The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Odile]

	Quote:	Sandgrounder
	Semantics aside, I'd be surprised if there is not some legal backlash affecting the continuity of Brexit whilst there is an active fraud case underway with a direct implication to the referendum.

Exactly - this.

And its getting more and more interesting about this guy

https://www.channel4.com/news/diamon...X7Abp9ALOit84g

[Sandgrounder]

	Quote:	Odile
	Oh, and now Cameron is bored ... https://www.theguardian.com/politics...z9S8yJjPEx9AoA

Best tweet

	Quote:
	Getting David Cameron back. That's going to save the country is it? That's like asking Mark Chapman to coax another album out of John Lennon. You could write a list of Camerons successes as PM on the back of a hummingbirds eyelids. And still have room to draw a fecked pig.

[Swisstree]

	Quote:	Sandgrounder
	Best tweet

Isn't there a tiny uninhabited island somewhere where we could send Cameron and Blair?

They could busy themselves with developing effective immigrant policies and do some tidal research with sticks.. and we could send Farage along to cheer them up if they get bored.

[Sandgrounder]

	Quote:	Swisstree
	Isn't there a tiny uninhabited island somewhere where we could send Cameron and Blair? They could busy themselves with developing effective immigrant policies and do some tidal research with sticks.. and we could send Farage along to cheer them up if they get bored.

Latecomers to I'm A Celebrity? That would be one not to miss.

Cameron did say he was piss-bored. Maybe munching kangeroo testicles will scratch that itch...

[StirB]

	Quote:	Sandgrounder
	Latecomers to I'm A Celebrity? That would be one not to miss. Cameron did say he was piss-bored. Maybe munching kangeroo testicles will scratch that itch...

A week of having to listen to 'Arry Redknapp bollock on will soon have him wishing he was sitting at home piss-bored.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Odile
	With such a tiny majortiy, so many BIG lies- as big as a bus ... if fraud is doubly proven (it already has been once) and the PM was involved in stifling justice- they will have not much of a foot to stand on - as the reality (S*it) hits the proverbial fan.

	Quote:	Sandgrounder
	Semantics aside, I'd be surprised if there is not some legal backlash affecting the continuity of Brexit whilst there is an active fraud case underway with a direct implication to the referendum.

The legal basis for BREXIT is set out in European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and that alone. There is no legal way to force parliament to repeal the act because the parliament is sovereign and the Supreme Court will not over turn an act of parliament. So unless Boris, Arlene and friends suddenly develop morals and are willing to admit that it was a big lie, it is not going to get repealed.

[bowlie]

Dear Members,

The British Embassy would like to invite about 50 British Residents to a Consular Tea at the Residence of the British Ambassador in Berne on Wednesday the 12th December from 1500-1700 hours. The event will be an informal get-together over tea and mince-pies. It will provide an opportunity for residents to find out how they can keep informed about the latest messages regarding the UK exiting the EU, and to ask any questions they may have.

If you are interested in attending the event, please email fabiana.bertozzi@fco.gov.uk at the Embassy by 23rd November, stating your name, place of residence (town and canton) and email contact address.

Fabiana will then send out invitations to individuals on a “first come first served” basis, whilst ensuring that there is a fair representation from all over Switzerland.

Graham Robertson, BRA Chairman
1 November 2018



The British Residents’ Association of Switzerland
C. P. 30
1617 Remaufens

Tel: 021 728 62 55

www.britishresidents.ch


Don’t shoot the messenger.

[Sandgrounder]

	Quote:	Jim2007
	The legal basis for BREXIT is set out in European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and that alone. There is no legal way to force parliament to repeal the act because the parliament is sovereign and the Supreme Court will not over turn an act of parliament. So unless Boris, Arlene and friends suddenly develop morals and are willing to admit that it was a big lie, it is not going to get repealed.

To be fair, I did say "affect the continuity" rather than "repealed" as in "another big fat spanner in the works". I don't for a moment think it will reverse the process by any means. However this campaign seems to have been run on dodgy deals and skulduggery from the outset so, what's another shady scumbag and his dirty money?

[Jim2007]

I came across this article on the rejected referenda in Denmark and Ireland:

Asking The Public Twice: why do voters change their minds in second referendums on EU treaties

And although the sample size is small - about 40 people, it does make some interesting points including:

	Quote:
	In all three of the second referendums, the Yes campaigners used two new strategies to tie the hands of No campaigners. After the initial rejection, the government sought reassurances from the EU on the controversial themes of the first campaign, effectively allowing them to ask the same question again. Having changed the context successfully, the Yes side could thereby frame the question differently. To achieve this they used their second strategy, which was to raise the stakes of a second rejection. This time the Yes side could use the risk factor, which was more available to the No side in the first rounds. Importantly, Denmark initially designed these strategies, which the Irish learned and adopted later on.

So maybe the leave side do have more to fear in a second BREXIT referendum!

	Quote:	Jim2007
	I came across this article on the rejected referenda in Denmark and Ireland: Asking The Public Twice: why do voters change their minds in second referendums on EU treaties And although the sample size is small - about 40 people, it does make some interesting points including: So maybe the leave side do have more to fear in a second BREXIT referendum!

The question people should be asking themselves is why is it that people are only invited to vote again when they reject the EU? And not when they’ve previously voted for more EU?

[Sandgrounder]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	The question people should be asking themselves is why is it that people are only invited to vote again when they reject the EU? And not when they’ve previously voted for more EU?

