Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

He didn't vote out.

That Markit stuff shows only one side (surprise surprise) It might as well have been written by a remainer.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/976bd7e8-3952-11e6-9a05-82a9b15a8ee7.html#axzz4F8tzzSf2

Dumbo,

"Fred HATES Britain and all of the British ,i wonder why he wants to see the UK decline .

No. In the majority of its practices and its culture it has a lot going for it.

Climate could be a little better.

Some problems with its antiquated political system.

-===-=-===


But tell me, what it is like for you seeing the rest of the world as your enemy?

Going around terrified about what others are doing, anxiously looking over your shoulders, in case the may be getting more than you think they should have or blaming others for your own position.

But I suppose blaming, or picking on other groups, or individuals, or organisations etc. may relieve you of your anxiety and divert you from your own inadequacies.

But good luck to you.

I did vote out, but still concerned at economic effect.

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/insight-does-brexit-mean-brexit-could-uk-change-120137576--sector.html

When does Brexit mean Brexit - Could the UK change its mind?
Reuters
By Guy Faulconbridge 1 hour 46 minutes ago
By Guy Faulconbridge

LONDON (Reuters) - Since entering Downing Street as Britain's new prime minister last week, Theresa May has quickly dispelled hopes that the UK might change its mind about leaving the European Union.

"Brexit means Brexit," she said in her inaugural speech.

She added later that Britain will take the time it needs to invoke the now notorious Article 50 of Europe’s de facto constitution governing a member’s divorce from the EU. Both May and her new minister for Brexit have said Article 50 would not be triggered before the end of the year.

Yet once May gets the United Kingdom onto the Brexit runway, can she turn back the plane?

That is the question many UK and continental European legal minds are now pondering. One London firm of human rights lawyers has formally asked the government's legal department to clarify whether a country can invoke Article 50 and begin the process of EU divorce — but then revoke it down the line.

May’s government is also looking into the issue, as ministers study their position regarding the timing and aftermath of invoking Article 50, according to a person close to the government.

Article 50 of the European Union’s 2009 Lisbon Treaty, which was drafted by a former British ambassador to the EU, has never been used, providing no legal precedent for how it works.

Yet how May navigates the 256-word provision is ultimately a political decision, government officials say, that will define her premiership and the future of Britain's ties with the rest of Europe.

If Article 50 can be revoked after it is invoked, then May's calculations of when and how to start Britain's EU divorce could be radically different from the widely assumed "irrevocable trigger" of Article 50, according to lawyers and government sources.

Charles Streeten, a British barrister who has examined the legal arguments around the invocation and possible revocation of Article 50, says a country can unilaterally pull back at any point prior to the expiry of the two-year period during which, according to the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union and the exiting state need to work out the terms of their divorce.

"The benefits of this should not be underestimated. If I am right, Britain would have a much stronger hand to play in the EU negotiations," Streeten told Reuters. Streeten said the government should seek formal advice from the European Union’s Court of Justice on the matter.

Bindmans, a top London firm of human rights lawyers, has written to the government’s legal department seeking clarification on the revocability issue as well. "It would appear to be in the UK’s interests for that issue to be resolved before the Article 50 process is commenced," Bindmans wrote in its letter. The department declined comment.

In Brussels, another view prevails.

EU lawyers say Britain could only revoke an Article 50 notification if all the other 27 members of the EU agreed. Otherwise, Britain could theoretically pull out of its divorce a day before the two-year negotiating period is up and start again, tangling the world’s biggest trading block in years of divorce talks.

UN-DIVORCE?

The June 23rd referendum in which 17.4 million voters cast their ballots in favour of leaving the European Union versus 16.1 million who wanted to remain has opened up the biggest period of British financial, political and constitutional uncertainty in modern times.

The vote has been cast by some lawyers as a "Peasants' Revolt" that is now facing a “counter revolution” because the vote went against the wishes of most of Britain's political, financial and business elites.

Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage, Britain’s foremost Brexit politician, has said there is a concerted attempt to slow - or even prevent - a British exit, just like the Peasants' Revolt of 1381 was ultimately crushed.

Since the referendum, several legal challenges have been mounted aimed at giving MPs a say over both Brexit and Article 50. At least seven lawsuits have been started arguing that only parliament has the authority to decide whether Britain should trigger Article 50.

The first of such lawsuits will be heard in October.

"I believe that people have been fooled," Gina Miller, a co-founder of London fund manager SCM Private, 51, who is the main claimant in the challenge.

"They have not realised that the referendum was not legally binding and secondly there is no Brexit plan.”

Dominic Chambers is a senior lawyer who has filed another lawsuit aimed at forcing the government to allow parliament to decide whether Brexit goes ahead. That case form part of Miller's case.

Chambers, who is acting for hairdresser Deir Dos Santos, says he wants parliament involved precisely because he believes "Article 50 is a one-way street; once Article 50 has been triggered it is irreversible.”

Yet two of Britain's top law professors, Michael Dougan and Derrick Wyatt, said they believe Britain could revoke a divorce notification before the two-year negotiation period is up.

Still, Dougan, professor of European law at the University of Liverpool, said any revocation would in practise depend on making a political agreement with the other members states.

