Hundreds of thousands march in London to demand new Brexit referendum

[vinny41]

Conservative Maggie Throup calls for online government petitions to be reformed, saying public opinion on important issues like #Brexit can be "manipulated" with "unverified signatures from across the world"

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Conservative Maggie Throup calls for online government petitions to be reformed, saying public opinion on important issues like #Brexit can be "manipulated" with "unverified signatures from across the world"

 

 

She didn’t, by chance, happen to mention £millions donated from overseas to the Leave campaign that nobody is able to explain the original source of?

 

Or lucrative business prospects/tv slots offered to the leaders of Leave by a foreign government with a vested interest in the collapse of the EU?

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She didn’t, by chance, happen to mention £millions donated from overseas to the Leave campaign that nobody is able to explain the original source of?

 

Or lucrative business prospects/tv slots offered to the leaders of Leave by a foreign government with a vested interest in the collapse of the EU?

Do you have a link to those stories , or did you just make them up ?

[evadgib]

Farage addressing the EU parliament today:

 

[evadgib]

15 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Conservative Maggie Throup calls for online government petitions to be reformed, saying public opinion on important issues like #Brexit can be "manipulated" with "unverified signatures from across the world"

 

 

A point of order followed PMQs in which a member in the Petitions dept questioned this claim.

[nausea]

 

I would've thought 1 million in London and 200 in Nottinghamshire spoke for itself. Not that I care, a short, sharp, shock is just what the UK needs. Go out without a deal I say. 

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Do you have a link to those stories , or did you just make them up ?

Always a pleasure to oblige.

 

Lucrative business deal:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/aug/09/revealed-detail-of-exclusive-russian-deal-offered-to-arron-banks-in-brexit-run-up

 

Un explained source of donation to Leave:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/01/arron-banks-referred-to-agency-over-suspected-offences-in-brexit-campaign

 

And a nice little earner for your mate Nigel:

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/07/kremlin-backed-broadcaster-rt-offers-nigel-farage-his-own-show/

[vinny41]

6 minutes ago, nausea said:

 

I would've thought 1 million in London and 200 in Nottinghamshire spoke for itself. Not that I care, a short, sharp, shock is just what the UK needs. Go out without a deal I say. 

There almost certainly weren’t a million people on the People’s Vote march

Claim

An estimated 1 million people marched for a People’s Vote on Saturday 23rd March.

Conclusion

It’s impossible to say with precision how many people attended the march. However experts in crowd estimation put the number at between 312,000 and 400,000.

https://fullfact.org/europe/peoples-vote-march-count/

[nontabury]

7 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Farage addressing the EU parliament today:

 

 

 Nigel Farage the only politician who comes out of this utter shambles with his standing risen to a new hight. It’s a national disgrace that he was not put in charge of the negotiations from day one.

 Now watch the anti British brigade come out with their usual spiel

They’ll start of by saying he’s never won a seat in Parliament, which is perfectly true.

 As we all know the British electoral system does not favour the breaking of political monopolies. Although there was strong evidence to show that he was cheated in one of the by-elections.He has however stood for election as a MEP, useing the proportional representation system to increase his vote over the last 20+ years. And hopefully he will lead the Brexit party, should the need arise, to obtain our freedom from the E.u.

 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

17 minutes ago, nausea said:

 

I would've thought 1 million in London and 200 in Nottinghamshire spoke for itself. Not that I care, a short, sharp, shock is just what the UK needs. Go out without a deal I say. 

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Chomper Higgot

[sanemax]

31 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Always a pleasure to oblige.

 

Lucrative business deal:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/aug/09/revealed-detail-of-exclusive-russian-deal-offered-to-arron-banks-in-brexit-run-up

 

Un explained source of donation to Leave:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/01/arron-banks-referred-to-agency-over-suspected-offences-in-brexit-campaign

 

And a nice little earner for your mate Nigel:

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/07/kremlin-backed-broadcaster-rt-offers-nigel-farage-his-own-show/

The links that you provided do not back up your allegations .

The links do not show that "Millions were donated to Brexit from an unnamed  Foreign source" , infact it shows that Banks declined to make unrelated business deals with Russians

[7by7]

13 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

As has been explained previously, your suggestion has two 'remain' options, so leavers would be forced to vote for a remain option as their 'second choice' - which is why I'm against your 'second choice' idea.

 

Having said that, I support the idea of another referendum with only the first two options.

Two Remain options? No, it doesn't and never has. No matter what you think you may have explained previously. My suggestion has always contained exactly the same three options..

