Donate SIGN UP

How Damaging Could This Be To Britain’s International Reputation?

Avatar Image
ichkeria | 16:59 Wed 09th Sep 2020 | News
103 Answers
Gravatar

Answers

41 to 60 of 103rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ichkeria. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I never had either of you pegged as snowflakes till today
MaybeTTT needs anger management advice. Just a suggestion.
and I said I was looking for evidence, and I am, stopping only to politely answer your posts. If I don't find any I will apologise - I'm aware that lots of things have been deleted from AB so there's every chance you'll get your apology.
What do you think, me old china?
TTT - go and have a glass of your favourite scotch or whatever tipple - and then chill. Seriously this is not worth raising your blood pressure over - just move on and enjoy life as best you can in this brave New World of six of the best. Accepting that you won't classify jno as one of your six.
'We expect everybody in this country to obey the law' says Boris Johnson in parliament.

Except for himself of course, after his government's announcement of their intention to break international law, followed by the swift resignation of their top civil service legal adviser.

Another exception is required for the Tory Housing Minister Robert Jenrick, who broke the law to help a major Tory donor rip off a local council to the tune of £40 million on their lavish property development.

Another exception is obviously needed for Dominic Cummings, who famously defied the Tory government's own lockdown rules to drive to Durham and stay in the house that his family built on their land without planning permission, and which they apparently pay no Council Tax on either!

Then there was Johnson and Cummings plot to illegally suspend parliament in order to prevent democratic scrutiny of the Withdrawal Agreement (a deal that Johnson now admits he knew was nonsense from the very beginning, which is exactly why he didn't want parliament scrutinising it).

Let's not forget the Tory Home Secretary Priti Patel, who acted as an agent of a foreign state embedded within the UK government by conducting secret meetings with Israeli politicians aimed at diverting the UK foreign aid budget to the Israeli military in the illegally occupied territories!
Patel should be in jail for treason, but somehow, such is the level of absolute impunity in the Tory ranks, Johnson decided that she's a fit and proper person to run the Home Office!

Then there were Chris Grayling's extraordinary 350 million worth of Brexit ferry contracts, some of them handed out to companies that didn't even have any ferries. Not only were these contracts ludicrously absurd, they also broke competition law and forced the UK government to pay £33 million in compensation to the Channel Tunnel operators!

Before Johnson the Tories were just as lawless, with loads of their malicious and incompetent legislation ruled unlawful in the courts.

The £1,200 in unlawful tribunal fees they imposed in order to lock low-income employees out of the justice system, and prevent them from receiving compensation from their bad bosses.

Then there were Iain Duncan Smith's brazenly unlawful forced-unpaid-labour schemes, which he didn't even bother to present before parliament before enacting into law!
Once he was caught out illegally bypassing parliament to enact his nonsense legislation, he tried to retroactively change the forced-unpaid-labour rules so that they would have been lawful had they been written that way at the time. This cynical retroactive trickery was also ruled unlawful by the UK courts.

It's not like the British public don't know that the Tory party are a bunch of lawless criminals who think that laws should only ever apply to little people, not Westminster gangsters like them.

The British public knew it perfectly well, and a significant proportion of us decided that they actually want a lawless bunch of Tory criminals running the country.

When Britain becomes a pariah state, with nobody wanting to deal with us, because we're the kind of country that defies international law and even brags about it in parliament, and casually rips up legally binding international agreements within a year of signing up to them, we'll only have ourselves to blame.

We were given a choice between a honest man who is a stickler for doing things by the books, and for respecting international law, and the most egregious liar in the entire political system heading up a party of serial lawbreakers.

And we chose the liar and the lawbreakers.
Have you got a link to that site canary or do you need me to provide it? Or are you trying to pass it off as all your own work?
//We were given a choice between a honest man who is a stickler for doing things by the books, and for respecting international law, and the most egregious liar in the entire political system heading up a party of serial lawbreakers.
\\

If I remember correctly the 'honest man' to whom you refer was one J Corbyn. Pardon me while I split my sides.
Jno just ignore TGT,e is desperate to get this thread closed, because it hurts his Brain.
he's already left for some temporary hotel/institution to recover. Fear not, TTT will be back.
Corbyn had many faults, although I'm not sure that dishonesty was one of them.
history will show - - -
things cd have been conducted much better
I think May conceded things in good faith and all that happened is that they wanted more on the next round ....

Trump abrogated some treaty and no one said boo!
I think there has been bad faith on both sides - the one I heard was that Barnier who I dont regard as that bright said

delay too much and you wont eat !

and this is designed to stop that

[I have been involved in bad faith negotiations and the next time you cant get anyone to do anything because they think they are going to get shafted again, if they concede in good will] - something which is totally predictable and I warned them about ....
( I retired)

Boris is justified in what he is going

Good knows why the mandarin felt he had to go.
in 1973 the opposition said they would indemnify the Clay Cross Councillors if they disobeyed legislation
and no civil servant committed hara kiri
the new attorney general went - I cant remember his name(*)

here is some blah-blah in the commons about it
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1975/may/14/termination-of-disqualifications-for

(*) on the obvious grounds that no legislator to be elected should say "oh but dont obey those laws obnly obey mine!"
more likely plain ignorance was the factor.....not the sharpest chisel on the rack of politicans.
// What do you think, me old china?//

I fink - foo!

hey we cd be TTT chat-bots and no one wd know ( ie we would fulfil the Turing test - that an observer cannot tell a bot from the real thing!) - hey yeah and then say sensible things every now and then....but not too often .....
Re OP - not a lot. 'Perfidious Albion' and all that. It's all miniscule. Article 38 exists in the treaty, it's just being given more precedence. Besides, the W.Ag. was entered into as a precursor to a Free Trade Treaty, wasn't it and to buy time? If no such treaty is forthcoming (which looks likely) then it has no validity, surely?
//Corbyn had many faults, although I'm not sure that dishonesty was one of them.//

It was actually. He claimed to be a remainer when he was anti EU all along. He did it in a whiny fashion with his fingers crossed behind his back so we all knew he didn't mean it, but it was still dishonest.
//How Damaging Could This Be To Britain’s International Reputation?//

Not much. Europe hates us anyway, so this won't change that. As regards the rest of the world I don't think our reputation is particularly great at the moment, so this won't make things much worse.
All countries renege on deals when it suits them and everyone knows that.
Question Author
“ Besides, the W.Ag. was entered into as a precursor to a Free Trade Treaty, wasn't it and to buy time? If no such treaty is forthcoming (which looks likely) then it has no validity, surely?”

On the contrary, the bill relates in part to doing things which would apply in the event of there not being a trade deal, and in part to things which which still apply (checks on goods and services between GB and NI) regardless of a trade deal.
Either way, the Withdrawal Agreement is and would still be valid.
So
Expecting everybody in this country to obey the law, is a strange expectation. It has been shown from past history that, "We were only obeying orders", has no validity. Each has personal responsibility to do the right thing.
We'll survive.

41 to 60 of 103rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

How Damaging Could This Be To Britain’s International Reputation?

Answer Question >>

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.