Spiral wrote:But that isn't condescending, it's a matter of fact. I have no idea what you're talking about with your comment on Pandora's box, and I'm all ears if you're willing to explain. Your entire argument in post #17615 centred around your indignation at, and your misunderstanding of, governments needing parliamentary approval to govern. But this is a matter of fact. It isn't up for dispute, yet you're alleging what? Foul play? Because you're confused at a supreme court ruling? You have a responsibility to yourself to understand these things if you aren't to be taken for a mug by cynical politicians.
NO, it did not, or let me say it was not meant to. It was in relationship to how this parliament, and I mean all of them has done things I did not think or expect them to do, the P box was in relationship to going outside normal parliamentary behavior, well normal for me.
I am not confused by a court ruling, it's quite black and white even for a mug of an old women like me. It is the fact it went to court at all, let alone 4 courts. Hypothetically Labour in power, prorogue, Tories go to court because they do not like the length, maybe to short because someone wants a longer holiday but am sure with your total knowledge of how parliament works you will assure me that is not possible.
Coupled with all that is the fact that while parliament went back I did not see anything for those days they were sitting that was that important they had to sit rather than letting the government work on achieving a satisfactory deal to leave, it was all white noise.
Hopefully you will be able to understand my indignation, but I doubt it as you seem not to be able to understand what I have been trying to say, it would be very very difficult for me to try to explain this in braille to you.