 

I repeat, these three options are:

1. Brexit with whatever deal has been agreed between the UK and EU,
2. Brexit without a deal, or
3. cancel Article 50 and remain in the EU.

That's two Brexit options and one Remain!

 

Which means, as I have said many times previously, if support for Brexit is still as strong as it was in 2016 then this would favour Brexit as very few, if any, Brexiteers would put remain as their second choice. 

[7by7]

4 hours ago, nontabury said:

Where have you heard and read this opinion. Certainly not in the part of the U.K.where I live. An area that has been greatly effected by the immigration of Eastern Europeans

Do tell, how has your area been 'greatly effected' by the immigration of Eastern Europeans?

 

Road sweepers speaking Romanian?

 

Polish grocers?

 

What?

[sanemax]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Two Remain options? No, it doesn't and never has. No matter what you think you may have explained previously. My suggestion has always contained exactly the same three options..

 

I repeat, these three options are:

1. Brexit with whatever deal has been agreed between the UK and EU,
2. Brexit without a deal, or
3. cancel Article 50 and remain in the EU.

That's two Brexit options and one Remain!

 

Which means, as I have said many times previously, if support for Brexit is still as strong as it was in 2016 then this would favour Brexit as very few, if any, Brexiteers would put remain as their second choice. 

What would be the point of voting "Brexit with no deal " ?

The M.P.s have already voted NOT to go through with it .

Why have another referendum, the Politicians have already shown that they will not abide by it and just ignore what the voters vote for 

[7by7]

3 hours ago, vinny41 said:

There almost certainly weren’t a million people on the People’s Vote march

Claim

An estimated 1 million people marched for a People’s Vote on Saturday 23rd March.

Conclusion

It’s impossible to say with precision how many people attended the march. However experts in crowd estimation put the number at between 312,000 and 400,000.

https://fullfact.org/europe/peoples-vote-march-count/

 Still a lot more than the couple of hundred max who turned up to listen to Farage on the same day!

 

BTW, why do you have to shout!
Forum Netiquette
 
1. Please do not post in all capital letters, bold, unusual fonts, sizes, colors or use unusually large emoticons. It can be difficult to read.

[7by7]

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

What would be the point of voting "Brexit with no deal " ?

The M.P.s have already voted NOT to go through with it .

Why have another referendum, the Politicians have already shown that they will not abide by it and just ignore what the voters vote for 

 

I have already explained all that; but will do so again just for you.

 

The point of including Brexit with no deal is because it does seem to be an option many people want. As shown by the many posts here advocating it. Personally I think it would be a disaster for the UK if that option won; but I believe in democracy which means giving the people the choice of all the options.

 

By making the referendum legally binding, as was done with the 2011 AV one, then Parliament will have to take whichever course the people voted for.

 

Got it now?

 

 

[nontabury]

13 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Do tell, how has your area been 'greatly effected' by the immigration of Eastern Europeans?

 

Road sweepers speaking Romanian?

 

Polish grocers?

 

What?

 

O.K. I’ll repost from another Brexit thread. 

 

 

Just yesterday in our local Lidl supermarket, I got into conversation with one of the assistants. He found it very easy to obtain employment in this area, even though he’s Romanian, due to the fact he’s only about 23yrs old, speaks very good English,university educated. As I say just a shop assistant.

Meanwhile there are many young Brits, who want to work hard in this area who would love his job, but not being university educated, the same as 50% of today’s school leavers,what chance do they have, against such competition, to obtain this low paid work. 

 Average minimum monthly salary in Romania is approximate £235. While for a graduate it’s £260.

 Again yesterday I was informed about one local business, that has amongst their staff, a Polish girl, who is responsible for recruitment. Unfortunately she’s biased to only employing Poles, for no other reason that they are fellow Poles. So unlike some so called Brits who always seem to prefer to discriminate against their fellow countryman.

But why should selfish people be concerned, about other,when it does’t directly affect them

 These are of course only small examples of what is taking place throughout the country, and people wonder why Nigel used the slogan,

” We want our country back”

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

I have already explained all that; but will do so again just for you.

 

The point of including Brexit with no deal is because it does seem to be an option many people want. As shown by the many posts here advocating it. Personally I think it would be a disaster for the UK if that option won; but I believe in democracy which means giving the people the choice of all the options.

 

By making the referendum legally binding, as was done with the 2011 AV one, then Parliament will have to take whichever course the people voted for.

 

Got it now?

