Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Boris is showing the character to be a strong leader. It looks like he is going to deliver what the country voted for with nothing to stand in his way ,dragging all of us out including the petulant remainers kicking and screaming.

Spit your dummy out protest and march , kick off and get tear gassed and cry a little more.

Adio Euro.

Yeh that is the spirit no one messes with Bojo and the lads.

[Greenmile]

While I’ve little time for David Davis , to compare him politically and ability wise to JRM is nothing short of insane...

That isn’t what I was doing.

[Colburn_Claret]

Please tell me how remainers are going to prevent negotiations with the EU.

They can't.
Bit they can prevent meaningful honest negotiations, just by continuing to tell Brussels that if they dont renegotiate, then they will get the referendum overturned.

We all know that is true, so why do you deny it or pretend that isnt the case. If you have right on your side why lie about it.

[nil_desperandum]

The real liars here, are those claiming that TMs WA was the best we could get. As I've shown lots of times, there is no evidence for that. .

That obviously depends on your definition of "best we could get".
I agree that she could have got a better deal.
If she'd moved a little on her red lines over the CU and SM then she would have solved the Irish border issue and got the deal through Parliament too, but whilst I would consider that to have been a better deal than she brought back you and one or two others on here would no doubt disagree.
That's the sort of deal -by the way - that Farage was advocating prior to the referendum when he repeatedly said that some kind of Norway option would be good, and if May had gone for that from day one then Farage would have been in no position at that point to challenge it. (Being only a couple of months after he had been championing it I mean)

[AndrewJB]

As I just said to Spijed, if he proves incompetent you should be happy it means remainers may well win with the scare tactics.
I think what you really fear is that he isnt as incompetent as you hoped, and he might just succeed.
Those people who told you wed get a good deal, didn't lie to anybody. They could only do that if they knew they couldn't get one. That's yet to be proved because May never even tried.
The real liars here, are those claiming that TMs WA was the best we could get. As I've shown lots of times, there is no evidence for that. Just the repeated rantings of people who never wanted to leave in the first place, and still hope not to leave now.

"If he proves incompetent"? He already has shown this in his part time role as London mayor, and foreign secretary. He's just a son of a rich man who, because wealth is regarded in higher esteem than intelligence, has wormed his way into being PM. He described his £250K salary from the Telegraph as "chicken feed" - so is rich enough that if he fails to get a deal and we do crash out, his life won't be materially affected.

If those leavers who claimed we'd get a good deal were just wrong, then they were stupid, because there were plenty of people who pointed out they were deluded when they originally made their claims.

So you say Theresa May didn't try hard enough to get a deal. And that a better deal could have been achieved? Not with the red lines the brexiteers imposed on our negotiating position, and when you combine that with the EU's position not to compromise an international treaty on the Ireland border, you have zero chance of success. I think this is what some leavers wanted all along, and how many people who voted leave have been conned.

[dsr]

"If he proves incompetent"? He already has shown this in his part time role as London mayor, and foreign secretary. He's just a son of a rich man who, because wealth is regarded in higher esteem than intelligence, has wormed his way into being PM. He described his £250K salary from the Telegraph as "chicken feed" - so is rich enough that if he fails to get a deal and we do crash out, his life won't be materially affected.

If you think Johnson isn't intelligent, you haven't been paying attention. He's a very intelligent man.

[AndrewJB]

They can't.
Bit they can prevent meaningful honest negotiations, just by continuing to tell Brussels that if they dont renegotiate, then they will get the referendum overturned.

We all know that is true, so why do you deny it or pretend that isnt the case. If you have right on your side why lie about it.

Get your excuses in now, quickly, before Johnson fails to get a deal. Even if the country were united on this, why would the EU compromise an international treaty and buckle to us? We are the ones leaving, and we can't dictate to them how it's all going to be. We were lied to, and this is the result.

