Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

I have been watching this very closely Lordo and I believe I have taken a principled approach.

Denying that Parliament has a right to change either the the default date or the default position and that because they exercised this right, they do democratically have, in law, in constitutional precedent and in fact, with a democratic result you do not like therefore they should just simply have that right removed from them entirely so you can get what you want, is about as far from a 'principled approach as you could get in my book.

[Paphitis]

I have been watching this very closely Lordo and I believe I have taken a principled approach.

Denying that Parliament has a right to change either the the default date or the default position and that because they exercised this right, they do democratically have, in law, in constitutional precedent and in fact, with a democratic result you do not like therefore they should just simply have that right removed from them entirely so you can get what you want, is about as far from a 'principled approach as you could get in my book.

Parliament has no such right to impede the people’s choice.

Make no mistake about that!

To do that makes the British Parliament no different to The Greek Junta of the 70s.

Might as well become bum chums with Assad!

There is not a court in the land that will take the side of Parliament. That is the harsh reality which I know you don’t want to be true but is true and can NEVER be any other way.

[Lordo]

I have been watching this very closely Lordo and I believe I have taken a principled approach.

Denying that Parliament has a right to change either the the default date or the default position and that because they exercised this right, they do democratically have, in law, in constitutional precedent and in fact, with a democratic result you do not like therefore they should just simply have that right removed from them entirely so you can get what you want, is about as far from a 'principled approach as you could get in my book.

Parliament has no such right to impede the people’s choice.

Make no mistake about that!

To do that makes the British Parliament no different to The Greek Junta of the 70s.

Might as well become bum chums with Assad!

There is not a court in the land that will take the side of Parliament. That is the harsh reality which I know you don’t want to be true but is true and can NEVER be any other way.

what kind of astupid statement is this. since when havepeople voted on anything andit bacme a law without parliament voting for it.

the court in the land has approved that it is not referendum and it is not even the pm or his cronies that can take such decisions. only parliament can take such decision. have got any fakin brain cells in that empty fakin skull of yours.

in fact even with coalition a majority of one is impossible becasue a single tory mp can block it and there are at least 30 tories ready to do it. what is it you don't understand gavole

boris is doing only one thing different to ay. may in her infinite wisdon attemted to blackmail parliament with no-deal to get them to vote for her deal it did not work. boris has expanded the blackmailing to both mps and eu. he is blacmailing them both to get his way and he will go the same way of may, down the toilet. boris may look like a leader but he is fram from that. he is a liar who has been fired twice for lies. he makes up quotes andeven went as far to give an address of a reporter so his mate can hospitalise him. when he was asked about he pointed out that he was incompetentand the information he gave was not correct. you are really behaving like a true fly. attracted to shit.

[Paphitis]

I have been watching this very closely Lordo and I believe I have taken a principled approach.

Denying that Parliament has a right to change either the the default date or the default position and that because they exercised this right, they do democratically have, in law, in constitutional precedent and in fact, with a democratic result you do not like therefore they should just simply have that right removed from them entirely so you can get what you want, is about as far from a 'principled approach as you could get in my book.

Parliament has no such right to impede the people’s choice.

Make no mistake about that!

To do that makes the British Parliament no different to The Greek Junta of the 70s.

Might as well become bum chums with Assad!

There is not a court in the land that will take the side of Parliament. That is the harsh reality which I know you don’t want to be true but is true and can NEVER be any other way.

what kind of astupid statement is this. since when havepeople voted on anything andit bacme a law without parliament voting for it.

the court in the land has approved that it is not referendum and it is not even the pm or his cronies that can take such decisions. only parliament can take such decision. have got any fakin brain cells in that empty fakin skull of yours.

in fact even with coalition a majority of one is impossible becasue a single tory mp can block it and there are at least 30 tories ready to do it. what is it you don't understand gavole

boris is doing only one thing different to ay. may in her infinite wisdon attemted to blackmail parliament with no-deal to get them to vote for her deal it did not work. boris has expanded the blackmailing to both mps and eu. he is blacmailing them both to get his way and he will go the same way of may, down the toilet. boris may look like a leader but he is fram from that. he is a liar who has been fired twice for lies. he makes up quotes andeven went as far to give an address of a reporter so his mate can hospitalise him. when he was asked about he pointed out that he was incompetentand the information he gave was not correct. you are really behaving like a true fly. attracted to shit.

It's not stupid. I can't believe there are people like you willing to make it up as you go along.

A people's referendum is the final say in the matter. The wording and the question asked in that referendum was also very clear and the default position when people actually asked and were responded to, was in fact a NO DEAL BREXIT anyway.

Not only was the referendum very clear, but the mandate delivered by the people was also clear as crystal.

Boris can take the UK out of the EU and he can do it on Britain's terms and he can do it with a NO DEAL as well. Parliament is not required to approve or accept the people's choice.

Parliament must only ratify any possible deal with the EU, which they have refused to do. They are not required to approve a NO DEAL BREXIT. Boris is more than entitled to go down that road.

Deal with it!

[erolz66]

A people's referendum is the final say in the matter.

Well not the one held in 1975 apparently. Yeah yeah I know and call me pedantic if you like but what you have actually said there, as opposed to what I must guess you meant to say, is BS.

Parliament is not required to approve or accept the people's choice.

