Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.
She was only pitching that as teh minimum UK had to go for , whilst knowing that there was zero chance of UK ever getting it. If it is hard brexit and she does not go for referendum she is stuffed , so all this mince by Times and know it alls on here is just rubbish.
But if it is hard Brexit, then Yes will lose. Badly. England is by a huge margin Scotland's most important export market and you'd be on the wrong side of the EU/UK border. Independence hopes will be gone for a generation.
Would be brave to bet on that Patrick , it is on a knife edge and much better chance of YES this time I reckon. People know they were stiffed last time and many will not be taken in by the lies again.
Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.
She was only pitching that as teh minimum UK had to go for , whilst knowing that there was zero chance of UK ever getting it. If it is hard brexit and she does not go for referendum she is stuffed , so all this mince by Times and know it alls on here is just rubbish.
But if it is hard Brexit, then Yes will lose. Badly. England is by a huge margin Scotland's most important export market and you'd be on the wrong side of the EU/UK border. Independence hopes will be gone for a generation.
Would be brave to bet on that Patrick , it is on a knife edge and much better chance of YES this time I reckon. People know they were stiffed last time and many will not be taken in by the lies again.
$ 113/ barrel
Oil is a miniscule part of Scottish revenue and that small amount is kept by London, it has NO impact whatsoever.
The Iraq invasion was never that popular, but there remained the notion that perhaps politicians knew more than they were telling, or could tell.
I was against the invasion, but only because it looked like Dubya wanting to finish his dad's uncompleted business. It was public opinion, helped by gory images from the media which stopped Bush senior. I still think they should have finished things off properly.
Saddam in 2003 just looked like a convenient target. He was secular, definitely no Muslim extremist, and not even the worst dictator around. But despite all that, there could be a reason for the invasion they couldn't reveal. I hoped so anyway, despite my opposition,
But no, it was all bollocks as I feared.
And Dr Palmer wonders why I dislike politicians so much. He then says that EU federalism was inherent in the project from the start, so we knew what we were getting into. No, because it was downplayed, and in 1975 actually denied. I was there.
Now there are feeble attempts to claim that the referendum was always meant to be only advisory. And these people also moan about post-truth!
@wallaceme: Got to love the Trumpkins who started the weekend justifying Trump's policy applying to Brits and ended it saying it never applied to Brits.
The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.
Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.
The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.
Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote
It's not about access tot he single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.
As single market membership is so desirable, there are two explanations for that. One, Mrs May is secretly an Ultra (I doubt that), or, based on sidebar discussions with the various counterparties, we know that FoM really is an EU red line.
I know you're a self-confessed worrywart, but I do think you're mischaracterising the UK position. It's pointless opening with demands that will simply be rejected out of hand. That's just a basic tenet of negotiation.
Ultimately, its out of our hands (in the sense of any PB poster having any influence over the outcome). Worrying about things that are outwith our control is a recipe for an unhappy life. Here endeth the sermon.
We never tested the red line though. Perhaps it indeed was and if we pushed the door would have remained closed. But a window might have opened on the first floor. We have no idea what they would have said and the fact that your sidebar discussions yielded the information that FoM is a red line is an indication of the (dare I say superior?) EU negotiating strategy.
But that is all moot. We can't be a member of the SM not because of the concomitant FoM requirement, but because the ECJ opines on the SM and that would be politically intolerable for those titans of British politics Bill Cash and the Moggster and wouldn't they let her know about it.
Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.
She was only pitching that as teh minimum UK had to go for , whilst knowing that there was zero chance of UK ever getting it. If it is hard brexit and she does not go for referendum she is stuffed , so all this mince by Times and know it alls on here is just rubbish.
But if it is hard Brexit, then Yes will lose. Badly. England is by a huge margin Scotland's most important export market and you'd be on the wrong side of the EU/UK border. Independence hopes will be gone for a generation.
Would be brave to bet on that Patrick , it is on a knife edge and much better chance of YES this time I reckon. People know they were stiffed last time and many will not be taken in by the lies again.
Then I'm brave. I fully, fully get the emerging emotional and cultural disconnect of the heart - and if I were Scottish I'd very much want to be independent. But....the head! Eeeek! Currency. Central bank. Trade with England. EU. Lender of last resort. Financial services industry. The monarchy. Etc. Etc. I respect very much how emotionally invested you are personally in the exit outcome. But I think it clouds your judgment. Scotland would have to become a truly independent nation (from Brussels as well as Westminster), you'd have to run a surplus from day one, you'd have to become an overtly mercantilist trading nation - a competitive economy. Not a deficit monster socialist utopia. Ain't gonna happen.
Rare I agree with the Government but there are many countries whose Heads of State have visited the UK who impost even more draconian restrictions on who can enter and leave their country than anything Trump has imposed now.
The problem is the United States is regarded as the most "open" of countries - its development was predicated on immigration, it has an iconic image of taking people in and giving them a chance to build new lives. It is the public reversal and denial of that iconic status that shocks, not what has actually been implemented which, although ham fisted round the edges, isn't a lot worse than many other countries already have.
If you dislike Trump, it's an excuse to dislike him more - if you like Trump, it's a chance to like him more.
Maybe but, as far as I'm aware, one rarely has nationalist/separatist parties who reach power like the SNP has done. The PQ/BQ managed it but ultimately foundered on losing referendums (and economic problems as Canadian business relocated to Ontario). The ANC continues in SA long past its objective sell-by date.
Predicting ultimate demise is probably right but without a specific date it's not a terribly illuminating prediction.
When I was writing that post, I was thinking of 10-20 years for three reasons:
*) Past record. Both the Thatcher/Major and Blair/Brown governments lasted for around this sort of period (T/M 18, B/B 13).
*) There is time for their record to become jaded, without being able to fully blame the previous government. Although the SNP may have some cover by continuing to blame Westminster. Basically, they have to start taking responsibility.
*) Change in politicians. Politicians can remain in politics for decades; but few people last at the very top for more than ten years or so - even Salmond stepped down from party leader a couple of times, each of which as a ten-year stint. It chews people up. There are exceptions: Angela Merkel being one. But as the generation that was in opposition retires or return to the backbenches, they are replaced with new people, who have often only known government. They often lack hunger or even basic competence. I almost think parties need time in opposition in which to renew their ideas and vigour.
For these reasons, I expect the Conservative government to start having real problems in the 2020-2025 parliament (Labour's AC epoch, or After Corbyn). The SNP majority government started in 2011; I expect them to start having serious troubles in the same timeframe.
(I count the 2010-15 coalition government for the Conservatives, but not the 2007-11 coalition for the SNP, because of the widespread perception that the 2010-15 government *was* a Conservative government, and the fact that the Labour-SNP government contained the SNP's main enemy. Others may differ.)
Some major errors there. There was no coalition in 2007 , SNP governed alone with a minority As long as there are Tory governments in London shafting Scotland and holding all the real powers , it is hard to blame it all on SNP. You can only blame them for the 10% of powers they have and even then inisolation using them is dangerous as planned by unionists.
Ooops. You are, of course, correct about the 2007 government. It doesn't particularly alter the theory.
But I fear you are overestimating the ability of the SNP to continually blame Westminster. They have power over various areas, and inevitable mistakes made in those areas will become increasingly hard to blame on Westminster.
There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.
Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.
Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?
Edit:
And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.
Exactly , you import the crime and fork out more benefits. A good idea might be for them to put some effort into our local non productive people having to get employment rather than paying them large benefits and importing more.
What do you think of the idea that freedom of movement could be retained for Scotland only, with passports stamped so that those concerned could only reside in Scotland?
According to this Guardian article Obama was bombing most of the countries involved in the Trump ban:
" America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama's reign — Medea Benjamin
While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries."
Rare I agree with the Government but there are many countries whose Heads of State have visited the UK who impost even more draconian restrictions on who can enter and leave their country than anything Trump has imposed now.
The problem is the United States is regarded as the most "open" of countries - its development was predicated on immigration, it has an iconic image of taking people in and giving them a chance to build new lives. It is the public reversal and denial of that iconic status that shocks, not what has actually been implemented which, although ham fisted round the edges, isn't a lot worse than many other countries already have.
If you dislike Trump, it's an excuse to dislike him more - if you like Trump, it's a chance to like him more.
The problem with Trump is not this, or any other particular policy, it's that he's a deranged lunatic, advised by incompetents, completely out of his depth, wielding immense power in an unpredictable and dangerous manner.
And he's now our best friend for good or ill.
This weekend he fcked up immigration through a combination of naivety, arrogance, ignorance and swagger.
How much else, much more important and dangerous, will he break next, and how closely do we want to be shackled to him when he does?
But I fear you are overestimating the ability of the SNP to continually blame Westminster. They have power over various areas, and inevitable mistakes made in those areas will become increasingly hard to blame on Westminster.
By this time next week the SNP administration could look in control and be worthy of the name of Scottish Government – or instead it could have been hammered by the UK government at Westminster, the opposition parties in Holyrood and the growing disenchantment of the Scottish public. Success or defeat will have been entirely due to the choices made by the First Minister and her closest ministers. If the choices were right then the SNP’s dream will have moved closer, but if they are wrong the SNP will have to face up to the reality that its strategy has failed and that it must develop a new one.
