welovesundaysatspace

27 minutes ago, sandyf said:

 

The EU will take Britain to the International Court of Justice if it tries to walk away without paying an estimated £50bn ‘divorce bill’, a leak of its negotiating strategy says.

Maybe ignoring laws, contracts and courts is part of the UK’s plan to “take back control” and for “sovereignty”. 

9 minutes ago, superal said:

People voted exit because of reasons spelt out to them as I described earlier . Is that difficult for you to understand ?

"reasons spelt out to them" is what was written on the ballot paper, or the lies and fantasies spreaded by Nigel, Boris & Co.? 

You want the vote to be "respected", but the vote only was to leave the EU, nowhere did you vote for any terms of the post-Brexit relationship. The UK should try to get a Norway-style agreement. It would make sense economically, it would keep disruption low, and the Brexiteers would have their vote respected.

9 minutes ago, superal said:

What are you on ? the negotiations are exactly that of agreements regarding current business rules and labour movements etc plus the extent of change and compromise .

I've never questioned that this is being negotiated. 

9 minutes ago, superal said:

The 39 billion ,   a no deal can mean walking away without making that contribution , not legally enforceable , fact .

Oh, blackmailing it is now. Good luck with that. The UK will have enough problems after crashing out of the EU that it doesn't need the consequences of breaching its payment liabilities on top.

22 minutes ago, billd766 said:

But how many times can they call for a vote until enough is enough especially if they keep losing? Who will pay for all the votes and the time?

What does the constitution/laws say?

8 minutes ago, OJAS said:

So where on earth did I say that “The Irish (...) had to vote again until they got it right in the eyes of the EU commissioners.”

User billd766 said that. I replied it’s nonsense, to which you replied “billd766 is actually spot on”. 

Therefore...

Quote

Yet another kneejerk reaction on your part, I think!

...next time better think back what you wrote before — saves YOU from kneejerk reactions like this. 

18 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

The why did Ireland hold another referendum a year later?

Because Ireland is a sovereign state and decided to do so, even if you don’t like their decision.

18 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

In a dramatic political U-turn, Ireland has voted decisively in favour of the Lisbon treaty just 17 months after rejecting the European Union's package of reforms.

Two thirds of the Irish electorate backed the treaty

29 minutes ago, vinegarbase said:

So the corrupt media

Please provide evidence what acts of corruption have been committed by what media or stop spreading lies. 

Quote

wants us to believe that

No, they are just reporting. They are also reporting all nonsense and lies Donald Trump spreads, but I’m pretty sure they don’t want us to believe that.

Quote

35 years later right before this man is suddenly about to get approved for the Supreme Court and allegation is brought forth and there is NOTHING suspicious at all about the timing of the whole thing?

If you find this suspicious, you should support an investigation. 

Meanwhile, another alleged victim has came out and a lawyer says a third one has spoken to him. Just move along folks, nothing to see here at all.

9 minutes ago, sandyf said:

UK democracy in action - is this really what people voted for.

People only voted to leave the EU, not on any future relationships. Any future relationship is possible (or would require another referendum). I still think a Norway-style relationship would be the best for everyone. The best for the UK and EU economy, and the people would have their leave-vote implemented. 

11 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

I have posted quotes which prove it from Monnet and Juncker like 4 or 5 times now. They are not my claims - they are Juncker's and Monnet's claims. I'm just the messenger.

Those are interesting quotes, but you haven’t provided any evidence to prove your accusation that the EU has been continuously lying to Europeans. What are those lies? What‘s the evidence proving they are in fact false statements (or at least highly inaccurate) intending to deceive the electorate?

Macron labelled the leave campaign as liars. That’s factually true; there are lists with what the false statements are. Red bus, anyone? 

You countered that the EU has been doing the same, but you fail to provide evidence for your claim. What’s the EU‘s red bus? 

I am pretty sure Macron could find some nice quotes from dead British leaders if he would dig deep enough. But he’s not argueing the leave campaign are liars because a dead guy said A, B and C some 60 years ago. 

Quote

But "pull A50 and you are out" is clearly naive.

No. It’s not. 

Quote

The EU is trying to push us back in

No. It’s not. 

Where in the EU regulations does it provide any way to push back a member state’s exit after it has pulled article 50? There isn’t any. 

