Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

[miltiades]

The backstop is easily solved with a couple of check points for Goods and trade to pass through to protect the common market.

The citizens of Ireland can come pass through as they please, with no change to their day to day lives.

A simple remedy from a simple mind !!
Stop making a fucking fool of your self !

[Lordo]

The backstop is easily solved with a couple of check points for Goods and trade to pass through to protect the common market.

The citizens of Ireland can come pass through as they please, with no change to their day to day lives.

it was so simple my god and nobody understands it but you.

have you considered how many roads there are in the 310 miles of border. how are you going to stop trade going through them you stupid idiot.
secondly how will you know whether the person crossing at these supposedly couple check points whether a crosser is an irish citizen or not.

were born stupid or did you become stupid later. its too late for you for your father to get you tested, go to the nearest human hospital and get your dna checked you don't sound like a human.

i like the clip you posted. no evidence of anything happening except in this assholes and your imagination.

only govrnment can ask for an extension or in exceptional circumstances it may speaker said the mps will be given that opporotunity if government has lost the motion of no confidence. no what hte hell would anybody need to contact the eu leaders for this process when they will granted if they are asked just like they have done before.

try engaing your brain sometimes you stupid asshole.

[Pyrpolizer]

No one wants to deny you of your democratic rights. You have voted and the Brexiteers won the majority in the referendum. So far so good. However, if invoking article 50 violates any of the principles of the Good Friday agreement which the UK is a signatory to that agreement, then it is no longer a democratic matter, but a legal one. I don’t know if there are any legal issues that may conflict between article 50 and the Good Friday agreement. If there are, then they would need to be dealt with in the courts. Democracy is not absolute, or else, the majority may vote tomorrow to merry 13 year old girls in the UK despite being against the law. Do we allow the majority to have it their way or do we try to stop it with the courts? We just have to wait and see what happens and when it happens with Brexit, that’s all.

Imo the parliament has absolutely no jurisdiction over a referendum. The people voted to leave, therefore whatever deal or no deal the government managed to get to satisfy the people's wish to leave, is none of the parliament's business. Therefore yes I actually see a legal point here, that by seeking the parliament's approval for a deal or no deal, is beyond the parliament's jurisdiction.
The argument that in no case did the people voted to leave without a deal, cannot stand legally either.The people voted and they knew that leaving could be with a deal or no deal. Yet they made their choice.

I don't think there are any legal issues with the Good Friday agreement. It is the people's right to vote in a referendum the dissolving of any agreement (in this case their EU membership) regardless of whether that would render other agreements (be it the Good Friday agreement) null and void as well.

[Lordo]

No one wants to deny you of your democratic rights. You have voted and the Brexiteers won the majority in the referendum. So far so good. However, if invoking article 50 violates any of the principles of the Good Friday agreement which the UK is a signatory to that agreement, then it is no longer a democratic matter, but a legal one. I don’t know if there are any legal issues that may conflict between article 50 and the Good Friday agreement. If there are, then they would need to be dealt with in the courts. Democracy is not absolute, or else, the majority may vote tomorrow to merry 13 year old girls in the UK despite being against the law. Do we allow the majority to have it their way or do we try to stop it with the courts? We just have to wait and see what happens and when it happens with Brexit, that’s all.

Imo the parliament has absolutely no authority over a referendum. The people voted to leave, therefore whatever deal or no deal the government managed to get to satisfy the people's wish to leave, is none of the parliament's business. Therefore yes I actually see a legal point here, that by seeking the parliament's approval for a deal or no deal, is beyond the parliament's jurisdiction.

i beg to differ old man, if you were right, the government would have declared article 50 without a vote. the court case that followed the government was forced to put it to the vote. as no deal was mentioned in the decleration of article 50 then it is obvious even if there is no other laws passed the government wil lhave to get parliament to vote for the no-deal exit.

but it will not be needed, the tory remainers which are willing to see this government fall are far greater in numbers to labour brexiters who are willing to vote for no deal brexit as was proven in the house. first two weeks in september will make it very clear. even if boris wins the no confidence vote, he will have to pass a no-deal exit from parliament and the courts will decide.

