I was told a rumour by someone one or two days after the event and I am absolutely 100% certain that it corroborates one side of a disputed event
Do people no longer believe in due process?
In the USA, Due Process seems to depend on which side of the political divide you are on, or where you go to church, the colour of your skin and whether or not you are female.
It has long been put about that your best chance of getting Due Process in the US is to be a white, male churchgoer. I believe the acronym is WASP...
Let's face if the GOP aren't bothered that their President is a lier, a bully and someone who treats women with contempt so they are not likely to be unduly concerned that a Supreme Court Judge displays the same traits. They would confirm him whatever the evidence showed.
The IFS are nothing more than a leftist front organisation now. It's a joke.
Lower corp tax has seen a huge rise in corp tax receipts.
Not to mention other receipts from NI, IT , VAT etc due to the economy being boosted.
Scotland has raised tax rates and seen a fall in revenue - not rocket science.
Would be most interested to see a link that proves revenue in Scotland has fallen since income tax rates increased in April of this year. You do have one, right?
"The Scottish Property Federation analysis of data from Revenue Scotland for the April to July 2018 period shows revenues from residential sales were down £1.8 million (2%) against revenues for the same period in 2017/18."
£1.8m? Tipping point, gamechanger etc, etc! I see your obsession with the Scottish housing market carries on unabated. Strangely there doesn't seem to be any mention in the piece of increased income tax rates for higher earners as a cause.
Any theories on the London downturn?
'London house prices fall again as stamp duty and Brexit fears bite'
Given that the Kavanaugh vote is now likely to be Sunday (thanks to a Republican Senator's prior wedding engagement), how many more stories like this, from witnesses the FBI have studiously ignored, might emerge and/or get noticed ? https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/will-the-fbi-ignore-testimonies-from-kavanaughs-former-classmates Several former Yale students who claim to have information regarding the alleged incident with Ramirez or about Kavanaugh’s behavior at Yale said that they had not been contacted by the F.B.I. Kenneth G. Appold was a suitemate of Kavanaugh’s at the time of the alleged incident. He had previously spoken to The New Yorker about Ramirez on condition of anonymity, but he said that he is now willing to be identified because he believes that the F.B.I. must thoroughly investigate her allegation. Appold, who is the James Hastings Nichols Professor of Reformation History at Princeton Theological Seminary, said that he first heard about the alleged incident involving Kavanaugh and Ramirez either the night it occurred or a day or two later. Appold said that he was “one-hundred-per-cent certain” that he was told that Kavanaugh was the male student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He said that he never discussed the allegation with Ramirez, whom he said he barely knew in college. But he recalled details—which, he said, an eyewitness described to him at the time—that match Ramirez’s memory of what happened. “I can corroborate Debbie’s account,” he said in an interview. “I believe her because it matches the same story I heard thirty-five years ago, although the two of us have never talked.”...
And as @ydoethur might tell you (?), one should not doubt the word of a theological historian...
The proposed Sunday vote isn't a hold up of today's scheduled vote btw. It is a hold on Saturdays vote should today's pass.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
No-one kicks a dead dog. Labour has answers for issues that people think are important. The Conservatives don't. We and possibly the electorate as a whole may not like Labour's answers. Nevertheless Labour is ahead of the Conservatives on this.
The Conservatives have Brexit. Remainers will blame them for the many detriments of Brexit. Leavers will also blame them for the many detriments that they firmly believe have nothing to do with Brexit.
The irony of course being that Lab can't attack Brexit on account of its Lab Brexit heartlands.
But Labour can blame the Conservatives for the effects of Brexit, even if Labour Leave voters don't think it has anything to do with them.
First of all, there is the nationalist fear that dare not speak its name, namely that any second referendum on the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU might be regarded as a precedent for what should happen if Scotland were ever to vote in favour of the principle of independence. The idea that there would need to be a second referendum on the terms of Scotland’s departure from the UK has been one against which the party has long since set its face.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge
We'll have had more time to prepare....and I suspect the EU will have other things on its mind.....
It looks very much as thought the EU have accepted a fudge which makes it possible to get round the barmy backstop block. It should never have been proposed by the EU or agreed by the UK in the first place; all it has done is get in the way of discussing the actual solutions to the border question which can only be discussed in the context of a deal which makes the backstop redundant.
You think a perpetual all UK backstop is an improvement? Er - how is this leaving?
It relates to the Customs Union not the single market.
Is Turkey part of the EU?
