Food for thought Brexiters

OUT OF HOURS BULLY'S TRUCKSTOP BAR (INTERACTIVE)
101

Carryfast:

Mazzer2:

dexxy57:
The EU is not a Federal State, it’s an Economic Bloc of 28 Sovereign Nations.

With the aim of becoming a Federal State read the aims of the founding members written back when the economic trading block was started

The fact that laws which are binding on all member states are made by the EU commission and the ECJ and which are passed through the EU parliament by QMV ,with no right of national opt out or substitution and the EU claims state borders in its own right,show that it is already a Federal state.

An economic bloc of sovereign states would mean that there would be no need for Brexit because every state would have the power of opt out and substitution over all EU legislation and agreements including immigration and even free trade which is damaging to the economy and in no one’s interets.IE a Confederal Europe made up of sovereign states not a Federal State.

As described by the AfD leader here at 4.15 - 5.18.Which is where UKIP should have concentrated its efforts.

youtube.com/watch?v=CNh3312dTtA

Thanks for the YouTube link. Interesting stuff.

‘A Confederation of States rather than a Federal State’ she proposes. Yeah, I’d probably go for that. It’s what I thought, (maybe naively), the EU was all about.
But even an ultra right-wing nutjob will occasionally say something that when taken out of context is reasonable.

You’re a big fan of AfD and the FN, you’ve even referred to them in previous posts as ‘our allies’. Fair enough, it’s a free country, express your views. I personally don’t think xenophobia and racism is the best option, but, hey ho, it’s only an opinion. Is that a minority opinion on TruckNet UK? I hope not.

By the way, Merkel didn’t handle the Middle East refugee crisis very well. Admittedly she was under enormous pressure at the time because the scale of the problem was vast, and growing daily. You’d hopefully agree with me, though, that there was a suspiciously high number of young men in that wave of refugees, and a suspiciously low number of women and children.

102

dexxy57:
I personally don’t think xenophobia and racism is the best option

But anything other than anti nation state no borders Soviet style dictatorship translates as xenophobia and racism to a full on indoctrinated Socialist.Unfortunately for your lot it ain’t working anymore the sheep are waking up and European Nationalism is gaining ground.

While before you bother with the usual lies regarding Nationalism,the Nazis were just another bunch of tin pot dictators trying to assimilate Europe under one Reich.Just like Stalin’s and Tito’s rabble.That all ended well.

103

Thought I’d throw in a little bit of EU history, seems some only think it existed in recent times.

“In 1950, the concept of a European trade area was first established. The European Coal and Steel Community had six founding members: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. In 1957, the Treaty of Rome established a common market. It eliminated customs duties in 1968. It put in place standard policies, particularly in trade and agriculture. In 1973, the ECSC added Denmark, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. It created its first Parliament in 1979. Greece joined in 1981, followed by Spain and Portugal in 1986.

In 1993, the Treaty of Maastricht established the European Union common market. Two years later, the EU added Austria, Sweden, and Finland. In 2004, twelve more countries joined: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

In 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon increased the powers of the European Parliament. It gave the EU the legal authority to negotiate and sign international treaties. It increased EU powers, border control, immigration, judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters, and police cooperation. It abandoned the idea of a European Constitution. European law is still established by international treaties.”

104

Carryfast:

dexxy57:
I personally don’t think xenophobia and racism is the best option

But anything other than anti nation state no borders Soviet style dictatorship translates as xenophobia and racism to a full on indoctrinated Socialist.Unfortunately for your lot it ain’t working anymore the sheep are waking up and European Nationalism is gaining ground.

While before you bother with the usual lies regarding Nationalism,the Nazis were just another bunch of tin pot dictators trying to assimilate Europe under one Reich.Just like Stalin’s and Tito’s rabble.That all ended well.

Aye, ok . . . whatever.

105

Carryfast:

dexxyy:

Carryfast:
The Queen is the relevant power regarding matters of state and sovereignty.The idea of a bunch of Soviet style nutters thinking that they can vote a recognised nation state out of existence and into the illegal unrecognised de Jure EU Federal superstate is how wars start without a decent head of state prepared to do and uphold her role.

The Queen is the relevant power?
This just gets sillier and sillier.
Have I missed a joke here?

Maybe you missed the reference to matters of state and sovereignty.Not much point in having a head of state,who the armed forces owe allegiance to’,if that head of state has no powers and people like Blair can order the surrender of the country to a foreign illegal power like the EU.

You do understand that the Queen is a symbolic head of state, the powers of the monarchy are held by the UK government?

Its part of the democratic deficit of this country, which UK Governments have used in the past to bypass parliament and push their own agenda through this includes taking us into the EEC, and needs to be done away with.

