British Indy: What Happens Now?

Will the army be out too, fighting with people in queues and ration cards?...honestly such is the depth of the remainers last change of stopping it, you could really make anything up as they have always done.

It's all dross of course but it is funny to watch the extreme remainers trying to outdo each other with the silliest scripts of the week. next week, the U.K. is shrinking in size and unless we stop brexit we will have to go to mars

 

And stop banging on about how great Scottish produce is and why Scotland should be independent maybe?

Ar, no. Good for Scotland to stand alone, not good for U.K.

Still maintain, in the r countries of U.K. we can grow and Fish all we need to fulfil any needs of the U.K. population. Just may need to realign shopping habits. Wouldn’t it be great if a local farm shop sold to local people? For a price that was in line with what people pay at, say, Tesco because Tesco can no longer strangle farmers with 1% margins?

Let angels and stuff will still be imported, maybe just a bit more expensive...who knows but still not sure that’s an issue either.

 

Isnt if funny what part truths can deliver? Like a totally different outcome.

 

And stop banging on about how great Scottish produce is and why Scotland should be independent maybe?
why is that bradly? why wouldn't i talk about the local affects of brexit? why is it not worth pointing out the facts of the matter? why not stop talking about the motor industry or financial sector? why not have a go at noob, i will put money down and say he mentions it most, why even comment on these threads, then moan about the amount of em, yer a biking god after all.
twat.

 

I think it’s great that you are proud of that local produce, and that it’s the sort of quality that others should want to buy.

But seems that you think Ok for Scotland but not for U.K. (or do you mostly mean England?)

So if you want us to carry on buying loads of expensive imports, rather than buying local (which is what you were saying up there) how can you shouty of still for Scotland? It’s full of contradictions. Simple as that.

Not sure about the riding god or twat thing. I neither ride on cliff nor am laying eggs.

 

here, you can shove this on yer pipe and smoke it bradly, and all you other one nation britnats.
https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2018/07/26/this-is-where-we-are-now/

 

i am no more proud of being Scottish than you are are being English, i am however passionate about not being screwed over.
if you had even the slightest idea how the uk is set up, how things are run and taxes are raised in different countries across the uk, and reading between the lines on many of your posts, you wouldn't be so cocky. i am sure of it.

 

Actually, I’m proud to be British. British to me is a culture of variety, tolerance, soldering on and standing up to at difficult times to do the right thing.

But carry on reinforcing a wide held view of Scots, their pure hatred of anything English and the size of shoulder chips to anyone who reads this stuff.

 

I know, I gave you the article that gave you them figures. The article also shows we can get tariff free on some items whether you are in or out of the e.u. and there is expansion for more food to come in. It is a sillyness that we sell foodstocks overseas whilst then having to import the very same foodstocks.

Buying more of our own produce within our own shores would not only ensure we are able to manage it better, track it better and maintain a higher standard but it will also reduce unecessary animal movements and therefore decrease carbon footprints

U.K. customers buying more U.K. produce might just be the best way forward, it could collapse the republic of Ireland's farming industry but so be it, Varadkar has made it known what side he thinks the Republics bread is buttered

 

To be fair fin, we could be talking about which toothpaste is best and you'd say toothpaste would be better in an independent Scotland but it tastes worst because of the tory toothpastes in westminster

Not saying your a boring old fart fin, but you do a good impression of one ...tories tories westminster grrrr

 

Wouldn't a short lived food crisis help reduce the huge levels of child obesity that we're constantly told about by Jamie Oliver?

Brexit, saving our childrens lives

HUZZAH

 

i guess we could eat immigrants, maybe gnaw on the bones of the elderly, i think they are the biggest scroungers of all. they could of saved all that bad PR on the rape clause and just insist that every third child born is for the pot, maybe?.

 

Good idea, washed down with some snozzcumber juice



HUZZAH

 

Well it's one in 4.5 for the bin in Scotland fin. Births in Scotland 2017 52,861, abortions in scotland for the 2016/2017 period 12,062. Want to carry that line on?

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/scotlands-facts/births-in-scotland
page 6 http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-T...05-30/2017-05-30-Terminations-2016-Report.pdf

 

not particularly. busy as fook and tbh, i am only on here today because i have a couple of backroom convos going on. and besides, some will low a fuse. yer a grumpy lot when its not about yersel's and faced with the flip side of a argument yer not used to hearing.
but of course, every baby born in Scotland is a better baby.
the sottish baby box is free but bad.
the english baby box tho less equipped and no less flammable, it's £450, but good. Brian Wilson of the BBC told me so.
but maybe you will tell me about what ever it is yer going on about, mostly because i aint entirely sure what yer point is.
maybe i will find the time to read it, maybe i wont. you know how it is. if i need an extra dose of bollox, i dare say i will be back.
good lad.

