|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Wed 28 Aug 14:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Wed 28 Aug 14:06
Don't you just love living in an autocracy....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 28 Aug 14:30
Johnson may just have shot himself in the foot with this latest wheez. If all the opposition MPs and the Tory MPs who didn't vote for him in the recent leadership contest line up against, he's toast..... đ
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Wed 28 Aug 14:39
"Johnson may just have shot himself in the foot with this latest wheez. If all the opposition MPs and the Tory MPs who didn't vote for him in the recent leadership contest line up against, he's toast..... đ"
You're forgetting that there are Labour MPs who voted for Brexit who will not vote against him in this. Kate Hoey probably being the most prominent example.
If the numbers were there then there would already have been a No Confidence vote. At the end of the day MPs are in it for themselves and will only do whatever they think will keep them in a job. The very idea that any of them are doing it for the country or "the people" is actually laughable.
Threats of civil disobedience from the likes of Clive Lewis and Jess Phillips will see them unemployed very soon after the next election too.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parsfan
Date: Wed 28 Aug 15:26
"Aye, go on then" she said, "it'll get my laddie out the news".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The universe is ruled by chance and indifference
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Wed 28 Aug 15:31
Bye-bye Conservative party. It was 'nice' knowing you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 28 Aug 15:45
Quote:
Captain Desmond Fancey, Wed 28 Aug 14:39
"Johnson may just have shot himself in the foot with this latest wheez. If all the opposition MPs and the Tory MPs who didn't vote for him in the recent leadership contest line up against, he's toast..... đ"
You're forgetting that there are Labour MPs who voted for Brexit who will not vote against him in this. Kate Hoey probably being the most prominent example.
If the numbers were there then there would already have been a No Confidence vote. At the end of the day MPs are in it for themselves and will only do whatever they think will keep them in a job. The very idea that any of them are doing it for the country or "the people" is actually laughable.
Threats of civil disobedience from the likes of Clive Lewis and Jess Phillips will see them unemployed very soon after the next election too.
Indeed, CDF. Just for one distracted moment, I forgot that the vast majority of Mps are exactly as you describe them. âč
Eta. If there are any altruistic MPs, it's probably a safe bet that they're not in either the Tory or Brexit Parties.
Not your average Sunday League player.
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 15:59)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Wed 28 Aug 16:18
Quote:
parsfan, Wed 28 Aug 15:26
"Aye, go on then" she said, "it'll get my laddie out the news".
So much this.... the old cow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 16:53
Funny how Remainers in Parliament are calling this action unconstitutional when they have been conspiring with the Speaker for months to tear up Parliamentary conventions in order to stop not just a âno dealâ but to stop Brexit completely.
Hypocrites comes to mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Wed 28 Aug 16:59
What exactly have remainers proposed that even comes close to this? Stop spouting utter drivel
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 17:00)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:00
Quote:
parbucks, Wed 28 Aug 16:53
Funny how Remainers in Parliament are calling this action unconstitutional when they have been conspiring with the Speaker for months to tear up Parliamentary conventions in order to stop not just a âno dealâ but to stop Brexit completely.
Hypocrites comes to mind.
Funny indeed, we're loving it up here in Scotland
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:14
Now we know what Brexiters meant by 'taking back control'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:19
âWhat exactly have remainers proposed that even comes close to this? Stop spouting utter drivelâ
I guess you must be selective in what you read or deaf to the news media.
What was yesterdayâs conspiracy meeting of the Opposition parties about?
Full marks to Boris for putting them on the back foot.
No doubt Grieve, Bercow et al will be researching all the obscure procedures that Bercow ignores when it suits his agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:26
In what sense is parliamentarians meeting to discuss parliamentary strategy "tear up Parliamentary conventions"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:37
BBC reporting that Ruth Davidson on the verge of resignation... đ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:46
Quote:
hurricane_jimmy, Wed 28 Aug 17:37
BBC reporting that Ruth Davidson on the verge of resignation... đ
Good on her if she does. Not many MPs would resign their sinecure on a matter of principle.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parsweep
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:47
Well done Boris . At last a politician who's taking the fight to the EU .
I voted to leave and find it disgusting we're still in 3 years later . To make it worse , there are those in charge of political parties , that say they still wouldn't accept it if they got another referendum and it went against them . Can't be arsed listening to all those folk telling me what I voted for . I voted out . Deal or no deal .
Bobvo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:53
''Good on her if she does. Not many MPs would resign their sinecure on a matter of principle.''
Her decision isn't connected to the decision to prorogue Parliament apparently. It's more to do with her differences with B Johnson and the pressures of motherhood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:55
Wotsit
You misquote me. You have conflated two separate posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Wed 28 Aug 18:01
They might have been two separate posts but it seems to me like they followed on from each other:
Parbucks: Funny how Remainers in Parliament are calling this action unconstitutional when they have been conspiring with the Speaker for months to tear up Parliamentary conventions in order to stop not just a âno dealâ but to stop Brexit completely.
Andrew238: What exactly have remainers proposed that even comes close to this? Stop spouting utter drivel
Parbucks: I guess you must be selective in what you read or deaf to the news media.
