Supreme Court: Suspending Parliament was unlawful, judges rule

[DannyCarlton]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

What an amazing coincidence that you know this racist Brexiteer in your local that so perfectly backs up your point. 

 

If I didn't know better, I'd think you just made that up ????.

You wish.

 

I gave him as an example of someone who is married to a foreigner but is still intensly racist. Read the post I was replying to.

 

Do you live in Pattaya? If so, a freind from the Uk is coming to stay with me this weekend. He drinks in the same pub and knows the guy better than me. Meet us for a beer and hear it from him. I'd advise you not to call him a liar though. Serious offer.

[Thingamabob]

2 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

Sadly not a single one of you will accept the fact that the Leave campaign commeted electoral fraud, nor have you had the decency to say that it's wrong or the honesty to say that you're ok with it. Once again, nobody should accept a result achieved through fraud, that's democracy.

There was no fraud. You're a bit behind with the news.

[Slip]

6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Was it, or was it not a political decision by Johnson?

 

And did unelected judges over-ride that political decision?

 

Therein lies the problem. Are governments going to be taken to court for every political decision they make so that unelected judges can over-ride those decisions? That sounds like the sort of Democracy a Remainer might like. ????

The question that you should be asking is "was it, or was it not a lawful decision by Johnson?".  Of course, as we now know, the answer is a resounding "NO".

[Basil B]

2 hours ago, evadgib said:

Waiting for yesterday's ruling was akin to waiting for a VAR decision from the chairman of the losers @ an FA Cup Final.

FA inquiry into cheating, winners to be disqualified. ???? 

 

Brexit FC to be kicked out of the league and will nether be heard of again.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Basil B

[DannyCarlton]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

A

 

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/09/24/a-tyranny-of-judges/

 

Let me clarify (again). Quoting Spiked isn't quoting a recognised source. See forum rules. You might as well quote from The Beano. Right wing pro Brexit online magazine.

[Thingamabob]

2 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

You can still emigrate and settle in one of the other 27 EU states with better judges.

Already long gone. Happily ensconced in Thailand where the courts are wonderful.

[DannyCarlton]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Was it, or was it not a political decision by Johnson?

 

And did unelected judges over-ride that political decision?

 

Therein lies the problem. Are governments going to be taken to court for every political decision they make so that unelected judges can over-ride those decisions? That sounds like the sort of Democracy a Remainer might like. ????

"Was it, or was it not a political decision by Johnson?" He claimed that it wasn't at the time.

 

"And did unelected judges over-ride that political decision?" No they ruled on a point regarding the unwritten parliamentary constitution.

 

"Are governments going to be taken to court for every political decision they make so that unelected judges can over-ride those decisions? That sounds like the sort of Democracy a Remainer might like."

 

No, it wasn't a political decision. No precedent has been set for that. That's the sort of democracy Brexiteers don't like when they're LOSERS!

 

[oldhippy]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

Then you would be completely wrong as usual with nothing to back you up.

This was a reply to my post:

And not a single brexiteer to distance himself from this racist remark.

Is it any wonder that some people say all brexiteers are racists?

 

I have this tread to back me up.

[evadgib]

17 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Let me clarify (again). Quoting Spiked isn't quoting a recognised source. See forum rules. You might as well quote from The Beano. Right wing pro Brexit online magazine.

How very appropriate:

 

[oldhippy]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

Being married to Asians renders that claptrap unnecessary.

 

Incidentally; when the Quail was poorly a few months ago it was the Brexiters he routinely slags off who enquired as to his welfare. 

Marying Asians (under certain legal conditions about inheritance and such) could very well be a proof of racism.

[JamesBlond]

16 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

This was a reply to my post:

And not a single brexiteer to distance himself from this racist remark.

Is it any wonder that some people say all brexiteers are racists?

 

I have this tread to back me up.

The leave vote is all about immigration, in case you were not aware. I dare say there are some leavers who declare more euphemistic reasons due to the PC terreur afflicting the nation, but cultural identity is the root of the matter.

If you want to characterise that as racist you will have to admit:

a) that you have no preference for your own culture

b) that you think economic migrants should be welcomed into the UK at the same rate as in recent decades.

Kindly address those points. If you cannot/will not do so, then you are just as 'racist' as I am.

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by JamesBlond

[stuandjulie]

16 hours ago, JamesBlond said:

Except that's not at all the way it is. They are bound by the fact that if the result is not enacted, Britain's international reputation will be in shreds, parliament will lose all credibility, the foundations of participative democracy will be utterly undermined, and there will be rioting in the streets.

 

'Not legally binding' is just caviling. Everyone knows a referendum is morally binding otherwise it would not be held, and the result will stand unless there are legal reasons why the vote was invalid. As there are no such reasons, the vote is as good as binding.

As good as is not binding then is it? Your whole comment does not alter the facts and I was talking facts not what someone thinks of it !

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, DannyCarlton said:

Guy who drinks in my local is married to a Russian mail order bride. I've never met a bigger racist. Has been banned from several pubs for exopunding his views. Brexiteer, of course.

 

And those same Brexiteers have accused everyone and anyone, all remainers, of being Grouse, in order to get them banned.

- How can a Russian be a B-B-Brexiter?

- Neither the Quail nor the late Arachnid needed any help ????

Edited September 25, 2019 by evadgib

[oldhippy]

3 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

The leave vote is all about immigration, in case you were not aware. I dare say there are some leavers who declare more euphemistic reasons due to the PC terreur afflicting the nation, but cultural identity is the root of the matter.

If you want to characterise that as racist you will have to admit:

a) that you no preferance for your own culture

b) think you think economic migrants should be welcomed into the UK at the same rate as in recent decades.