Then you are not paying the slightest attention. If GB diverges from EU regulations, being in a CU will not solve the NI border problem at all. So any backstop is going to require the UK to remain fully aligned with SM rules. Which means the backstop is a permanent backdoor to SM membership, which means that the EU will insist on FOM and money.
Exactly. What's not to like?
By and large we are happy with technical alignment on goods with the EU.
And TM has committed to FOM ending on 29 March next year, as recently as three days ago.
Has she? I thought she committed to ending it after transition?
It is. There was an initial suggestion that it might end next March but it was very quickly pointed out that for 'things to stay the same' FOM would have to continue too.
I think what TMay is saying is that FOM is about control, we'll have control from next march and exercise it to allow the current situation to perpetuate for the transition.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
Given that the Kavanaugh vote is now likely to be Sunday (thanks to a Republican Senator's prior wedding engagement), how many more stories like this, from witnesses the FBI have studiously ignored, might emerge and/or get noticed ? https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/will-the-fbi-ignore-testimonies-from-kavanaughs-former-classmates Several former Yale students who claim to have information regarding the alleged incident with Ramirez or about Kavanaugh’s behavior at Yale said that they had not been contacted by the F.B.I. Kenneth G. Appold was a suitemate of Kavanaugh’s at the time of the alleged incident. He had previously spoken to The New Yorker about Ramirez on condition of anonymity, but he said that he is now willing to be identified because he believes that the F.B.I. must thoroughly investigate her allegation. Appold, who is the James Hastings Nichols Professor of Reformation History at Princeton Theological Seminary, said that he first heard about the alleged incident involving Kavanaugh and Ramirez either the night it occurred or a day or two later. Appold said that he was “one-hundred-per-cent certain” that he was told that Kavanaugh was the male student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He said that he never discussed the allegation with Ramirez, whom he said he barely knew in college. But he recalled details—which, he said, an eyewitness described to him at the time—that match Ramirez’s memory of what happened. “I can corroborate Debbie’s account,” he said in an interview. “I believe her because it matches the same story I heard thirty-five years ago, although the two of us have never talked.”...
And as @ydoethur might tell you (?), one should not doubt the word of a theological historian...
Hearsay!
I was told a rumour by someone one or two days after the event and I am absolutely 100% certain that it corroborates one side of a disputed event
Do people no longer believe in due process?
Yes. even in common-law systems, the hearsay rule only applies to actual trials. Hearsay is admissible as evidence in many other judicial proceedings, such as grand jury deliberations, probation hearings, parole revocation hearings, and proceedings before administrative bodies...
Trump is an idiot, so I don't think proving that adds much to the sum of human knowledge.
I don't believe that Kavanaugh has said no attack occurred but that the event as described - i.e. an attack by him did not
I agree with you on Trump, but I would note that probably over 40% of the American public have a different view of the US President, so I think it is relevant.
I think when Kavanaugh says "This is a smear, plain and simple" he is doing more than saying the event as described did not happen. He is saying that Ramirez is deliberately making this up to damage him, which is rather more than just saying she is mistaken.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
It looks very much as thought the EU have accepted a fudge which makes it possible to get round the barmy backstop block. It should never have been proposed by the EU or agreed by the UK in the first place; all it has done is get in the way of discussing the actual solutions to the border question which can only be discussed in the context of a deal which makes the backstop redundant.
You think a perpetual all UK backstop is an improvement? Er - how is this leaving?
It's a fudge to get rid of the backstop nonsense without the EU losing face. It will never be implemented, and in fact will be soon forgotten.
That sounds like it could be a "Rogeradmus Special..."
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I also scrub up well in a penguin suit. Also not sure if my driving/blonde entertaining skills are up to the mark. But if a film studio wants to pay me a fabulous amount of money to try, I'm all in...
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Aidan Turner would be a decent choice.
I note Chris Evans has just hung up his Captain America shield... how’s his English accent ?
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
Is that a problem? I think Tom Cruise is only 4'6"
Gillian Anderson (as Scully) sometimes had to stand on a box to be in the same shot as Fox Mulder
I agree with Mr. Pedley: twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1048170759930171392
Trident is a 51-49 issue so how many votes is it really going to move. Also, anybody intending to vote for Corbyn knows they are going to be getting de facto nuclear disarmament anyway with him.
We could have such a nice Navy without Trident...
But that would mean forfeiting our ability to nuke the French. It's a tough choice.
Not an issue. Cancel Brexit and subsume us into Greater Europe and then we will be Northern France and rather than nuking the cheese eating surrender monkeys our fellow Europeans, we can use the French nukes for Trump or Putin.
