Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
blueinsa said:
Ah its our honour that is now the subject of attack?

Makes a change i suppose.....
Click to expand...
Classic - the double standards and hypocrisy are - if not surprising - highly amusing

This thread goes back over a year - I am guessing some Remainers have been deleting the posts that they made last autumn
 
bluethrunthru said:
Did any have any to start with....????
Click to expand...
I had assumed so. Taking a principled position, taking umbrage at equally honourable attempts to beseech people to think they were mistaken and vote again, even it the real reason was fear of the way another democratic vote would go, pointing up Labour's problem in trying to face different ways in different constituencies, perhaps even believing the obvious untruth that most Labour voters voted Leave, objecting to the backstop on NI, refusing to recognise that the official Leave campaign said we'd still be in a free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and claiming a hard Brexit was what they (and every leave voter) voted for.... even when these arguments were crap, I took them as honourably-held positions.

Like the UK itself, it's all gone to shit, and some are even criticising honourable people who won't go along with the shit.

I'm disappointed - I thought they might be embarrassed - but I suppose I'm not surprised.
 
Vic said:
I'm disappointed - I thought they might be embarrassed - but I suppose I'm not surprised.
Click to expand...

tenor.gif
 
mcfc1632 said:
Classic - the double standards and hypocrisy are - if not surprising - highly amusing

This thread goes back over a year - I am guessing some Remainers have been deleting the posts that they made last autumn
Click to expand...

Really? At which point last Autumn were Remainers advocating the UK breaking International Law?

I’ll wait.
 
Chris in London said:
Yes, our sovereign parliament can ignore any international treaty it chooses. So if
Parliament were say, to withdraw from the GFA, then as a matter of U.K. law the GFA would no longer have legal force. However in the real world, unilateral withdrawal from international agreements has consequences. So if the EU fishing fleet started ignoring our territorial waters, we’d sink them. Or, more realistically, if we put in jeopardy the GFA, the US would be unlikely to agree a trade deal with us.

The reason is that Parliament is the supreme arbiter of what is lawful within the U.K. So if it says blue eyed babies are no longer lawful, that’s the law.
Click to expand...
Thank you for being so clear on these matters

IMO - you may understandably have a different view - it is all about judgement - the government has to make a judgement about what will damage the UK’s interests most......

For me the damage of the May/Robbins /EU crafted WA is - long term - far more damaging than any temporary reputational issues

But I accept that is all about personal opinions. I respect your professional opinion 100% - some of the Remainers on here though just come across as 'faux indignant'
 
Turns out Sir Jonathan gave a seminar earlier in the year about how the government should obey international law. His position became untenable. Every civil servant will be reviewing their position against the civil service code.

A new cabinet secretary takes office tomorrow in these circumstances. Maybe resigns before the day is out....
 
grunge said:
Im more concerned that a hard boarder in Ireland, contravening the GFA and will reignite the troubles. This manoeuvre could lead to one and Its a real risk.
Click to expand...
Indeed - a valid concern

But surely you are not advocating that the strategic policies of the UK and its ability to act in the interests of its citizens should be determined by a need to appease potential terrorism?
 
mcfc1632 said:
Please keep up - as @Chris in London explained - the rumoured changes will not be illegal or breaking the law....

What was that you were saying about tears???
Click to expand...

I missed this. Do I have to reference the NI Minister stating the proposed changes will break International Law?

No? Thought not.

And for the record the WA which we passed into law to reflect the joint agreement between two sovereign parties does state that it cannot be changed by future unilateral legislation.

Incidentally the EU cannot do so either and if they did unilaterally propose changing the WA nine months after it was signed on the grounds ‘well, it’s a bit shit’, I am sure Brexiteers to a man would be frothing at outrage at them even thinking of doing so.
 
blueinsa said:
I do, you're upset as others are. Our sovereign parliament was all the rage last year as it voted down the government time and time again but now, with a pro brexit majority it will do the opposite it's an affront to democracy and the end of the world and you are all outraged.

International law? I remember last year during the migrant crisis the EU being accused of similar in regards its lack of action to the mediterranean crisis.

No one is getting arrested. No one will sit before an international court and no one will go to jail Vic. Its not how it works.

This government, elected with a huge majority and asked to get brexit done is doing just that.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the truth is just so simple - if inconvenient

Today has been a new PB in the double-standards of some posters
 
Len Rum said:
Could make the future of the Falklands interesting (the British argument for sovereignty over these islands being Self determination of the people, it being a fundamental tenet of International Law).
Oh and who owns Gibraltar ( Treaty of Utrecht 1703 says it's us)? But hey if Spain want to ignore international law.
U getting my drift mate?
Click to expand...
At a guess you are emphasising that the people of the UK self-determined to leave the EU in 2016?

Do I get a prize?
 
mcfc1632 said:
Thank you for being so clear on these matters

IMO - you may understandably have a different view - it is all about judgement - the government has to make a judgement about what will damage the UK’s interests most......

For me the damage of the May/Robbins /EU crafted WA is - long term - far more damaging than any temporary reputational issues

But I accept that is all about personal opinions. I respect your professional opinion 100% - some of the Remainers on here though just come across as 'faux indignant'
Click to expand...
If you think we're "faux" indignant you're even less smart than I thought.

This WA is Johnson's WA. He voted for May's deal, got it changed to something no British MP could support, went to the country with it, got it through Parliament and ratified by the EU and now wants to break the law to change it.

Which bit of "reputation" don't you understand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top