Jump to content

Another Broken Promise


Recommended Posts

So the Tories have sated that there now WONT be a refendum on Europe!

After promising us one since 1997 they have done exactly what Labour did and deny us a fundamental/constitutional right.

So thats it Folks You are all now officially European and we can all await with joy the election of the 1st European president......oh hang on he wont be elected will he because europe is a non elected parliment.

Tony BeLiar as president?!!!! WTF The man who brought you to where we are today.

 

Who's packing bags now then?

 

 

Swampy

 

ninging in a multilingual way

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

You were only getting a referedum if the treaty had not been ratified (nothing to do with rats) once its ratified then its European law and you would then have to pull out of Europe if you did'nt want to accept it. Are you a Sun journalist because you do'nt let the truth get in the way of a good thread. :clapper:

Link to post
Share on other sites
And just so I will get another reaction from all on the THL............A U-Turn on the hunting act will follow once/if they get in?

 

Swampy

 

A very dissalutioned ning

 

A U-Turn on the hunting act you say :laugh:

 

They wont need to do a U-Turn becuase they already know that free vote (which is what they have promised) wont achieve the result that we would like.

I'ts like offer an empty bag of sweets to kid!

 

Politicians!!!! i dont trust a single one...

 

Blair should be in prison for lying to the whole country and having the cheek to do it live on tele...

He knew damn well that there wasnt any weapons in Iraq worth getting your knickers in a twist over.

Then Dr Kelly (a weapons inspector, the one person that could have stated with authority that there were no weapons) mysteriously slashes his wrists with a swiss army knife? :hmm:

 

I wonder what position blair would be in now, if Kelly had gone on the news just before the war and said the he knew for a FACT that there wasnt any weapons of MD in Iraq?

Link to post
Share on other sites
You were only getting a referedum if the treaty had not been ratified (nothing to do with rats) once its ratified then its European law and you would then have to pull out of Europe if you did'nt want to accept it. Are you a Sun journalist because you do'nt let the truth get in the way of a good thread. :clapper:

No I'm not.

And wrong!

David Cameron promised us a referendum on Europe prior to Irland voting on it for a second time Czechs didn't even get a mention.

So a referendum on the Lisbon treaty would effectively been our "ratification".(can't help but see the irony of the word) on Europe. Despite it already being signed by Lab. So a refrendum would still have been an option. It was likely that he was going to run with this tack as he knew he would have an escape route if it all went through. We have been duped in the same way as we were in 1972 by Ted Heath who has admitted he lied to the public about the common market.

jeez.

Not with standing any of that it was unconstitutional and illegal. A law was passed after the submission of Mr Goldsmith that any legal challenge to the signing of said treaty would not be heard on the basis of (and i can't think of the words used) petty litigation would probably best descridbe it. We were gagged, the courts were gagged and thats that.

Federal Europe now exists and you are right we have to get out of it........and fast!

Give us our right and put this to the people!

 

 

Swampy

 

 

 

Not a redtop man but a ninger

Link to post
Share on other sites
And just so I will get another reaction from all on the THL............A U-Turn on the hunting act will follow once/if they get in?

 

Swampy

 

A very dissalutioned ning

 

A U-Turn on the hunting act you say :laugh:

 

They wont need to do a U-Turn becuase they already know that free vote (which is what they have promised) wont achieve the result that we would like.

I'ts like offer an empty bag of sweets to kid!

 

Politicians!!!! i dont trust a single one...

 

Blair should be in prison for lying to the whole country and having the cheek to do it live on tele...

He knew damn well that there wasnt any weapons in Iraq worth getting your knickers in a twist over.

Then Dr Kelly (a weapons inspector, the one person that could have stated with authority that there were no weapons) mysteriously slashes his wrists with a swiss army knife? :hmm:

 

I wonder what position blair would be in now, if Kelly had gone on the news just before the war and said the he knew for a FACT that there wasnt any weapons of MD in Iraq?

 

Surely it would depend on what the motion was as to how it would be voted by a free vote.

I.E Motion to abolish hunting with dgs act? Yes or No

motioned to abolish hunting with dogs act and replace it with Blah blah blah balh........Yes or No

 

 

two different answers

 

 

Swampy

 

 

rgds

 

passing this motion with a ning vote

Link to post
Share on other sites
And just so I will get another reaction from all on the THL............A U-Turn on the hunting act will follow once/if they get in?