Kindly address those points. If you cannot/will not do so, then you are just as 'racist' as I am.

I expose racists. I do not enter into discussions with racists.

[JamesBlond]

4 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

I expose racists. I do not enter into discussions with racists.

You refuse to discuss. I win the discussion.

 

Anyone who refuses to answer the two questions in #461 above is thereby admitting that they are racist by their own criteria. I challenge anyone with this test.

Edited September 25, 2019 by JamesBlond

[Rookiescot]

48 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Was it, or was it not a political decision by Johnson?

 

And did unelected judges over-ride that political decision?

 

Therein lies the problem. Are governments going to be taken to court for every political decision they make so that unelected judges can over-ride those decisions? That sounds like the sort of Democracy a Remainer might like. ????

So it was a political maneuver by Johnson? Suspend parliament so he can behave like a dictator.

Something he explicitly denied on several occasions and indeed appears to affirmed that this was not the case to the Queen.

So he was lying AGAIN.   

[oldhippy]

4 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

You refuse to discuss. I win the discussion.

I can live with that.

 

[evadgib]

3 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

I expose racists. I do not enter into discussions with racists.

You've had me rolling about like Sgt Wilson ????

[oldhippy]

6 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

You refuse to discuss. I win the discussion.

 

Anyone who refuses to answer the two questions in #461 above is thereby admitting that they are racist by their own criteria. I challenge anyone with this test.

I will answer to your edited post: I do not understand your point, and anyway I don't need to understand your point.

[Blue Muton]

56 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

There was no fraud. You're a bit behind with the news.

For the third tme in this one thread, you are confusing yesterday's news about criminal investigation being stopped through lack of evidence with the proven findings of electoral fraud for which the Leave campaign were fined the maximum amount of £20,000 on multiple counts. Those offences were described by the head of the Electoral Commission as "most serious". Do try to keep up, you're a bit confused by the news.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Blue Muton
typo

[Blue Muton]

10 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

So it was a political maneuver by Johnson? Suspend parliament so he can behave like a dictator.

Something he explicitly denied on several occasions and indeed appears to affirmed that this was not the case to the Queen.

So he was lying AGAIN.   

Well he was sacked for lying previously, surprising that so many thought he'd change his spots if they selected him for PM.

[JonnyF]

58 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

You wish.

 

I gave him as an example of someone who is married to a foreigner but is still intensly racist. Read the post I was replying to.

 

Do you live in Pattaya? If so, a freind from the Uk is coming to stay with me this weekend. He drinks in the same pub and knows the guy better than me. Meet us for a beer and hear it from him. I'd advise you not to call him a liar though. Serious offer.

Evadgib pointed out that it is kind of difficult to label someone racist when they are married to someone from another race.

 

Your comeback was, "Well I know a white guy who married a (Russian) white girl and he's still racist". What does marrying someone from another country have to do with racism if they are the same race as you? I assume you know the difference between nationality and race?

 

Re. Pattaya - No, I live in Bangkok but I'm in Korat this weekend. Thanks for the offer though...

 

 

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Slip said:

The question that you should be asking is "was it, or was it not a lawful decision by Johnson?".  Of course, as we now know, the answer is a resounding "NO".

I repeat, it was a political decision and as such, not justiciable (as the first court correctly found before arms were twisted).

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, DannyCarlton said:

Let me clarify (again). Quoting Spiked isn't quoting a recognised source. See forum rules. You might as well quote from The Beano. Right wing pro Brexit online magazine.

To balance things up I also quote from the Guardian which is a left wing anti Brexit online version of the Beano.

 

Edit ; how about addressing the points in the article rather than dismissing it because it's "online". The internet is quite a thing these days.

Edited September 25, 2019 by JonnyF

[DannyCarlton]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

I repeat, it was a political decision and as such, not justiciable (as the first court correctly found before arms were twisted).

Irepeat. According to Johnson (aka Boris Emptyhead) it wasn't a political decision.

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, DannyCarlton said:

Irepeat. According to Johnson (aka Boris Emptyhead) it wasn't a political decision.

Johnson said it wasn't to stifle debate, it was for a queens speech. Now, only Johnson knows his true motives, that is not what the court ruled on. They distinctly said they were not concerned with his motive.

 

But by any definition, proroguing Parliament is a political decision. It may have been for good political reasons or bad political reasons, but it's still political. And if it's political, the courts should stay away. This is unprecedented. And it's a very bad precedent to set, unless you want every government decision going to the supreme court to be over-ruled by un-elected judges. 

 

[DannyCarlton]

20 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Re. Pattaya - No, I live in Bangkok but I'm in Korat this weekend. Thanks for the offer though...

 

My friend and i are in Korat from the 4th to the 8th. Probably spend most of the time in the Monkey Bar. He's a brexiteer if that helps. Any tips on where the "action" is in Korat? Went last year and it was a desert!

 

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by DannyCarlton

[oldhippy]

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Evadgib pointed out that it is kind of difficult to label someone racist when they are married to someone from another race.

 

Your comeback was, "Well I know a white guy who married a (Russian) white girl and he's still racist". What does marrying someone from another country have to do with racism if they are the same race as you? I assume you know the difference between nationality and race?

 

Re. Pattaya - No, I live in Bangkok but I'm in Korat this weekend. Thanks for the offer though...

 

 

Good on you!

You say the Slavic subrace is not inferior to "real" whites.

Some racists will not agree with you.....

[DannyCarlton]

14 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

But by any definition, proroguing Parliament is a political decision.

Proroguing parliament for the Queens speech isn't a political decision. It's a parliamentary procedure convention.

[adammike]

4 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Proroguing parliament for the Queens speech isn't a political decision. It's a parliamentary procedure convention.

That's true but normally it's less than a week.