I'm one of those people who harks back to the days of Empire, only in my case, it's the Angevin one. The French have it coming. They stole our land.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
I didn't realise that 2 CV stood for 'deux (2) chevaux' till I went to France recently.
I was told a rumour by someone one or two days after the event and I am absolutely 100% certain that it corroborates one side of a disputed event
Do people no longer believe in due process?
In the USA, Due Process seems to depend on which side of the political divide you are on, or where you go to church, the colour of your skin and whether or not you are female.
It has long been put about that your best chance of getting Due Process in the US is to be a white, male churchgoer. I believe the acronym is WASP...
Let's face if the GOP aren't bothered that their President is a lier, a bully and someone who treats women with contempt so they are not likely to be unduly concerned that a Supreme Court Judge displays the same traits. They would confirm him whatever the evidence showed.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
Was he wearing, ahem, a top hat and did he have a dozen eggs on the seat while he was driving over a ploughed field?
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
Is that a problem? I think Tom Cruise is only 4'6"
Gillian Anderson (as Scully) sometimes had to stand on a box to be in the same shot as Fox Mulder
Conversely Alan Ladd's leading ladies sometimes had to stand in a trench!
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
I didn't realise that 2 CV stood for 'deux (2) chevaux' till I went to France recently.
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Aidan Turner would be a decent choice.
I note Chris Evans has just hung up his Captain America shield... how’s his English accent ?
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so
The 'blood & soil' nationalists are embarrassing themselves. And I doubt they even realise they're doing it.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Any number of people pontificating from under their tin foil hats.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
I didn't realise that 2 CV stood for 'deux (2) chevaux' till I went to France recently.
The most shocking thing about that post is that you're obviously completely unacquainted with the Lloyd Cole & The Commotions album Rattlesnakes, which is a stone cold classic.
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
Is that a problem? I think Tom Cruise is only 4'6"
Gillian Anderson (as Scully) sometimes had to stand on a box to be in the same shot as Fox Mulder
Conversely Alan Ladd's leading ladies sometimes had to stand in a trench!
Why did they not make HIM stand on a box? Sexist, misogynistic so and sos.......
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
Is that a problem? I think Tom Cruise is only 4'6"
Gillian Anderson (as Scully) sometimes had to stand on a box to be in the same shot as Fox Mulder
Conversely Alan Ladd's leading ladies sometimes had to stand in a trench!
Why did they not make HIM stand on a box? Sexist, misogynistic so and sos.......
Pretty small potatoes by the standards of Hollywood in the 40s and 50s. If you thought Weinstein was bad...
No. Just no. Wrong body type and can't do rugged to save his life. I suggest:
* Dan Stevens * That bloke from Poldark * That bloke from Bodyguard
Dan Stevens has recently added 'menace' to his repertoire, though I think Aidan Turner (Poldark) and Richard Madden (Bodyguard) have more saturnine looks - and Madden is Scottish, which brings us back to the original & best!
Unfortunately, Richard Madden is 5ft 9 inches tall (1.77m)...
Is that a problem? I think Tom Cruise is only 4'6"
Gillian Anderson (as Scully) sometimes had to stand on a box to be in the same shot as Fox Mulder
Conversely Alan Ladd's leading ladies sometimes had to stand in a trench!
Why did they not make HIM stand on a box? Sexist, misogynistic so and sos.......
How funny. Remember how, when Unilever announced back in March that it had decided to move its headquarters from London to Rotterdam, it was all to do with Brexit? According to the Guardian’s subheadline on 14 March: ‘Brexit and favourable business conditions in Netherlands said to be behind decision’. The following day an FT leader asserted: ‘Unilever’s protestations that [the move] has nothing to do with Brexit do not convince’. It went on to add: ‘The decision is clearly coloured by the approach Theresa May has taken on Brexit, and by the way she has handled relations with business.’ As for the BBC, while its news story on 15 March quoted Unilever as saying the move had nothing to do with Brexit, it also quoted at some length Eloise Todd, chief executive of the Best for Britain group: ‘The government are saying to anyone who will listen this is not to do with Brexit, but anyone with any sense knows it’s a factor. The company has had an HQ in the UK for over 90 years, and all that history and legacy has gone down the plughole.’
