Brexit!

[Jimothy]

43 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Still no apology from Bojo on Marr this morning.  No backing down on calling it the surrender bill.  As you were.

 

Away from Brexit, Bojo promises new hospitals springing up all over the UK, 20k police officers, more funding in schools - why didn't any of this happen under May?  What's his strategy for getting this done?  

Cummings: “Remember to keep on mentioning ‘Surrender’. Mention ‘Surrender’ and ‘Surrender Act’ at every opportunity.”

 

Johnson: “Yes boss.”

 

C: “Whatever questions he ask, steer him back towards ‘Getting it done on 31st October’.”

 

J: “Yes Boss.”

 

C: “If he throws a curve-ball you can’t answer, just start talking about lots of new hospitals and police and schools.”

 

J: “Yes boss.”

 

C: “If he asks you about ‘Humbug’, deny you said it. If you’re forced to concede you said it, just say everyone misunderstood what you meant. Whatever you do - DO NOT apologise, although it’s OK to say you’re sorry that people didn’t understand what you meant.”

 

J: “Yes boss.”

 

C: “He’s bound to mention your relationship with Jennifer Arcuri. When he does just deny everything. If he keeps on trying to pin you down, just mention Sadiq Khan and Police funding in London.”

 

J: “Yes boss.”

 

C: “Good, off go. Remember what I told you and you’ll be fine.”

 

J: “Oh..... What should I say if he asks me if I’d do a deal with Farage..?”

 

C: “Say something like: ‘Definitely not. Conservatives don’t do deals with other parties’.”

 

J: “But........”

 

C: “Don’t worry. It’s only Marr.... he won’t pick-up on it.”

[bovril]

The language is just a distraction. Stop asking him about it and focus on illegally proroguing parliament, him and his friends profiting from shorting the pound, and his dodgy deals as mayor.

[Guest MattP]

54 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Still no apology from Bojo on Marr this morning.  No backing down on calling it the surrender bill.  As you were.

 

Away from Brexit, Bojo promises new hospitals springing up all over the UK, 20k police officers, more funding in schools - why didn't any of this happen under May?  What's his strategy for getting this done?  

Quite rightly as well - it is a surrender bill - a bill where parliament forces our PM to ask for something from a foreign jurisdiction and can't refuse the answer, a law created by many people like Philip Lee and Sam Gyimah who lied to the electorate to be able to create that law.

 

As I said last week, the intention here from the opposition is to try and remove that phrase from an election campaign as they know it will resonate with people. 

 

The bottom bit though is clearly nonsense I agree - the Tories just don't care anymore though, they are going to make Corbyn look like a fiscal conservative come the next election, the attitude seems to be if the young are voting Labour anyway then why not? No problem to load debt on them.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

The language is just a distraction. Stop asking him about it and focus on illegally proroguing parliament, him and his friends profiting from shorting the pound, and his dodgy deals as mayor.

It wasn't illegal, it was unlawful.  To be illegal there would have to be a law on the statute books saying this specific action was against the law, which would be a crime and THe government would be liable to prosecution.  The Supreme Court have made a judgement that the constitutional basis for proroguing parliament was not valid and hence unlawful, ie the law as it stands did not support the action.  The consequence of this is not an illegal act but the tearing up of the action.  No one is guilty of anything as such, and as Boris had legal advise from his attorney General that it was fine there is no reason to keep going on about it.  The fact that absolutely nothing useful is happening in Parliament now that it is back also makes a mockery of the decision in my view.  

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

The language is just a distraction. Stop asking him about it and focus on illegally proroguing parliament, him and his friends profiting from shorting the pound, and his dodgy deals as mayor.

The idea that some hedge fund mates of Boris holding short positions is making them billions has also been widely discredited.

[Benji]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

The idea that some hedge fund mates of Boris holding short positions is making them billions has also been widely discredited.

I don’t see the direct correlation between the average leave voter voting the way they did and Boris having these types of mates so it’s a bit of a diversionary story.  That said his sister has been pretty open about it recently - I think you’d have to be pretty naive or have Arsene Wenger’s selective blindness to think this grotesque practice isn’t going on in the City.

[Benji]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Quite rightly as well - it is a surrender bill - a bill where parliament forces our PM to ask for something from a foreign jurisdiction and can't refuse the answer, a law created by many people like Philip Lee and Sam Gyimah who lied to the electorate to be able to create that law.

 

As I said last week, the intention here from the opposition is to try and remove that phrase from an election campaign as they know it will resonate with people. 

 

The bottom bit though is clearly nonsense I agree - the Tories just don't care anymore though, they are going to make Corbyn look like a fiscal conservative come the next election, the attitude seems to be if the young are voting Labour anyway then why not? No problem to load debt on them.

