You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > new migrant crisis
May 1 2024 2.12am

new migrant crisis

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 141 of 143 < 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 >

 

View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag The garden of England 02 Nov 23 5.15pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We joined an EU which continued to expand and develop. We agreed with these at every stage. Not via the discredited route of holding referendums but via the representatives we elect.

We opted out of the currency, and continue to use our flag, anthem and parliament.

Directly involving the public in making these decisions completely negates the whole basis of parliamentary democracy. This was shown so very clearly with the Brexit disaster. It opens up vital and hugely complicated issues to short-term politicking and foreign influences. I want our future to be decided by those we vote for, looking hard at all the complexities.

We get our say every 5 years. That's the way it's intended to work. Not to throw such decisions to the winds of chance, or the desire of the Tory Party to silence UKIP or indeed to either the Daily Mail, Rupert Murdoch or Vladimir Putin.

Don’t blame the public. You yourself state that politicians didn’t have to brexit !

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Behind Enemy Lines's Profile Behind Enemy Lines Flag Sussex 02 Nov 23 5.17pm Send a Private Message to Behind Enemy Lines Add Behind Enemy Lines as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We joined an EU which continued to expand and develop. We agreed with these at every stage. Not via the discredited route of holding referendums but via the representatives we elect.

We opted out of the currency, and continue to use our flag, anthem and parliament.

Directly involving the public in making these decisions completely negates the whole basis of parliamentary democracy. This was shown so very clearly with the Brexit disaster. It opens up vital and hugely complicated issues to short-term politicking and foreign influences. I want our future to be decided by those we vote for, looking hard at all the complexities.

We get our say every 5 years. That's the way it's intended to work. Not to throw such decisions to the winds of chance, or the desire of the Tory Party to silence UKIP or indeed to either the Daily Mail, Rupert Murdoch or Vladimir Putin.

So if no political party existed during those 4 decades that would give the British public a say, why do you think that UKIP could gain traction if the British public was happy to allow parliament to make decisions for us? Why did so many vote to leave the EU if there wasn’t the requirement to do so? Or are you saying that those that voted to leave were somehow ‘uneducated’?

 


hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 02 Nov 23 6.09pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We joined an EU which continued to expand and develop. We agreed with these at every stage. Not via the discredited route of holding referendums but via the representatives we elect.

We opted out of the currency, and continue to use our flag, anthem and parliament.

Directly involving the public in making these decisions completely negates the whole basis of parliamentary democracy. This was shown so very clearly with the Brexit disaster. It opens up vital and hugely complicated issues to short-term politicking and foreign influences. I want our future to be decided by those we vote for, looking hard at all the complexities.

We get our say every 5 years. That's the way it's intended to work. Not to throw such decisions to the winds of chance, or the desire of the Tory Party to silence UKIP or indeed to either the Daily Mail, Rupert Murdoch or Vladimir Putin.

No we didn't. The representatives that we elected to the EU could not propose and make laws and in budgetary matters and foreign policy matters had no say in even scrutinising them. Our representatives in the EU were largely UKIP and they certainly did not agree with EU expansion and development at every stage in any way whatsoever.

Edited by georgenorman (02 Nov 2023 6.14pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Nov 23 7.07pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Don’t blame the public. You yourself state that politicians didn’t have to brexit !

That the Labour Party under Corbyn bottled it is as shameful as the Tories under Cameron holding the referendum. They could have voted it down, but they chose not to. Which was a failure to do their duty, in my opinion.

The only ones to come out of it with any integrity were the LibDems and the various rebels.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Nov 23 7.16pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Behind Enemy Lines

So if no political party existed during those 4 decades that would give the British public a say, why do you think that UKIP could gain traction if the British public was happy to allow parliament to make decisions for us? Why did so many vote to leave the EU if there wasn’t the requirement to do so? Or are you saying that those that voted to leave were somehow ‘uneducated’?

UKIP gained traction for the very simple reason that enough people who were either solidly Euro-sceptics or gullible enough to fall for the jam tomorrow promises existed to make such a party viable. That they either don’t understand how parliamentary democracy works, or are prepared to ignore it, played into UKIP’s hands, along with the fact that change is always easier to sell than the status quo. We should have required a 2/3rds majority for exit in such circumstances.