What was yesterdayâs conspiracy meeting of the Opposition parties about?
Could be wrong though, it might just be a random non sequitur?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 18:32
I donât see the problem.
They were separate posts but the essence is still the same: Remainers have never accepted the Referendum result and have been conspiring to block the Leave vote any way they can for the past 3 years and as recently as yesterday were still plotting to take control of the Parliamentary agenda to stop a â no dealâ option.
It would have been time better spent getting behind the Governmentâs attempts to get a revised deal that will get through Parliament rather than undermining our negotiations with the EU yet again.
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 18:37)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 28 Aug 19:18
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 28 Aug 17:46
Quote:
hurricane_jimmy, Wed 28 Aug 17:37
BBC reporting that Ruth Davidson on the verge of resignation... đ
Good on her if she does. Not many MPs would resign their sinecure on a matter of principle.
GG Riva.......With all due respect.....she has no principles , never had.
She realises that she is fighting a losing battle and was going to be put on the spot by the SNP and asked to fight against a No deal Brexit which she canât possibly do as she does what she is told by her boss at number 10.
Bailing out as she canât answer difficult questions unless she is given a wee peek at the questions at least 24 hours in advance from her chums in the media.
Horrible woman , gone , good but will just be replaced by another zoomer.
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 19:19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 28 Aug 19:30
Thanks for clearing that up, desperado. I've never accused any Tory MP of having principles before and I did feel a bit silly when I posted that comment earlier.......đ
Maybe if I'd stopped to give it a bit of thought, I'd have realised it was pure fantasy.
Not your average Sunday League player.
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 19:30)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Wed 28 Aug 19:47
Another invaluable contribution from Andrew....
These MPs voted overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50 knowing that this meant leaving, Deal or No Deal.
They then rejected a "deal" 3 times. The EU have said the "deal" it's not open for recognition.
Pretty simple maths really then... We leave with no deal.
I'll wager too that come the 1st November the buses will still be running, the shops will still be open and the kids will still be off to school.
And we'll soon be looking forward to five years of a majority conservative government and a party which will have disposed of traitors like Grieve and Kerwin.
Happy days are coming
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:08
I think Brexit has to happen in some form and it looks like it will be the worst form in a no deal one.
The best tactic now from a remain perspective is to allow it to happen but come the next election set up a new party as Brexit Party did and campaign as a party to rejoin the European Union.
Leaving doesn't mean forever if as expected, little Britain turns out to be a horrible experiment.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein PĂ€ckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:15
I wouldn't expect Brexit to have any effect on buses running, shops being open or kids going to school. It might have an effect on Scots being governed by Tories for the next five years though.
Who is Kerwin by the way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:18
Civil war coming to Englandshire.....Run Scotland Run !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:36
Anyone else on here actually met Ruth?
She is can utterly disappointing chomp of a person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:38
Suppose we will see her at lots of Pars games now then eh ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:50
Davidson knows a Tory wipe-out in Scotland with her as leader destroys her anyway.Escape with the highest Tory count under her leadership for years leaves her reputation good.No doubts she'll end up working with her pal Kezia.
Losers together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 28 Aug 20:52
Prof. Colin_Church (@ColinTKIrk) Tweeted:
Just overheard this activist in Shetland. đ€@agcolehamilton https://t.co/qOlesQN5IV
https://twitter.com/ColinTKIrk/status/1166771734076448768?s=17
Thousands more joining this young man.......people are slowly but surely opening their minds leaving the British Nationalists, orange order, and other minority groups like SIU floundering, stuttering, stammering and wondering what is happening as their old arguments and lies fall one by one like dominoes.
I am not going to predict an SNP win in Shetland tomorrow but if they do lose it will be very narrowly. A massive swing to SNP on the cards.
Sign of the times.
UKGE in October will return 50+ SNP MPâs . Put independence in the manifesto and the game is up.......tick tock.....đ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 21:48
Didnât take long for the SNP to get a mention.
Another gang who canât accept the will of the people in a referendum. đ€
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 28 Aug 22:01
The UK gov never accepted the will of the Scottish people in 2014.
We voted to stay in the UK providing we got the strongest devolved parliament in the world . A promise not to remove devolved powers unless our parliament was consulted. The UK gov broke those promises.
That among other reasons is why we will have another referendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 22:15
The SNP keep finding reasons to keep the indie issue going regardless of any vote to the contrary.
What was the âvote of a generationâ has been quickly forgotten as they pursue their relentless agenda.
Itâs got nothing to do with devolved powers. All or nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Wed 28 Aug 22:26
Quote:
parbucks, Wed 28 Aug 22:15
The SNP keep finding reasons to keep the indie issue going regardless of any vote to the contrary.
What was the âvote of a generationâ has been quickly forgotten as they pursue their relentless agenda.
Itâs got nothing to do with devolved powers. All or nothing.
The terms have changed now, they promised us we would stay in the EU but now Scotland is being taken out against our wishes. There must be an Independence Referendum 2, and it's pretty clear to me this time it will be Yes. People have seen through Westminster lies now
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 28 Aug 22:36
Johnson, Gove, Javid, Rudd, Hancock all said during the Tory leadership campaign they were against proroguing Parliament. What's changed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Wed 28 Aug 23:06
Ruth Davidson so far as I am aware, and I have a relative who works in the Holyrood Parliament, is a very sincere person. Always polite to junior staff unlike many others.
Regarding Johnson's coup, it has nothing to do with Brexit. He was not even a brexiteer himself a few years back. It is simply a vehicle to suspend parliament indefinitely- once it is suspended only he will decide when it resits. In the interim, before a military ocup or General Strike, he needs to finish the Thatcher revolution which was aimed at emasculating the voice of the proletariat. Given the pitiful state of the Left in UK politics he is entitled to think he is in with a chance.
sammer
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 23:08)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Wed 28 Aug 23:20
A week is a long time in politics so the old saying goes, but it is still a week Sammer, definitely not indefinitely
Post Edited (Wed 28 Aug 23:22)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Wed 28 Aug 23:29
Quote:
red-star-par, Wed 28 Aug 22:26
Quote:
parbucks, Wed 28 Aug 22:15
The SNP keep finding reasons to keep the indie issue going regardless of any vote to the contrary.
What was the âvote of a generationâ has been quickly forgotten as they pursue their relentless agenda.
Itâs got nothing to do with devolved powers. All or nothing.
The terms have changed now, they promised us we would stay in the EU but now Scotland is being taken out against our wishes. There must be an Independence Referendum 2, and it's pretty clear to me this time it will be Yes. People have seen through Westminster lies now
I never saw any mention of EU membership on the Independence Referendum ballot paper. Must've had my eyes shut.....
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Mario
Date: Wed 28 Aug 23:30
Nobody can accuse you of sticking to your guns GG. A puff of wind and over you roll.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 28 Aug 23:34
Da_no_1, you are quite correct it didn't say that on the indy ref ballot paper. It also never said on the ballot paper that it would be a once in a generation referendum so then I'm sure you agree we could have another one then if we want....
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Wed 28 Aug 23:43
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Wed 28 Aug 23:34
Da_no_1, you are quite correct it didn't say that on the indy ref ballot paper. It also never said on the ballot paper that it would be a once in a generation referendum so then I'm sure you agree we could have another one then if we want....
Yeah until you get the result you want.....I suppose so.
Then the SNP will actually have to govern. Can you imagine?!
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 00:10
They have been doing that for the past 12 years and have done a decent enough job of it. Certainly alot better than their opposite numbers down at Westminster.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Thu 29 Aug 06:22
Of course you can back that up with statistics ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 29 Aug 06:47
Quote:
da_no_1, Wed 28 Aug 23:43
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Wed 28 Aug 23:34
Da_no_1, you are quite correct it didn't say that on the indy ref ballot paper. It also never said on the ballot paper that it would be a once in a generation referendum so then I'm sure you agree we could have another one then if we want....
Yeah until you get the result you want.....I suppose so.
Then the SNP will actually have to govern. Can you imagine?!
Why would it be the SNP who would govern? Surely after independence there would be other political parties registered and belonging to Scotland who would stand for election
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Thu 29 Aug 07:46
Quote:
Mario, Wed 28 Aug 23:30
Nobody can accuse you of sticking to your guns GG. A puff of wind and over you roll.
Guilty as charged, 'lud. âč
Maybe I should change my user name to Tumbleweed?
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Thu 29 Aug 07:50
Quote:
da_no_1, Wed 28 Aug 23:43
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Wed 28 Aug 23:34
Da_no_1, you are quite correct it didn't say that on the indy ref ballot paper. It also never said on the ballot paper that it would be a once in a generation referendum so then I'm sure you agree we could have another one then if we want....
Yeah until you get the result you want.....I suppose so.
Then the SNP will actually have to govern. Can you imagine?!
Would they. After their main goal has been achieved they could fall apart within 10 years and a new party appear. Or God forbid Labour would return from the dead.
Post Edited (Thu 29 Aug 07:51)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Thu 29 Aug 08:08
Yeah, I've never understood people who equate independence with the SNP running it.
They would quite rightly have to administer the transition period but after that, I would expect to see a whole new generation of Scottish political parties.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein PĂ€ckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 29 Aug 08:10
''I never saw any mention of EU membership on the Independence Referendum ballot paper. Must've had my eyes shut.....''
I never saw any mention of 'No Deal' on the EU Referendum ballot paper but apparently it's what the great British public voted for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Thu 29 Aug 10:20
"I never saw any mention of 'No Deal' on the EU Referendum ballot paper but apparently it's what the great British public voted for."
The UK electorate voted to leave the European Union, it was really that simple. I don't know what is so hard for people to understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bandy
Date: Thu 29 Aug 10:44
"The UK electorate voted to leave the European Union, it was really that simple. I don't know what is so hard for people to understand."
The fact that Leave campaigned on the basis that a deal would be secured.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Thu 29 Aug 11:32
"The fact that Leave campaigned on the basis that a deal would be secured."
It was never stated once that a deal was guaranteed. I know when I cast my vote, it never entered my head about it being deal or no deal. It was always remain.
I suspect countless other Leave voters were the same.
Even now if it was a choice between Remain and No Deal I wouldn't need to think about it for a second.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 11:56
That's because you hold an entrenched view. No different to any other radical.
In my opinion I don't see how anyone can believe that leaving with no deal can be anything but detrimental to the nation. Now a no deal brexit greatly enhances the chances of Scottish independence which is a cause I largely support however I don't want to see the UK been substantially damaged to achieve it. Remember a no deal is just that. No deal on anything. From trade, to movement, to law enforcement, to air traffic control. So when you say you want no deal that's just false. You can't surely want no arrangements, a deal in other words, to be made.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 17:18
We havenât finished negotiations yet with the EU. The government has said it would prefer a deal just not the one currently on the table which was the result of the most futile efforts by a Remainer Prime Minister and her cohorts.
If all the energy being expended on trying to stop Brexit was channelled to support the government then there still remains the possibility of a deal but thatâs not the outcome most Remainers want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Superally
Date: Thu 29 Aug 18:02
Strange that the no deal brexitiers were all shouting about recognising the sovereignty of Parliament. Like the big red bus another convenient lie that the sheep will follow if it suits.
2009/10, 2010/11, 2013/14, 2015/16 dafc.net Prediction League Champion
It's a well known medical fact that some men were born two drams below par.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 29 Aug 18:45
I think the result of the EU referendum would have been more readily accepted if the Exit campaign had not been based on so many lies - the red bus, Farage's poster showing a queue of non-EU immigrants, claims that Turkey was about to join the EU, etc. That's without raising questions over how it was funded.
Unfortunately the trend in politics today is that the end justifies the means, however it was achieved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 19:30
Maybe it depends on which end you look through the telescope?
We were âwarnedâ before the referendum of the likely consequences of Brexit by a leaflet costing ÂŁ9 million sent to every household:
Threats of another world war, immediate economic recession, up to 800,000 unemployed within 6 months etc etc., people like Obama drafted in to tell us we would be âback of the queueâ.
The government also said it would honour the result as have the leading political parties at the last GE.
Despite all that in the biggest turnout in electoral history in the U.K. the public voted âLeaveâ. There were no conditions put on that. In or Out.
On the other side no one outlined what Remain meant but as we now know it is the progression to a Superstate Europe where country independence is ceded to Brussels. The answer to Europeâs problems ,primarily the Eurozone which dominates the EU, according to the Five Presidents Report of around 4 years ago is â more Europeâ. That means more fiscal, financial and central control from Brussels and Frankfurt.
A European Army which would undermine NATO is a simple example.
Time for the Remainers to articulate what Remain actually means in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 29 Aug 20:28
''Time for the Remainers to articulate what Remain actually means in the future.''
Are you suggesting a second referendum?
The EU referendum campaign was the most shallow, superficial political campaign I have encountered in my lifetime. For example, I don't remember the question of the Irish border being mentioned, far less identified as a major issue. For us Scots who had experienced the Independence referendum two years earlier it was an eye-opener. Maybe it was different down South but I don't think it engaged people in Scotland much. It's a sad state of affairs if the electorate is left to decide which side is telling the biggest lies. I wonder if 'Leave' would have accepted such a narrow defeat if it had gone the other way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 21:06
Wee eck
I think we substantially agree on most points re the U.K. referendum.
The consequences were not thought through because Cameron never expected a Leave vote since he was not in tune with what people outside the Metropolitan elite in London thought and experienced.
The EU was not working for them particularly uncontrolled immigration with the consequent impact on public services, housing, wage depression and crime.
A city the size of Coventry having to be built every year and it still continues despite the rhetoric.
Scotland because immigration was not a big deal in contrast welcomed this and to use your words was ânot engagedâ. There lies the difference.
I also believe if Leave had lost then the result would have been accepted after all it is the Masters of the People(MPâs) in Parliament who have never accepted the Leave result.
Post Edited (Thu 29 Aug 21:41)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 29 Aug 22:19
'A European Army which would undermine NATO is a simple example.'
As your user name indicates, you are an Atlanticist whose vision of the UK is to become the 51st state of America. NATO could have been stood down after the Cold War if its function was what id initially claimed. It is now busy surrounding Russia with its missiles, much to the disquiet of Macron and Merkel.
'A city the size of Coventry having to be built every year and it still continues despite the rhetoric.' Pure Faragist propaganda: where are these cities you speak of? Do they appear on any map?
BTW, Farage was open about the referendum which he expected to lose: he would have continued the fight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 29 Aug 22:29
'The EU was not working for them particularly uncontrolled immigration with the consequent impact on public services, housing, wage depression and crime.'
Amazing how these Tory brexiteers suddenly lament the lack of public housing, the public housing they sold off in the heyday of Thatcherism. As for increased crime, that is probably a comment worthy of Reggie Kray or Frankie Fraser, diamond geezers who gave us good old fashioned British gangsterism before the foreigners moved in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Thu 29 Aug 22:52
The fly in the ointment is that they want to keep the Irish border open but ignore the fact that is an open border between the EU and the UK.It will not work as the rules,and tariffs, will be different.That means a hard border and bombs going off again.
Lots of deals they could have made but none of them protected the rich boys tax havens so we end up in this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 22:53
âAtlanticist â. I think you are a fantasist based on your comments. It was the NATO alliance during the Cold War years and beyond that kept the Russian threat to Europe neutralised. Putin is on a path to try and restore the supremacy of the old USSR.
It will only be the maintenance of a deployable nuclear deterrent that will keep him and his ilk in check.
Anyone who thinks that Putinâs actions in Crimea, Ukraine, Syria and activities surrounding the Baltic states, repeated incursions into our air space and waters are not a provocative act is deluded. Why have likes of Estonia and Latvia asked for help?
As for Macron and Merkel the latter should know better as she is a former East German citizen and knows first hand about Russian oppression.
Macron like most French politicians going back to De Gaulle is just anti American and for many years withdrew active support to NATO. Neither country fulfils their pledged economic contribution to NATO. Trump is right in calling them to account. Free loading.
By the way Germany does not want to poke the Russian bear as much of its energy supplies come from there. Just saying like.....
So a European army is the solution according to the EU.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 29 Aug 23:02
Sammer
âAs for increased crime, that is probably a comment worthy of Reggie Kray or Frankie Fraser,â
You clearly donât understand that under current EU rules and freedom of movement we are powerless to stop known criminals in other EU countries coming here.
We also seem powerless to deport them as and when they continue their criminal activities in this country. Oooman rights if they have to go back to an EU country whose prison standards donât meet ours, for example. Or loss of family including dogs and cats. You couldnât make all this crap up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Thu 29 Aug 23:26
Daily Mail and Express a marvelous read I'd guess.They do live on a different planet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Fri 30 Aug 06:06
Parbucks - Your points about Russia are all valid. I would largely not trust Putin as far as I could throw him, but I do find it interesting how he comes across as fairly reasonable when speaking English and then more extreme when speaking Russian. That said, there is no doubting his intentions but do you truly believe that the UK is not an antagonist in the world today? The UK is desperately determined to paint the picture of being a "Global Power" and this is much of the reason why the UK Government are determined to hold on to a Nuclear Deterrent.
If Britain had any real integrity on the world stage, the UK Government would be cutting ties with the Saudis, calling Israel out and declaring China in breach of the 1997 deal over Hong Kong, as well as confronting them on their bullying of Taiwan. We both know the two main reasons why they do none of these things: the US and money.
Generally the UK has an obsession with creating extensive guidelines and following them to the letter. By and large this doesn't happen in other memeber states and they'll implement EU directives in a far looser way that suits then. The UK implements things letter for letter then complains that they are being dictated to and that other countries don't follow the rules - if the UK did not have such an insular mindset and was actually open to looking at how other countries do things then they might actually make some decent progress. The UK is widely regarded as being markedly slower to implement change than other European nations too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Fri 30 Aug 07:38
I've never hidden the fact that, as a European, I'd have preferred the UK to stay in the EU, like the vast majority of MPs at the time of the referendum. ( About 550 said they thought the UK should remain in the EU.)
I'm the first to admit that the EU is overly bureaucratic and riddled with corruption, however. The best way to address that would have been from the inside, rather than by walking away. I can see the argument for the UK running it's own affairs, unfettered by some of the crazy directives that sometimes emanate from Brussels.
Where I'm at odds with the PM and his fellow Brexiteers, is the obsession that we must leave the EU by 31st October, come hell or high water, deal or no deal and the arrogant and autocratic way in which he's trying to remove Parliament from the decision.
I can't imagine how anyone can believe it is in the country's best interests to leave without a deal. Why would any responsible leader want to put his/her citizens through all the pain, anxiety and chaos that this would almost certainly bring?
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 30 Aug 07:45
GG - as always you make a fair point.
However, the MPs voted by a massive majority to trigger Article 50 and the legalities of that were that we would leave with our without a deal two years after it was triggered. We've already had two extensions and deal - albeit a dreadful one - rejected three times.
What the country needs above anything else right now is some kind of clarity and I don't think that another extension and more months of arguing and dithering (remember the EU have already more or less said they won't budge). The alternative to that would then be to revoke article 50 and I would imagine doing that would make this week's (rather lame so far) protests look like country fete.
Of course a deal would be in the best interests but if it's not going to happen (I see from today's news that efforts are now being stepped up from both sides) then I believe we need to walk away without one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 30 Aug 07:46
So you are criticising the UK for following rules that other nations ignore?
By the way I don't see any other nation confronting China over Taiwan. Even America refuses to recognise Taiwan officially but thank goodness they support them militarily or the Chinese would have already crossed the straits. As for calling them out over Hong Kong? As if that would make a bit of difference to the autocrats in Beijing. Besides some people would criticise the UK for doing that. Accuse them of acting like a colonial power.