[aggi]

As I just said to Spijed, if he proves incompetent you should be happy it means remainers may well win with the scare tactics.
I think what you really fear is that he isnt as incompetent as you hoped, and he might just succeed.
Those people who told you wed get a good deal, didn't lie to anybody. They could only do that if they knew they couldn't get one. That's yet to be proved because May never even tried.
The real liars here, are those claiming that TMs WA was the best we could get. As I've shown lots of times, there is no evidence for that. Just the repeated rantings of people who never wanted to leave in the first place, and still hope not to leave now.

I think I've mentioned before that a friend of a friend was on the negotiation team in Brussels. The view from very early on was that something akin to what we ended up with was the only thing that would respect May's red lines, the EU's red lines and the Good Friday Agreement. There's not really many other options.

[android]

Please tell me how remainers are going to prevent negotiations with the EU.

Alright Martin you got me, serves me right for copying someone else late at night. Prevent was the wrong word - hinder would have been better.

Remainers obviously don't want our government wasting time negotiating with the EU, they want them in the commons huffing and puffing over the same old arguments day after day after day. And if they can rule out no deal they know that's a great way to weaken our position in the negotiations and so and so on - you get the idea.

[AndrewJB]

If you think Johnson isn't intelligent, you haven't been paying attention. He's a very intelligent man.

If "paying attention" means reading newspapers that are no better than Pravda, then no I haven't. If I break down "intelligence" to six qualities: common sense, ethics, imagination, intuition, memory, and reason - then Johnson has a serious deficiency in at least one.

[RingoMcCartney]

John Major has announced he's joining Gina Miller in her legal challenge to stop the prorogation of parliament, claiming it to be an abuse of power!!!

What absolute and utter hypocrisy!!

This is the very same John Major who had no trouble in proroguing Parliament when he "abused his power" in 1997, when prorogation delayed the publication of a highly embarrassing report into the “cash for questions” sleaze scandal involving his Government.

I bet he's glad nobody tried to sue him !!!

But lets look at his viewpoint on brexit and his newly found and convenient dislike, but clearly hypocritical, attitude to prorogation.


Major is a Remoaner. He did not want change, he wanted the uk to stay in the EU. He wanted keep the status quo , as he saw it.

Prorogation is being portrayed by the hysteria riddled remoaners ( and mainstream media) as a coup, as an undemocratic power grab. In reality, it simply keeps the law as it is. Prorogation keeps the legal status quo.

What is the legal status quo? Answer - No deal. Which it wouldn't have been , if our elected representatives (MPs) hadn’t already voted for No Deal. When they set it as the legal default by passing the EU Withdrawal Act a year ago!!!!

Summary - John Major used prorogation to stop an enquiry into the dodgy dealings that his government was clearly upto its neck in.

John Major is attempting to stop the current PM from using prorogation to simply implement the result of the largest single expression of democracy this nation has ever witnessed.

[dsr]

If "paying attention" means reading newspapers that are no better than Pravda, then no I haven't. If I break down "intelligence" to six qualities: common sense, ethics, imagination, intuition, memory, and reason - then Johnson has a serious deficiency in at least one.

Can you name anyone who does meet your standards of "intelligent", preferably someone that most people could agree on?

[RingoMcCartney]

Alright Martin you got me, serves me right for copying someone else late at night. Prevent was the wrong word - hinder would have been better.

Remainers obviously don't want our government wasting time negotiating with the EU, they want them in the commons huffing and puffing over the same old arguments day after day after day. And if they can rule out no deal they know that's a great way to weaken our position in the negotiations and so and so on - you get the idea.

Undermine.

Embolden the EU.

Subvert

Present a divided front.

Weaken

Do the dirty work for the EU.

Impede

Compromise

Impair

Dilute bargaining position

Hamper

Set back

Inhibit

Hold back

Frustrate

[AndrewJB]

Undermine.

Embolden the EU.

Subvert

Present a divided front.

Weaken

Do the dirty work for the EU.

Compromise

Impair

Dilute bargaining position

Ever since leave won the referendum, it has made extraordinary claims as to why it has failed to produce the sunlit uplands it promised. None of which include; "we were wrong". Always the fault of the other side. The con goes on...

