Hundreds of thousands march in London to demand new Brexit referendum

[StreetCowboy]

19 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

BoycottEUProducts

https://twitter.com/BoycottEu

 

I'm not going to buy British until this is sorted.  Our manufacturers need to get used to the pain.

[aright]

12 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

I'm not going to buy British until this is sorted.  Our manufacturers need to get used to the pain.

I can feel your epicaricacy in East Yorkshire.

[bomber]

30 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

BoycottEUProducts

https://twitter.com/BoycottEu

 

oh dear here we go again,i remember the buy british campaigns in the late 70s early 80s,anyone who bought a morris marina or Ital wishes they didnt bother,although doc martins and braces should see a boom in sales ready for no-brexit riots,

[bomber]

21 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

I'm not going to buy British until this is sorted.  Our manufacturers need to get used to the pain.

500 million plus boycotting UK products v 70 million boycotting a 500+ million population throughout 27 countries, seems a bit unfair to me,typical of those european bully boys ???? wait till vinny and nontabury and tommy cross that channel to sort them all out,not be laffing then will they 

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

BoycottEUProducts

https://twitter.com/BoycottEu

 

What’s a “EU product”? 

[vogie]

8 hours ago, Basil B said:

But how would you define what is a serious offence???

 

I think it at present is a 12 months sentence. Maybe the bar should be lowered to say any prison sentence including suspended???   

I wouldn't personally define any type of crime, we have lawmakers and the police for that, and the crime in question, perverting the course of justice is a serious crime. So that begs the question, should MPs be allowed who have committed a serious crime shape the future of our country? 

 

[Nigel Garvie]

2 hours ago, vogie said:

I wouldn't personally define any type of crime, we have lawmakers and the police for that, and the crime in question, perverting the course of justice is a serious crime. So that begs the question, should MPs be allowed who have committed a serious crime shape the future of our country? 

 

It is obvious from the posts that the serious crime that the lady in question committed was to be the voter that tipped the scales, of course it could have been any one of 300+ votes that tipped the scales. I don't imagine for a moment, that the Brexiteers here actually give a tupenny monkeys about the original offense. Here is a quote about the Tories at (Essentially) the same game  “I’m afraid Mrs Leadsom’s party yesterday lost any ounce of credibility in leading the investigation into sexual harassment and bullying in this place when they restored the whips to Mr Griffiths and Mr Elphicke". (Vote of no confidence Dec. 2018).

[tomacht8]

9 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

What’s a “EU product”? 

I think Einstein means flags, pins, ball pens and lighters with EU logo imprint.

[vogie]

35 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

It is obvious from the posts that the serious crime that the lady in question committed was to be the voter that tipped the scales, of course it could have been any one of 300+ votes that tipped the scales. I don't imagine for a moment, that the Brexiteers here actually give a tupenny monkeys about the original offense. Here is a quote about the Tories at (Essentially) the same game  “I’m afraid Mrs Leadsom’s party yesterday lost any ounce of credibility in leading the investigation into sexual harassment and bullying in this place when they restored the whips to Mr Griffiths and Mr Elphicke". (Vote of no confidence Dec. 2018).

Were either Griffiths or Elphicke ever charged or convicted, serious question. 

But the point we are discussing here is a tagged convicted criminal being allowed to vote in the HoC, I would be interested to hear your views on this, rather than going down the road of whataboutery. For the record if it was up to me, Jeffrey Archer would still be in prison, but it is not up to me. So I will ask you again for a straight answer, are you ok with convicted criminals voting in the HoC.

[Nigel Garvie]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

Were either Griffiths or Elphicke ever charged or convicted, serious question. 

But the point we are discussing here is a tagged convicted criminal being allowed to vote in the HoC, I would be interested to hear your views on this, rather than going down the road of whataboutery. For the record if it was up to me, Jeffrey Archer would still be in prison, but it is not up to me. So I will ask you again for a straight answer, are you ok with convicted criminals voting in the HoC.