According to this Guardian article Obama was bombing most of the countries involved in the Trump ban:
" America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama's reign — Medea Benjamin
While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries."
But Obama was a black Democrat President, so it's ok. The fact that his drone strikes killed and maimed innocent civilians in countries that the US isn't actually at war with doesn't resonate with the people signing petitions or marching with witty placards.
Mr. Stopper, reminds me of a comment I can't precisely recall but which (in relation to 'Nazi-punching') said it wasn't about behaviour, it was about people.
Obama = good person Trump = bad person
Not saying Trump doesn't deserve censure, but that Obama perhaps deserved rather more than he got.
Podcast: 37 mins in, intrigued to hear Jade Azim repeat her suggestion that the right is better than the left at (effectively) sloganising. I generally disagree with the right being better at language, but she's right, I think, for both the UK referendum result and Trump's election. The left used language woefully (although there was a split in the UK, of course). 'Basket of deplorables' isn't a wonderful way to describe people whose votes you need.
I've realised the way to build up my post number is to do smaller crisper posts than try to formulate an argument or a cogent thesis. Morris has done over 30,000 posts, I haven't reached 2,500 - that tells me something.
On topic, as one or two others have argued, the world has moved on since 23/6 (you wouldn't think so on here sometime) and for many people it's no longer an issue. The decision was taken and it should be implemented.
Until we start to get some sense of what will result from the A50 negotiations, I suspect it will simmer on the back burner. I strongly suspect problems with the EU will be balanced by glowing reports of wonderful trade deals with New Zealand, Pitcairn Island and St Helena in the offing as a way for May to sell the basic argument that "it will be all right outside the EU".
As long as people believe "Global Britain" as a concept will not mean economic hardship for them personally or for their families and communities, people won't look at the detail of A50 or trade deals. May will keep banging the drum that Britain will not only survive but indeed will prosper outside the EU and as long as the evidence suggests leaving the EU isn't hurting people directly, the line will be held. The oversold benefits of devaluation are coming with a commensurate downside in terms of rising prices and the sensitivity of Government to fuel prices is something to note if they continue to creep higher.
Rare I agree with the Government but there are many countries whose Heads of State have visited the UK who impost even more draconian restrictions on who can enter and leave their country than anything Trump has imposed now.
The problem is the United States is regarded as the most "open" of countries - its development was predicated on immigration, it has an iconic image of taking people in and giving them a chance to build new lives. It is the public reversal and denial of that iconic status that shocks, not what has actually been implemented which, although ham fisted round the edges, isn't a lot worse than many other countries already have.
If you dislike Trump, it's an excuse to dislike him more - if you like Trump, it's a chance to like him more.
The problem with Trump is not this, or any other particular policy, it's that he's a deranged lunatic, advised by incompetents, completely out of his depth, wielding immense power in an unpredictable and dangerous manner.
And he's now our best friend for good or ill.
This weekend he fcked up immigration through a combination of naivety, arrogance, ignorance and swagger.
How much else, much more important and dangerous, will he break next, and how closely do we want to be shackled to him when he does?
It's Trump's direction of travel that is worrying, not where he is now. I suppose he is used to giving orders, not having discussions.
Isn't Wellington, when he became prime minister, supposed to have been surprised that his cabinet. Having been given their orders, wanted to sit around and discuss them?
I've realised the way to build up my post number is to do smaller crisper posts than try to formulate an argument or a cogent thesis. Morris has done over 30,000 posts, I haven't reached 2,500 - that tells me something.
On topic, as one or two others have argued, the world has moved on since 23/6 (you wouldn't think so on here sometime) and for many people it's no longer an issue. The decision was taken and it should be implemented.
Until we start to get some sense of what will result from the A50 negotiations, I suspect it will simmer on the back burner. I strongly suspect problems with the EU will be balanced by glowing reports of wonderful trade deals with New Zealand, Pitcairn Island and St Helena in the offing as a way for May to sell the basic argument that "it will be all right outside the EU".
As long as people believe "Global Britain" as a concept will not mean economic hardship for them personally or for their families and communities, people won't look at the detail of A50 or trade deals. May will keep banging the drum that Britain will not only survive but indeed will prosper outside the EU and as long as the evidence suggests leaving the EU isn't hurting people directly, the line will be held. The oversold benefits of devaluation are coming with a commensurate downside in terms of rising prices and the sensitivity of Government to fuel prices is something to note if they continue to creep higher.
@Laura_K_Hughes: Downing Street source tells BBC that the petition calling for #DonaldTrump's state visit to be postponed is a “populist gesture”
What, exactly, did you expect them to say?
"Fair enough, it's off then"?