Many countries have ties with Saudi Arabia and do extensive trade with them. For example Sweden exports close to ÂŁ1 billion worth of goods and services to the Kingdom.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Fri 30 Aug 11:13
Quote:
GG Riva, Fri 30 Aug 07:38
I've never hidden the fact that, as a European, I'd have preferred the UK to stay in the EU, like the vast majority of MPs at the time of the referendum. ( About 550 said they thought the UK should remain in the EU.)
I'm the first to admit that the EU is overly bureaucratic and riddled with corruption, however. The best way to address that would have been from the inside, rather than by walking away. I can see the argument for the UK running it's own affairs, unfettered by some of the crazy directives that sometimes emanate from Brussels.
Where I'm at odds with the PM and his fellow Brexiteers, is the obsession that we must leave the EU by 31st October, come hell or high water, deal or no deal and the arrogant and autocratic way in which he's trying to remove Parliament from the decision.
I can't imagine how anyone can believe it is in the country's best interests to leave without a deal. Why would any responsible leader want to put his/her citizens through all the pain, anxiety and chaos that this would almost certainly bring?
They're making millions from misery, of course they would.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 30 Aug 11:17
"They're making millions from misery, of course they would."
As are the likes of the Kinnocks and countless others by wishing to remain.
Politicians on Brexit are a bit like the Old Firm. Two poisonous cheeks of the same bottom .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Fri 30 Aug 14:12
TOWKS - I guess the main point I'm making is that the UK paints the EU guidelines as profoundly rigid and interprets them to the letter, which not how they are intended, nor is it the approach of other countries. One of the first things you'll encounter working abroad in the private sector dealing with UK Companies is that they absolutely LOVE rules and regulations - I don't know if you have personal experience of that but that is mine and I've seen it with various organisations' British divisions.
Your points on Taiwan I agree with.
The UK position on Hong Kong is a unique one and having visited HK over the summer and Taiwan previously, I genuinely feel sorry for these people as their countries are bullied. Hong Kong Island and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity to the UK as part of the Opium wars, while the New Territories was a 99 year lease. It was agreed by the Thatcher Government in the 80s that the New Territories was too integrated with Hong Kong and Kowloon and that any negotiation should encompass all three. When Hong Kong returned to China in 97, it accounted for 26% of the whole country's GDP and so it was left alone. Today, after the massive growth in China, it only accounts for 3% which is why Beijing is trying its luck at going against the "One Country, Two Systems" agreement that was supposed to stay in place until 2047. If memory serves correctly, the Hong Kong legislature is 2/3 elected and 1/3 of members are appointed by the business community who are naturally pro-China. Elected members/Candidates of the Legislature must swear loyalty to the Hong Kong Basic Law, which states "Hong Kong is an inalienable part of China", otherwise they cannot stand so the system is inherently rigged on two counts. While I think we know that the Chinese can be fundamentalist politically to a level akin to Evangelicals and Islamists, the agreement made in 97 is subject to International Law and I think China could potentially come a-cropper if the UK declared them in breach of the treaty to the UN. One could surmise that this would potentially return Hong Kong and Kowloon to the UK legally - obviously China would protest but it would essentially force China's hand. Yes, people could claim the UK is acting like a colonial power in such an instance but they are the ones with the power to do something here.
As for the Saudis, yes the UK are not the only ones - Germany, Belgium, Sweden, France and others are all guilty of enabling the Saudis. I just find it hypocritical how anti-Iran the UK and US are when they are so supportive of another nation where the population is by and large more fundamentalist and the Government are funding numerous Islamist groups. 9/11 was a Saudi plot with all bar one Qatari holding Saudi citizenship, yet these guys are apparently still our pals!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Fri 30 Aug 15:00
Quote:
Captain Desmond Fancey, Fri 30 Aug 07:45
GG - as always you make a fair point.
However, the MPs voted by a massive majority to trigger Article 50 and the legalities of that were that we would leave with our without a deal two years after it was triggered. We've already had two extensions and deal - albeit a dreadful one - rejected three times.
And the reason they voted to trigger Article 50?
(a) They believed this was in the best interests of their constituents or
(b) They believed voting against would be political suicide.
Take your pick.....
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 30 Aug 19:12
We were nearly all, whether by desire or resignation, accepting that Brexit was happening up until the point when the actual facts started to emerge, up to the point where everybody started fighting over what Brexit means, up to the point where the government usurped democracy, etc, etc.
Now those who were resigned to it have changed their minds as a result of changing information and some, such as me, who voted Leave, simply can't see the point any more and I for one really wish Brexit had never come onto the political radar because it is an absolute god-forsaken mess.
Maybe we should just have a civil war and be done with it?
"The Leavers might have the tanks but we have the high ground!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 30 Aug 21:44
Wotsit: âThe Leavers might have the tanks but we have the high ground!"
Maybe you should reflect on that statement?
In the largest democratic vote in U.K. history we voted to Leave.
Since then the losers have used every trick in the book to overturn that result with the connivance of the supposedly politically neutral Speaker of the House.