The question people should be asking themselves is why is a result being accepted which was the product of such a flawed campaign supported almost fully by lies and misinformation?

I guess there's a decent whack of voters that now object to having been taken for mugs, but it depends where your standards are set I guess.

[Odile]

Yes, this - and you've forgotten to mention fraud and foreign money/interference.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Odile
	Yes, this - and you've forgotten to mention fraud and foreign money/interference.

Why would foreign money do what you claim? The £ has fallen so not in foreign investors interest. I know that maths was not your strong subject

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	The question people should be asking themselves is why is it that people are only invited to vote again when they reject the EU? And not when they’ve previously voted for more EU?

Really? You must be about the only one that can’t work it out! On the other hand I suppose it is on par with most of your lack of analysis!

[Odile]

It is plain illegal to finance a Ref or election campaign with foreign money- plain and simple and nothing to do with maths (and yes, I was **** at maths- and only passed my Bac thanks to my massively brainy older brother ).

But I do quote from sources in the know, like the LSE:

'Article 50 notification can be nullified

A court can declare any corrupt vote void. If it does, this nullifies the Prime Minister’s notification to the EU of the UK’s intention to leave. Any use of the ‘power to notify’ the UK’s ‘intention to withdraw’ would be irrational, and take into account an irrelevant factor (a corrupt Brexit vote). Notification to negotiate to leave the EU under article 50 must follow the UK’s ‘own constitutional requirements’. The UK may unilaterally revoke the notification, like in the private law of contract. Even if this were a question of EU law, the answer the Treaties require must be one that European Union holds together, not one that allows it to be torn apart.

This summary does not even scratch the surface, or the evidence, of Brexit’s corruption. Elections, and the Brexit referendum, can also be void if there are broadcasts ‘from a place outside’ the UK, that includes a programme on an electronic communications network. It is clear Russian bots were active on Twitter. The ripple effect is incalculable. Youtube has stayed silent about its network, while Facebook has issued denials that it was exploited – even though Russian bots were targeting American voters around the same time. Even though Putin’s Russia has supported UKIP, the AfD, Le Pen and Lega Nord, Youtube and Facebook have not yet been forced to disclose data about activity on their platforms.

Nor does this scratch the allegations about the reported £435,000 donation from Saudi Arabia to the DUP to be used for Brexit. It does not take a Sherlock Holmes to guess a motive for petro-state despots, whose exports are 60% or 83% fossil fuels, to fund causes like the DUP’s or UKIP who deny climate damage. David Cameron saw it coming. If the law is not enforced, the rule of law is in jeopardy. To stop the advance of the far-right in Europe, the UK government should go to Brussels with new mission: a big, new, open offer to unite for full employment on fair wages through democracy in a free society.
'

Full article here:

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpo...ZEAEQpzLsynrls

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Sandgrounder
	The question people should be asking themselves is why is a result being accepted which was the product of such a flawed campaign supported almost fully by lies and misinformation?

Because there is no way to challenge it apart from voting at the next general election and that is too late. It is a huge weakness in Parliament of Westminster style democracies - parliament is sovereign and there is no way for a citizen to challenge an act of parliament as being unconstitutional. Even if there was another referendum there is no way to require the likes of the DUP to carry it out.

[k_and_e]

	Quote:	Sandgrounder
	The question people should be asking themselves is why is a result being accepted which was the product of such a flawed campaign supported almost fully by lies and misinformation?

the problem of your statement is that this counts for any voting. you can replace lies by promises and misinformation by propaganda, and have a regular political campaign.

[Odile]

In the meantime, some people are enjoying all the fun:

SOMEBODY IS SHORTING THE POUND, Do not be fooled by all these "deal is near" stories in the UK, they are NOT matched by similar stories in Europe in any way. Each bit of supposed good news raises the pound and then they will move their money out just before the news that it is actually not good news at all. The plan is to pump up the pound and then crash it. It is so cynical it, beggars belief. Every single person now telling you a deal is near (Dominic Raab, Arlene Foster, etc,.) are playing their part in a truly cynical ploy.



from the safety of their tax haven in the sun.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Odile
	In the meantime, some people are enjoying all the fun: SOMEBODY IS SHORTING THE POUND, Do not be fooled by all these "deal is near" stories in the UK, they are NOT matched by similar stories in Europe in any way. Each bit of supposed good news raises the pound and then they will move their money out just before the news that it is actually not good news at all. The plan is to pump up the pound and then crash it. It is so cynical it, beggars belief. Every single person now telling you a deal is near (Dominic Raab, Arlene Foster, etc,.) are playing their part in a truly cynical ploy. from the safety of their tax haven in the sun.

1000's of people short stocks, currencies on a daily basis, some trades will be profitable others will cause them bankruptcy. With a short position your loss is unlimited with a long position you can only lose 100% of your money unless your using gearing as most currency traders do.

Holding assets in a tax haven does not necessarily reduce the ultimate tax payable & many people are liable to world wide taxation.

[Blueangel]

For anyone who is interested, this debate is being broadcast at 8pm Monday 5th November on Channel 4... https://www.channel4.com/info/press/...-really-thinks

For anyone who will need some light after all that shade, it ends just in time for the last Big Brother Final on Channel 5 My only serious decision is whether to have a vodka during the debate or hold off for the BB final. Hmmm...