Just listened to Sky's paper review and both of the reviewers said that the state visit should continue. They both said they were reassured by Theresa May's steady hand.
Also heard Shami Chakrabarti on five live going off the deep end and then suffering a car crash as she was asked to justify Corbyn taking the IRA into the HOC just 14 days after the Brighton bombing
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
This looks as it is still developing. Reason for attack is not clear.
It is the weirdest story (and very sad, of course). I presumed it was neo-Nazis - Quebec has a few of those, and this mosque has been targeted before. And Muslims rarely attack Muslims in the West (though it's not unknown - Kurds v Arabs, "heretical" Muslim minorities etc)
But now the cops say one of the attackers shouted "Allahu Ahkbar"??
Maybe he did it facetiously, to taunt?
The cops have two of the suspects in cuffs, they know their names (one French surname, apparently), yet they have "no idea of the motive". Odd.
"In June last year the same mosque was the target of an Islamophobic incident when a pig's head was left in front of the building, with a card saying "bonne appetit"."
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
My real worry is that the EU are driving a wedge between themselves and the US and there will be only one winner and it will not be the EU
These are difficult times but both sides have arguments to make.
One thing is certain Trump has dialled up the fight against terror and created an earthquake of division that was always just under the surface
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
My real worry is that the EU are driving a wedge between themselves and the US and there will be only one winner and it will not be the EU
These are difficult times but both sides have arguments to make.
One thing is certain Trump has dialled up the fight against terror and created an earthquake of division that was always just under the surface
How has he dialled up the "fight against terror"? All he has done is give ISIS what they want.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
But the Queen thought it was Andrew Marr she was entertaining so it wasn't too bad for her.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
The pro-EU FT disagrees with you
"Opponents of Brexit in the UK have dismissed the possibility of a trade pact with the US on the grounds that Mr Trump’s protectionist agenda would affect Britain as well. Except that this deal will not be primarily about trade. It will be a political deal, a vehicle to sow discord between the UK and the EU, the one trade deal Mr Trump may go soft on for strategic reasons"
I believe I made this point at the time. For those self-flagellating over being so unlucky to have been born a Brit, this casts us in the unlovely position of being a conman's shill. We're the ones that get to win the shell game, in order to lure the marks in. Still, I'll take it .
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
I note Hills have pulled the 5-6 on Trump to do a state visit.
Mr. Jobabob, possibly. The other way of viewing things is that the Scots have already been through a long campaign and voted. Views may be harder set now than they were. As for the big change, if the argument is economic that harms the SNP now because they'd be saying losing a smaller single market is worse than losing a larger one.
You could well be right, as the consensus has it, but that's not the only potential reading of the figures.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
TTIP was a good deal that the EU cost us to protect French farmers. If we get a slimmed down TTIP between the UK and USA then great.
Sentiment towards brexit has probably also been helped by increasing support and sympathy from other electorates within the EU, other than their hectoring, bullying politicians that is.
? What? (a) I don't think most voters have any impression at all of what other electorates think (or especially care). Have you ever met anyone who said, "I was against Brexit but I gather that Spanish voters are sympathetic, so I've changed my mind"? (b) the unanimous polling verdict across the EU (in the half dozen countries polled) has been a pro-EU shift in the other countries since Brexit, as people eye the choatic prospects and recoil (c) as someone who reads the French, German, Danish and Swedish media regularly, I don't get the impression that GBritish departure is actually a major isswue for most people on the Continent, one way or the other. They generally have other fish to fry.
This looks as it is still developing. Reason for attack is not clear.
It is the weirdest story (and very sad, of course). I presumed it was neo-Nazis - Quebec has a few of those, and this mosque has been targeted before. And Muslims rarely attack Muslims in the West (though it's not unknown - Kurds v Arabs, "heretical" Muslim minorities etc)
But now the cops say one of the attackers shouted "Allahu Ahkbar"??
Maybe he did it facetiously, to taunt?
The cops have two of the suspects in cuffs, they know their names (one French surname, apparently), yet they have "no idea of the motive". Odd.
"In June last year the same mosque was the target of an Islamophobic incident when a pig's head was left in front of the building, with a card saying "bonne appetit"."
Yes - but being able to deliver a pig's head isn't exactly as hard as obtaining an AK47 (which is banned in Canada). That would suggest support from outside Canada...
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
Putin was granted a state visit to the UK a few years ago despite everything he's been doing in Russia and elsewhere.
And Mugabe and Suharto and Caecescu......
And did the government say we were leading the world together with them?
May really needs to sack her spokesman and advisers. The statement that it would 'undo everything' to cancel the state visit really does make her sound like a Bridget Jones PM.
It's called "building an argument", Richard. I can't do the cheap jibe, sneer or one-line insult.
