to give a view. Some people, including some on here, think that's a waste of time, but of course it is helpful to know what is possible. In forming a view on the legalities, given that the situation appears to be ambiguous, the court will need to consider (as do our own courts when making their own judgements on domestic matters) what was intended by the legislative body in the first place. It would be surprising if the court did not take into account any signals given by politicians in such a situation. Not to say they will simply do the bidding of the politicians, more that it is a relevant and proper consideration, if the legal situation is less than clear-cut. Similarly, the views of the people who drafted A50, and the legal advice they were given at the time, may also carry some weight if the court is faced with a situation where it has to decide what was intended. I find it hard to imagine that the court, if given clear signals about what politicians intended then and are now prepared to accept, take a position that says "well our interpretation of the wording is that it's the opposite", if the wording is in fact ambiguous Edited January 16, 2018 by peterms sp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 what a choice, ask to stay in the Verhofstadt superstate, or leave in a brexit 'organised' by the likes of Fox and May that's a double arsed coin that is 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 16, 2018 Moderator Share Posted January 16, 2018 I see Boris has double-downed on the £350mil a week claim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts