With Brexit looming, and brexiteers continually telling remain voters to shut up and accept it, i thought I'd look back at what happened, and why I think we shouldn't shut up. I believe we were lied to, the broke election laws on spending, and data protection laws when targeting their ads. This doesn't leave much ground that they didn't act illegally in their bid to win the vote, yet for some reason, the vote is still valid. How can that be? This sends a clear message that you can do whatever you like to win, and there will be no repercussions.
If vote leave broke the law, then those running it, should be charged, and the vote should be invalid and run again. I keep hearing more and more that is just suspect about the vote, so I wanted to list the main points - more for myself than anything, so I can see just how bad/wrong/illegal the vote was, to list what exactly I though was shady about the Brexit vote in general, and how those who now claim are looking out for the best interests of us, are lying through their teeth.
If vote leave broke the law, then those running it, should be charged, and the vote should be invalid and run again. I keep hearing more and more that is just suspect about the vote, so I wanted to list the main points - more for myself than anything, so I can see just how bad/wrong/illegal the vote was, to list what exactly I though was shady about the Brexit vote in general, and how those who now claim are looking out for the best interests of us, are lying through their teeth.
- The Brexit bus.This is a well known one. The £350 million figure was a work of fiction. It was known at the time, yet they never removed it, it remained a key point in their campaign and many voters claimed it was one of the key things that swayed their vote.
It should be asked... why is anyone allowed to blatantly lie in any vote, and yet the vote is allowed to stand? This is election fraud of the highest order - surely? - Immigrants.
Another well known one. The claims that they are a constant drain, stealing peoples jobs is a myth - no matter what Nigel Farage and his band of merry racists claim. Not only are farmers now struggling to hire people to help farm, pick crops and pack produce, but the NHS is struggling to maintain and recruit enough doctors and nurses to help save lives. Ironic since making the NHS better was a key claim of the leave campaign. At the end of the day, for someone to steal a job, it has to be one someone from the UK is willing to do, and it seems they aren't.
There are now many EU companies getting ready to leave the UK so they can remain in the EU and benefit from EU trade deals. - Parliamentary Sovereignty
This claim that the UK can't make it's own rules is rabble-rousing-rubbish. The UK only takes a tiny fraction of laws from the EU, but it's a "vote winner", so it's front page for the vote.
But lets be clear.... the Government only want Parliamentary Sovereignty when it works for them. They want to reduce workers rights, remove the human rights act and allow surveillance on anyone or anything, and without the EU to counter that, they'll be able to push through whatever they like.
As proof of their contempt for Parliamentary Sovereignty, the latest strikes on Syria were done while Parliamentary was in recess, so there wouldn't be a vote on it. Now, why would you do that if you wanted Parliamentary to be Sovereign? it's not about Sovereignty, it's about power, plain and simple. - Politicians that don't believe in Brexit.
This is one that really annoys me. Those attempting to make Brexit happen, don't even believe in it. The Prime Minister spent the EU Referendum saying it would be a disaster, that the economic and safety of the UK would suffer, and that the Norther Ireland border was an impossible problem if we left. She now tries to say the complete opposite. Has she changed her mind? Or is she just doing whatever she can to cling to power? After the £1 Billion deal with the DUP to stay in power, I'd argue for the latter.
She's not the only one either. Boris Johnson was writing prior to the vote why we should stay in, then decided then running the leave campaign that he thought would lose, would be a great springboard for higher office - if he ran a good campaign. Then he won. Watching the press conferences afterwards, Johnson and Gove talk to the press like a pair of naughty schoolboys, clearly crapping themselves and what they had done. Johnson immediately launches a PM bid, with Gove stabbing him in the back the only reason he pulls out. Gove claiming that in the past couple of weeks he'd come to realise Johnson wasn't the person to leave. This from a man who had known Johnson for 30 years. The truth being Gove wanted the position, and decided to stab Johnson in the back to get it. These are just the kinds of people we want running Brexit, basically doing whatever they can for themselves, and no one else - Deal would be "Easiest in human history"
This was another laughable claim. Liam Fox claimed a post-Brexit free trade deal with the EU should be the “easiest in human history”. This was picked up by many politicians, claiming the EU couldn't do without our trade, and that any deal with them would be the simplest ever.
This is of course a lie. It was't simply them being mistaken either, but an our right falsehood. With so many member states, no deal can ever be that simple.The ALL have to agree. On top of this, the EU pretty much holds all the cards. The UK government insisted that a trade deal must be worked on along with other issues, but the EU insistence that the divorce bill and EU residents status be discussed first, meant the UK had no choice by to fold and give them pretty much whatever they wanted. - Having our cake and eating it.
The UK prior to the vote was also claiming they could get pretty much what ever they wanted. Free trade without freedom of movement, being outside the EU but getting "special" deals for the motor and finance industries. All of this was never going to happen. Why would the Eu give away any of this? From their perspective, any business that wanted to maintain these things, would move from the UK to another member state, and the EU would benefit. Why give the UK a special deal to keep something they wanted for themselves? How could you possibly persuade 27 other member states to agree to a "give away" of epic proportions.
You can't. Simple as that, and they never would have. The EU said from day one, this was never going to happen. - Northern Ireland.
Theresa May pre-Brexit claimed it would be impossible to have Brexit and any kind of free movement across the Irish border. Now that she's supposed to be running it all, it's really simple, and of course it could happen. This is all about her just clinging to power.
The EU have said, if the UK leaves, then there will have to be some kind of border. Between 2 different types of rules and regulations, you have to have a border.
The UK Government have flip-flopped back and forth from saying Northern Ireland can stay in the customs union, to they can simply maintain the same laws/rules on goods, to saying technology will solve all the worlds problems. All of these are fantasy.
As a Scot, what's particularly annoying is that the UK government has refused point blank to Scotland remaining in the customs union, yet to save their own hides, suggest N.Ireland can. Surely of they can, then so could Scotland? But they refuse to even discuss it. - Vote Leave broke spending limits
So here's another one which is just outright illegal, and should also have invalidated the vote.
An ex-employee of vote leave has said it "broke spending limits on industrial scale". These rules/laws are there for a reason, and by breaking them - along with using companies like Cambridge Analytics who use stolen data to target more ads at voters, means they reached more people than Remain. This makes for an unbalanced contest, and sure if you have twice the money (say) you'll reach more people and you'll be able to get a better result.
So surely because they did this, it means the vote is in itself, illegal? How can it not be? - Scottish Independence Referendum
Another one which, as a Scot, really pisses me off.
The No camp told voters continuously that it was safer to remain part of the UK, that Scotland would never be able to join the EU, and we would have to say No in order to remain in the EU.
This promise has clearly been broken.
We were also told if we left, we couldn't use the pound, and the value of our savings and pensions would suffer. Well, again, thanks to Brexit, the pound has been smashed, and savings and investments have suffered anyway. In fact, a study has placed UK pensions as the worst in the developed world.
Told we'd have no oil soon, so we'd need the rest of the UK to prop us up. Lots of new oil fields are being discovered, so again....bollocks.
We were also told if we left, there would be no friction-less trade with the UK. Yet, this is precisely the argument the Brexit camp are using with the EU. In fact, I heard on an interview a UK minister say "Why wouldn't they want free trade with their nearest neighbour?", yet this was exactly what we were told would never happen if Scotland went independent.
Huge numbers of new powers. They've given a few new powers over, but have kept some of the most significant - like immigration. In fact, The Minister of State for Immigration compared the whole of Scotland to an English county - to quote "I wouldn't grant any powers to the Scottish Government that I wouldn't grant to Lincolnshire county council", that's how little Westminster thinks of Scotland. - Biased press
All you need to do is look at the BBC, and the main stream media and see that they've all been backing Leave for some time. Nigel Farage is never off the BBC, despite having never won a UK election. Why is he on? He speaks for no one.
Owners of papers (like the Sun, Mirror, Daily Express etc) have also been pushing hard on Brexit because they'll have more power. These owners are all multimillionaires, many of them not living in the UK, but using their powers to push their own agenda. Who can forget "The Enemies of the People" headline when a legal challenge on parliamentary sovereignty was questioned? These papers will have more chance to bend the laws to what they want, if they can more easily influence their creation, and that will only happen with Brexit. - People didn't understand what they were voting for
This is a personal one. I've had discussions with some people I know who voted to leave, and a lot of the time, they've either listened to the lies and fictions they were sold, or just didn't understand. One person who voted Leave, didn't understand why everything now had to change, and why it couldn't just stay the same. I was speechless at this - "Well, because you voted to leave...perhaps?".
I've also heard folk complain that they'll now have longer immigration queues, and why do we have to have this? Well again.... no freedom of movement means....
I think a large number of folk simply don't understand the complexities involved, and the banner headlines of £350 million a week, immigrants stealing YOUR job! The EU making our laws! It'll be easy to get a great deal - we'll get everything we want. All this kind of thing makes it seem like nothing was going to be a problem, and we'd have everything we have now - and more. Which is all rubbish obviously. - Jacob Rees-Mogg and his millionaire friends
Jacob Rees-Mogg is a hard Brexit fan, he wants to cut the ties and leave now. no looking back. But all you need to do is look as were his money is, and you see why. His investments are highly suspect, including some banned Russian banks, and if the UK were to have a hard brexit, he will personally make millions out of it.
This is another thing to remember, most of these big players - politicians, news papers etc. Everyone of them stands to gain hugely from it, and they don't give a toss if the average person in the street suffers for it. If you doubt that, then just look at what Conservative policies are doing to the average person just now. Foodbank usage is soaring as people struggle to put food on the table, and all Jacob Rees-Mogg has to say is that it's "rather uplifting". For those of you wondering, the correct response is "That's horrible, what can we do to help and stop it". But it's very much a case of "I'm okay, so I don't care". - Even the Government says it'll be a disaster
The Government had a study done - one it tried to hide, because it stated in every possible case, everyone will be worse off. It ranges from just "slightly worse", to monumentally worse.
They tried hard to bury this, but it eventually got out, and it makes for some disturbing reading. The EU vote was advisory, and that means, they should have said "Oh okay, the public would like us to look into leaving"....do the study....."okay, we looked. Turns out the UK will be much worse off if we do - here's the study, have a look. So, we thanks for your input, but we've decided it's not in the UKs best interest".
Instead we constantly get.... they people voted to leave, so we're leaving.
I'm pretty sure the people didn't vote the make rich people richer, and everyone else poorer, while at the same time removing a whole heap of rights. - The witch-hunt of immigrants
There seems to be a thing, that appears to be taking back control, means "hunting down" anyone not born in the UK. There are cases of people who have been living here for decades, paying taxes, doing jobs we want them to do, and immigration is trying to get them deported. Not only that, but people who came here as very young kids, have lived here all their lives, and they are trying to deport them back to a country they many not even speak the language of.
This is just evil. Can I have my loving, compassionate country back please?
One last interesting fact. The EU vote was "adversary", which means by definition many might have thought it didn't matter, and so may not have voted. This again calls into question how such a vote can be deemed to be "the peoples choice". In fact, only around 30-odd percent (can't remember he exact number) of eligible voters, voted to leave. That's hardly the will of the people.
Also, part of the law stated that if "significant" changes in status or rights occurred, then a second vote would be required. This kind of means that by definition, any "final deal" needs a second vote. It's in the EU vote bill, and it hasn't been withdrawn, so it's still valid.
Also, part of the law stated that if "significant" changes in status or rights occurred, then a second vote would be required. This kind of means that by definition, any "final deal" needs a second vote. It's in the EU vote bill, and it hasn't been withdrawn, so it's still valid.
So.... I'm struggling to find something they said that IS true. Anyone?