[Heathclaret]

If you think Johnson isn't intelligent, you haven't been paying attention. He's a very intelligent man.

I guess it comes down to how you measure intelligence, to call him very intelligent, is being extremely generous.

He’s been educated to the highest level, but I don’t think he is a particularly great thinker or speaker.


Calculating, ambitious, borderline dishonest and sly are his characteristics, whilst putting on a show of being one of the lads who wants the best for everyone.

Just an opinion.

[RingoMcCartney]

Ever since leave won the referendum, it has made extraordinary claims as to why it has failed to produce the sunlit uplands it promised. None of which include; "we were wrong". Always the fault of the other side. The con goes on...

Acknowledgment. It's a start!!!!


The next stage is respect. After that, accept.




Baby steps Andrew, baby steps.

[dsr]

I guess it comes down to how you measure intelligence, to call him very intelligent, is being extremely generous.

He’s been educated to the highest level, but I don’t think he is a particularly great thinker or speaker.

Or author, presumably.

You can't educate someone to the highest level if they aren't intelligent.

[AndrewJB]

Can you name anyone who does meet your standards of "intelligent", preferably someone that most people could agree on?

Why do I have to name someone else when we're talking about Johnson's shortcomings as a political leader? If you think he's so good, then give us some examples of how he's been so. What did he do as London Mayor, or Foreign Secretary that back you up? We're talking about a man who has suggested building a bridge to France. Imagination - check! Common Sense - erm, no! Do we even need to consider Ethics? He's far from the best we have. He's a Carlton Palmer (as a manager).

[martin_p]

They can't.
Bit they can prevent meaningful honest negotiations, just by continuing to tell Brussels that if they dont renegotiate, then they will get the referendum overturned.

We all know that is true, so why do you deny it or pretend that isnt the case. If you have right on your side why lie about it.

And how are they going to get the referendum result overturned? There isn’t currently a parliamentary majority for a second referendum, never mind overturning the result!

[Heathclaret]

Or author, presumably.

You can't educate someone to the highest level if they aren't intelligent.

I think you know what I meant, he has been given the opportunity of a first class education, one not accessible to most and if it weren’t for the old school tie privilege, I doubt he would have amounted to much.

You can teach reasonably dumb animals quite a lot, if you have the time and money to invest in them.

[CombatClaret]

3rd Brexit secretary suddenly understanding something everyone has been saying since day 1.

brx.jpg (88.78 KiB) Viewed 1596 times

[AndrewJB]

Acknowledgment. It's a start!!!!


The next stage is respect. After that, accept.




Baby steps Andrew, baby steps.

And those sunlit uplands?

[dsr]

Why do I have to name someone else when we're talking about Johnson's shortcomings as a political leader? If you think he's so good, then give us some examples of how he's been so. What did he do as London Mayor, or Foreign Secretary that back you up? We're talking about a man who has suggested building a bridge to France. Imagination - check! Common Sense - erm, no! Do we even need to consider Ethics? He's far from the best we have. He's a Carlton Palmer (as a manager).

The point being that I reckon your definition of intelligent is so restrictive that hardly anyone would qualify. Does anyone (below the level of Stephen Hawking) meet your standards?

[nil_desperandum]

John Major has announced he's joining Gina Miller in her legal challenge to stop the prorogation of parliament, claiming it to be an abuse of power!!!

What absolute and utter hypocrisy!!

This is the very same John Major who had no trouble in proroguing Parliament when he "abused his power" in 1997, when prorogation delayed the publication of a highly embarrassing report into the “cash for questions” sleaze scandal involving his Government.

.

That's not strictly true.
He prorogued Parliament and called a General Election, so the two aren't really comparable.
Where you are totally correct however is that it had the effect of delaying the publication of the "cash for questions" report until after the election, so he was indeed accused of political opportunism or an abuse of power.
It is however always the case that Parliament is prorogued leading up to a General Election.