I like to argue, debate and discuss - this site used to do it a lot and still does it occasionally but unfortunately too many people come on here and think politics is like supporting a football team - their team is the best, all the others are rubbish etc.
The ability to concede your party may not always be right and the other side may sometimes be right as well as the ability to see that just because a majority wants something doesn't make it right are or should be prerequisites for political debate or argument.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
My real worry is that the EU are driving a wedge between themselves and the US and there will be only one winner and it will not be the EU
These are difficult times but both sides have arguments to make.
One thing is certain Trump has dialled up the fight against terror and created an earthquake of division that was always just under the surface
How has he dialled up the "fight against terror"? All he has done is give ISIS what they want.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
The pro-EU FT disagrees with you
"Opponents of Brexit in the UK have dismissed the possibility of a trade pact with the US on the grounds that Mr Trump’s protectionist agenda would affect Britain as well. Except that this deal will not be primarily about trade. It will be a political deal, a vehicle to sow discord between the UK and the EU, the one trade deal Mr Trump may go soft on for strategic reasons"
He would have to get that deal through Congress and it would involve legislators voting to make life tougher for businesses in their districts/states.
And, of course, the last thing that the UK wants is discord with the EU - our single biggest trading partner (though it would undoubtedly suit the Trump agenda).
However ghastly, moronic and odious Trump is, has he actually murderered anyone, like previous State Visit heads of state, or indeed ordered their extra judicial murder, like Obama?
It's pretty simple really - if it is in the US's interests to have a trade deal with thre UK then Trump does not need a state visit. If it isn't, then we will not get one whatever.
If we are to see the US president in the same light as the Saudi king or the Communist dictator of Romania then stating that we walk hand in hand with him to lead the world may not be the best idea.
Sentiment towards brexit has probably also been helped by increasing support and sympathy from other electorates within the EU, other than their hectoring, bullying politicians that is.
? What? (a) I don't think most voters have any impression at all of what other electorates think (or especially care). Have you ever met anyone who said, "I was against Brexit but I gather that Spanish voters are sympathetic, so I've changed my mind"? (b) the unanimous polling verdict across the EU (in the half dozen countries polled) has been a pro-EU shift in the other countries since Brexit, as people eye the choatic prospects and recoil (c) as someone who reads the French, German, Danish and Swedish media regularly, I don't get the impression that GBritish departure is actually a major isswue for most people on the Continent, one way or the other. They generally have other fish to fry.
Completely agree. I'm baffled by the obsession people have with our standing in the world and what other countries think of us - as if the average Swabian is weighing our moral worth on a daily basis. It must be some sad variant of the Spotlight Effect.
I'm firmly in the 'don't give a fuck' camp. I'm well travelled, and my interactions with the indigenes (outside the Anglosphere) have seldom developed much beyond 'ni siku nzuri' or the equivalent thereof.
However ghastly, moronic and odious Trump is, has he actually murderered anyone, like previous State Visit heads of state, or indeed ordered their extra judicial murder, like Obama?
Well depending on how you look at it there was a US raid in Yemen a day or so ago.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
The pro-EU FT disagrees with you
"Opponents of Brexit in the UK have dismissed the possibility of a trade pact with the US on the grounds that Mr Trump’s protectionist agenda would affect Britain as well. Except that this deal will not be primarily about trade. It will be a political deal, a vehicle to sow discord between the UK and the EU, the one trade deal Mr Trump may go soft on for strategic reasons"
That is a really good article - not just for the point you have highlighted but the four actions the EU should take. It is a creative article with new thought provoking content.
I'd be interested in the shape of the trade deal that Trump might agree to for strategic reasons. He doesn't strike me a a strategic kind of a man. He's transactional. He can't resist winning and being applauded for winning.
The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.
Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.
The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.
Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote
It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.
As the EU have refused to compromise on it at all before negotiations have even started, at most May will get Swiss style bilateral agreements in a few sectors, if she tries any free movement control single market membership is off the table
She never tried. The Tory right would never have let her.
He would have to get that deal through Congress and it would involve legislators voting to make life tougher for businesses in their districts/states.
And, of course, the last thing that the UK wants is discord with the EU - our single biggest trading partner (though it would undoubtedly suit the Trump agenda).
The last thing that the UK wants is harm to the UK, what suits the EU is another matter.
Would I accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the EU? Yes of course I would. Hell I'd accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the UK itself.
PB is at its worst when there is an Islamic attack. Wait for the facts would be my advice – those who want a running commentary on the rumours can no doubt find it elsewhere.
He would have to get that deal through Congress and it would involve legislators voting to make life tougher for businesses in their districts/states.
