Cyprus-Forum.com

[cyprusgrump]

Agreed by them because they understood that they could if wanted and via democratic means change what the default position is up to and until the 'default date'.

So you agree then?

Contrary to what you claim over and over (and over) WTO is the default agreed by parliament?

And because parliament has not agreed anything different (and is unlikely to now) then WTO is the default at the default date?

[Lordo]

If BREXIT does not occur, then we have basically made it as we go along and we have crapped all over democracy and due process.

People will become angry and disillusioned and they will rebel by voting for BREXIT parties like UKIP. Even some remainers will vote for the BREXIT parties because they are sick of what is probably the biggest derailment of British Democracy in their entire history.

If a no deal Brexit does get implemented by Jonhson shutting down Parliament in order to deny Parliament their ability to have a fair democratic say on this means of exit, overturning 500 years of democratic normality in the UK, then I can tell you that the levels of anger, righteous anger, will rise to levels far beyond anything seen to date. This will be even more true IF such an exit causes the sort of damage to the UK and peoples lives that I 'speculate' that it would.

I differentiate here between the remainers and remoaners as there is a big difference.

The very term 'remoner' is based on a premise that when someone is in a minority of opinion on a subject, there is a vote on that subject that goes against their view, they then should and must just 'shut up' on that subject. This is not a notion that respects democracy, it is one that either fundamentally mis understands what democracy is and requires or is just contemptuous of democracy when that does not suit what the person wants.

Boris can simply ignore parliament and do whatever he likes citing the people's referendum.

Whether he has the balls to do that is another matter but if he proves to be as gutless as his predecessor then his future as PM is in jeopardy and not just that but the future of the Tories is also dire but there is a bigger issue at stake than the future of a party which will be replaced by UKIP, and that is the entire institution of Democracy is being dealt a devastating blow and that is something that should worry every Brit.

This is why Tory MPs who even voted to remain and want to stay in the EU are now going along with Hard BREXIT. They see no other choice and they are correct.

I don't have the time to discuss terms and terminology I'm sorry.

you really are a very stupid individual and have no understanding of what you are talking about. may though exactly like you and was heading that way till the small matter of gina miller and her court case. the decision was the government never mind pm cannot take us out of the eu without firat a parliement voteand then the house of lordsapproving it. now parliement voted to declare article 50 so government can begin to negotiate. unfortunately for us they voted without specifying that a dealhas to be struck. so all government has to do is just wait till 31st of october and wallah we crash out. thats where you are wrong. this government has not got a majority to push that through ot even allow it to be delivered via default. may had about 8 majority with the help of the nazis over at northern ireland. but her hands were tied by the remain tory mps. they would not vote for her deal and joined with corbyn. even when 4 labour mps voted for it they still could not get it through. now boris's hands and feet are tied. not that different than the way cypriots tied the donkey's front legs so it could not run away where there was nothing to tie the beast to. he now has only one majority. it means any single tory mp can bring this government down and there is about 30 that would.

the odds of brexit happening now has just gone up to a million to one. as back stop cannot be removed and crashing out will not be allowed by the remainiers.

you really need to educate yourself before posting so you do not show your stupidity.

[Londonrake]

Because a no deal (or WTO terms) Brexit is the default that has been agreed by parliament as the default.

Over and over.

Agreed by them because they understood that they could if wanted and via democratic means change what the default position is up to and until the 'default date'.

That these discussions are circular is the sole responsibility of those when faced with a counter argument they can not or do not want to address , go back to just repeating their first argument, unchanged, rather than address the counter argument. In just about every case I have seen here - that means YOU CG.

There is no "counter argument", other than that to be made by the people who lost. The argument was settled on 23rd June 2016. I'm afraid you're the one making things circular.

There was a referendum - the largest electoral event in the history of the UK. With a simple binary question. In the usual UK election FPTP competition there was a majority of over a million in favour of leaving. The largest mandate ever given to the UK parliament and that by its entire electorate.

I think the case for leaving has been "addressed" repeatedly by numerous people on this thread and of course the first argument gets repeated.

It's seemed to me that there's been a lot of patience displayed. Clearly though it's pretty pointless. Wouldn't it be best on this subject to "agree to disagree" and let events unfold?

[erolz66]

Agreed by them because they understood that they could if wanted and via democratic means change what the default position is up to and until the 'default date'.

So you agree then?

Contrary to what you claim over and over (and over) WTO is the default agreed by parliament?

And because parliament has not agreed anything different (and is unlikely to now) then WTO is the default at the default date?

Are you really going to be so obtuse CG ? DO you really think your answer above 'addresses my counter argument' ?

If I agree to something with a default position on a certain date, on the understanding that I can change that default position or date up to the default date and someone after I have voted on that basis, then removes my ability and right to change my mind and because I want to change the default position, then that default position is no longer legitimate as a default in terms of when I did vote for it.

That you appear either unable or unwilling to accept this CG I find astounding.

[Londonrake]

Poor old Erolz. He can't type fast enough.

Anyway, that life thingy intervenes. I have got to paint something.......................................... apparently.

[erolz66]

There is no "counter argument", other than that to be made by the people who lost.

Yet the reality is that there are MANY people, who voted 'leave' who ardently and sincerely believe that leaving is the best thing for the UK who are making exactly the same counter argument, that you claim is not a valid one and is only made by those who voted to remain and despite the clear and unequivocal and undeniable evidence to the contrary that is there in front of you face.

Astounding.

[cyprusgrump]

Agreed by them because they understood that they could if wanted and via democratic means change what the default position is up to and until the 'default date'.

So you agree then?

Contrary to what you claim over and over (and over) WTO is the default agreed by parliament?

And because parliament has not agreed anything different (and is unlikely to now) then WTO is the default at the default date?