Well it is hard for you to "Ask me again", since you never directed me to your question before. However, I will answer, I do think that a convicted criminal should not be able to vote as an MP, although the point I was making (Which you glibly describe as what about-ism) is that there are plenty of others who I think shouldn't be able to vote AS WELL. (That's as well-ism BTW!). Of course if the powers that be in any particular country, can charge an opposition party with sedition (For example), then for democracy, the game's a bogie. As another poster pointed out this may be why it was felt at some point in History, that MPs should be protected, I wouldn't know.

[bomber]

12 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

What’s a “EU product”? 

A straight banana

[Basil B]

14 hours ago, vogie said:

I wouldn't personally define any type of crime, we have lawmakers and the police for that, and the crime in question, perverting the course of justice is a serious crime. So that begs the question, should MPs be allowed who have committed a serious crime shape the future of our country? 

 

How do you define what is a serious crime then???

 

Is Preventing the course of justice more serious than convictions for violence, financial fraud, immigration fraud, drug possession, public order offences or contempt of court??? 

[Jip99]

21 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

What’s a “EU product”? 

 

 

Well, I certainly make sure that I buy my Bordeaux wine from Australia.

 

 

No more Piat d'Or for me....

[Jip99]

On 4/4/2019 at 7:44 PM, AlexRich said:

It’s really not looking good for Brexit, not what anyone was promised. 

 

It’s like an old diseased dog that needs to be put out of its misery.

 

Roll on the second referendum, let’s take back control and end this madness.

 

 

No need for a second referendum - the first one was "In or Out"................... the result was "Out".

 

That is final.

 

 

What is diseased is the subsequent process so I am quite happy for a People's Vote on the obvious option - the best that parliament will come up with is the deal that May and Corbyn strike; the alternative is no deal....................... let the public decide deal/no deal:-

 

1. Do you favour leaving the EU on the deal brokered by May/Corbyn.

 

2. Do you favour leaving the EU without a deal.

 

 

 

 

[vogie]

8 hours ago, Basil B said:

How do you define what is a serious crime then???

 

Is Preventing the course of justice more serious than convictions for violence, financial fraud, immigration fraud, drug possession, public order offences or contempt of court??? 

A serious crime is a serious crime. Does pigeon holing crime make any difference, a crime is a crime. Seriously, are you trying to justify a MP commiting perjury and preventing the course of justice.

[malagateddy]

Amend 1 to...the may/corbyn deal WITHOUT THE UK BEING A VASSEL STATE FOR X NUMBER OF YEARS.

 
 
No need for a second referendum - the first one was "In or Out"................... the result was "Out".
 
That is final.
 
 
What is diseased is the subsequent process so I am quite happy for a People's Vote on the obvious option - the best that parliament will come up with is the deal that May and Corbyn strike; the alternative is no deal....................... let the public decide deal/no deal:-
 
1. Do you favour leaving the EU on the deal brokered by May/Corbyn.
 
2. Do you favour leaving the EU without a deal.
 
 
 
 

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jip99]

8 minutes ago, malagateddy said:

Amend 1 to...the may/corbyn deal WITHOUT THE UK BEING A VASSEL STATE FOR X NUMBER OF YEARS.

 

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

 

 

It doesn't matter what the exact terms of such a deal are.................the People would be able to vote on that deal OR No Deal.

[malagateddy]

My Friend..with respect everyone elegible to vote in such an important issue should be given as much info re any deal that may and corbyn come up with.

 
 
It doesn't matter what the exact terms of such a deal are.................the People would be able to vote on that deal OR No Deal.

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

A serious crime is a serious crime. Does pigeon holing crime make any difference, a crime is a crime. Seriously, are you trying to justify a MP commiting perjury and preventing the course of justice.

I am saying how do you define what is serious and what is not, I am not saying what she did was not serious and she should be kicked out of parliament, if I lived in her constituency I would have been one of the first to sign the the recall petition.

fact is I do not think you can have a pick and mix on what is serious or just a minor offence. like in football the goalposts are a in defined place and conform defined sizes, the word serious is undefinable unless set against a measurable standard.