 

 

Thaivisa isnt really the place to get a comprehensive view of what the UK population thinks or wants .

   Voters in the UK voted to leave the E.U. , it was only after the vote that the deal or no-deal came into the equation .

  The "deal or no deal" was just a way for the Government to stay in the E.U. 

[nontabury]

9 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

I have already explained all that; but will do so again just for you.

 

The point of including Brexit with no deal is because it does seem to be an option many people want. As shown by the many posts here advocating it. Personally I think it would be a disaster for the UK if that option won; but I believe in democracy which means giving the people the choice of all the options.

 

By making the referendum legally binding, as was done with the 2011 AV one, then Parliament will have to take whichever course the people voted for.

 

Got it now?

 

 

You mean legally binding, as long as it suits the Unelected Bureaucrats in Brussels,the parasites in Westminster and you.

 

 

[7by7]

5 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 

O.K. I’ll repost from another Brexit thread. 

 

 

Just yesterday in our local Lidl supermarket, I got into conversation with one of the assistants. He found it very easy to obtain employment in this area, even though he’s Romanian, due to the fact he’s only about 23yrs old, speaks very good English,university educated. As I say just a shop assistant.

Meanwhile there are many young Brits, who want to work hard in this area who would love his job, but not being university educated, the same as 50% of today’s school leavers,what chance do they have, against such competition, to obtain this low paid work. 

 Average minimum monthly salary in Romania is approximate £235. While for a graduate it’s £260.

 Again yesterday I was informed about one local business, that has amongst their staff, a Polish girl, who is responsible for recruitment. Unfortunately she’s biased to only employing Poles, for no other reason that they are fellow Poles. So unlike some so called Brits who always seem to prefer to discriminate against their fellow countryman.

But why should selfish people be concerned, about other,when it does’t directly affect them

 These are of course only small examples of what is taking place throughout the country, and people wonder why Nigel used the slogan,

” We want our country back”

Your Lidl example is about employing graduates rather than non Graduates; not employing Romanians instead of Brits!

 

However, most shops, Lidl included, are reluctant to employ university graduates as shop assistants as they suspect, usually rightly, that they will be leaving as soon as something more suitable and better paid comes along. I suspect that the Romanian you spoke to is far more likely to be on Lidl's graduate programme rather than just a shop assistant. 

 

Meanwhile, how many young Brits do you know who have applied to be shop assistants at Lidl, or anywhere else, and been refused because they aren't graduates; or refused for any other reason?

 

Your second example is mere hearsay. But if you know of anyone who has been refused employment, or even refused an interview, because they are British then that is illegal. So tell them to contact your local Citizens Advice who will be able to tell them what action to take.

[7by7]

11 minutes ago, nontabury said:

You mean legally binding, as long as it suits the Unelected Bureaucrats in Brussels,the parasites in Westminster and you.

As already explained, the bureaucrats in Brussels have no say in the matter of whether or not a referendum in the UK is legally binding or not. Neither do the elected MEPs nor the Council of Ministers.

 

Such a matter is entirely a matter for the sovereign UK Parliament. If they make it legally binding, then legally binding it will be.

 

Which means whatever the result, that result could not be challenged or changed without a major constitutional crisis.

[7by7]

20 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Thaivisa isnt really the place to get a comprehensive view of what the UK population thinks or wants .

   Voters in the UK voted to leave the E.U. , it was only after the vote that the deal or no-deal came into the equation .

  The "deal or no deal" was just a way for the Government to stay in the E.U. 

 

So what did you think voting leave would mean?

 

Did you fall for the lies of Boris and his gang that leaving simply meant ditching the bits we didn't like but keeping the bits we did?

 

What exactly did you expect to happen?

 

Those who voted to leave didn't know under what terms we would leave. Didn't know what our relationship would be with our largest trading partner if we left. Neither did Vote.Leave!

 

Even Rees-Mogg has now admitted that; and admitted it was a huge mistake.

[sanemax]

8 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

As already explained, the bureaucrats in Brussels have no say in the matter of whether or not a referendum in the UK is legally binding or not. Neither do the elected MEPs nor the Council of Ministers.

 

Such a matter is entirely a matter for the sovereign UK Parliament. If they make it legally binding, then legally binding it will be.

 

Which means whatever the result, that result could not be challenged or changed without a major constitutional crisis.

Oh yeah , lets have another vote then, as long as we really mean it this time .

As long as you promise to abide by it this time ....................

[nontabury]

6 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Thaivisa isnt really the place to get a comprehensive view of what the UK population thinks or wants .