 

I know I’ve posted this before,but I so desperately want it to be tested in court.So I lifted it from a new Facebook post:
Helen Booth
Just now ·
Vernon Coleman
Many constitutional experts believe that Britain isn't actually a member of the European Union since our apparent entry was in violation of British law and was, therefore invalid.
In enacting the European Communities Bill through an ordinary vote in the House of Commons, Ted Heath's Government breached the constitutional convention which requires a prior consultation of the people (either by a general election or a referendum) on any measure involving constitutional change. The general election or referendum must take place before any related parliamentary debate. (Britain has no straightforward written constitution. But, the signing of the Common Market entrance documents was, without a doubt, a breach of the spirit of our constitution.)
Just weeks before the 1970 general election which made him Prime Minister, Edward Heath declared that it would be wrong if any Government contemplating membership of the European Community were to take this step without `the full hearted consent of Parliament and people'.
However, when it came to it Heath didn't have a referendum because opinion polls at the time (1972) showed that the British people were hugely opposed (by a margin of two to one) against joining the Common Market. Instead, Heath merely signed the documents that took us into what became the European Union on the basis that Parliament alone had passed the European Communities Bill of 1972.
Some MPs have subsequently claimed that `Parliament can do whatever it likes'. But that isn't true, of course. Parliament consists of a number of individual MPs who have been elected by their constituents to represent them. Political parties are not recognised in our system of government and Parliament does not have the right to change the whole nature of Britain's constitution. We have (or are supposed to have) an elective democracy not an elective dictatorship. Parliament may, in law and in day to day issues, be the sovereign power in the state, but the electors are (in the words of Dicey's `Introduction for the Study of the Law of the Constitution' published in 1885) `the body in which sovereign power is vested'. Dicey goes on to point out that `in a political sense the electors are the most important part of, we may even say are actually, the sovereign power, since their will is under the present constitution sure to obtain ultimate obedience.' Bagehot, author of The English Constitution, 1867, describes the nation, through Parliament, as `the present sovereign'.
In 1972, when Heath decided to take Britain into the Common Market, he used Parliament's legal sovereignty to deny and permanently limit the political sovereignty of the electorate. Heath and Parliament changed the basic rules and they did not have the right (legal or moral) to do that. The 1972 European Communities Bill wasn't just another Act of Parliament. Heath's Bill used Parliament's legal sovereignty, and status as representative of the electorate, to deny the fundamental rights of the electorate.
Precedents show that the British constitution (which may not be written and formalised in the same way as the American constitution is presented) but which is, nevertheless, enshrined and codified in the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628), the Bill of Rights (1689) and the Act of Settlement (1701) requires Parliament to consult the electorate directly where constitutional change which would affect their political sovereignty is in prospect. (The 1689 Bill of Rights contains the following oath: `I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority within this Realm.' Since this Bill has not been repealed it is clear that every treaty Britain has signed with the EU has been illegal.)
So, for example, Parliament was dissolved in 1831/2 to obtain the electorate's authority for the Reform Bill and again in 1910 following the Lord's rejection of the Liberal Finance Bill.
In 1975, when the Government changed, Harold Wilson sought to put right the clear constitutional error by organising a retrospective referendum (something quite unprecedented in British history) designed to obtain the permission of the British people for Britain to join something it had already `joined'.
Wilson's referendum was inspired solely by the realisation that the consent of the electorate ought first to have been obtained before we joined the EEC. The lack of legitimacy of the European Communities Act brought about the decision by the incoming Prime Minister and Labour leadership that a referendum should be held in preference to yet another general election.
But, almost inevitably, the question asked in the referendum was also illegal since voters were asked: `Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?'
The problem was that since Heath had ignored the constitution duties and requirements of Parliament and had signed the entrance documents illegally the words `stay in' were deceptive. We couldn't stay in the EEC because, constitutionally, we had never entered. We couldn't enter the Common Market because Parliament did not have the right to sign away our sovereignty.
The referendum Wilson organised to remedy Heath's constitutional breach misled the electorate on a simple constitutional issue and was, therefore, itself illegal. (Wilson's referendum was passed after a good deal of very one-sided propaganda was used to influence public opinion. If the nation had voted against our `continued' membership of the EEC the political embarrassment for all politicians would have been unbearable.)
Attempts through the courts to annul our membership of the European Union on the basis that Parliament acted improperly have failed because Parliament, through its legal sovereignty, is the source of the law in Britain and the courts are, therefore, unable to challenge any Parliamentary Act.
Only Parliament can reclaim the legislative powers that Heath and subsequent Prime Ministers have handed to the European Union.
And so, only when Parliament is filled with honest politicians (not inevitably an oxymoron) who are not controlled by the private party system will the mistake be rectified and our membership annulled.
Britain's entry into the Common Market (later to be transformed into the EU) was also illegal for another reason. The Prime Minister who signed the entry documents, Edward Heath, later confirmed that he had lied to the British people about the implications of the Treaty.
Heath told the electorate that signing the Treaty of Rome would lead to no essential loss of National Sovereignty but later admitted that this was a lie. Astonishingly, Heath said he lied because he knew that the British would not approve of him signing the Treaty if they knew the truth. Heath told voters that the EEC was merely a free trade association. But he was lying through his teeth. He knew that the original members of the EEC had a long-standing commitment to political union and the step by step creation of a European superstate.
Edward Heath received a substantial financial bribe for taking Britain into the EU when he was Prime Minister. (Heath was no stranger to bribery. One of his aides bribed a senior Labour Party official £25,000 for details of Harold Wilson's election tactics.) The reward of £35,000, paid personally to Heath and at the time a substantial sum of money, was handed over to him (in the guise of The Charlemagne Prize) for signing the Treaty of Rome.
Because of Heath's dishonesty we never actually joined the Common Market. And so all the subsequent treaties that were signed were illegal.
Britain's Treason Act (1351) is (at the time of writing) still in place. It states `that treason is committed when a man be adherent to the King's enemies in his realm, giving them aid and comfort in the realm'.
And under the Treason Felony Act (1848) it is treason if `any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, devise or intend to deprive our most gracious Lady the Queen (Elizabeth) from the style, honour or Royal Name of the Imperial crown of the United Kingdom.'
Our membership of the European Union will mean the end of the United Kingdom. So, since our membership of the European Union will doubtless `deprive our most gracious Lady the Queen from the style, honour or Royal Name of the Imperial crown of the United Kingdom' Britain's entry into the Common Market, under Edward Heath's signature, was null and void.
Heath committed an act of treason. He betrayed the Queen and he deliberately misled the British people.
Does any of this really matter to politicians?
Is there any hope that Parliament will repeal the 1972 European Communities Act and restore sovereignty to the people? Not in the immediate future.
But the errors made by Heath and Wilson mean that when we want to leave the EU it will be very easy.
Because, officially, we never joined.
An independent British Parliament would simply have to pass one short Act of Parliament and give notice to the EU and we would be out of this accursed club.