[AndrewJB]

I think you know what I meant, he has been given the opportunity of a first class education, one not accessible to most and if it weren’t for the old school tie privilege, I doubt he would have amounted to much.

You can teach reasonably dumb animals quite a lot, if you have the time and money to invest in them.

If you throw enough glitter at a turd, it will sparkle.

[dsr]

3rd Brexit secretary suddenly understanding something everyone has been saying since day 1.

brx.jpg

Actually, "everyone" (ie. Remainers) have been saying "it can't be done, it can't be done, cancel Brexit". There has been very little ambition to see how it could be done.

[CombatClaret]

MP.jpg (210.8 KiB) Viewed 1591 times

[AndrewJB]

The point being that I reckon your definition of intelligent is so restrictive that hardly anyone would qualify. Does anyone (below the level of Stephen Hawking) meet your standards?

It's not restrictive at all. Six qualities, and many people have them to a greater or lesser degree. It's not a matter of being a ten in every category, but having a reasonable balance. As other people have said, Johnson is where he is more to do with the wealth of his father than anything else. That's what private education gets you. A low quality elite.

[aggi]

People are going to be really unhappy with this suggestion that wealth creators need to be able to move freely between territories.

Capture.JPG (24.12 KiB) Viewed 1581 times

[Spijed]

That's not strictly true.
He prorogued Parliament and called a General Election, so the two aren't really comparable.
Where you are totally correct however is that it had the effect of delaying the publication of the "cash for questions" report until after the election, so he was indeed accused of political opportunism or an abuse of power.
It is however always the case that Parliament is prorogued leading up to a General Election.

What I'm puzzled by is why hasn't BoJo just called an election to happen before the 31st rather than all the current shenanigans

[CombatClaret]

All hail the lying PM!

[SonofPog]

That's a bad (like really bad) photoshop surely, the two halves of paper aren't even the same colour.

[Colburn_Claret]

3rd Brexit secretary suddenly understanding something everyone has been saying since day 1.

brx.jpg

We need to start talks now.
WTF
We should have been having these talks for the last 2.5 years. It should all be sorted by now. We both know why it isn't , and it's not because of Boris. TM stopped Civil Servants from preparing for Brexit, ask yourself why?

[CombatClaret]

That's a bad (like really bad) photoshop surely, the two halves of paper aren't even the same colour.

I know, I just wanted the signature in but without all the guff about One Nation Conservatives, whom he's also shafted.

[RingoMcCartney]

And those sunlit uplands?

All in good time.

Next stage , "respect"

Baby steps Andrew, baby steps.

[Colburn_Claret]

"If he proves incompetent"? He already has shown this in his part time role as London mayor, and foreign secretary. He's just a son of a rich man who, because wealth is regarded in higher esteem than intelligence, has wormed his way into being PM. He described his £250K salary from the Telegraph as "chicken feed" - so is rich enough that if he fails to get a deal and we do crash out, his life won't be materially affected.

If those leavers who claimed we'd get a good deal were just wrong, then they were stupid, because there were plenty of people who pointed out they were deluded when they originally made their claims.

So you say Theresa May didn't try hard enough to get a deal. And that a better deal could have been achieved? Not with the red lines the brexiteers imposed on our negotiating position, and when you combine that with the EU's position not to compromise an international treaty on the Ireland border, you have zero chance of success. I think this is what some leavers wanted all along, and how many people who voted leave have been conned.

Sorry, but you just spout the same opinionated rubbish
There are little to no facts in your assumptions.
If leavers who claimed wed get a good deal are just wrong. How do you know they're wrong in 2.5 years they've never been given the opportunity to show that one way or the other.

The red lines are Brexit, if you give up on them you give up on Brexit, which is what the WA agreement was. It wasnt away to deliver Brexit, it was a way to claim we'd left, when really we hadn't at all. Wed still have been tied to the bureaucracy of the EU. Only we'd be sat outside the room waiting to be told what to do, rather than sat inside the room waiting to be told what to do.

[RingoMcCartney]

That's not strictly true.
He prorogued Parliament and called a General Election, so the two aren't really comparable.
Where you are totally correct however is that it had the effect of delaying the publication of the "cash for questions" report until after the election, so he was indeed accused of political opportunism or an abuse of power.
It is however always the case that Parliament is prorogued leading up to a General Election.

You want to argue the reasons they did it "aren't really comparable"

They are. Why? Because they exercised their constitutional right to do so (despite the BS spouted by mainstream media and hysterical remoaners about power grabs and coups) to maintain the status quo.

As a remoamer , you hate the hypocrisy of one of your own being highlighted.

Major prorogued parliament to maintain the status quo, and stop the People being made aware of how corrupt his government was.

Johnson is using prorogation to maintain the status quo
by our elected representatives (MPs) voting for No Deal. When they set it as the legal default by passing the EU Withdrawal Act a year ago, and implementing the will of the People.

The former wanted to hide the truth from The People

The latter wants to enact their Will.

[Colburn_Claret]

Get your excuses in now, quickly, before Johnson fails to get a deal. Even if the country were united on this, why would the EU compromise an international treaty and buckle to us? We are the ones leaving, and we can't dictate to them how it's all going to be. We were lied to, and this is the result.

Not an excuse it's a fact, one I've been stating for a long time if you can be bothered to check. We can still get a deal, but its 99% sure we cant negotiate anything until after we've left.
As long as the EU does nothing concedes nothing, it has no effect on them. It just perpetuates the status quo. That all changes if we leave without a deal. We trade under WTO, it's worse, but nothing terminal, but it's also worse for them. The problems you forecast we will have exporting to Europe, must be exactly the same problems they will face exporting to the UK. we share the same ports, the same paperwork issues, the same traffic hold ups, if they turn out to be true.
Only as a typical remainer, this CHAOS only affects us, products from Europe will flow as sweet as a nut.

[CombatClaret]

The red lines are Brexit

The red lines were not on the ballot paper, neither was No Deal or Norway + etc.
That's why we're in this mess, because the only thing Brexit means is... Brexit..?

[Spijed]

If the govt lose the case in court next week will Boris have to resign for telling porkies to Liz?

[aggi]

The red lines are Brexit, if you give up on them you give up on Brexit

No. The red lines are your Brexit. As we've been told repeatedly, leave means leave, there was no question about how we leave on the ballot paper. Leaving with a Norway style deal is as valid as No Deal (possibly more valid given that a number of prominent Brexiteers such as Farage referenced a Norway type deal before the referendum).

[Colburn_Claret]

I think I've mentioned before that a friend of a friend was on the negotiation team in Brussels. The view from very early on was that something akin to what we ended up with was the only thing that would respect May's red lines, the EU's red lines and the Good Friday Agreement. There's not really many other options.

The EUs red lines are only incumbent on its members. They cant impose their red lines on anyone, just negotiate an agreement with the outside body. If they want to change those red lines, and move the goal posts, then they have to renegotiate. As an incumbent you dont renegotiate anything, you just get told what the changes are. If you disagree, you just get voted down, and you cant unilaterally refuse, because the way the spiders web works is if you accept some of the threads, you are tied to them all.

That's all we want, the opportunity to negotiate a deal with them, escape the spiders web, it's not a lot to ask for really. If as remainers argue the EU has never done anything but good for us, it should be fairly straight forward to start off many things by adopting the status quo, continuing as we are. That doesn't mean that if they decide to move the goal posts down the line we should have to accept, just renegotiate.

[Colburn_Claret]

Undermine.

Embolden the EU.

Subvert

Present a divided front.

Weaken

Do the dirty work for the EU.

Impede

Compromise

Impair

Dilute bargaining position

Hamper

Set back

Inhibit

Hold back

Frustrate

Any and all of the above. Surely not, these people are democrats

[AndrewJB]

Sorry, but you just spout the same opinionated rubbish
There are little to no facts in your assumptions.
If leavers who claimed wed get a good deal are just wrong. How do you know they're wrong in 2.5 years they've never been given the opportunity to show that one way or the other.

