Mark my words.

On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

--
Michael Chare

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

I bloody well hope not. Those unelected smarmy ego trips at the top need a
good kicking. As does the queen in waiting of Scotland, and Salmond the
previous king in waiting.
None of them give a crap about anyone but themselves which sadly can be said
of many politicians.

On 26/06/16 14:07, Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures...

....from Mr Tux, in Antarctica.

;-)
--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

On 26/06/16 15:40, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

Dream on.

Can you imagine what would happen if they turn round and say 'well you
have had your fun, but it means nothing so **** you all'


Half the country would descend on Westminster and blockade it.

The other half would turn the M1 into a car park

UKIP would be in power within weeks as the only bunch of swine who
hadn't reneged on their promises.


--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!


Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.
--

%Profound_observation%


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

because, now that there has been some analysis of where they are from, they
have likely been placed by one of those third world sweat shops that are
paid to increase "hits" on your site

tim

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 19:32:48 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

because, now that there has been some analysis of where they are from, they
have likely been placed by one of those third world sweat shops that are
paid to increase "hits" on your site

tim




I looked at a communication from one contributor from Australia. It
seems that he was just some pathetic simpleton who thought it was a
stroke of genius to tie a postcode and name together.

No third world sweat shops, just a load of pathetic morons who would
be otherwise engaged in button pressing on pelican crossings if a more
"worthwhile" outlet to their talents wasn't provided.


AB

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 19:32:48 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

because, now that there has been some analysis of where they are from, they
have likely been placed by one of those third world sweat shops that are
paid to increase "hits" on your site

And apparently ~77,000 or so have now been removed, only leaving 3.4
million.

That's now nearly 3x the number of people who wanted to Leave over
those wanting to Remain.

Cheers, T i m

On 26/06/2016 14:07, Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

300,000 were made from the Vatican city !!.

Only 400,000 have been made by people allowed to vote here.

So, it's the usual faux petition.

T i m wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 19:32:48 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It
must have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

because, now that there has been some analysis of where they are
from, they have likely been placed by one of those third world sweat
shops that are paid to increase "hits" on your site

And apparently ~77,000 or so have now been removed, only leaving 3.4
million.

That's now nearly 3x the number of people who wanted to Leave over
those wanting to Remain.

Cheers, T i m

It won't make one iota of difference even if it gets 34 million signatures,
there won't be a second referendum.[1]
They'll raise the question in parliament, as they are obliged to do once it
hits 100,000 signatures, it will get shouted down with a well rehearsed
speech as to how and why it's unfeasible, and that'll be the end of it, it
won't get mentioned again.

[1]
There's already aspertions cast over it's authenticity and the signatories,
who's to say that any more than 100,000 genuine people have signed it?

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:04:46 +0100, "Phil L"
wrote:

T i m wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 19:32:48 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It
must have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

because, now that there has been some analysis of where they are
from, they have likely been placed by one of those third world sweat
shops that are paid to increase "hits" on your site

And apparently ~77,000 or so have now been removed, only leaving 3.4
million.

That's now nearly 3x the number of people who wanted to Leave over
those wanting to Remain.



It won't make one iota of difference even if it gets 34 million signatures,
there won't be a second referendum.[1]

You may well be right. However, I might just lodge a feeling in people
minds ...

They'll raise the question in parliament, as they are obliged to do once it
hits 100,000 signatures, it will get shouted down with a well rehearsed
speech as to how and why it's unfeasible, and that'll be the end of it, it
won't get mentioned again.

We will see if you are right.

[1]
There's already aspertions cast over it's authenticity and the signatories,
who's to say that any more than 100,000 genuine people have signed it?

According to your 'rules' it *only* needs 100,000 genuine people to
have signed it so I'm guessing that must be the case out of 3.4M. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:02:47 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 26/06/2016 14:07, Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

300,000 were made from the Vatican city !!.

Only 400,000 have been made by people allowed to vote here.

So, it's the usual faux petition.

Only needs 100,000 to get raised in Parliament so job done.

And no, I haven't signed it.

Cheers, T i m

On 26/06/16 17:56, Huge wrote:
On 2016-06-26, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

If you're referring to the referendum, it *isn't* binding.