 

The eu have said right from the earliest point we are not going to punish you but we are really. It's that kind of partner that makes you ask why you didn't leave earlier

Most will be seeing the ramping up over the summer break now they know it's going to wto and free trade. Of the silly campaigns, fear factories, polls upon polls, wheeling out ex british eu commissioners still getting pay from the eu, etc etc as the worst of the remain side and multinationals try to convince us democratic votes no longer matter.

This is to be expected as their desperation see's that door finally closing and we finally get on with it, they will try and tell you that at one minute past midnight on the 29th of March 2019, the lights will be turned off, you won't be able to get your money out of a bank, no planes will fly into the U.K., our fields will become like the sahara and we will be so food poor that overnight, we will become Ethiopia of the 70's.

and yet all of it will be a lie. a lie created by the very same people who said fake news lost them the vote, now have no trouble using fake news to try and get a second vote.

Those of us who voted for brexit knew and still know in the long run but not too far away, the U.K. will be far better for leaving the eu expected this crazed zombieland panic of the extreme remainers and their desperate child like sillyness. Like I said, as that door closes the crazier they will become, the sillier they will become and the fear stories will reach such plateaus that even low birth rates will be blamed on brexit too.

The calm people will just watch those crazy frogs jumping around in that box as though they have licked fingers coated in spice. Keep calm and carry on

 

I'd endure him for one reason: that he isn't the unprincipled EU fifth columnist currently infesting No.10 with her sinister anti-UK machinations.
If Rees-Mogg was elected leader though,I'd vote Conservative again...(supporting anyone from a wealthy family,who has been publicly-schooled and insulated from the misery of political decision-making) ,makes me grind my teeth in anguish,but he has made perfect sense with every statement,accepts that his religious and family views might not chime with the electorate and so doesn't try to foist them on every one else,and,(like Trump),is independently wealthy so doesn't need the patronage of big business,the EU or the likes of George Soros.
He also skewers civil,"servants",with incisive questioning and makes the majority of politicians look like fools, idiots and bandwagon jumpers.
Which is exactly what they are.