9 hours ago, NanLaew said:

To be more specific, it's him!

 

 

He was a major player in ensuring Theresa May stayed on her token Brexit course and he's hell-bent on trying to drive Johnson's ship onto the same dangerous rocks.

Moreover, he is such a committed democrat that he has attempted to circumvent the likely desire of his constituency party not to select him as their candidate at the next election, by attempting to engineer his adoption as candidate by the executive committee of that party, (all his mates) and thus avoid the need for the full selection process, and a vote by the members.

Edited August 31, 20196 yr by JAG

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

You should read the post again.

How about both of you copping an earfull...

 

8 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

As everything can change then EU says here's a freebie - Bercow puts it to the commons - vote agrees job done. We can't leave until Parliament agrees. Remember Parliament took control of the process by law and still has it. //

Sorry but (I think that) you are wrong.

You can leave with or without a deal, and with or without Parliament agreement !

UK activated the Article 50 of the EU. When the delay (and extensions) is over, UK is out. Simple.

Looks like many British forget that Article 50 is cover by EU laws, not UK laws. 

8 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Sorry but (I think that) you are wrong.

You can leave with or without a deal, and with or without Parliament agreement !

UK activated the Article 50 of the EU. When the delay (and extensions) is over, UK is out. Simple.

Looks like many British forget that Article 50 is cover by EU laws, not UK laws. 

For sure seen as law by E.U. side ….. so whatever the U.K. is "cooking"... is their problem , if nothing special happens (extension asked or revoking A50 …) Brexit is fact 31 October midnight .

And U.K. can bicker further on their own, in or out parliament or on the streets ….it's all your's????

Edited August 31, 20196 yr by david555

6 minutes ago, evadgib said:

How about both of you copping an earfull...

 

Like JRM I wouldn't give him the time of day.

I always thought you were one of the more sensible.

7 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Like JRM I wouldn't give him the time of day.

I always thought you were one of the more sensible.

It's getting late ????

53 minutes ago, sandyf said:

You should read the post again.

No need. Thanks.

1 hour ago, flossie35 said:

 

The (unecessary) referendum was ADVISORY, leaving MPs to decide whether or not it was in the national interest to take the advice. Art 50 merely allowed dicussions to take place; it was not a commitment to leave if the discussions led to the conclusion that we should remain. Parliament can revoke art 50 and I hope they do; we've wasted 3 years on this brexit nonsense while other problems pile up and are ignored. EU membership was never a real problem and there are no benefits to leaving. And no deal would be a big disaster according to those who understand these things. Unfortunately this group does not include buffoon JB.

What a complete collection of cobblers.

8 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

The EU will be in talks with rebels as to procedures of that you can be sure. And the Speaker and his office will be advising. If this happens Farage will say if you want Brexit you need to vote BP - the tories could get slaughtered. Game On !

Not only the Tories but labour too. The winners will be, as you say BP and God-help us, Lib-Dems.

 

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

He is pretty quiet but he was on TV a couple of times last week. He knows that all he can do for now is to wait patiently and see what happens. 

  7 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Nigel Farage has been strangely quiet recently. I doubt he really wants to run a political party. The payback he is due from the tax avoiders he has helped, must be eye watering. Then there's his EU pension. BJ suits him fine, if there is a GE he will do a deal and be content with a few seats if any. Imagine never having to talk to Anne Widdecome ever again - bliss indeed!

 

As Milton said, "They also serve who only stand and wait."

Edited August 31, 20196 yr by blazes

10 hours ago, dunroaming said:

I have become quite sanguine about the whole Brexit thing now.  Dominic Cummings and the ERG are very much in control and all the huffing and puffing isn't going to change that.  Johnson will stagger from one lie to the next but then we all knew what he was like from the start.

 

 

Brexit has taught me that in fact, I was wrong and the country is far more divided than I ever imagined.  I have never experienced such vitriol and anger sustained over such a long period.  So no more shouting or getting my knickers in a twist over Brexit for me.  Life is for living and enjoying and so I will stand back and let all these politicians (Ha!) screw themselves into the ground and wallow in their own s**t.  I have moved my business to mainland Europe and it is now doing well again and I am perusing the property brochures of sunny Spain.  Not so bad after all!

 

So you've done roaming, have you?

Sorry but (I think that) you are wrong.
You can leave with or without a deal, and with or without Parliament agreement !
UK activated the Article 50 of the EU. When the delay (and extensions) is over, UK is out. Simple.
Looks like many British forget that Article 50 is cover by EU laws, not UK laws. 

Parliament have already agreed to leave without a deal. It’s legislated for in the Withdrawal Act.
Article 50 is not important to us at all. It’s only the notification to the EU that we are Leaving. We can Leave whenever we want without further ado. Extensions are only there to keep us in the EU longer.
Boris should simply tell the EU “We’ve Left. There’s no more contributions. Would you now like to talk about trade deals?”

6 hours ago, evadgib said:

How about both of you copping an earfull...