Not only that, the referendum is not law, it isn't a substitute for
parliamentary democracy, it doesn't trump the constitution.

It might be an indication of the will of the people, and as such it has
indicated that the people do not speak with one voice, but are deeply
divided.

There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no pro
brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will be an
election. A general election might produce a government with a mandate
and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new government may
declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense that it clearly is.

TW

On 26/06/16 15:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/06/16 15:40, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

Dream on.

Can you imagine what would happen if they turn round and say 'well you
have had your fun, but it means nothing so **** you all'


Half the country would descend on Westminster and blockade it.

The other half would turn the M1 into a car park

UKIP would be in power within weeks as the only bunch of swine who
hadn't reneged on their promises.


Fantasy

TimW wrote:
On 26/06/16 17:56, Huge wrote:
On 2016-06-26, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It
must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

If you're referring to the referendum, it *isn't* binding.


Not only that, the referendum is not law, it isn't a substitute for
parliamentary democracy, it doesn't trump the constitution.

It might be an indication of the will of the people, and as such it
has indicated that the people do not speak with one voice, but are
deeply divided.

There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no
pro brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will
be an election. A general election might produce a government with a
mandate and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new
government may declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense
that it clearly is.

TW


There won't be an election. Boris isn't that stupid.

On 26/06/16 21:44, TimW wrote:
There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no pro
brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will be an
election. A general election might produce a government with a mandate
and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new government may
declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense that it clearly is.

TW

"Clearly"

Speak for yourself.

Tim Watts wrote:
On 26/06/16 21:44, TimW wrote:
There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no pro
brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will be an
election. A general election might produce a government with a mandate
and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new government may
declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense that it
clearly is.

TW

"Clearly"

Speak for yourself.

He's still part of the remain campaign that can't accept that they
lost.

On 26/06/16 21:58, Capitol wrote:
TimW wrote:
On 26/06/16 17:56, Huge wrote:
On 2016-06-26, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It
must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

If you're referring to the referendum, it *isn't* binding.


Not only that, the referendum is not law, it isn't a substitute for
parliamentary democracy, it doesn't trump the constitution.

It might be an indication of the will of the people, and as such it
has indicated that the people do not speak with one voice, but are
deeply divided.

There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no
pro brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will
be an election. A general election might produce a government with a
mandate and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new
government may declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense
that it clearly is.

TW


There won't be an election. Boris isn't that stupid.

Boris won't have a majority, so his stupidity won't enter into it. There
isn't going to be a Boris Government.

TW

On 26/06/16 22:19, TimW wrote:

Boris won't have a majority, so his stupidity won't enter into it. There
isn't going to be a Boris Government.

TW

You're probably right there - he's ****ed to many people off. And apart
from the share value of popcorn[1] I don't think Bojo will be good for
the job.

[1] He'll certainly light a load of fireworks under the EU which for a
limited time may be very amusing to watch - but in effect we just did
that, so what we need now is a skilled negotiator to take full advantage
of the situation, not start WW3.

I just hope it's not May.

A sensible and intelligent outsider would be very welcome at this point.

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures

Which is more evidence that either it is likely to be the expats
that are out of the country that are signing it, and it is hardly
surprising that they don’t like the result of the referendum
and want a new one now.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 22:27:18 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

You're probably right there - he's ****ed to many people off. And apart
from the share value of popcorn[1] I don't think Bojo will be good for
the job.

I agree. I'm still not convinced about his eurosceptic credentials.

[1] He'll certainly light a load of fireworks under the EU which for a
limited time may be very amusing to watch - but in effect we just did
that, so what we need now is a skilled negotiator to take full advantage
of the situation, not start WW3.

I just hope it's not May.

Shudder! Perish the thought.

A sensible and intelligent outsider would be very welcome at this point.

Dan Hannan is the very chap IMV.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 22:05:35 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

"Clearly"

Speak for yourself.

His usual load of old tosh. Probably a sock-puppet of Plowperson.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:29:58 +0100, T i m wrote:

Only needs 100,000 to get raised in Parliament so job done.

