The EU debate - Part III

There's a few bits on the following video I can't quite grasp, but a fair few points I think are worth making.

As an aside, I've been watching a fair few clips on the US election, and the comments are almost identical, apart from the names of the demons.

 

A one day Motion is clearly not 'illegal'. But I don't think it can repeal a Law which is what the Court said was necessary. So she can have one passed but it won't be sufficient for her to trigger article 50. I don't understand why a democrat such as yourself wants the Govt to usurp the powers of Parliament to make laws

 

Ever been to Japan, for instance? I have,

They discriminate against 'Gaijin' quite openly.

In Trinidad, I suffered from blatant discrimination because of my skin colour.

Having experienced it first hand, it's not nice, trust me. And yes, you could easily feel victimised if you spent enough time in a place like that.

 

I don't see that they create the fear, they capitalise on the fear that's already there. Of course offering solutions will help sell papers!!

 

There are areas of this country I've experienced it too.

 

We live in a Parliamentary democracy where the right to make laws is that of parliament and parliament alone. If Parliament had wanted to allow the referendum to change the Law of the Land they could have done so but they didn't. What should my MP do? His constituents voted for remain. Is it democratic of him to ignore that and vote the way the rest of the country voted. What the people should really be doing in this situation is howling against the Govt that lied to them about the effects of the referendum.

 

Before I start, I'm not sure what the answer is, as the democratic solution has to prevail. However, this has got ****up with a capital F, written all over it.
Whilst the rest of the EU is waiting for us to trigger article 50, our own parliament will be squabbling like a load of school children, with the sole aim of stroking there already over inflated ego's.
You can then imagine any future negotiations with the EU. We will go in with our demands and they will tell us to go **** ourselves. Maybe this is what May is afraid of?

 

But we won the war!..Bloody ingrates!..

Seriously, you're exactly right. As the spoof said, the courts cannot derail our Brexit plan, because we don't have one!...

Unless and until May can find a middle way to satisfy her own warring party, what's the point of going to the EU?

 

The CPS is considering investigating the leave campaign for 'misleading voters' and being in breach of electoral law. The campaign was based on a pack of lies, which its arch-proponents came out and admitted were lies the very next morning.

MPs should vote on what is best for the country and that can only be done if a full and proper parliamentary bill is debated in the commons on the terms of brexit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...investigation-misleading-voters-a7403036.html

 

A resolution that could potentially go through parliament in a day or two would be sufficent to give the PM permission to act.
The supreme Court could decide this is sufficent dependant on the terms of the resolution. Article 50 itself doesn't remove any rights, it's the fact that rights will be lost so it's possible the court could rule this is sufficent providing legislation is brought before the house prior to the two years expiring( or the date those rights would be lost).

That's my take anyway.

 

Perhaps this would be justified if I were actually a racist, but I'm not, so it isn't. Why is wanting to see the continuation of a race of people 'archaic'? Why is it dangerous to think? Even more so, why is it out of place in our own society, you realise you are essentially advocating for the very downfall of this society with your objections? Ooh I'm a fascist too now, so many labels I've lost count.

My sole focus isn't on skin colour, I've mentioned other factors. You just keep choosing to focus on race because all you then have to do is call me a racist and run off rather than answer any of my questions and expose your narrow ideas to any challenges.

What are your suggested remedies to a declining white population? Again, wanting to ensure the continuation of a group of people doesn't make me a supremacist, I don't think you know what the word means if that is how you are defining it.

 

Erm...

You do sound rather Stormfronty, Zlatan.

 

Is the white population declining or is the proportion of whites in society (UK or world) declining? Or both? Genuine questions.

 

I'm not squirming, although I think you've deliberately been trying to mislead my preconceptions of you by the things that you've posted just to try and get a petty one up on me.

I don't quite know what you mean by that.

The rest of what you say is a bit redundant, it's just a denial of what I've mentioned before without any reason. Playground stuff.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom#Ethnicity
54m in 2001, 55m in 2011. 92% down to 87%.

 

That's a nice word, 'rehabilitate'. Rehabilitate what exactly? Do you want compulsory education classes for bigots like me?

 

I don't need any petty one upmanship. I'm clear in my mind of exactly what you are and what you represent regardless of what you try to claim.

Racism pure and simple.

 

Oh no there are 900,000 more of us.

 

As I said, there's no point as there's no hope.

 

So it's the percentages that worry him?

More non whites acceptable as long as the whites are ****ing and reproducing like bunnies to keep the percentages at what he considers to be acceptable levels?