Parliament approval is not required for a no deal exit to be implemented, because that is the default position. That is all correct (though you conflating 'peoples choice' with 'no deal exit' is not correct). What is also true and correct is the Parliament has the right to vote by majority to change either the default position or the default state. It has exercised this right one all ready. That is how our system of democracy works and has always worked. Now you can end up in a situation where by MP's that are supposed to do as the people want but do not. The system has a mechanism for if and when that happens. It has always had such a mechanism. For 500 years it has such a mechanism. The mechanism is for the people to change their MPs to ones that will do that job better. However than standard, normal way of of dealing with such a situation is not guaranteed to give you what you want regardless and despite what the true will of the people may actually be in terms of exiting that way rather than some other. So what you do, in order to guarantee you get the result you want, is propose a way of dealing with the situation that is unprecedented , fundamentally anti democratic , involves taking the rights of Parliament that it has held for 500 years away and specifically ignores what the will of the people is in terms of no deal as a way of exiting and seeks to deny the people any say at all on this issue of how we leave and THEN you run around after the fact trying to find ways you can present that as not fundamentally anti democratic.

[erolz66]

Parliament has no such right to impede the people’s choice.

Who has the right to decide how we exit ? Parliament ? The people ? Or Johnson by fiat decision ? Who is the highest democratic power ? You will say the people have already had that say on how we will exit. I will say that is BS. So what is the best way to truly know if you are right or I am as to what that will is , that does not and can not possibly involve trampling over the peoples right to decide ? You ask them. That is no only the best way it is the only way if you have any REAL regard for the supremacy of the will of the people. You do not ask them what they have already been asked in 2016. You ask them do you support a no deal exit, yes or no. Nothing else. Of course this will not guarantee that you will get what you want regardless of the will of the people, so this is not an acceptable solution to you.

You can not subvert the genuine will of the people by asking them. It is literally impossible. You can only subvert that will by NOT asking them.

[miltiades]

Mate, Don't tske Paphitis seriously by doing so is like being served a plate of shit and you send your ...compliments to the chef asking for the ...recepy!!
He is a complete moron, very tired as well having just ....lost a war in Syria.
What a Plonker !!

[Paphitis]

A people's referendum is the final say in the matter.

Well not the one held in 1975 apparently. Yeah yeah I know and call me pedantic if you like but what you have actually said there, as opposed to what I must guess you meant to say, is BS.

Parliament is not required to approve or accept the people's choice.

Parliament approval is not required for a no deal exit to be implemented, because that is the default position. That is all correct (though you conflating 'peoples choice' with 'no deal exit' is not correct). What is also true and correct is the Parliament has the right to vote by majority to change either the default position or the default state. It has exercised this right one all ready. That is how our system of democracy works and has always worked. Now you can end up in a situation where by MP's that are supposed to do as the people want but do not. The system has a mechanism for if and when that happens. It has always had such a mechanism. For 500 years it has such a mechanism. The mechanism is for the people to change their MPs to ones that will do that job better. However than standard, normal way of of dealing with such a situation is not guaranteed to give you what you want regardless and despite what the true will of the people may actually be in terms of exiting that way rather than some other. So what you do, in order to guarantee you get the result you want, is propose a way of dealing with the situation that is unprecedented , fundamentally anti democratic , involves taking the rights of Parliament that it has held for 500 years away and specifically ignores what the will of the people is in terms of no deal as a way of exiting and seeks to deny the people any say at all on this issue of how we leave and THEN you run around after the fact trying to find ways you can present that as not fundamentally anti democratic.

No they don't! You show me a law that states that parliament can change the default position of NO DEAL BREXIT.

It is the British Parliament who rejected the EU Deal that was offered. maybe they were right to reject it because maybe it was a bad deal, but let's not pretend to be surprised when Parliament started making stupid statements like the NO DEAL BREXIT was off the table.

The Parliament made the NO Deal BREXIT the only viable opion because of their stupidity and that might be the only way forward now and BORIS is allowed to go down that road if he has to and he may have to. Not that he doesn't want a deal. He invited the EU back to the negotiating table and made it clear NO DEAL BREXIT is an option for Britain which is sensible.

Parliament can jump up and down all it likes but the mandate is there.

[Paphitis]

Mate, Don't tske Paphitis seriously by doing so is like being served a plate of shit and you send your ...compliments to the chef asking for the ...recepy!!
He is a complete moron, very tired as well having just ....lost a war in Syria.
What a Plonker !!

Stay off the grog.

All you got a stupid one liners and profanities.

Go to bed and sleep it off!

[Paphitis]

Parliament has no such right to impede the people’s choice.

Who has the right to decide how we exit ? Parliament ? The people ? Or Johnson by fiat decision ? Who is the highest democratic power ? You will say the people have already had that say on how we will exit. I will say that is BS. So what is the best way to truly know if you are right or I am as to what that will is , that does not and can not possibly involve trampling over the peoples right to decide ? You ask them. That is no only the best way it is the only way if you have any REAL regard for the supremacy of the will of the people. You do not ask them what they have already been asked in 2016. You ask them do you support a no deal exit, yes or no. Nothing else. Of course this will not guarantee that you will get what you want regardless of the will of the people, so this is not an acceptable solution to you.

You can not subvert the genuine will of the people by asking them. It is literally impossible. You can only subvert that will by NOT asking them.

The people have that right. The question asked was clear.

Thee people were asked if they wanted to remain or leave the EU. That's clearcut and to me the default here means NO DEAL!

The people knew exactly what they voted for.