I'll wager most of those signatories are either under-age anyway or else
Eastern Europeans who are not eligible. I'd be amazed if there were
anything close to 100k genuine, qualifying signers.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:29:58 +0100, T i m wrote:

Only needs 100,000 to get raised in Parliament so job done.

I'll wager most of those signatories are either under-age anyway or else
Eastern Europeans who are not eligible. I'd be amazed if there were
anything close to 100k genuine, qualifying signers.

Bet the bulk of them are Brits who are out of the country
who are shocked at the result.

"Graham." wrote in message
...
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!


Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

In practice it is, because if the govt chose to ignore such an unambiguous
result, at the next election the govt would get severely punished at the
ballot box and quite a few UKIP MPs would get elected and Britain
would leave and the govt would be stuck with those UKIP MPs.

In article ,
Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:29:58 +0100, T i m wrote:

Only needs 100,000 to get raised in Parliament so job done.

I'll wager most of those signatories are either under-age anyway or else
Eastern Europeans who are not eligible. I'd be amazed if there were
anything close to 100k genuine, qualifying signers.

Why shouldn't they be genuine? for the first time I've 'signed' one of the
petitions - there will be tens of thousands like me.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 26/06/16 21:44, TimW wrote:
Not only that, the referendum is not law, it isn't a substitute for
parliamentary democracy, it doesn't trump the constitution.

It might be an indication of the will of the people, and as such it has
indicated that the people do not speak with one voice, but are deeply
divided.

There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no pro
brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will be an
election. A general election might produce a government with a mandate
and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new government may
declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense that it clearly is.

Here have another straw to clutch at. This ones got special depleted
uranium sinkers on it.

If the guvmint holds a a referendum and then ignores it, what does that
say to the electorate?

That they area bunch of devious lying ****s?

Forget sleaze, that would destroy the tory and the labour party and put
UKIP in in a landslide...


--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

On 26/06/16 21:45, TimW wrote:
On 26/06/16 15:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/06/16 15:40, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

Dream on.

Can you imagine what would happen if they turn round and say 'well you
have had your fun, but it means nothing so **** you all'


Half the country would descend on Westminster and blockade it.

The other half would turn the M1 into a car park

UKIP would be in power within weeks as the only bunch of swine who
hadn't reneged on their promises.


Fantasy

Just watch. It's you who is in the fantasy.

It only takes 3 -5 cars doing 5mph to bring the M1 to a standstill.


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 26/06/16 21:58, Capitol wrote:
TimW wrote:
On 26/06/16 17:56, Huge wrote:
On 2016-06-26, Graham. wrote:
Capitol Wrote in message:
Michael Chare wrote:
On 26/06/2016 13:24, bm wrote:
Mark my words.


I pray that you are right. The petition now tops 3.16 million. It
must
have broken records for the speed it has collected signatures


Pity they are invalid!



Dimbleby made an interesting aside on Friday morning. Something
to the effect that the electorate had indicated its preference to
the government. The implication being it was not necessarily
binding.

If you're referring to the referendum, it *isn't* binding.


Not only that, the referendum is not law, it isn't a substitute for
parliamentary democracy, it doesn't trump the constitution.

It might be an indication of the will of the people, and as such it
has indicated that the people do not speak with one voice, but are
deeply divided.

There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no
pro brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will
be an election. A general election might produce a government with a
mandate and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new
government may declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense
that it clearly is.

TW


There won't be an election. Boris isn't that stupid.

I am not so sure.

If Labia get a leader they think has a chance to improve their vote,
they would be up for it.

SNP would out of sheer ****ishness.

It doesn't take too many tories to join and you have the vote of no
confidence.


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 26/06/16 22:15, Capitol wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:
On 26/06/16 21:44, TimW wrote:
There is no pro brexit majority in the commons, so there will be no pro
brexit government, and no article 50. It seems likely there will be an
election. A general election might produce a government with a mandate
and authority to invoke article 50. Then again the new government may
declare the referendum to be the ill-conceived nonsense that it
clearly is.

TW

"Clearly"

Speak for yourself.