Uneducated? Possibly more than those who voted to remain. Foolish, ill informed and misguided, certainly.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Nov 23 7.19pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

No we didn't. The representatives that we elected to the EU could not propose and make laws and in budgetary matters and foreign policy matters had no say in even scrutinising them. Our representatives in the EU were largely UKIP and they certainly did not agree with EU expansion and development at every stage in any way whatsoever.

Edited by georgenorman (02 Nov 2023 6.14pm)

I am not going around that circle again.

The decision was taken by us in the UK. Not in the EU Parliament which has another function.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 02 Nov 23 7.29pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I am not going around that circle again.

The decision was taken by us in the UK. Not in the EU Parliament which has another function.

You said: "We joined an EU which continued to expand and develop. We agreed with these at every stage. Not via the discredited route of holding referendums but via the representatives we elect."

I am merely pointing out that what you said is simply not true.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Nov 23 9.54pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

You said: "We joined an EU which continued to expand and develop. We agreed with these at every stage. Not via the discredited route of holding referendums but via the representatives we elect."

I am merely pointing out that what you said is simply not true.

Not true?

Every Treaty had to be agreed by our Government, as the executive, and scrutinised by Parliament who could, should they so have chosen, voted to withdraw their support and thereby have forced a new Government to be formed, generally via a general election.

That’s the way our parliamentary democracy works. You might not approve of parliamentary democracy but it’s what you have.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Behind Enemy Lines's Profile Behind Enemy Lines Flag Sussex 02 Nov 23 10.05pm Send a Private Message to Behind Enemy Lines Add Behind Enemy Lines as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

UKIP gained traction for the very simple reason that enough people who were either solidly Euro-sceptics or gullible enough to fall for the jam tomorrow promises existed to make such a party viable. That they either don’t understand how parliamentary democracy works, or are prepared to ignore it, played into UKIP’s hands, along with the fact that change is always easier to sell than the status quo. We should have required a 2/3rds majority for exit in such circumstances.

Uneducated? Possibly more than those who voted to remain. Foolish, ill informed and misguided, certainly.

I am not surprised by your reply and we are not going to agree on this topic, so let’s take it sideways…seeing how you believe that elected representatives should be free to decide what to do for the good of their populations, how would you support that notion with Hamas. They were elected and presumably attacked Israel on 7th October for the good of their electorate. Presumably they also thought it best not to hold further elections since 2007 for the good of their electorate too.

 


hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Nov 23 8.58am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Behind Enemy Lines

I am not surprised by your reply and we are not going to agree on this topic, so let’s take it sideways…seeing how you believe that elected representatives should be free to decide what to do for the good of their populations, how would you support that notion with Hamas. They were elected and presumably attacked Israel on 7th October for the good of their electorate. Presumably they also thought it best not to hold further elections since 2007 for the good of their electorate too.

It’s a fair question but not a fair comparison.

The people voted for politicians but ended up with the military taking over and refusing any further elections to remove them. This is more a dispute between the PLO and Hamas than a dispute between Israel and Palestinians, although Israel created the circumstances in which it could happen.

[Link]

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Behind Enemy Lines's Profile Behind Enemy Lines Flag Sussex 09 Nov 23 12.35pm Send a Private Message to Behind Enemy Lines Add Behind Enemy Lines as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It’s you who wilfully ignores the success of many of our new arrivals and especially the second and third generations. You only see the misfits and trouble makers and then seek to tar them all.

I think it’s down to how many migrants we need before we get someone who is a required doctor, scientists or whatever.
Anyway, today a report has been released about the 27-30 deaths in the Channel 2 years ago. Apparently it’s our fault because of a variety of reasons but I found it somewhat amusing that the sister of one of those migrants was questioning what the UK government had done to try and find his body. I’d like to know what she said to her brother to try and prevent him from making a dangerous and illegal journey in the first place…

 


hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Spiderman's Profile Spiderman Flag Horsham 19 Nov 23 8.42am Send a Private Message to Spiderman Add Spiderman as a friend

As I have stated many times, this is what the HO are up against when trying to remove people.
Hope those passengers feel pleased with themselves. Don’t be on him coming across the Channel in the not too distant future

[Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 141 of 143 < 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > new migrant crisis