 

Good man. What he says is spot on. He must have been reading my posts for the last 3 years.

6 hours ago, nauseus said:

What a complete collection of cobblers.

A typical howling Brexiteers reply to the truth. Try to argue one point in the post that isn't true. You can't so you post some one-liner schoolboy rhetoric. Sad.

2 hours ago, Loiner said:

Parliament have already agreed to leave without a deal. It’s legislated for in the Withdrawal Act.
Article 50 is not important to us at all. It’s only the notification to the EU that we are Leaving. We can Leave whenever we want without further ado. Extensions are only there to keep us in the EU longer.
Boris should simply tell the EU “We’ve Left. There’s no more contributions. Would you now like to talk about trade deals?”

Have to disagree a bit there. Shock/horror:

 

Article 50 is important to us because, if it did not exist, leaving might be even more painful:

1. It is part of an EU treaty that we are signed up to as a member state.

2. It enables us to leave. It is the only legal mechanism to do this under treaty rules (see 1).

3. If no agreement is reached after 2 years then the nominal default is that we are out. 

4. We are still in only because of the time extensions agreed, which are allowable under Article 50. 

 

 

4 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

A typical howling Brexiteers reply to the truth. Try to argue one point in the post that isn't true. You can't so you post some one-liner schoolboy rhetoric. Sad.

It was all cobblers, typical remainer complaints about a referendum lost. Sad.

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

It was all cobblers, typical remainer complaints about a referendum lost. Sad.

But all true. The truth isn't important in the Brexiteer's world of alternatve facts. You sound more like Trump's base every day.

23 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

But all true. The truth isn't important in the Brexiteer's world of alternatve facts. You sound more like Trump's base every day.

The facts concerning whether the referendum was necessary, or not, are well explained at the end of the VDO in post 63. Our entry into the EEC was only enabled by Heath's deception. UK membership into the EU was driven by Major, then Blair and Brown, who all signed EU treaties, without the referendums that were promised but should have been.

 

The 2016 result itself fact, showing that a referendum, at last, was necessary. 

17 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The facts concerning whether the referendum was necessary, or not, are well explained at the end of the VDO in post 63. Our entry into the EEC was only enabled by Heath's deception. UK membership into the EU was driven by Major, then Blair and Brown, who all signed EU treaties, without the referendums that were promised but should have been.

 

The 2016 result itself fact, showing that a referendum, at last, was necessary. 

So again no arguments on the 'cobblers' in the post.

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So again no arguments on the 'cobblers' in the post.

No arguments here. Still cobblers AFAIAC.

50 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The facts concerning whether the referendum was necessary, or not, are well explained at the end of the VDO in post 63. Our entry into the EEC was only enabled by Heath's deception. UK membership into the EU was driven by Major, then Blair and Brown, who all signed EU treaties, without the referendums that were promised but should have been.

 

The 2016 result itself fact, showing that a referendum, at last, was necessary. 

The referendum was totally unnessesary. Just gameplay between Cameron and Farage.

 

Normal practice for parliament would have been to vote on triggering Article 50. No need for a referendum. In the UK, the government has never governed by referendum. That's how the British parliament works.

 

In my opinion, if the Government had triggered Article 50 and an agreement with the EU had been negotiated, then it would have been sensible to have a confirmatory vote as to whether the majority wanted to leave under the agreed terms or not. But, neither the Referendum or a confirmatory vote are legally required or binding on government, which is why they will always remain advisory.

 

In summation, the UK is governed by parliament not the people. If you don't like it leave and find a country that is governed by the people. Thailand? 555

 

As this post contains mainly facts which you dislike, I expect no more than one line of rhetoric from you, in reply. Or perhaps just a smiley face. 555

1 hour ago, DannyCarlton said:

The referendum was totally unnessesary. Just gameplay between Cameron and Farage.

 

Normal practice for parliament would have been to vote on triggering Article 50. No need for a referendum. In the UK, the government has never governed by referendum. That's how the British parliament works.

 

In my opinion, if the Government had triggered Article 50 and an agreement with the EU had been negotiated, then it would have been sensible to have a confirmatory vote as to whether the majority wanted to leave under the agreed terms or not. But, neither the Referendum or a confirmatory vote are legally required or binding on government, which is why they will always remain advisory.

 

In summation, the UK is governed by parliament not the people. If you don't like it leave and find a country that is governed by the people. Thailand? 555

 

As this post contains mainly facts which you dislike, I expect no more than one line of rhetoric from you, in reply. Or perhaps just a smiley face. 555

Referendums that should have been were either avoided, or promised then conveniently forgotten. This was the real start of resentment of governments by the people who wanted a choice on EU membership.

 

You really think that parliament would have voted to leave the EU without consulting the people first? What would the remainers have said to that? You really are having a laugh now, aren't you?

 

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

Referendums that should have been were either avoided, or promised then conveniently forgotten. This was the real start of resentment of governments by the people who wanted a choice on EU membership.