He's still part of the remain campaign that can't accept that they
lost.
Probably works for an EU funded quango or charity that has no reason to
exist apart from that.


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 26/06/16 22:27, Tim Watts wrote:
On 26/06/16 22:19, TimW wrote:

Boris won't have a majority, so his stupidity won't enter into it. There
isn't going to be a Boris Government.

TW

You're probably right there - he's ****ed to many people off. And apart
from the share value of popcorn[1] I don't think Bojo will be good for
the job.

[1] He'll certainly light a load of fireworks under the EU which for a
limited time may be very amusing to watch - but in effect we just did
that, so what we need now is a skilled negotiator to take full advantage
of the situation, not start WW3.

I just hope it's not May.

A sensible and intelligent outsider would be very welcome at this point.
Nigel.


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 27/06/16 00:48, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 22:05:35 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

"Clearly"

Speak for yourself.

His usual load of old tosh. Probably a sock-puppet of Plowperson.

No, he can form long sentences and isn't foaming at the mouth and swivel
eyed.

Just deluded


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 27/06/16 08:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/06/16 22:27, Tim Watts wrote:
On 26/06/16 22:19, TimW wrote:

Boris won't have a majority, so his stupidity won't enter into it. There
isn't going to be a Boris Government.

TW

You're probably right there - he's ****ed to many people off. And apart
from the share value of popcorn[1] I don't think Bojo will be good for
the job.

[1] He'll certainly light a load of fireworks under the EU which for a
limited time may be very amusing to watch - but in effect we just did
that, so what we need now is a skilled negotiator to take full advantage
of the situation, not start WW3.

I just hope it's not May.

A sensible and intelligent outsider would be very welcome at this point.
Nigel.



Tricky, with him not being an MP...

Tim Watts wrote:
On 27/06/16 08:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/06/16 22:27, Tim Watts wrote:
On 26/06/16 22:19, TimW wrote:

Boris won't have a majority, so his stupidity won't enter into it.
There
isn't going to be a Boris Government.

TW

You're probably right there - he's ****ed to many people off. And apart
from the share value of popcorn[1] I don't think Bojo will be good for
the job.

[1] He'll certainly light a load of fireworks under the EU which for a
limited time may be very amusing to watch - but in effect we just did
that, so what we need now is a skilled negotiator to take full
advantage
of the situation, not start WW3.

I just hope it's not May.

A sensible and intelligent outsider would be very welcome at this
point.
Nigel.



Tricky, with him not being an MP...

Douglas Home?

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Charlie
wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:29:58 +0100, T i m wrote:

Only needs 100,000 to get raised in Parliament so job done.

I'll wager most of those signatories are either under-age anyway or else
Eastern Europeans who are not eligible. I'd be amazed if there were
anything close to 100k genuine, qualifying signers.

Bet the bulk of them are Brits who are out of the country
who are shocked at the result.

Do I give a monkey's that they are shocked, assuming they are?

No, but clearly if it is them, they are legally entitled to sign that
petition.

It's a bit like the lefties last year going: "But everyone I know on
Twitter/Facebook voted for Ed!"

Nothing like with a petition. Yes, the petition makes
no sense, but I was just commenting on whether
they were likely to be genuine, qualifying signers.

pamela wrote:
On 13:24 26 Jun 2016, bm wrote:

Mark my words.


If a party campaigned not to leave the EU and won a general election
later this year then would they have a mandate to over rule the
referendum result?


No.

On 27/06/16 10:28, pamela wrote:
On 13:24 26 Jun 2016, bm wrote:

Mark my words.


If a party campaigned not to leave the EU and won a general election
later this year then would they have a mandate to over rule the
referendum result?

That's a bit like saying if a man ran naked to from Norwich to the North
pole would he deserve a dog biscuit?


I'd say canonisation would be more appropriate as it would be a bloody
miracle.

Do you HONESTLY expect, with just about every region bar half a dozen in
England and wales voting OUT, someone campaigning on an 'I'll keep us
in' ticket would win?

Its a UKIP landslide dear. They only need another 5-7% of the vote.


--
€œIt is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.€�

Thomas Sowell