The referendum choice was simple : Remain or Leave and the government of the day used all its powers to influence the result and got it WRONG.
That was democracy in action when the people said Leave.
Honour the result. Go BoJo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Fri 30 Aug 22:31
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 30 Aug 21:44
In the largest democratic vote in U.K. history we NARROWLY voted to Leave.
Fixed that for you, Parbucks.
All the Referendum proved was that the voters were hopelessly split. It is entirely plausible that those who wanted to leave went out and voted for constitutional change, whereas many of those who may have been in favour of remaining in the EU didn't make the effort to get out to vote, since it was generally believed that the Brexiteers could not win. (You could get 8/1 against Brexit the day before.)
In my humble one, a vote for constitutional change should require a sizeable majority for it to go ahead.
51.8% of 74% of those eligible to vote is hardly that.....
37.5% of those eligible to vote, voted Leave. A case of the tail wagging the dog?
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 30 Aug 22:37
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 30 Aug 21:44
Wotsit: âThe Leavers might have the tanks but we have the high ground!"
Maybe you should reflect on that statement?
In the largest democratic vote in U.K. history we voted to Leave.
Since then the losers have used every trick in the book to overturn that result with the connivance of the supposedly politically neutral Speaker of the House.
The referendum choice was simple : Remain or Leave and the government of the day used all its powers to influence the result and got it WRONG.
That was democracy in action when the people said Leave.
Honour the result. Go BoJo.
The biggest mistake was made by Theresa May when she called a general election thinking to strengthen her position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 30 Aug 22:43
GG
Try as you might disagree thatâs how the system works just as it would have been if the referendum result had turned out differently.
If it had, I suspect strongly, we would not have had the obstructions and protestations against the democratic process we currently have but thatâs just my opinion.
As has been said many times we are leaving the EU not Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 30 Aug 23:03
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 30 Aug 22:43
GG
Try as you might disagree thatâs how the system works just as it would have been if the referendum result had turned out differently.
If it had, I suspect strongly, we would not have had the obstructions and protestations against the democratic process we currently have but thatâs just my opinion.
As has been said many times we are leaving the EU not Europe.
If the result had been the reverse, we would have had three plus years of leave saying it was a close call and their campaign would still be ongoing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 30 Aug 23:19
So you have a crystal ball and the wisdom of hindsight?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 30 Aug 23:39
So thatâs a fact then đ€
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 30 Aug 23:45
Are you calling Nigel Farage a liar?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 30 Aug 23:45
Farage is on record as admitting that he would not have accepted a referendum result which went against him as the final word. Which is fair enough; a man is entitled to keep campaigning for what he thinks is best.
Referenda have generally been used to rubber stamp decisions already taken, such as Hitler invading Austria or Harold Wilson confirming EEC Membership back in 1975. Only an idiot of a politician would use a referendum for advice on what to do next, especially since there was no plan on the table of what to do in the event of a Brexit vote. Itâs not been so much about stalling and prevaricating from the politicians, itâs more a case that no one in the government had a clear plan of how to make Brexit happen. For example the Irish border problem, which is insoluble save for some form of diplomatic language, was never even a consideration back in 2016. Sacking civil servants and half the cabinet might change the mood music but not the reality that Johnson cannot, as he once boasted, have his cake and eat it. Those who bet against Britain donât always lose their shirts either, as Iâm sure independent nations such as the USA and Eire would agree.
A âcrash-outâ Brexit is unlikely to be tolerated by the business community, since they will spend the next few years having to negotiate trade and tariffs with EU countries that already exist by common agreement. Economically, Brexit in âcrash-outâ form is madness. If there were corresponding advantages in terms of national unity or social cohesion then an economic hit might be worth taking, yet every indication is that the UK as it stands at present will be even more divided after we leave. Which is hardly surprising since Brexit was an internal dispute within the Conservative Party which has spilled out into the body politic and may yet spill out on to the streets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 30 Aug 23:59
Indeed a referendum can often be used as a rubber stamping exercise as was shown even more recently than the examples you gave with the vote in Crimea in 2014.
There will be no direct action on the streets Sammer. Not unless a no deal takes Netflix or Facebook offline.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 31 Aug 00:16
That's a point Sammer: we already decided in 1975 (well, I didn't, I was 3) so why is this government stubbornly insisting on overturning the democratic will of the British people?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 31 Aug 02:53
Reading Parbucksâ simplistic interpretation of the Baltic Countries situation within Europe made me realise that my own knowledge was little better.
If you have time, it is worth reading up on what developed in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania during the inter-war years when parliamentary democracy was rather easily was shoved aside and replaced by authoritarian rule. The idea that either the USSR or Nazi Germany demolished democracy inside these countries is fanciful given that their own parliaments had long ceased to function by 1940. The reasons for this are specific to the time and the development specific to each country of course, but the general deterioration may have some resonance for us in the UK at the moment.