I get the rhetoric and reasoning but fundamentally “surrender bill” doesn’t really make much sense.  Boris keeps saying he wants a deal.  If he gets a deal and it’s voted through then we don’t need an extension so the bill is null.  It’s temporarily surrendering our option of a no deal, so it’s surrender lite.

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Benji said:

I get the rhetoric and reasoning but fundamentally “surrender bill” doesn’t really make much sense.  Boris keeps saying he wants a deal.  If he gets a deal and it’s voted through then we don’t need an extension so the bill is null.  It’s temporarily surrendering our option of a no deal, so it’s surrender lite.

But you won't get a deal unless you still have a walkaway position, the totally pointless extension doesn't let you walk away which is the threat we need to get any serious negotiation.

 

The only good thing is it appears many in Europe want rid of us now anyway.

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

The idea that some hedge fund mates of Boris holding short positions is making them billions has also been widely discredited.

Made me chuckle today the same people criticising the "collusion" MOS story due to lack of evidence then believe Philip Hammond who also has no evidence whatsoever.

[Benji]

17 minutes ago, MattP said:

But you won't get a deal unless you still have a walkaway position, the totally pointless extension doesn't let you walk away which is the threat we need to get any serious negotiation.

 

The only good thing is it appears many in Europe want rid of us now anyway.

 

I wouldn't say it's that black and white and it certainly isn't the case in every business sale.  In fact it's now publicly stated that the EU never truly believed May would take us out without a deal and she still achieved her WA.  But yes of course it does help to have red lines and an ability to walk away which is why I fully supported the "keep no deal on the table" approach three years ago and really disliked how during May's office our negotiations became so public and were undermined in Parliament. 

 

The problem is at this stage it's become a bit of a parody where we're all sat in the UK whispering to each other "don't tell the EU but we're only pretending we'll leave with no deal so we get a better deal" as if we're in some kind of break-out conference room where the EU can't hear us.  Ultimately Boris has been left with the job of trying to re-convince the EU that we will leave without a deal if a better one isn't offered and so it's all become a transparent and useless PR stunt. That leaves me to believe that he's either genuinely trying to get a new deal that can pass through Parliament, or he's full of shit and can't wait to force through no deal.  I have no idea which one it is but I'm really concerned that it could be the latter.

 

[WigstonWanderer]

43 minutes ago, MattP said:

But you won't get a deal unless you still have a walkaway position, the totally pointless extension doesn't let you walk away which is the threat we need to get any serious negotiation.

 

The only good thing is it appears many in Europe want rid of us now anyway.

I have some sympathy with this argument, but the walk away position is so ludicrous anyway that it just doesn’t hold water.

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I have some sympathy with this argument, but the walk away position is so ludicrous anyway that it just doesn’t hold water.

But it does hold sway, even if it causes us more harm.

 

If I threatened to blow off my leg but shoot your arm first it would hurt me more - but if I was stood there with a gun about to do it I still think there is more chance of you going for a handshake than letting me pull the trigger. 

[WigstonWanderer]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

But it does hold sway, even if it causes us more harm.

 

If I threatened to blow off my leg but shoot your arm first it would hurt me more - but if I was stood there with a gun about to do it I still think there is more chance of you going for a handshake than letting me pull the trigger. 

Well I agree it wouldn’t be good for either of us, but I think you’re pointing at my finger 

[Guest MattP]

4 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Well I agree it wouldn’t be good for either of us, but I think you’re pointing at my finger 

I'd still take a guess you would rather a handshake than me blow your finger off

[Alf Bentley]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

I'd still take a guess you would rather a handshake than me blow your finger off

 

But @WigstonWanderer is the leader of a gang of 27, and Wigston knows that some of those 27 are not very loyal to him.

 

He knows that if they see him give in to your threat, they'll see him as weak. They might well challenge him as gang leader or leave his gang.....an incentive for Wigston not to bottle it, but to risk his finger/arm. 

 

(My preferred image is a bloke threatening his neighbour: "If you don't give in, I'll burn down half my house and your conservatory!")

 

 

The mad thing about all this is that, just as Johnson probably didn't give a shit either way about the referendum, he probably doesn't give a shit either way about the Brexit outcome.

For him, it's all about using Brexit, the nation and all the people in it as pawns in his narcissistic power game and quest to gain 5 years of complete power. To do what, I wonder? He probably doesn't even know himself....it's the personal power that matters. As a child, he reportedly said that it was his ambition to be "King of the World". I wonder if he's diagnosable with a narcissistic personality disorder? 

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

But @WigstonWanderer is the leader of a gang of 27, and Wigston knows that some of those 27 are not very loyal to him.

 

He knows that if they see him give in to your threat, they'll see him as weak. They might well challenge him as gang leader or leave his gang.....an incentive for Wigston not to bottle it, but to risk his finger/arm. 

 

(My preferred image is a bloke threatening his neighbour: "If you don't give in, I'll burn down half my house and your conservatory!")

