4 hours ago, 473geo said:

Well you see UK would have been gone long ago but the EU keeps granting extensions in attempt to disguise the fact they are a 'one trick horse', and, further, if a deal is agreed, one country decides to veto, they are an embarrassing 'no trick ass'

Why does UK accept extensions? No need to do so if Johnson & his ilk were desperate to leave?

24 minutes ago, Letseng said:

Why does UK accept extensions? No need to do so if Johnson & his ilk were desperate to leave?

Protocol they must be seen to ask, EU didn't have the bottle to refuse

6 minutes ago, 473geo said:

Protocol they must be seen to ask, EU didn't have the bottle to refuse

(I assume that this is a wind-up, but I'll play along). 

 

No protocol involved, or lack of bottle on the EU's part: The UK government could simply have let the deadline come and go and we would have been out by default.

1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

Get on with it UK get out and dump the foreign filthy rubbish countries.

There are some xenophobic colours showing there.

3 hours ago, 473geo said:

But extentions didn't have to be granted did they? UK would be long gone!!

 

And the UK didn't have to ask for them!

 

We would have been long gone had Boris not put his own political ambitions ahead of this country and, in conjunction with the ERG, blocked May's WA. Only to present one which is virtually identical to May's and then once signed renege on the one area of difference!

2 hours ago, cyril sneer said:

amazing how much damage islamic immigration has done, brexit would never have happened without it

 Why? Did all the Islamic immigrants vote for it?

2 hours ago, robblok said:

Are you sure about that were those fishing contracts sold privately between parties if that is the fact then its a disgrace if the UK wants to change it. f it was a goverment to goverment deal its something different. 

 

But if an UK fisherman got money for selling his rights to an Spanish or Dutch one then that should not be changed. You cant cancel a deal like that without compensation. 

 

So I am not sure that that is the case I mean the Brexiteers have shown how untrustworthy they are with canceling a treaty they themselves negotiated but this would be going even further if its true. It would be criminal. Once sold or rented out then you need to keep that no way the  government can undo that. Unless they were government to government agreements.

 

Can you show me a source ?

 

Under the CFP each EU coastal state government issued licences to fish in it's waters. The UK government issued it's licences to UK fleet owners, but then allowed those fleet owners to sell them on to foreign fleet owners. This many UK fleet owners did.

 

See Privatising the seas: how the UK turned fishing rights into a commodity for the full story.

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 

And the UK didn't have to ask for them!

 

We would have been long gone had Boris not put his own political ambitions ahead of this country and, in conjunction with the ERG, blocked May's WA. Only to present one which is virtually identical to May's and then once signed renege on the one area of difference!

Give over with tit tat rubbish and accept both sides would prefer a deal - just do not try to lay all the responsibility on Boris, both sides have bypassed the opportunity to leave the table, the EU although it appears they are not capable of closing a deal, and the UK because they feel it would be beneficial to have a deal but not surrender to ultimatum.

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Under the CFP each EU coastal state government issued licences to fish in it's waters. The UK government issued it's licences to UK fleet owners, but then allowed those fleet owners to sell them on to foreign fleet owners. This many UK fleet owners did.

 

See Privatising the seas: how the UK turned fishing rights into a commodity for the full story.

This.

 

A very simple fact Brexiteers are unable, or unwilling, to grasp.

39 minutes ago, 473geo said:

Give over with tit tat rubbish and accept both sides would prefer a deal - just do not try to lay all the responsibility on Boris, both sides have bypassed the opportunity to leave the table, the EU although it appears they are not capable of closing a deal, and the UK because they feel it would be beneficial to have a deal but not surrender to ultimatum.

The UK chose to leave, it’s therefore not for the UK to chose the ‘benefits’ of membership they leave with.

 

‘There is no deal better than membership’

the only way to laeave a cartel is with a bullet in the head so the EU is true to form

you cant leave the EU as they fear the loss of income

10 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Under the CFP each EU coastal state government issued licences to fish in it's waters. The UK government issued it's licences to UK fleet owners, but then allowed those fleet owners to sell them on to foreign fleet owners. This many UK fleet owners did.

 

See Privatising the seas: how the UK turned fishing rights into a commodity for the full story.

Ok so quota's were traded like milk quotas in the Netherlands. If that is the case then the government has no right to change this. The fishermen had those rights and they sold them off. Its totally unfair and cheating if the Brits try to change this. Unless of course the fishermen who got the money pay part of it back.

 

I actually don't see the problem with trading in quota's English money is as good as Spanish or Dutch money. The English could have bought their own quota from their fishermen. They did not have to sell them to foreigners.

 

But now that they are sold those fishermen have no right. Its kinda like stealing your car back after you sold it. Shameful if this is what the UK is trying. Then they are truly untrustworthy cheaters.  I hope this is not the case. 

4 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

you cant leave the EU as they fear the loss of income

The UK left, and sure the EU does not want its members to leave. Its just that the Brits wanted it all freedom and a good deal. So all the benefits but none of the burdens. That is not how things work. Kind of naïve to think you could get the same deal as when you shared in the burdens too. 

14 hours ago, 473geo said:

But extentions didn't have to be granted did they? UK would be long gone!!

 

Oh you Brexiteers would have loved that.

When the economy tanks because of Brexit you could all claim its the EU's fault.

Its you guys who voted to leave so its up to you guys to come up with a solution to the problem you created. 

Just now, Rookiescot said:

 

Oh you Brexiteers would have loved that.