106

Grumpy Dad:
In 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon increased the powers of the European Parliament. It gave the EU the legal authority to negotiate and sign international treaties. It increased EU powers, border control, immigration, judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters, and police cooperation. It abandoned the idea of a European Constitution. European law is still established by international treaties.”

And this is when we, and all the people of the Countries of the EU, should have had a vote, the fact that only a few countries gave their citizens a vote over such a major change in the constitutions of their countries and power of their elected representatives and national parliaments, probably because those in power wanted this, (and that includes both our government and the official opposition at the time).

The vote Cameron gave us was not for the people, but for the conservative party, it was supposed to be a walk in the park for the Remain side, which is why there was no plan for leaving and no support in the UK leadership for leaving, which has basically got us in the mess we’re in today.

Judging by what’s happening in many parts of Europe, recent Dutch and Estonian elections being the latest of a series of events where the people have stuck their fingers up to the traditional political groups, pigeons are coming home to roost and situations could develop that makes Brexit look like a civilised tea party, unless those in power genuinely start to listen and act for the ordinary people.

107

I do not think any one would get away with selling donkey or horse meat as stake in USA, or fiddling customers cars with fake emission figures. I have never had a small or bad meal in the USA or had to send a search party out to find my stake like in france

108

muckles:

Carryfast:

dexxyy:

Carryfast:
The Queen is the relevant power regarding matters of state and sovereignty.The idea of a bunch of Soviet style nutters thinking that they can vote a recognised nation state out of existence and into the illegal unrecognised de Jure EU Federal superstate is how wars start without a decent head of state prepared to do and uphold her role.

The Queen is the relevant power?
This just gets sillier and sillier.
Have I missed a joke here?

Maybe you missed the reference to matters of state and sovereignty.Not much point in having a head of state,who the armed forces owe allegiance to’,if that head of state has no powers and people like Blair can order the surrender of the country to a foreign illegal power like the EU.

You do understand that the Queen is a symbolic head of state, the powers of the monarchy are held by the UK government?

As I said the Queen is anything but a ‘symbolic’ head of state in the case of matters of ‘state’ and sovereignty.The clue is in the title and the fact that the armed forces swear allegiance to the King/Queen/Crown not the PM.

‘‘The Monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the Royal Perogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet’’.It’s bleedin clear that parliament handing over the country to a foreign power fits the definition of the type of situation in which such action would be needed and justified.IE foreign affairs,defence and National Security.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_pre … ed_Kingdom

109

Carryfast:

muckles:
[quote
As I said the Queen is anything but a ‘symbolic’ head of state in the case of matters of ‘state’ and sovereignty.The clue is in the title and the fact that the armed forces swear allegiance to the King/Queen/Crown not the PM.

‘‘The Monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the Royal Perogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet’’.It’s bleedin clear that parliament handing over the country to a foreign power fits the definition of the type of situation in which such action would be needed and justified.IE foreign affairs,defence and National Security.

[en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_pre … ed_Kingdom]
(Royal prerogative in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia)

She must be happy enough with the way things are going then. When was the last time she used her Royal Perogative?

110

dexxy57:
She must be happy enough with the way things are going then. When was the last time she used her Royal Perogative?

That’s the point.It’s the Head of State who’s enthusiastically allowed the handover of the country to a foreign power ( German run 4th Reich ).Oh wait the Sax Coburg’s working for German interests who would have thought it.Everything else is a diversion to cover up at best dereliction of duty or at worse treason at the top.

While she obviously can’t back out now without it being an admission of the above.All very serious stuff if/when anyone looks into the situation far enough to see what’s happening here.IE a bs diversionary charade to cover up a fait accompli in the Head of State having handed over the country to an illegal invalid self appointed de Jure Kraut run Reich.

111

Carryfast:

dexxy57:
She must be happy enough with the way things are going then. When was the last time she used her Royal Perogative?

That’s the point.It’s the Head of State who’s enthusiastically allowed the handover of the country to a foreign power ( German run 4th Reich ).Oh wait the Sax Coburg’s working for German interests who would have thought it.Everything else is a diversion to cover up at best dereliction of duty or at worse treason at the top.

While she obviously can’t back out now without it being an admission of the above.All very serious stuff if/when anyone looks into the situation far enough to see what’s happening here.IE a bs diversionary charade to cover up a fait accompli in the Head of State having handed over the country to an illegal invalid self appointed de Jure Kraut run Reich.

Now that you explain it so clearly it makes perfect sense.
All this time we’ve been thinking Brexit’s got something to do with us leaving Europe, but it’s really just a dastardly plot by the Queen to hand the UK over to Germany. She’s a wee rascal eh?