Are you really going to be so obtuse CG ? DO you really think your answer above 'addresses my counter argument' ?

If I agree to something with a default position on a certain date, on the understanding that I can change that default position or date up to the default date and someone after I have voted on that basis, then removes my ability and right to change my mind and because I want to change the default position, then that default position is no longer legitimate as a default in terms of when I did vote for it.

That you appear either unable or unwilling to accept this CG I find astounding.

I think some of us find you astounding!

You've argued continually that leaving with no deal would be undemocratic 'because reasons'.

But you've agreed above that the default, agreed by parliament is a WTO exit.

The MPs have had plenty of time to agree some other result but have not managed to do so.

Therefore the democratic result is a WTO exit that has already been agreed by parliament.

[Paphitis]

If BREXIT does not occur, then we have basically made it as we go along and we have crapped all over democracy and due process.

People will become angry and disillusioned and they will rebel by voting for BREXIT parties like UKIP. Even some remainers will vote for the BREXIT parties because they are sick of what is probably the biggest derailment of British Democracy in their entire history.

If a no deal Brexit does get implemented by Jonhson shutting down Parliament in order to deny Parliament their ability to have a fair democratic say on this means of exit, overturning 500 years of democratic normality in the UK, then I can tell you that the levels of anger, righteous anger, will rise to levels far beyond anything seen to date. This will be even more true IF such an exit causes the sort of damage to the UK and peoples lives that I 'speculate' that it would.

I differentiate here between the remainers and remoaners as there is a big difference.

The very term 'remoner' is based on a premise that when someone is in a minority of opinion on a subject, there is a vote on that subject that goes against their view, they then should and must just 'shut up' on that subject. This is not a notion that respects democracy, it is one that either fundamentally mis understands what democracy is and requires or is just contemptuous of democracy when that does not suit what the person wants.

Boris can simply ignore parliament and do whatever he likes citing the people's referendum.

Whether he has the balls to do that is another matter but if he proves to be as gutless as his predecessor then his future as PM is in jeopardy and not just that but the future of the Tories is also dire but there is a bigger issue at stake than the future of a party which will be replaced by UKIP, and that is the entire institution of Democracy is being dealt a devastating blow and that is something that should worry every Brit.

This is why Tory MPs who even voted to remain and want to stay in the EU are now going along with Hard BREXIT. They see no other choice and they are correct.

I don't have the time to discuss terms and terminology I'm sorry.

you really are a very stupid individual and have no understanding of what you are talking about. may though exactly like you and was heading that way till the small matter of gina miller and her court case. the decision was the government never mind pm cannot take us out of the eu without firat a parliement voteand then the house of lordsapproving it. now parliement voted to declare article 50 so government can begin to negotiate. unfortunately for us they voted without specifying that a dealhas to be struck. so all government has to do is just wait till 31st of october and wallah we crash out. thats where you are wrong. this government has not got a majority to push that through ot even allow it to be delivered via default. may had about 8 majority with the help of the nazis over at northern ireland. but her hands were tied by the remain tory mps. they would not vote for her deal and joined with corbyn. even when 4 labour mps voted for it they still could not get it through. now boris's hands and feet are tied. not that different than the way cypriots tied the donkey's front legs so it could not run away where there was nothing to tie the beast to. he now has only one majority. it means any single tory mp can bring this government down and there is about 30 that would.

the odds of brexit happening now has just gone up to a million to one. as back stop cannot be removed and crashing out will not be allowed by the remainiers.

you really need to educate yourself before posting so you do not show your stupidity.

I have been watching this very closely Lordo and I believe I have taken a principled approach.

Firstly I am happy to have accepted the remain option if that is what the people voted for. They didn’t! They voted to leave.

So Boris has an opportunity here to lead and execute the mandate delivered by the people.

Yes the fact is, he can go and take Britain out of the EU by the end of October with a No Deal and it is perfectly legal as well and very brave as well.

People are willing to accept and yearn for brave and self belief and his actions will find vindication in the most Churchillian of ways.

This is a good vs evil and the EU here is the epitome of evil and if no one believes me just look at the austerity and indignity they subjected millions of people to.

I also have a lot of time for Varoufakis. Yes you heard that right. I standby what I say and formulate my stance in an informed manner. Just because I say the things I say does not mean I don’t tip my hat off to people like Varoufakis who does talk a lot of good sense.

[erolz66]

You've argued continually that leaving with no deal would be undemocratic 'because reasons'.

No that is simply untrue. I have argued that such an exit, if the only way it can be executed is by bypassing and subverting every democratic norm in the UK for 500 years, is then in that case and that case only by definition undemocratic. That, despite every thing I have said about this to date, still the best you have got is to pretend I have said and am saying the above without the 'if' and 'then' part, speaks volumes to me.

The MPs have had plenty of time to agree some other result but have not managed to do so.

Therefore the democratic result is a WTO exit that has already been agreed by parliament.

MP's had been unable to democratically agree on what form of exit to pursue, so they exercised their right to democratically change either the default position or date, a right that was the very basis for why they voted to accept that default position in the first place. Now because YOU do not like that democratic decision to change the default date (and potentially change the default position as well some point down the line) you propose that they should have that right to change the default position or date, that was the very basis on which many of them did support it in the first, removed from them entirely and then claim having done this, that default date and position are still valid. It is nonsense.

[cyprusgrump]

Now because YOU do not like that democratic decision to change the default date (and potentially change the default position as well some point down the line) you propose that they should have that right to change the default position or date, that was the very basis on which many of them did support it in the first, removed from them entirely and then claim having done this, that default date and position are still valid.

What does that sentence even mean?

It is nonsense.

Yup! Marked your own work!