Keith Ewing, a law professor at King’s College London, believes there is no provision for revoking Article 50. Yet he too believes there might be the possibility of a political “fudge” with the rest of the European Union.

"But this is all moot: it is not foreseeable that the British government will change its mind," he said.

BREXIT LIGHT?

Any attempt at a fudge would enrage supporters of Brexit, including many lawmakers in May’s government, which has a majority of 16 in the 650-seat House of Commons.

Brendan O’Neill helped organise a protest outside Downing Street on May’s first day in office.

O’Neill, who described himself as a Marxist libertarian, says any attempt to block Brexit would thrust Britain into an even deeper political crisis as the elites would be seen to be frustrating the clearly expressed wishes of voters.

He said he hopes Brexit will happen but that he has his worries.

“What I think might happen is that we get Brexit light.”

Fred ,you can write what you like about me i couldn't care less .
Does it not bother you though that almost everyone on here thinks your an idiot ?
Wanting to help refuges is one thing but you constantly defend any act of terrorism ,you have made excuses for them time and again ,that is why i believe you HATE Britain .

Dumbo,

You are entitled to your beliefs, and values, however, baseless they are.

(Hold onto them, you never know what is around the next corner and perhaps they will keep you feeling safe.)

You defend every act of terrorism FACT , there is always a reason in your world .
You call people Dumbo and other childish names does that not make you a prat ?
I do not need anyone to keep me safe i can assure you, i am far better travelled and worldly wise than you .
Not wanting this small island filling up with 300 thousand new mostly unqualified people every year is not wrong and no one else on here thinks so as well , now run along and have your evening drink .

Dumbo,

When I consider you, I think my choice of Dumbo as a name, feels apt.
-==-==-=-=
I cannot think of any occasion on this board when I have defended acts of "terrorism".
However, I think many so-called acts of "terrorism", if thought about, can be seen as responses by those who committing such actions as their "rightful" responses to perceived "abuses" they have received at the hands of those they are trying to “harm” or “kill”. (Ignorance of the individual “harmed” and grouping them as foreigners, immigrants, or UKIPPERS etc. .)
(Wars are won by victors, believing in their right to “justifiable” murder. If they had lost, their adversaries would have justified similar actions in order to justify gaining the win.)
Also, they justify their actions for "change" by utilising the weapons, which appear available to them. The result of a plane or drone dropping its bombs at 30,00ft is little difference in its effect to the individual than being shot in the back or kill by a grenade.
Trying to understand the “reason” for “terrorism” may lead to reduction of, or prevent the ongoing carnage. That does not mean one should not attempt to arrest, prevent or prosecute, even kill those committing acts of terrorism.
The justifications for terrorism, is “questionable”, as are some of your arguments about the consequences of “immigration” and the EE.
But, perhaps, their “beliefs” are as strongly held as some of your seem to be.
I still think that much of the propaganda around the referendum was fraudulent and also, seen by many to be deliberately fanning racial tension for “political” benefits.
If I have other information I might modify that opinion.

Have a good weekend.


PS. Allowing only the "qualified" immigrant into a country could be seen as a modern day form of pillaging, or piracy of another country, especially if the immigrant's country is less develop.

But that is OK..

Or is it?

You are a liar as well as an idiot and thick as they come . Your views are far more radical than anyone on here.

Thank you for your considered opinion.

Can't see much wrong in radical thinking, rather than "stuck in the rut" thinking, as long as the actions from it are moderate and responsible for all.

-=-=-=-

Not sure about that weekend.

Perhaps, you should "calm down dear" and find a secluded refuge for a little peace and quiet.

But don't venture abroad, you may be mistaken for a migrant.

Shooting incident in Munich, one death, multiple injuries

Sounds bad on the news at 6 , they don't know who it is yet .

Now saying multi deaths

Police say they think there are several attackers, who are on the run ..

Reports of 6 deaths and 3 shooters

Allowing only the "qualified" immigrant into a country could be seen as a modern day form of pillaging, or piracy of another country, especially if the immigrant's country is less develop.
But that is OK..
Or is it?

=================

of course it's ok
if you take your country as being your club - not an unreasonable analogy - then you allow in those whom you feel fit in and/or "add value" to the club ...... it's not pillaging or piracy or any other such pejorative term that you (fred) wish to attach ..... it's called being selective as one has every right to be

It's just Fred being an asshole again , i'm sure he will be back to justify the horrific attacks in Munich this evening .

Listen guys Fred is a Twat, we all recognise that. He's sat at home gin soaked, wearing his Wheel Tappers And Shunters Flat Cap, portrait of Neil Kinnock (signed) adorning his tiled coal fire place as he lolls in his flea invested armchair. His poor wife is subject to escape by playing Bingo down the local Mecca 5 nights a week cause she knows she will get some peace Saturday and Sunday cause Fred will be absent down the local Labour Club.

Just ignore the knobhead, let him rant his usual bile, post his cartoons, tell he's Welsh his English is shite!

PPS Fred what did your countrymen vote for? They are all dicheads as well eh? Ah well, takes one to no one Freda.

My answer to this shit is to knock every Mosque down in the UK/Europe and if you don't fecking like it piss off somewhere else.

FFS we aren't a Muslim country and we aren't a Muslim continent , religion is a total fecking joke imo and the sooner the whole world realises it the better.