And, of course, the last thing that the UK wants is discord with the EU - our single biggest trading partner (though it would undoubtedly suit the Trump agenda).
The last thing that the UK wants is harm to the UK, what suits the EU is another matter.
Would I accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the EU? Yes of course I would. Hell I'd accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the UK itself.
Your definition of a great deal may be moot given we already have access to the US market on very low tariffs already.
This looks as it is still developing. Reason for attack is not clear.
It is the weirdest story (and very sad, of course). I presumed it was neo-Nazis - Quebec has a few of those, and this mosque has been targeted before. And Muslims rarely attack Muslims in the West (though it's not unknown - Kurds v Arabs, "heretical" Muslim minorities etc)
But now the cops say one of the attackers shouted "Allahu Ahkbar"??
Maybe he did it facetiously, to taunt?
The cops have two of the suspects in cuffs, they know their names (one French surname, apparently), yet they have "no idea of the motive". Odd.
"In June last year the same mosque was the target of an Islamophobic incident when a pig's head was left in front of the building, with a card saying "bonne appetit"."
Yes - but being able to deliver a pig's head isn't exactly as hard as obtaining an AK47 (which is banned in Canada). That would suggest support from outside Canada...
The AK 47 is quite a striking detail.
Though they're banned in Canada, you can buy AK47s all over the USA.
An interesting fact - neither GW Bush nor Barak Obama had a state visit to the UK until over two years into their presidencies. They came on official visits first.
The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.
Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.
The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.
Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote
It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.
As the EU have refused to compromise on it at all before negotiations have even started, at most May will get Swiss style bilateral agreements in a few sectors, if she tries any free movement control single market membership is off the table
She never tried. The Tory right would never have let her.
Or she spent months trying behind the scenes and ran into a brick wall and decided not to waste her limited 2 year window that Brown's Lisbon treaty and the EU's refusal to pre-negotiate leaves her with.
PB is at its worst when there is an Islamic attack. Wait for the facts would be my advice – those who want a running commentary on the rumours can no doubt find it elsewhere.
My goodness, we agree. Release the pigeons, world peace cannot be far away. Perhaps the world would be a more tranquil place if we still communicated via Pony Express. In less than a week we shall know all about the perpetrators, their motives and so on.
This looks as it is still developing. Reason for attack is not clear.
It is the weirdest story (and very sad, of course). I presumed it was neo-Nazis - Quebec has a few of those, and this mosque has been targeted before. And Muslims rarely attack Muslims in the West (though it's not unknown - Kurds v Arabs, "heretical" Muslim minorities etc)
But now the cops say one of the attackers shouted "Allahu Ahkbar"??
Maybe he did it facetiously, to taunt?
The cops have two of the suspects in cuffs, they know their names (one French surname, apparently), yet they have "no idea of the motive". Odd.
"In June last year the same mosque was the target of an Islamophobic incident when a pig's head was left in front of the building, with a card saying "bonne appetit"."
Yes - but being able to deliver a pig's head isn't exactly as hard as obtaining an AK47 (which is banned in Canada). That would suggest support from outside Canada...
The AK 47 is quite a striking detail.
Though they're banned in Canada, you can buy AK47s all over the USA.
He would have to get that deal through Congress and it would involve legislators voting to make life tougher for businesses in their districts/states.
And, of course, the last thing that the UK wants is discord with the EU - our single biggest trading partner (though it would undoubtedly suit the Trump agenda).
The last thing that the UK wants is harm to the UK, what suits the EU is another matter.
Would I accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the EU? Yes of course I would. Hell I'd accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the UK itself.
Your definition of a great deal may be moot given we already have access to the US market on very low tariffs already.
If free trade deals are meaningless then leaving the Single Market is meaningless. This is an absurd argument, trade deals affect remaining tariffs and Non Tariff Barriers and you know it.
He would have to get that deal through Congress and it would involve legislators voting to make life tougher for businesses in their districts/states.
And, of course, the last thing that the UK wants is discord with the EU - our single biggest trading partner (though it would undoubtedly suit the Trump agenda).
The last thing that the UK wants is harm to the UK, what suits the EU is another matter.
Would I accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the EU? Yes of course I would. Hell I'd accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the UK itself.
Your definition of a great deal may be moot given we already have access to the US market on very low tariffs already.
Also agree. Both parties do very nicely out of GATT.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
A f**cking moronic argument. No surprise Scott'n'paste is repeating it.
It's clear that May is desperate for a trade deal with the US to wave at the EU and her supporters. The EU won't be fooled by that - they know all about TTIP and they've heard Trump. But May's supporters could be fooled, and we may end up in a really awful trade deal with the US.