 

You really think that parliament would have voted to leave the EU without consulting the people first? What would the remainers have said to that? You really are having a laugh now, aren't you?

 

First paragraph: No basis on the truth whatsoever.

 

Second paragraph: It was in the Tory party manifesto, the people duly elected them on that manifesto. That was their mandate to trigger Article 50. If the parliament had voted not to trigger Article 50, that would have been British democracy which Brexiteers, not respecting British democracy, would have howled about to this day. Personally, I think that parliament would have voted to trigger Article 50 as it was in both party's manifestos.

 

However in the confirmatory vote, May's deal or some derivative of it vs. remain, remain would/will win by a landslide.

10 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

First paragraph: No basis on the truth whatsoever.

 

Second paragraph: It was in the Tory party manifesto, the people duly elected them on that manifesto. That was their mandate to trigger Article 50. If the parliament had voted not to trigger Article 50, that would have been British democracy which Brexiteers, not respecting British democracy, would have howled about to this day. Personally, I think that parliament would have voted to trigger Article 50 as it was in both party's manifestos.

 

However in the confirmatory vote, May's deal or some derivative of it vs. remain, remain would/will win by a landslide.

First paragraph is historically true. You can deny it for all I care.

 

And if you want to quote GE manifestos, try this from the CON election manifesto of 2015:

"Our plan of action: We will let you decide whether to stay in or leave the EU We will legislate in the first session of the next Parliament for an in-out referendum to be held on Britain’s membership of the EU before the end of 2017. We will negotiate a new settlement for Britain in the EU. And then we will ask the British people whether they want to stay in on this basis, or leave. We will honour the result of the referendum, whatever the outcome."

Cameron won easily. So the referendum idea was popular, already set to go and promised. The manifesto statement set out what would happen and it did, for once.  

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

We will negotiate a new settlement for Britain in the EU. And then we will ask the British people whether they want to stay in on this basis, or leave.

And is this promise going to be kept? Not on Boris/Cummings life. 555. Good to see that Brexiteers are selective about which parts of the manefesto they want the government to adhere to. Talk about cherry picking....

 

If, in the manifesto, it had said, "trigger Article 50" rather than "hold a referendum" the outcome would have been even more certain and much more in line with parliamentary democracy. Semantics really as Article 50 would have been triggered either way.

2 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

And is this promise going to be kept? Not on Boris/Cummings life. 555. Good to see that Brexiteers are selective about which parts of the manefesto they want the government to adhere to. Talk about cherry picking....

 

If, in the manifesto, it had said, "trigger Article 50" rather than "hold a referendum" the outcome would have been even more certain and much more in line with parliamentary democracy. Semantics really as Article 50 would have been triggered either way.

Well, it seems that most people expected and favoured the customary, logical progression of a referendum first, followed by the appropriate action. It was a General Election, after all. It was not specific to the EU. 

 

  

15 hours ago, evadgib said:

Isn't that the same woman who has just been fired on the right?

Yes. Chancellor Sajid Javid's senior aide was not only interrogated and had both her work and personal phones seized and searched by the PM's senior adviser Dominic Cummings but he also didn't tell her boss that he had found evidence of her communicating with her friend who used to work for the former Chancellor (the other lady in that picture) on one of those phones. Nor did he tell the Chancellor that he had fired his senior aide and had armed police escort her out the front door of #10.

 

Bojo just shot himself in the foot if he lets this ride and Sajid Javed goes postal.

Edited September 1, 20196 yr by NanLaew

3 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Bojo just shot himself in the foot if he lets this ride and Sajid Javed goes postal.

I learn something new every day - it's possible to mail a shot foot these days. Well I never

10 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Yes. Chancellor Sajid Javid's senior aide was not only interrogated and had both her work and personal phones seized and searched by the PM's senior adviser Dominic Cummings but he also didn't tell her boss that he had found evidence of her communicating with her friend who used to work for the former Chancellor (the other lady in that picture) on one of those phones. Nor did he tell the Chancellor that he had fired his senior aide and had armed police escort her out the front door of #10.

 

Bojo just shot himself in the foot if he lets this ride and Sajid Javed goes postal.

All the more reason why these links to the ITP & ICO are relevant.

 

Edited September 1, 20196 yr by evadgib

11 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Yes. Chancellor Sajid Javid's senior aide was not only interrogated and had both her work and personal phones seized and searched by the PM's senior adviser Dominic Cummings but he also didn't tell her boss that he had found evidence of her communicating with her friend who used to work for the former Chancellor (the other lady in that picture) on one of those phones. Nor did he tell the Chancellor that he had fired his senior aide and had armed police escort her out the front door of #10.

 

Bojo just shot himself in the foot if he lets this ride and Sajid Javed goes postal.

 

Brexit is serious sh!t, and you don't eff around if you're serious about getting this whole thing finished.  Cummings is just the exact kind of guy that's needed to weed out the traitors.

The weeding starts with the little guys (or, as here, the gals) and moves on up the chain until the likes of Hammond the Hammerhurler is brought to heel.