[vogie]

27 minutes ago, Basil B said:

I am saying how do you define what is serious and what is not, I am not saying what she did was not serious and she should be kicked out of parliament, if I lived in her constituency I would have been one of the first to sign the the recall petition.

fact is I do not think you can have a pick and mix on what is serious or just a minor offence. like in football the goalposts are a in defined place and conform defined sizes, the word serious is undefinable unless set against a measurable standard.

The lawmakers difine what a serious crime is and perverting the course of justice is a serious crime, I'm sorry but I cannot see why you cannot understand this.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

The lawmakers difine what a serious crime is and perverting the course of justice is a serious crime, I'm sorry but I cannot see why you cannot understand this.

I wonder if you’d be at all concerned about this if she’d voted the other way?!

[Basil B]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

The lawmakers difine what a serious crime is and perverting the course of justice is a serious crime, I'm sorry but I cannot see why you cannot understand this.

Ok it took a long time but I found it.

Legislation that defines "serious Crime", The Police Act 1997 section 93(4).

Quote

Quote

(4)For the purposes of subsection (2), conduct which constitutes one or more offences shall be regarded as serious crime if, and only if,—

(a)it involves the use of violence, results in substantial financial gain or is conduct by a large number of persons in pursuit of a common purpose, or

(b)the offence or one of the offences is an offence for which a person who has attained the age of twenty-one and has no previous convictions could reasonably be expected to be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of three years or more,

and, where the authorising officer is within subsection (5)(h), it relates to an assigned matter within the meaning of section 1(1) of the [1979 c. 2.] Customs and Excise Management Act 1979.

 

 

 Therefore neither she or career criminal Tommy B*ll*cks have been convicted of any crime that falls in to the category defined as "serious Crime" as far as I know.

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I wonder if you’d be at all concerned about this if she’d voted the other way?!

Oh dear, there are more remainers with a morality deficiency than I first thought.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

Oh dear, there are more remainers with a morality deficiency than I first thought.

Says Brexiteer who jumps on campaign vilifying a single MP when Brexiteers don’t get what they want.

 

Away with you and your self proclaimed moral superiority.

[Jip99]

3 hours ago, malagateddy said:

My Friend..with respect everyone elegible to vote in such an important issue should be given as much info re any deal that may and corbyn come up with.

 

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

 

 

Yes, of course, Teddy. 

 

My point is that everyone in the Nation has the right to vote for no deal (if they don't like the offered deal) or for the deal (if it is acceptable to them, or they don't want no deal)

[vogie]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Says Brexiteer who jumps on campaign vilifying a single MP when Brexiteers don’t get what they want.

 

Away with you and your self proclaimed moral superiority.

Are you sure you are thinking this through chomper. The Labour Party dismissed her, John Bercow is writing to her Peterborough election council to see if they want to hold a by-election to get her ousted. So I am not vilifying the MP, I am saying it as it is. Just because she voted the way you would have chosen, does not make her any less despicable than she already is.

 

 

[nontabury]

7 hours ago, vogie said:

A serious crime is a serious crime. Does pigeon holing crime make any difference, a crime is a crime. Seriously, are you trying to justify a MP commiting perjury and preventing the course of justice.

 

 I beleive she was subject to a curfew order,and as such she should not have been in the House Of Collaborators at that time.

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

 

 I beleive she was subject to a curfew order,and as such she should not have been in the House Of Collaborators at that time.

You also believed Brexit would bring you 350 million a week and you would be out by now. 

[Loiner]

Oh dear, there are more remainers with a morality deficiency than I first thought.

All the Remainers are innately immoral. Lies and deceit prior to the referendum, followed by subversion and treachery post referendum. Masquerading as the ‘nice’ people, they are devoid of what we consider morals.

[damascase]

18 minutes ago, Loiner said:

All the Remainers are innately immoral. Lies and deceit prior to the referendum, followed by subversion and treachery post referendum. Masquerading as the ‘nice’ people, they are devoid of what we consider morals.

What have you been smoking?