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
TTIP was a good deal that the EU cost us to protect French farmers. If we get a slimmed down TTIP between the UK and USA then great.
It wasn't French farmers that stopped TTIP. It was informed German consumers. It's not just chlorine washed chicken or growth hormones in beef.
Update-10:43PM CST: Syrian Refugees Bashir al-Taweed & Hassan Matti have killed 8 in Quebec City Mosque. Yelled "Allah Akbar" & used AK47s 0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
HOWEVER it is being spread by Trumpsters and alt-right accounts, and the only source seems to be "Canadian police radio", so treat with EXTREME caution.
If that is true it would be a big moment for Canada.
Trudeau opening his arms to the World's refugees is populist but the reality is it took my son 15 months and volumes of paperwork to get the OK to leave New Zealand and join his wife in Canada.
Also UK residents need an ETA now which they didn't 12 months ago.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
Whilst I wouldn't countenance a rerun of the vote (the people have spoken and all that), I've said previously that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump, the EU would have looked more wholesome and benevolent to many - probably enough a to swing it to Remain. All hypothetical of course, but I bet Dave kicks himself for not following Ozzy and Crosby's advice and delaying things. Another example of pressure from Farage addling a Tory leader's brain.
Comments
I'm happy with that.
A lot of people voted to leave the EU last year in good faith. Now the world has changed. Now we have a choice to make. Europe or Trump?
And many others.
I was against the invasion, but only because it looked like Dubya wanting to finish his dad's uncompleted business. It was public opinion, helped by gory images from the media which stopped Bush senior. I still think they should have finished things off properly.
Saddam in 2003 just looked like a convenient target. He was secular, definitely no Muslim extremist, and not even the worst dictator around. But despite all that, there could be a reason for the invasion they couldn't reveal. I hoped so anyway, despite my opposition,
But no, it was all bollocks as I feared.
And Dr Palmer wonders why I dislike politicians so much. He then says that EU federalism was inherent in the project from the start, so we knew what we were getting into. No, because it was downplayed, and in 1975 actually denied. I was there.
Now there are feeble attempts to claim that the referendum was always meant to be only advisory. And these people also moan about post-truth!
Pah!
But that is all moot. We can't be a member of the SM not because of the concomitant FoM requirement, but because the ECJ opines on the SM and that would be politically intolerable for those titans of British politics Bill Cash and the Moggster and wouldn't they let her know about it.
@Laura_K_Hughes: Downing Street source tells BBC that the petition calling for #DonaldTrump's state visit to be postponed is a “populist gesture”
I respect very much how emotionally invested you are personally in the exit outcome. But I think it clouds your judgment. Scotland would have to become a truly independent nation (from Brussels as well as Westminster), you'd have to run a surplus from day one, you'd have to become an overtly mercantilist trading nation - a competitive economy. Not a deficit monster socialist utopia. Ain't gonna happen.
Rare I agree with the Government but there are many countries whose Heads of State have visited the UK who impost even more draconian restrictions on who can enter and leave their country than anything Trump has imposed now.
The problem is the United States is regarded as the most "open" of countries - its development was predicated on immigration, it has an iconic image of taking people in and giving them a chance to build new lives. It is the public reversal and denial of that iconic status that shocks, not what has actually been implemented which, although ham fisted round the edges, isn't a lot worse than many other countries already have.
If you dislike Trump, it's an excuse to dislike him more - if you like Trump, it's a chance to like him more.
But I fear you are overestimating the ability of the SNP to continually blame Westminster. They have power over various areas, and inevitable mistakes made in those areas will become increasingly hard to blame on Westminster.
" America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama's reign — Medea Benjamin
While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy
And he's now our best friend for good or ill.
This weekend he fcked up immigration through a combination of naivety, arrogance, ignorance and swagger.
How much else, much more important and dangerous, will he break next, and how closely do we want to be shackled to him when he does?
Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brian-monteith-are-wheels-about-to-come-off-snp-bandwagon-1-4352200
Obama = good person
Trump = bad person
Not saying Trump doesn't deserve censure, but that Obama perhaps deserved rather more than he got.
Podcast: 37 mins in, intrigued to hear Jade Azim repeat her suggestion that the right is better than the left at (effectively) sloganising. I generally disagree with the right being better at language, but she's right, I think, for both the UK referendum result and Trump's election. The left used language woefully (although there was a split in the UK, of course). 'Basket of deplorables' isn't a wonderful way to describe people whose votes you need.
I've realised the way to build up my post number is to do smaller crisper posts than try to formulate an argument or a cogent thesis. Morris has done over 30,000 posts, I haven't reached 2,500 - that tells me something.