[Pyrpolizer]

No one wants to deny you of your democratic rights. You have voted and the Brexiteers won the majority in the referendum. So far so good. However, if invoking article 50 violates any of the principles of the Good Friday agreement which the UK is a signatory to that agreement, then it is no longer a democratic matter, but a legal one. I don’t know if there are any legal issues that may conflict between article 50 and the Good Friday agreement. If there are, then they would need to be dealt with in the courts. Democracy is not absolute, or else, the majority may vote tomorrow to merry 13 year old girls in the UK despite being against the law. Do we allow the majority to have it their way or do we try to stop it with the courts? We just have to wait and see what happens and when it happens with Brexit, that’s all.

Imo the parliament has absolutely no authority over a referendum. The people voted to leave, therefore whatever deal or no deal the government managed to get to satisfy the people's wish to leave, is none of the parliament's business. Therefore yes I actually see a legal point here, that by seeking the parliament's approval for a deal or no deal, is beyond the parliament's jurisdiction.

i beg to differ old man, if you were right, the government would have declared article 50 without a vote. the court case that followed the government was forced to put it to the vote. as no deal was mentioned in the decleration of article 50 then it is obvious even if there is no other laws passed the government wil lhave to get parliament to vote for the no-deal exit.

but it will not be needed, the tory remainers which are willing to see this government fall are far greater in numbers to labour brexiters who are willing to vote for no deal brexit as was proven in the house. first two weeks in september will make it very clear. even if boris wins the no confidence vote, he will have to pass a no-deal exit from parliament and the courts will decide.

The legal issue here is that the UK's Supreme court actually forced the UK government to get the consent of the Parliament over a referendum starting from their consent to invoke article 50 and the mess that followed later regarding the deal/no deal/what kind of deal and what have you.
The UK's supreme court decision should have been challenged in the EU courts or ICS on the first place. How can a parliament have any say on a referendum where the people voted directly is beyond belief !

[Paphitis]

No one wants to deny you of your democratic rights. You have voted and the Brexiteers won the majority in the referendum. So far so good. However, if invoking article 50 violates any of the principles of the Good Friday agreement which the UK is a signatory to that agreement, then it is no longer a democratic matter, but a legal one. I don’t know if there are any legal issues that may conflict between article 50 and the Good Friday agreement. If there are, then they would need to be dealt with in the courts. Democracy is not absolute, or else, the majority may vote tomorrow to merry 13 year old girls in the UK despite being against the law. Do we allow the majority to have it their way or do we try to stop it with the courts? We just have to wait and see what happens and when it happens with Brexit, that’s all.

Imo the parliament has absolutely no authority over a referendum. The people voted to leave, therefore whatever deal or no deal the government managed to get to satisfy the people's wish to leave, is none of the parliament's business. Therefore yes I actually see a legal point here, that by seeking the parliament's approval for a deal or no deal, is beyond the parliament's jurisdiction.

i beg to differ old man, if you were right, the government would have declared article 50 without a vote. the court case that followed the government was forced to put it to the vote. as no deal was mentioned in the decleration of article 50 then it is obvious even if there is no other laws passed the government wil lhave to get parliament to vote for the no-deal exit.

but it will not be needed, the tory remainers which are willing to see this government fall are far greater in numbers to labour brexiters who are willing to vote for no deal brexit as was proven in the house. first two weeks in september will make it very clear. even if boris wins the no confidence vote, he will have to pass a no-deal exit from parliament and the courts will decide.

The legal issue here is that the UK's Supreme court actually forced the UK government to get the consent of the Parliament over a referendum starting from their consent to invoke article 50 and the mess that followed later regarding the deal/no deal/what kind of deal and what have you.
The UK's supreme court decision should have been challenged in the EU courts or ICS on the first place. How can a parliament have any say on a referendum where the people voted directly is beyond belief !

It would have been challenged if Article 50 wasn't invoked.

Since Parliament voted for Article 50, there was no need to take anything to court.

But you are of course correct. The Parliamenbt can not over rule a referendum. If it did, then the whole democratic process has been undermined and is subject to legal action.

[Paphitis]

The backstop is easily solved with a couple of check points for Goods and trade to pass through to protect the common market.

The citizens of Ireland can come pass through as they please, with no change to their day to day lives.

A simple remedy from a simple mind !!
Stop making a fucking fool of your self !

Oh shut up!

And of course there is a simple solution to this problem.

The issue is that it is the remoaners that do not want ANY solution whatsoever let alone a simple one.

The BOJO Government has already made a 277 page report with what it intends on doing in Ireland. This report will be lodged with the EU in due course.

But they have made it very clear, that Britain will BREXIT come what may on the 31st of October. And this stance is already bearing fruit because both Macron and Merkel have indicated they are now willing to negotiate and come to a compromise!

BOJO 1 EU 0

[miltiades]

The backstop is easily solved with a couple of check points for Goods and trade to pass through to protect the common market.

The citizens of Ireland can come pass through as they please, with no change to their day to day lives.

A simple remedy from a simple mind !!
Stop making a fucking fool of your self !

Oh shut up!

And of course there is a simple solution to this problem.

The issue is that it is the remoaners that do not want ANY solution whatsoever let alone a simple one.

The BOJO Government has already made a 277 page report with what it intends on doing in Ireland. This report will be lodged with the EU in due course.

But they have made it very clear, that Britain will BREXIT come what may on the 31st of October. And this stance is already bearing fruit because both Macron and Merkel have indicated they are now willing to negotiate and come to a compromise!

BOJO 1 EU 0

But !!! As you say General, the UK will be able to trade with the EU and people will come and go as they do now for up to 10 years . So the UK after Brexit will still be in ....the EU ! !! You are a Plonker General!!
By the way, have you disposed of Assad yet ??

[Pyrpolizer]

No one wants to deny you of your democratic rights. You have voted and the Brexiteers won the majority in the referendum. So far so good. However, if invoking article 50 violates any of the principles of the Good Friday agreement which the UK is a signatory to that agreement, then it is no longer a democratic matter, but a legal one. I don’t know if there are any legal issues that may conflict between article 50 and the Good Friday agreement. If there are, then they would need to be dealt with in the courts. Democracy is not absolute, or else, the majority may vote tomorrow to merry 13 year old girls in the UK despite being against the law. Do we allow the majority to have it their way or do we try to stop it with the courts? We just have to wait and see what happens and when it happens with Brexit, that’s all.

Imo the parliament has absolutely no authority over a referendum. The people voted to leave, therefore whatever deal or no deal the government managed to get to satisfy the people's wish to leave, is none of the parliament's business. Therefore yes I actually see a legal point here, that by seeking the parliament's approval for a deal or no deal, is beyond the parliament's jurisdiction.

i beg to differ old man, if you were right, the government would have declared article 50 without a vote. the court case that followed the government was forced to put it to the vote. as no deal was mentioned in the decleration of article 50 then it is obvious even if there is no other laws passed the government wil lhave to get parliament to vote for the no-deal exit.

but it will not be needed, the tory remainers which are willing to see this government fall are far greater in numbers to labour brexiters who are willing to vote for no deal brexit as was proven in the house. first two weeks in september will make it very clear. even if boris wins the no confidence vote, he will have to pass a no-deal exit from parliament and the courts will decide.

The legal issue here is that the UK's Supreme court actually forced the UK government to get the consent of the Parliament over a referendum starting from their consent to invoke article 50 and the mess that followed later regarding the deal/no deal/what kind of deal and what have you.
The UK's supreme court decision should have been challenged in the EU courts or ICS on the first place. How can a parliament have any say on a referendum where the people voted directly is beyond belief !

It would have been challenged if Article 50 wasn't invoked.

Since Parliament voted for Article 50, there was no need to take anything to court.

But you are of course correct. The Parliamenbt can not over rule a referendum. If it did, then the whole democratic process has been undermined and is subject to legal action.

But it did go through the court and resulted to forcing the Government to get the parliament's approval before invoking article 50. Lordo was right!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... article-50

This automatically gave the right to the parliament to have a say on the terms of leaving the EU, hence the current mess