When the economy tanks because of Brexit you could all claim its the EU's fault.

Its you guys who voted to leave so its up to you guys to come up with a solution to the problem you created. 

Yes if the EU would not have given the extentions then the EU would have been inflexible and the ones that they could blame it all on. Now the Brits can break off at any moment and say no deal. They have not done so. Why, they want the EU to take the blame. Because if the deal is bad and the Brexit negotiators have made it or went for a no deal on their own. Then they are the ones responsible for the fallout. (they know that so they want the EU to be the bad guy) so it wont be used against them.

18 hours ago, robblok said:

Seems you got trans figured out too. 

Doubt it, well you haven't....????

18 hours ago, 473geo said:

Give over with tit tat rubbish and accept both sides would prefer a deal - just do not try to lay all the responsibility on Boris, both sides have bypassed the opportunity to leave the table, the EU although it appears they are not capable of closing a deal, and the UK because they feel it would be beneficial to have a deal but not surrender to ultimatum.

 

It is obvious to all but the most blinkered, jingoistic Brexiteer that a deal is the better option for both sides. 

 

But it is not the EU who have repeatedly asked for extensions, it is the UK. Why? Ask Boris.

 

It is a fact that this could all have been done and dusted at least a year ago had Boris, backed by Rees-Mogg, the ERG and others, not put his personal political ambitions first.

 

 

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

It is obvious to all but the most blinkered, jingoistic Brexiteer that a deal is the better option for both sides. 

 

But it is not the EU who have repeatedly asked for extensions, it is the UK. Why? Ask Boris.

 

It is a fact that this could all have been done and dusted at least a year ago had Boris, backed by Rees-Mogg, the ERG and others, not put his personal political ambitions first.

 

 

 

Neither side would want to be the designer of a harmful Brexit. But as people on this forum insist as the 'bigger party' the EU has the 'right' to make demands, set the rules, then as the 'bigger party' they appear to have small cajones when it comes to leaving the table.

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

It is obvious to all but the most blinkered, jingoistic Brexiteer that a deal is the better option for both sides. 

 

But it is not the EU who have repeatedly asked for extensions, it is the UK. Why? Ask Boris.

 

It is a fact that this could all have been done and dusted at least a year ago had Boris, backed by Rees-Mogg, the ERG and others, not put his personal political ambitions first.

 

 

But it's the EU that won't back off using our sovereign territory, is it not, if they had, it would have been sorted a long time ago, but then, folk like you don't care about the UK's sovereign land and sea, all you care about is slagging off anything to do with your own country...???? 

On 11/22/2020 at 6:28 AM, rooster59 said:

"If we don't get a deal, why is that? It is because they are refusing to compromise on what are some completely reasonable and very transparent principles that we've laid out from the beginning. We are not asking for ... super-special treatment."

not asking for super special treatment, only asking for SPECIAL treatment    555 ....????????????

On 11/22/2020 at 1:25 PM, Baerboxer said:

 

And in this case, that someone is France and Germany. 

couldn't say it better 555 (sarcasm intended) BJ & his gang and the brexiters here at TV always blaming somebody or something else, that's pity sad

On 11/22/2020 at 4:32 PM, 473geo said:

But extentions didn't have to be granted did they? UK would be long gone!!

if extensions were not granted. brexiters would be jumping/crying out the blues all over and finger pointing at the Bad EU that's doesn't want to allow for extra time and so forth......it's always something and/or somebody's else fault

23 hours ago, Loiner said:

The Irish have caused more trouble than they are worth too. Mixing it up from the side lines while pushing their own agendas while the big boys talk turkey. 

Never mind, they will loose out big time whatever happens regarding deal or not for UK. 

always blaming somebody else .... France, Germany, Ireland, the EU,  never blaming themselves for the shooting of their own foot

2 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

if extensions were not granted. brexiters would be jumping/crying out the blues all over and finger pointing at the Bad EU that's doesn't want to allow for extra time and so forth......it's always something and/or somebody's else fault

And those who ask why the 'UK has not just left' cannot appreciate this element pressures both sides of the 'negotiations', no wonder I see your 'confused' icons all over these threads  ????

2 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

always blaming somebody else .... France, Germany, Ireland, the EU,  never blaming themselves for the shooting of their own foot

The UK hasn't shot itself in the foot, they have left your club, which was the goal...

21 hours ago, Letseng said:

Why does UK accept extensions? No need to do so if Johnson & his ilk were desperate to leave?

he needed to show his gang that he was trying (very hard 555) to make a deal, MP's previously vote that No deal was allowed

7 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

if extensions were not granted. brexiters would be jumping/crying out the blues all over and finger pointing at the Bad EU that's doesn't want to allow for extra time and so forth......it's always something and/or somebody's else fault

I think you'll find that the slogan 'always somebody else fault' belongs to another member on here and is indeed copyrighted by his company 'Slogans R,Us.

????

the confused emoji was to justify that you post was misleading and/or confusing, was going to give you another one but decided for benefit of the doubt

3 minutes ago, 473geo said:

And those who ask why the 'UK has not just left' cannot appreciate this element pressures both sides of the 'negotiations', no wonder I see your 'confused' icons all over these threads  ????

2 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

????

the confused emoji was to justify that you post was misleading and/or confusing, was going to give you another one but decided for benefit of the doubt

I find posts are seldom misleading, I guess as one who is not easily 'led' nor confusing, as one who is not easily confused, usually just a variance of conjecture or opinion. Get well soon.