   Voters in the UK voted to leave the E.U. , it was only after the vote that the deal or no-deal came into the equation .

  The "deal or no deal" was just a way for the Government to stay in the E.U. 

 

I wonder if the people’s referendum in 2016 had gone the other way, and the country had voted to remain in this so called onion. Let’s say by 52% v 49%against. Would the remainers then have been so vocal, if the leavers had pointed out that we did’t know that the unelected Bureacrats in Brussels intended to create an E.u army, or the U.K would lose the abstention veto. Similarly the people were not informed pre the people’s referendum that E.u law would have supremacy over own own laws.

This has only been admitted this very week by the remain supporting speaker Bercow. 

 

 

[vinny41]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

So what did you think voting leave would mean?

 

Did you fall for the lies of Boris and his gang that leaving simply meant ditching the bits we didn't like but keeping the bits we did?

 

What exactly did you expect to happen?

 

Those who voted to leave didn't know under what terms we would leave. Didn't know what our relationship would be with our largest trading partner if we left. Neither did Vote.Leave!

 

Even Rees-Mogg has now admitted that; and admitted it was a huge mistake.

People that voted Leave did understand what they were voting for 

Leave the EU, Leave the single market, leave the custom union , Leave the ECJ

David Cameron !!28 TIMES!! "Leave Single Market" (June 2016)

 

[7by7]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

Oh yeah , lets have another vote then, as long as we really mean it this time .

As long as you promise to abide by it this time ....................

As i have already said, the main reason why we need another vote is because Parliament simply can't, or wont, decide.

 

As Parliament wont decide, let the people do so.

 

 

[7by7]

2 hours ago, nontabury said:

 

I wonder if the people’s referendum in 2016 had gone the other way, and the country had voted to remain in this so called onion. Let’s say by 52% v 49%against. Would the remainers then have been so vocal, if the leavers had pointed out that we did’t know that the unelected Bureacrats in Brussels intended to create an E.u army, or the U.K would lose the abstention veto. Similarly the people were not informed pre the people’s referendum that E.u law would have supremacy over own own laws.

This has only been admitted this very week by the remain supporting speaker Bercow. 

 

The bureaucrats in Brussels can intend all they want, and a European Army has been suggested many times over the last 60 years or so. But it hasn't happened yet, and wont unless the elected heads of the member states agree.

 

But will you explain what is wrong with the idea of such an alliance? We have been similar many times in the past; such as NATO since it's inception, and in the War our armed forces were under a Supreme Commander who was an American.

 

As you claim to be a firm believer in Democracy I would have thought that a majority vote to decide issues and set policy would be more to your liking than the ability of one member to veto. Remember it's not just us who would lose the veto; it's the other 27 as well. So, for example, Poland could no longer veto something which we wanted.

 

At the end of the day, Remain means we keep our options open. If the EU were to become the autocratic dictatorship you fear, then we could always leave.

 

But once we are out, we are out. Even if the EU did agree to allow us back in it would not be under the advantageous terms we have now. No more rebate, have to join Schengen, commit to joining the Euro for starters. Therefore we need to ensure that leaving is the right thing to do before the decision is irreversible.

[7by7]

42 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

People that voted Leave did understand what they were voting for 

Leave the EU, Leave the single market, leave the custom union , Leave the ECJ 

So, no deal?

 

You voted to cut all ties with our biggest trading partner with no idea with what or who to replace them? 

 

Really?

 

What do you think would happen when we lost our largest trading partner with noting to replace them?.

 

50 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

David Cameron !!28 TIMES!! "Leave Single Market" (June 2016)

(Font size reduced by 7by7 to normal as per forum netiquette)

I didn't realise that Cameron was part of the leave campaign! 

[sanemax]

14 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

At the end of the day, Remain means we keep our options open. If the EU were to become the autocratic dictatorship you fear, then we could always leave.

 

 

How would we be able to leave ?

The people voted to leave :

The Politicians didnt allow that ,

The E.U didnt allow that .

How are we supposed to leave the E.U ?

[7by7]

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

How would we be able to leave ?

The people voted to leave :

The Politicians didnt allow that ,

The E.U didnt allow that .

How are we supposed to leave the E.U ?

 At the moment we will be leaving; it is not the EU who are stopping us, it is Parliament who wont agree on the future relationship between us and the EU.

 

Something the EU have already agreed upon.

 

The only thing which will stop us leaving is if we are allowed to make a democratic decision on the terms of leaving and instead we democratically decide to remain after all.