 

 

The mad thing about all this is that, just as Johnson probably didn't give a shit either way about the referendum, he probably doesn't give a shit either way about the Brexit outcome.

For him, it's all about using Brexit, the nation and all the people in it as pawns in his narcissistic power game and quest to gain 5 years of complete power. To do what, I wonder? He probably doesn't even know himself....it's the personal power that matters. As a child, he reportedly said that it was his ambition to be "King of the World". I wonder if he's diagnosable with a narcissistic personality disorder? 

Pssst Alf, just say wigston is a cùnt.

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Pssst Alf, just say wigston is a cùnt.

 

Why on earth would I say that, particularly on a day suffused with the warm glow of LCFC glory?

 

"Get away with you!", as my Grandma used to say. 

[WigstonWanderer]

9 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Why on earth would I say that, particularly on a day suffused with the warm glow of LCFC glory?

 

"Get away with you!", as my Grandma used to say. 

Thanks Alf. Got the match recorded and just about to watch it, and you’ve just told me the result! Thought this thread was safe. Reminds me of the Alf Garnet sketch where he’s got the big fight recorded, and the “silly old moo” phones him from Australia and tells him the result 

 

Well at least it’s a win so will be enjoyable to watch, and still don’t know the score.

 

Ps I’m sure some of my family agree with @Strokes 

 

Edit: 

[Alf Bentley]

7 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Thanks Alf. Got the match recorded and just about to watch it, and you’ve just told me the result! Thought this thread was safe. Reminds me of the Alf Garnet sketch where he’s got the big fight recorded, and the “silly old moo” phones him from Australia and tells him the result 

 

Well at least it’s a win so will be enjoyable to watch, and still don’t know the score.

 

Ps I’m sure some of my family agree with @Strokes 

 

Edit: 

 

I didn't say we won, just that it was a day of glory!

 

There can be glory in defeat, too. Like when you're playing with 9 men and are 0-7 down with 10 minutes to go, Maddison comes off the bench to score 6 and you're so gloriously unlucky to go down 6-7.

Oh! Now I've given it away, haven't I?! Sorry! 

 

There was a famous episode of The Likely Lads on that theme, too. They wanted to avoid the result of an England match in Bulgaria, managed to do it despite several narrow scares....only to find it was match abandoned due to fog.

Hope you weren't planning to watch that tonight?

[Guest MattP]

23 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

There was a famous episode of The Likely Lads on that theme, too. They wanted to avoid the result of an England match in Bulgaria, managed to do it despite several narrow scares....only to find it was match abandoned due to fog.

Hope you weren't planning to watch that tonight?

An all time classic that one. "Could be England five, could be England fail"

 

"It was England floodlight failure"

[Alf Bentley]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

An all time classic that one. "Could be England five, could be England fail"

 

"It was England floodlight failure"

 

Funny, the fallibility of human memory....

 

I remembered it as match abandoned due to fog, you remembered it as a floodlight failure.....

Just found on Youtube that it was a waterlogged pitch....but with the punchline "England flooded out", so your memory's not as deficient as mine! 

[Jimothy]

I love that you both got it wrong  

[Guest MattP]

8 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Funny, the fallibility of human memory....

 

I remembered it as match abandoned due to fog, you remembered it as a floodlight failure.....

Just found on Youtube that it was a waterlogged pitch....but with the punchline "England flooded out", so your memory's not as deficient as mine! 

Brilliant

 

It's probably been twenty years since I watched it and a even longer for you.

 

I'll give it a watch later, it certainly wouldn't make the BBC schedule now

[StanSP]

You'd think it'd be in the public interest to even have a little bit explained to us should we leave on 31st October, no? 

 

Are they refusing to say anything because there is no plan? Or are they too embarrassed to explain that it'll just be totally shite should we leave with no deal? 

 

I could understand if there was a hugely significant gap between now and the potential of leaving the EU but it's literally a month away. 

 

Funny how they keep saying 'get on with Brexit' and 'get Brexit done' when ironically it's very tough for people and companies to do such a thing when they aren't told what exactly will happen? 

[Nick]

9 minutes ago, StanSP said:

You'd think it'd be in the public interest to even have a little bit explained to us should we leave on 31st October, no? 

 

Are they refusing to say anything because there is no plan? Or are they too embarrassed to explain that it'll just be totally shite should we leave with no deal? 

 

I could understand if there was a hugely significant gap between now and the potential of leaving the EU but it's literally a month away. 

 

Funny how they keep saying 'get on with Brexit' and 'get Brexit done' when ironically it's very tough for people and companies to do such a thing when they aren't told what exactly will happen? 

 

Well that just says to me that we are posturing to get a deal but actually not bluffing because if a deal doesn't get reached - we'll go anyway... hmm.

 

It's who blinks first and I doubt that'll be Boris, so basically we are caught between the mercy of Brussels and the will of a fat, pompous, entitled, bumbling man-child.

 

Ah well.