Masterchef - The Professionals
Film, Media & TV24 mins ago
War Cabinet To "deliver Brexit By Any Means Necessary".......
62 Answers
https:/
Boris Johnson has set up a “war cabinet” to deliver Brexit “by any means necessary” by October 31 as a senior cabinet minister warned that there was “now a very real prospect” of no deal.
Nice turn around, up to now the HOQ as tried to thwart democracy by any means necessary. Will the EUSSR now accept we are prepared to leave with no deal? Will they let that happen?
Boris Johnson has set up a “war cabinet” to deliver Brexit “by any means necessary” by October 31 as a senior cabinet minister warned that there was “now a very real prospect” of no deal.
Nice turn around, up to now the HOQ as tried to thwart democracy by any means necessary. Will the EUSSR now accept we are prepared to leave with no deal? Will they let that happen?
Answers
The name calling and insults don't count 3T when they emanate from the "correct" source. The insults and name calling that started within hours of the Referendum result, and in some cases, during the preliminary "exchange of views". Remember some think freedom of speech is only an acceptable concept when they are doing the talking. The days are long gone...
14:42 Mon 29th Jul 2019
//We were delusional if we thought the Golf Club captain would negotiate with Fred Bloggs who'd just resigned from the club owing £millions.//
Why would Fred Bloggs owe the club £millions? Presumably he was up to date with his subscriptions (as the UK is). He surely cannot be expected to pay towards an extension to the clubhouse which he will no longer use.
//It was a 585 page document which set out the principles of us leaving.//
No it wasn’t (and yes, I have read most of it). It was a comprehensive list of demands, coupled with a bill for £39bn (for the clubhouse extension) which was made under the threat of causing us untold grief if we refused.
As an aside, Zacs, (and I had intended to mention it before) this assertion of yours is misleading:
//You should have ‘had your suspicions’ when you familiarised yourself with A50, Tora, where it clearly says that the leaving member state won’t be party to the negotiations.//
A50 says this:
“…the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that [leaving] State”
Note the word “negotiate”. Where I think you are sewing confusion is that it also says this:
“…the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.”
So, back to Fred Bloggs and his withdrawal from the golf club, if Fred was a Committee member he would not participate in the Committee meetings where his withdrawal was discussed. But he would negotiate the conditions for his departure after the Committee had reached a consensus.
Of course it is in the gift of the EU to compile their list of demands. But it is within the UK’s gift to tell them where to put it. Unfortunately too many of our lily-livered MPs, with little confidence or faith in their electorate's ability to cope and thrive without Nanny EU looking after their every need, believe they must capitulate to those unjustified demands.
Why would Fred Bloggs owe the club £millions? Presumably he was up to date with his subscriptions (as the UK is). He surely cannot be expected to pay towards an extension to the clubhouse which he will no longer use.
//It was a 585 page document which set out the principles of us leaving.//
No it wasn’t (and yes, I have read most of it). It was a comprehensive list of demands, coupled with a bill for £39bn (for the clubhouse extension) which was made under the threat of causing us untold grief if we refused.
As an aside, Zacs, (and I had intended to mention it before) this assertion of yours is misleading:
//You should have ‘had your suspicions’ when you familiarised yourself with A50, Tora, where it clearly says that the leaving member state won’t be party to the negotiations.//
A50 says this:
“…the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that [leaving] State”
Note the word “negotiate”. Where I think you are sewing confusion is that it also says this:
“…the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.”
So, back to Fred Bloggs and his withdrawal from the golf club, if Fred was a Committee member he would not participate in the Committee meetings where his withdrawal was discussed. But he would negotiate the conditions for his departure after the Committee had reached a consensus.
Of course it is in the gift of the EU to compile their list of demands. But it is within the UK’s gift to tell them where to put it. Unfortunately too many of our lily-livered MPs, with little confidence or faith in their electorate's ability to cope and thrive without Nanny EU looking after their every need, believe they must capitulate to those unjustified demands.
Maybe the Fred Bloggs scenario was unwise. I was dumbing down for Tora.
‘But he would negotiate the conditions for his departure after the Committee had reached a consensus’
That’s an out and out assumption on your part, NJ. There’s no more negotiating to do, save for the NI border issue.
The EU will not do any further negotiations on any other matter therefore any deal is off the table. They’ve said so.
‘But he would negotiate the conditions for his departure after the Committee had reached a consensus’
That’s an out and out assumption on your part, NJ. There’s no more negotiating to do, save for the NI border issue.
The EU will not do any further negotiations on any other matter therefore any deal is off the table. They’ve said so.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
//There’s no more negotiating to do, save for the NI border issue.
The EU will not do any further negotiations on any other matter therefore any deal is off the table. They’ve said so.//
Yes I quite agree with all of that, Zacs. In fact I don’t believe they will negotiate further on the Ireland border issue either. My point is that I got the impression that you would have us believe that Mrs May was excluded from any negotiations at all. The two parts of A50 I cited relate to different processes; one where negotiations between the UK and the EU take place (from which we would obviously not be excluded) and the other where the EU’s “committee” decides on its negotiating position (where obviously and quite rightly we would).