Quote

, that's a fact unless you haven't read any news in the last 2 years.

“the last 2 years” have been about the U.K. wanting to negotiate future (post-leave) relationships with the EU. Not about the leave. The leave cannot be undone or pushed back by the EU. The regulations do not provide any way to do so. 

Quote

 

If that's what you believe then you clearly haven't digested the quotes from Monnet and Juncker that I have made.

It’s not what I believe. It’s the reality. I prefer to stick to facts rather than what a dead guy mumbled 60 years ago. 

Quote

If I were to give you a list of books to read, would you open your mind and buy them and read them?

The academically correct way would be: You make your statement. Then you provide a reference to the author, title and page in a publication where the evidence proving your statement can be found. That’s what i suggested earlier. 

So please tell us what statements made by the EU are lies, and where we can find the evidence proving that it is in fact a lie. 

5 minutes ago, aright said:

Can you tell me at what election I voted for Martin Selmayr or  an alternative candidate as Secretary General of the European Commission?

 

I didn’t say that you voted for him. At which election did you vote for Theresa May?

10 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Its not my homework, it's yours.

Nope, when you throw out an accusation it’s your job to provide evidence proving it. Not the other way round. 

10 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

I have wasted too much time on this forum providing well researched and well written answers to people who ignore them or misconstrue them, and who reply with insults or one liners. There is ample evidence for what I have said  from multiple souces - it is not an obscure theory. If you are unable to use google or Amazon it's your problem. The quotes I have already provided are sufficient evidence for anyone with an open mind.

None of what you posted proves your claim that the EU has been lying to its people. I have asked you like 4-5 times now and you still fail to provide any evidence for your claims. 

10 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

As for article 50 guaranteeing reversibility - how naive are you?

I am not naive. You pull article 50 and you are out. That’s a fact. 

10 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

The EU is deceitfully and deliberately moving towards a superstate by a series of steps which combine to make it in practical terms irreversible.

All those decisions were and are being made by the member states themselves. If a member state doesn’t like increased integration, it can vote against it. If you as a citizen don’t like it, you can vote for a party that offers to leave the EU. No deceit there at all. A very democratic process. 

39 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Yes, we've already seen how free member states are to vote against new treaties.

Correct. They are free to do that. 

39 minutes ago, nauseus said:

It is even more difficult to actually leave with any kind of dignity, as we see now.

Nonsense. Just pull article 50. Couldn’t be easier. 

4 minutes ago, smedly said:

 the EU (...) is basically a power grab by Germany and France 

 All member states are equally part of the EU and participate in the EU’s decision-making. And they can all leave the club if they want to (same as it was their own decision to join in the first place). How is that “basically a power grab by Germany and France”?

30 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

In practice Monnet's vision (European superstate) and method (stealth and deceit and irreversibility) became the gameplan, masterplan, playbook that has been used for 70 years by EU leaders (and he wasn't working alone to begin with of course);

Utter nonsense; a conspiracy theory missing any evidence. Speaks volumes that you’re failing to provide facts for your claims the fourth time in a row now. 

Quote

it has been used as a deliberate policy of ever-increasing and irreversible integration through deceit.

Again, you are writing nonsense:

- “irreversible”: Article 50 let’s every member state exit the EU, as we can see with the U.K.  

- “through deceit”: It was each member state’s own sovereign decision to join the EU, and the terms of membership were clear to everyone. 

Quote

There is overwhelming evidence for this. Anyone who is interested in the EU owes themselves to do some research in this area.

Why should anyone do your homework? When you spread accusations, it’s your responsibility to prove it. 

Quote

It's shocking that so many people are unaware of this.

It’s shocking how much nonsense you write. 

Quote

If it's so hard for the UK to re-establish national sovereignty

The U.K. doesn’t have to re-establish sovereignty. It is and always has been a sovereign state. 

Your problem is that you’re confusing sovereignty with a world without any obligations. It’s like signing an employment contract and then crying someone took your sovereignty because you have to go work 40 hours a week and comply some work policies. And then you cry it’s irreversible because you have a notice period and would have to find a new job, and you actually like it in that city.

No one forces anyone to join the EU, and no one stops anyone from leaving. And the way the EU has developed and will develop in the future was and will be a decision of it’s member states. If member states don’t like further integration, they are free to vote against it or leave the EU.