Anyone who supports Scottish Independence would learn a great deal I think from the very difficult options available to the Baltic peoples in their fights for real independence, which continues to this day. As a footnote, I enjoy the knowledge Hurricane Jimmy brings to any debate, but when I visited Tallin last year it looked like a Soviet city that had been abandoned with a few cheap, dingy bars which I rather like, they being so hard to find these days. But of European money I could see little evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 31 Aug 03:12
I think civil disorder is actually required in order for a âcrash-outâ Brexit to take place. Iâm not suggesting that is Johnsonâs Plan A- more likely he intends to come back from Europe at the last moment like Neville Chamberlain with a âBrexit in our Timeâ deal in his grunbby paw amidst fanfare from the media.
But if he canât pull this off, then his suspension of parliament has to continue in the aftermath of a âcrash-out.â He can hardly rule, as an unelected PM, trying to impose the realities of a Brexit that was only ever supported by 52% of the electorate and probably commands less than that now. If lorries are jammed at ports and fuel supplies break down, if cashlines start imposing limits then a General Strike, which would certainly be welcomed by Whitehall civil servants, may be in the offing. Perhaps Johnson has taken âsoundingsâ from the military to judge support, but he is a reckless character who may not have taken this precaution.
I said a few weeks back that Johnson was like Goering waiting for a Reichstag fire, and he has certainly put the idea of parliament being ineffective out there to test public reaction. If parliament can be suspended for a week, then why not two weeks, or a month? Civil disorder on a large enough scale would allow him to seek an emergency extension from the Queen, allowing him to round up not just Remainers but also the Faragists elements he has so far being trying to appease. Then he can go scuttling back to the EU and come back with a âbetterâ deal than we had when we were members, so although we are out of the EU we are actually in a sense still in it, and he will be hailed as a Churchill for our times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sat 31 Aug 06:19
Quote:
parbucks, Fri 30 Aug 22:43
GG
Try as you might disagree thatâs how the system works just as it would have been if the referendum result had turned out differently.
If it had, I suspect strongly, we would not have had the obstructions and protestations against the democratic process we currently have but thatâs just my opinion.
As has been said many times we are leaving the EU not Europe.
Parbucks - is there any part of my previous post which you can point to as being factually inaccurate? Even the notion that those voted Leave did so in far greater proportion than those who were ambivalent or confused as to which future was best for the UK?
In truth, nobody can be sure how we will fare if and when we do leave the EU, but most analysts on both sides of the debate, agree that there will be a period of pain for the UK. How long that will last is anyone's guess.
My point about requiring a significant majority being necessary before embarking on a path of constitutional reform is a sound one. That David Cameron allowed a Referendum with a simple majority of 50% +1, doesn't make it watertight, especially as voters were repeatedly misled with a series of spurious claims by the likes of Johnson and Farage. A majority of somewhere between 60% and 2/3 of the vote would have been far more logical, imo. Hardly the same thing I know, but to enact league reconstruction in Scottish football, the Premiership clubs need to vote 11 to 1 in favour. That is excessive, of course, but even in the democratic days of one club, one vote, a 67% majority was required, a fact which frustrated two big a Scottish clubs - no prizes for guessing who.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Sat 31 Aug 06:56
There were as many lies on the Remain side as there were on Leave....800,000 jobs lost, emergency budget are two that spring immediately to mind.
Both sides as rotten as each other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 31 Aug 08:09
I don't agree with benchmarks. A government can hardly say that as a population we voted for brexit, but because we don't think enough of you did, then were not going to accept the result and essentially let the losing side (who we happen to support) win
Edited to say I liked the idea of each (equal) member country of the UK having to vote in the same way, but then that's because I see the UK as a political union of countries, as opposed to one combined country in its own right (so that view sits naturally with me)
Post Edited (Sat 31 Aug 08:13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sat 31 Aug 08:18
Quote:
Captain Desmond Fancey, Sat 31 Aug 06:56
There were as many lies on the Remain side as there were on Leave....800,000 jobs lost, emergency budget are two that spring immediately to mind.
Both sides as rotten as each other
We don't know how many lies the Remain side fed us, CDF and we don't know if the example you give will come to pass. Let's hope not, but we do know that some large employers have threatened to relocate their businesses elsewhere, so that figure could even turn out to be an underestimate. Like I said, let's hope not.
Where I'm convinced that I'm right is in saying that the majority vote which is to be used to determine our future, was so slender as to be insignificant. Most voters didn't really have a clear idea as to what they were voting for. The UK's future should have been decided by our MPs, they should be far better informed about the pros and cons of the EU, compared to Joe Public.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Sat 31 Aug 09:25
It's not come to pass though. These were things that would happen in the immediate event of a vote to leave.
Employment, and the economy, have both continued to grow since the vote.
Now the scare stories are just becoming ridiculous as desperation kicks in. Just what interest do so many of them have to remain. As you alluded to above it's certainly not them looking after their constituents.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 31 Aug 12:43
Employment hasn't really grown.
The number of jobs might have, but some jobs are more equal than others and you have to work enough to live above the poverty line to be employed, and the booming gig economy isn't the best way to achieve that.
If you have to go to a food bank when you have budgeted properly and worked all the hours available to you, then you really can't be considered "employed" can you?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