//What if Fred Bloggs had, at some previoys date, signed an agreement to pay certain amounts to his club for a future period which continues after the leaving date?//
Then the club would be con merchants and Fred would be a complete idiot (which seems about the right description for the circumstances we are discussing).
The EU will not do any further negotiations on any other matter therefore any deal is off the table. They’ve said so.//
Yes I quite agree with all of that, Zacs. In fact I don’t believe they will negotiate further on the Ireland border issue either. My point is that I got the impression that you would have us believe that Mrs May was excluded from any negotiations at all. The two parts of A50 I cited relate to different processes; one where negotiations between the UK and the EU take place (from which we would obviously not be excluded) and the other where the EU’s “committee” decides on its negotiating position (where obviously and quite rightly we would).
//What if Fred Bloggs had, at some previoys date, signed an agreement to pay certain amounts to his club for a future period which continues after the leaving date?//
Then the club would be con merchants and Fred would be a complete idiot (which seems about the right description for the circumstances we are discussing).
//If Fred hadn't read the agreement properly, he cannot blame the club for his mistake. //
No but he could always vow to burn the club down to the ground in revenge for the duplicity. :))
""Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone
All centuries but this, and every country but his own;""
Gilbert and Sullivan....Mikado. I've Got A Little List.
No but he could always vow to burn the club down to the ground in revenge for the duplicity. :))
""Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone
All centuries but this, and every country but his own;""
Gilbert and Sullivan....Mikado. I've Got A Little List.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
The only people who have stopped Brexit so far is the EU for refusing to come up with a "deal" worth even debating. Despite we asking for extensions so they can rethink their foolish strategy, time they just wasted refusing to shift. This is because the nations were foolish enough to leave the decisions to an uncaring elite who want power more than they want a good outcome for all.
No I don't believe the EU will get a conversion to responsibility by the 31st October, the elite can't lose face no matter the issues it causes to both the EU members and the one nation with sense to get out.
So now the only obstacle are the anti-democratic, "only my view counts, the public's doesn't", MPs trying to betray the voters. IMO suspending the House is the only realistic solution to their antics.
No I don't believe the EU will get a conversion to responsibility by the 31st October, the elite can't lose face no matter the issues it causes to both the EU members and the one nation with sense to get out.
So now the only obstacle are the anti-democratic, "only my view counts, the public's doesn't", MPs trying to betray the voters. IMO suspending the House is the only realistic solution to their antics.
Aint nothin gonna stop us now. :))
The Express.
//Boris Johnson can legally pull the UK out of the EU on October 31 even if he loses a vote of no confidence and his new Government collapses, Brexiteer Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said.
Brexit bulldog Mr Cox said there is no legal basis that would restrict new Prime Minister Mr Johnson from enforcing Brexit even if the UK was in the midst of a general election.//
The Express.
//Boris Johnson can legally pull the UK out of the EU on October 31 even if he loses a vote of no confidence and his new Government collapses, Brexiteer Attorney General Geoffrey Cox said.
Brexit bulldog Mr Cox said there is no legal basis that would restrict new Prime Minister Mr Johnson from enforcing Brexit even if the UK was in the midst of a general election.//
The leaving member state not being party to the negotiation is irrelevant. When one side of the table have made a decision without them, they still need the leaving party's acceptable of what they come up with. So it was always a meaningless criteria. As it happens, what they came up with was such blatant garbage, they made no progress whatsoever. Suspicion is that they never intended to.
Get ready for the Boris version of Cameron's leaflet telling us that Remain was the "government" advice to the populace.
//An information blitz will be launched by the Government to prepare Britain for a No Deal Brexit.
TV ads and leaflets are being produced to ensure every family and business is geared up to leave the EU on October 31.// The Sun.
//An information blitz will be launched by the Government to prepare Britain for a No Deal Brexit.
TV ads and leaflets are being produced to ensure every family and business is geared up to leave the EU on October 31.// The Sun.
Of course all this may just be academic. Remember the Tillbrook legal case that was to prove that we did indeed leave the EUSSR on March 31st. The case was dismissed based on one vote and the letter advising him had mysteriously been sent to him while he was away on holiday – no email or warning that it was coming! Suspicious?
Luckily someone was opening his post for him and spotted it, so Tillbrook was able to launch an appeal in time, which he got.
Now with a government that is intent on fulfilling the wishes of the electorate and doing it's own arm twisting in the legal corridors do you think that the appeal and subsequent decisions might take a different turn?
Luckily someone was opening his post for him and spotted it, so Tillbrook was able to launch an appeal in time, which he got.
Now with a government that is intent on fulfilling the wishes of the electorate and doing it's own arm twisting in the legal corridors do you think that the appeal and subsequent decisions might take a different turn?
Speaking of courts, the last time the UK tried to bully their way on the international stage was in the past 11 years. The contempt with which this was done was really quite spectacular as the opponent was tiny, even though the country is in per capita terms well ahead of the UK. The UK lost in the court and was heavily rapped on the knuckles so slinked home where everybody appeared to pretend none of it ever happened. This time the UK, or at least some of it, is up against a bigger opponent but the unrealistic perception of the UK's self-worth is the same.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles56 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles56 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles88 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles92 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.