 

Swampy

 

A very dissalutioned ning

 

A U-Turn on the hunting act you say :laugh:

 

They wont need to do a U-Turn becuase they already know that free vote (which is what they have promised) wont achieve the result that we would like.

I'ts like offer an empty bag of sweets to kid!

 

Politicians!!!! i dont trust a single one...

 

Blair should be in prison for lying to the whole country and having the cheek to do it live on tele...

He knew damn well that there wasnt any weapons in Iraq worth getting your knickers in a twist over.

Then Dr Kelly (a weapons inspector, the one person that could have stated with authority that there were no weapons) mysteriously slashes his wrists with a swiss army knife? :hmm:

 

I wonder what position blair would be in now, if Kelly had gone on the news just before the war and said the he knew for a FACT that there wasnt any weapons of MD in Iraq?

 

Surely it would depend on what the motion was as to how it would be voted by a free vote.

I.E Motion to abolish hunting with dgs act? Yes or No

motioned to abolish hunting with dogs act and replace it with Blah blah blah balh........Yes or No

 

 

two different answers

 

 

Swampy

 

 

rgds

 

passing this motion with a ning vote

 

 

From the way i understand it and correct me if i am wrong, they said that they would have a free vote on whether to repeal the hunting ban.

If i was voting based on that description, i would take it to mean that if i voted yes, then things would return to as they were before the ban was put in place. In other words it would be like the ban never existed.

 

If that is the case, there are too many politicians that will vote no. Conservatives know this already, so it is an empty promise. Yes, they may have the vote and fulfill thier promise, but what we are interested in, is the result.

I can see it now... "Well we had the vote, but unfortunatley the majority voted against overturning the ban, but hey! we held up our end of the bargain, we got your vote! now feck off!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
And just so I will get another reaction from all on the THL............A U-Turn on the hunting act will follow once/if they get in?

 

Swampy

 

A very dissalutioned ning

 

A U-Turn on the hunting act you say :laugh:

 

They wont need to do a U-Turn becuase they already know that free vote (which is what they have promised) wont achieve the result that we would like.

I'ts like offer an empty bag of sweets to kid!

 

Politicians!!!! i dont trust a single one...

 

Blair should be in prison for lying to the whole country and having the cheek to do it live on tele...

He knew damn well that there wasnt any weapons in Iraq worth getting your knickers in a twist over.

Then Dr Kelly (a weapons inspector, the one person that could have stated with authority that there were no weapons) mysteriously slashes his wrists with a swiss army knife? :hmm:

 

I wonder what position blair would be in now, if Kelly had gone on the news just before the war and said the he knew for a FACT that there wasnt any weapons of MD in Iraq?

 

Surely it would depend on what the motion was as to how it would be voted by a free vote.

I.E Motion to abolish hunting with dgs act? Yes or No

motioned to abolish hunting with dogs act and replace it with Blah blah blah balh........Yes or No

 

 

two different answers

 

 

Swampy

 

 

rgds

 

passing this motion with a ning vote

 

 

From the way i understand it and correct me if i am wrong, they said that they would have a free vote on whether to repeal the hunting ban.

If i was voting based on that description, i would take it to mean that if i voted yes, then things would return to as they were before the ban was put in place. In other words it would be like the ban never existed.

 

If that is the case, there are too many politicians that will vote no. Conservatives know this already, so it is an empty promise. Yes, they may have the vote and fulfill thier promise, but what we are interested in, is the result.

I can see it now... "Well we had the vote, but unfortunatley the majority voted against overturning the ban, but hey! we held up our end of the bargain, we got your vote! now feck off!"

 

 

Now with That I totally agree!

 

So lets not get our hopes up.

Although I do think that regardless of whether it is repealed or not. it will be ammended in soem way because I think that everyones agrees that it is un-workable

 

 

Swampy

 

 

ninging for a different way

Link to post
Share on other sites

what would be the point of a referendum ,now that the treaty has been ratified by all 27 countries. It would be pointless . Its just like ferguson making a cast iron promise to play rooney in the cup final then getting knocked out in the semi and everyone saying but you promised to play rooney in the final ! Its over and it was LABOUR who signed us up . . Not the tories. Im not a great believer in vox populi anyway , labours 36% majority amounts to 22% of the electorate , no one votes only on x factor, strictly etc , and no one fully understands the lisbon treaty , who can name 1 , 2 , 3 or even 10 of the 64 areas where the lisbon treaty removes the british veto ? I know i cant. How many of the c.a. Marchers voted labour or didnt even vote. As a people we are politically clueless ,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...