112

Bit of a Joseph Heller plot there C.F…
High Treason is the crime of disloyalty to the crown isn’t it?
Can the Queen be disloyal to herself?
The sentence is to be detained for life at “Her Majesty’s Pleasure”.
Base a book on it?
“Catch 29”?

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

113

Franglais:
Bit of a Joseph Heller plot there C.F…
High Treason is the crime of disloyalty to the crown isn’t it?
Can the Queen be disloyal to herself?
The sentence is to be detained for life at “Her Majesty’s Pleasure”.
Base a book on it?
“Catch 29”?

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

The Queen is capable of anything according to this nutjob. Liz’s cunning plan is coming to fruition. She is handing the UK, lock stock and barrel, over to Germany.

114

Carryfast:

muckles:
You do understand that the Queen is a symbolic head of state, the powers of the monarchy are held by the UK government?

As I said the Queen is anything but a ‘symbolic’ head of state in the case of matters of ‘state’ and sovereignty.The clue is in the title and the fact that the armed forces swear allegiance to the King/Queen/Crown not the PM.

‘‘The Monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the Royal Perogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet’’.It’s bleedin clear that parliament handing over the country to a foreign power fits the definition of the type of situation in which such action would be needed and justified.IE foreign affairs,defence and National Security.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_pre … ed_Kingdom

So are you saying an unelected person should have power over an elected parliament?

And back in the real World, its almost unthinkable that the monarch could go against an elected government, as the Royal Prerogative executive powers are now in the hands of the government.

115

muckles:

Carryfast:

muckles:
You do understand that the Queen is a symbolic head of state, the powers of the monarchy are held by the UK government?

As I said the Queen is anything but a ‘symbolic’ head of state in the case of matters of ‘state’ and sovereignty.The clue is in the title and the fact that the armed forces swear allegiance to the King/Queen/Crown not the PM.

‘‘The Monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the Royal Perogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet’’.It’s bleedin clear that parliament handing over the country to a foreign power fits the definition of the type of situation in which such action would be needed and justified.IE foreign affairs,defence and National Security.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_pre … ed_Kingdom

So are you saying an unelected person should have power over an elected parliament?

And back in the real World, its almost unthinkable that the monarch could go against an elected government, as the Royal Prerogative executive powers are now in the hands of the government.

No, he’s saying an unelected person HAS power over an elected parliament.
Brexit is just part of Liz’s cunning masterplan to hand the UK over to Germany. At least I think that’s what he’s saying. Difficult to understand him sometimes.

116

muckles:
So are you saying an unelected person should have power over an elected parliament?

And back in the real World, its almost unthinkable that the monarch could go against an elected government, as the Royal Prerogative executive powers are now in the hands of the government.

No I’m saying that the ‘Head of State’/‘Sovereign’ still holds the Royal Perogative and has the supreme power over matters of …‘State’ and …‘Sovereignty’ and National Defence.Which by definition means the power to make sure that only the ‘State’s’ elected government has the power to decide legislation here and she obviously retains the power to order the armed forces to arrest any national parliament or MP gone rogue in acting outside that of authority by delegating the government’s authority and democratic mandate to a foreign power and foreign vote.

Instead of which she chooses to facilitate the handing over of the country to a foreign politburo and majority foreign parliament backed up by a foreign court all collectively known as the ‘EU’.In the form of giving Royal assent to the European Communities Act to Lisbon Treaty.While it’s equally clear that she can’t now rescind that Assent without implicating herself regards giving it.

117

Carryfast:

muckles:
So are you saying an unelected person should have power over an elected parliament?

And back in the real World, its almost unthinkable that the monarch could go against an elected government, as the Royal Prerogative executive powers are now in the hands of the government.

No I’m saying that the ‘Head of State’/‘Sovereign’ still holds the Royal Perogative and has the supreme power over matters of …‘State’ and …‘Sovereignty’ and National Defence.Which by definition means the power to make sure that only the ‘State’s’ elected government has the power to decide legislation here and she obviously retains the power to order the armed forces to arrest any national parliament or MP gone rogue in acting outside that of authority by delegating the government’s authority and democratic mandate to a foreign power and foreign vote.

Instead of which she chooses to facilitate the handing over of the country to a foreign politburo and majority foreign parliament backed up by a foreign court all collectively known as the ‘EU’.In the form of giving Royal assent to the European Communities Act to Lisbon Treaty.While it’s equally clear that she can’t now rescind that Assent without implicating herself regards giving it.

Are you confusing Planet Earth with Game of Thrones?