On topic, as one or two others have argued, the world has moved on since 23/6 (you wouldn't think so on here sometime) and for many people it's no longer an issue. The decision was taken and it should be implemented.
Until we start to get some sense of what will result from the A50 negotiations, I suspect it will simmer on the back burner. I strongly suspect problems with the EU will be balanced by glowing reports of wonderful trade deals with New Zealand, Pitcairn Island and St Helena in the offing as a way for May to sell the basic argument that "it will be all right outside the EU".
As long as people believe "Global Britain" as a concept will not mean economic hardship for them personally or for their families and communities, people won't look at the detail of A50 or trade deals. May will keep banging the drum that Britain will not only survive but indeed will prosper outside the EU and as long as the evidence suggests leaving the EU isn't hurting people directly, the line will be held. The oversold benefits of devaluation are coming with a commensurate downside in terms of rising prices and the sensitivity of Government to fuel prices is something to note if they continue to creep higher.
"Fair enough, it's off then"?
Isn't Wellington, when he became prime minister, supposed to have been surprised that his cabinet. Having been given their orders, wanted to sit around and discuss them?
http://news.sky.com/watch-live
This looks as it is still developing. Reason for attack is not clear.
You could also copy Morris Dancer's habit of wishing us all a good afternoon. :-)
Also heard Shami Chakrabarti on five live going off the deep end and then suffering a car crash as she was asked to justify Corbyn taking the IRA into the HOC just 14 days after the Brighton bombing
And the poor Queen being used as a pawn in this. I hope she uses the Royal Prerogative. It would be quite justified.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38793071
These are difficult times but both sides have arguments to make.
One thing is certain Trump has dialled up the fight against terror and created an earthquake of division that was always just under the surface
The entire agenda of Government since the Brexit vote has been populist. Tezza's speech was populism on steroids
And surprised a Scotsman wants to be ruled by Brussels
If there aren't DKs to convert IndyRef2 is dead in the water.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/26/queen-confused-vladimir-putin-with-andrew-marr-during-state-visi/
What insanely huge odds those were.
You could well be right, as the consensus has it, but that's not the only potential reading of the figures.
(a) I don't think most voters have any impression at all of what other electorates think (or especially care). Have you ever met anyone who said, "I was against Brexit but I gather that Spanish voters are sympathetic, so I've changed my mind"?
(b) the unanimous polling verdict across the EU (in the half dozen countries polled) has been a pro-EU shift in the other countries since Brexit, as people eye the choatic prospects and recoil
(c) as someone who reads the French, German, Danish and Swedish media regularly, I don't get the impression that GBritish departure is actually a major isswue for most people on the Continent, one way or the other. They generally have other fish to fry.
May really needs to sack her spokesman and advisers. The statement that it would 'undo everything' to cancel the state visit really does make her sound like a Bridget Jones PM.
Hmmm...
I like to argue, debate and discuss - this site used to do it a lot and still does it occasionally but unfortunately too many people come on here and think politics is like supporting a football team - their team is the best, all the others are rubbish etc.
The ability to concede your party may not always be right and the other side may sometimes be right as well as the ability to see that just because a majority wants something doesn't make it right are or should be prerequisites for political debate or argument.
Of course, F1 discussion remains as objective and even-handed as ever. Still contemplating whether to back Bottas for four/five+ wins. Hmm.
And, of course, the last thing that the UK wants is discord with the EU - our single biggest trading partner (though it would undoubtedly suit the Trump agenda).
If we are to see the US president in the same light as the Saudi king or the Communist dictator of Romania then stating that we walk hand in hand with him to lead the world may not be the best idea.
I'm firmly in the 'don't give a fuck' camp. I'm well travelled, and my interactions with the indigenes (outside the Anglosphere) have seldom developed much beyond 'ni siku nzuri' or the equivalent thereof.
http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-countries-with-largest-muslim-populations-map.html
I'd be interested in the shape of the trade deal that Trump might agree to for strategic reasons. He doesn't strike me a a strategic kind of a man. He's transactional. He can't resist winning and being applauded for winning.
Would I accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the EU? Yes of course I would. Hell I'd accept a great deal for the UK if the cost was discord in the UK itself.
I've decided to stick with the quality approach - I had forgotten the first rule of PB:
"The quality of posts from any poster is inversely proportional to their number".
Your first post is always your best - from then on, it's downhill all the way.
Though they're banned in Canada, you can buy AK47s all over the USA.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/29/britain-us-trade-deal-gm-food-eu-rules
Trudeau opening his arms to the World's refugees is populist but the reality is it took my son 15 months and volumes of paperwork to get the OK to leave New Zealand and join his wife in Canada.
Also UK residents need an ETA now which they didn't 12 months ago.
Every Country is tightening it's borders