The red lines are Brexit, if you give up on them you give up on Brexit, which is what the WA agreement was. It wasnt away to deliver Brexit, it was a way to claim we'd left, when really we hadn't at all. Wed still have been tied to the bureaucracy of the EU. Only we'd be sat outside the room waiting to be told what to do, rather than sat inside the room waiting to be told what to do.

Three years have elapsed since the referendum, and we are precisely nowhere. The government has failed to deliver, and not because certain people didn't believe enough, but because what they promised is simply not possible. Remain supporters didn't invent the Northern Irish Peace Accord to foil brexit. It was always there, and all leavers said about it was that it was no big deal. It was a small problem that would be surmounted. It's obviously not.

Again, and I think you know this, if leave had campaigned to exit the single market and customs union as well as just the EU, they wouldn't have won the referendum.

[dsr]

If the govt lose the case in court next week will Boris have to resign for telling porkies to Liz?

What is this court case actually challenging? Is it that proroguing parliament should not be allowed at all, or is it just that it shouldn't be allowed except at the Remainers' convenience?

Johnson was appointed PM on 24th July. Since then, including today, there have been 37 days, on which Parliament has voluntarily and of its own accord, without impediment by the Prime Minister, chosen to sit on 1. 1 day out of 37. Why are they so fussed about losing 6 more scheduled days in and around the conference season?

[Colburn_Claret]

Ever since leave won the referendum, it has made extraordinary claims as to why it has failed to produce the sunlit uplands it promised. None of which include; "we were wrong". Always the fault of the other side. The con goes on...

As someone who is anti British, you do a very good impersonation of Nelson at Trafalgar. 'I see no ships'.

[martin_p]

The EUs red lines are only incumbent on its members. They cant impose their red lines on anyone, just negotiate an agreement with the outside body. If they want to change those red lines, and move the goal posts, then they have to renegotiate. As an incumbent you dont renegotiate anything, you just get told what the changes are. If you disagree, you just get voted down, and you cant unilaterally refuse, because the way the spiders web works is if you accept some of the threads, you are tied to them all.

Yes, that’s why we’re part of Schengen and the Euro. Why do you continue to write lies that are so easily disproved?

[Devils_Advocate]

What is this court case actually challenging? Is it that proroguing parliament should not be allowed at all, or is it just that it shouldn't be allowed except at the Remainers' convenience?

Johnson was appointed PM on 24th July. Since then, including today, there have been 37 days, on which Parliament has voluntarily and of its own accord, without impediment by the Prime Minister, chosen to sit on 1. 1 day out of 37. Why are they so fussed about losing 6 more scheduled days in and around the conference season?

I believe its arguing that the advice Johnson gave to the queen as part of his request was false and unlawful ergo Spijed's point that if this is proven and he has lied to the Queen on such a matter should he be duty bound to resign

[GodIsADeeJay81]

If the govt lose the case in court next week will Boris have to resign for telling porkies to Liz?

Remain lost the case today didn't they?

Or are they going to try again and again until they get the result they want?

[Colburn_Claret]

The red lines were not on the ballot paper, neither was No Deal or Norway + etc.
That's why we're in this mess, because the only thing Brexit means is... Brexit..?

If you truly believe that, why didn't you say something before the vote, or were you just stupid.
I dont mean to be offensive, but all this hindsight is just a smoke screen.
People were asked if they wanted to stay or leave, we voted to leave. If the terms of that departure were so important, why did nobody flag it up at the time.
I haven't heard anyone who voted to leave saying they only wanted to leave if we got a good deal.
However remainers are full of it, that nobody voted to leave without a deal.
The fact is, and it is a FACT, the people shouting loudest, are the same people who would vote against a deal, if it was covered in chocolate and covered in Goldleaf. If Boris came back with a deal 10 times better than the most ardent Brexiteer ever dreamt of, these people would still vote against it.
So as I said it's a smokescreen, a lie. Repeated over and over, in the hope that the gullible will fall for it.
Are you gullible?