This morning, Unilever announced that it has reversed its decision, after opposition from large shareholders. The company will continue to list its shares, as it does now, in both London and Amsterdam. And guess what? The decision had nothing to do with Brexit all along. The Guardian’s story this morning states: ‘Unilever has throughout insisted the move to Rotterdam was ‘nothing to do with Brexit”
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
Was he wearing, ahem, a top hat and did he have a dozen eggs on the seat while he was driving over a ploughed field?
Sadly, this was the early 80s model. (Though Moore’s tailoring seemed to be stuck in the late 70s)
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
The IFS are nothing more than a leftist front organisation now. It's a joke.
Lower corp tax has seen a huge rise in corp tax receipts.
Not to mention other receipts from NI, IT , VAT etc due to the economy being boosted.
Scotland has raised tax rates and seen a fall in revenue - not rocket science.
Would be most interested to see a link that proves revenue in Scotland has fallen since income tax rates increased in April of this year. You do have one, right?
"The Scottish Property Federation analysis of data from Revenue Scotland for the April to July 2018 period shows revenues from residential sales were down £1.8 million (2%) against revenues for the same period in 2017/18."
£1.8m? Tipping point, gamechanger etc, etc! I see your obsession with the Scottish housing market carries on unabated. Strangely there doesn't seem to be any mention in the piece of increased income tax rates for higher earners as a cause.
Any theories on the London downturn?
'London house prices fall again as stamp duty and Brexit fears bite'
You are welcome UD - £1.8m a quarter just from one tax. The impact of income tax rises in Scotland did of course was blamed on "less higher rate payers than thought" - i.e. they changed their residence..
The transgender lawyer who sued a transsexual solicitor is now suing Father Ted writer Graham Linehan for defamation and harassment, as well as for misuse of private information.
Linehan has been a vocal opponent of transgender activists' attempts to expand the definition of 'woman' to include people with penises. After clashing with Stephanie Hayden on Twitter, last week he told The Times that Hayden was a "dangerous troll" who tweeted details about his wife's business to "shut me up". Hayden, who has a history of commencing legal actions against those who cross her, has sued.
She claims that Linehan is a transphobe who publicised confidential information by referring to her former male identities in his tweets. She told RollOnFriday, "My right to not reveal that link has been removed from me forever now". Hayden maintains a public YouTube channel which included several videos featuring her as a man and which included her male name in their titles. However she deleted them from the platform this week. Hayden told RollOnFriday, "The videos were published many years ago long before my formal transition", and that until recently "nowhere within the public domain was there any document saying Tony Halliday/Steven Hayden is now Stephanie Hayden".
I agree with Mr. Pedley: twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1048170759930171392
Trident is a 51-49 issue so how many votes is it really going to move. Also, anybody intending to vote for Corbyn knows they are going to be getting de facto nuclear disarmament anyway with him.
We could have such a nice Navy without Trident...
But that would mean forfeiting our ability to nuke the French. It's a tough choice.
Not an issue. Cancel Brexit and subsume us into Greater Europe and then we will be Northern France and rather than nuking the cheese eating surrender monkeys our fellow Europeans, we can use the French nukes for Trump or Putin.
I'm one of those people who harks back to the days of Empire, only in my case, it's the Angevin one. The French have it coming. They stole our land.
Some very good English wines we are told. I can recommend Chateau Cheval Blanc.
The transgender lawyer who sued a transsexual solicitor is now suing Father Ted writer Graham Linehan for defamation and harassment, as well as for misuse of private information.
Linehan has been a vocal opponent of transgender activists' attempts to expand the definition of 'woman' to include people with penises. After clashing with Stephanie Hayden on Twitter, last week he told The Times that Hayden was a "dangerous troll" who tweeted details about his wife's business to "shut me up". Hayden, who has a history of commencing legal actions against those who cross her, has sued.
She claims that Linehan is a transphobe who publicised confidential information by referring to her former male identities in his tweets. She told RollOnFriday, "My right to not reveal that link has been removed from me forever now". Hayden maintains a public YouTube channel which included several videos featuring her as a man and which included her male name in their titles. However she deleted them from the platform this week. Hayden told RollOnFriday, "The videos were published many years ago long before my formal transition", and that until recently "nowhere within the public domain was there any document saying Tony Halliday/Steven Hayden is now Stephanie Hayden".
The transgender lawyer who sued a transsexual solicitor is now suing Father Ted writer Graham Linehan for defamation and harassment, as well as for misuse of private information.
Linehan has been a vocal opponent of transgender activists' attempts to expand the definition of 'woman' to include people with penises. After clashing with Stephanie Hayden on Twitter, last week he told The Times that Hayden was a "dangerous troll" who tweeted details about his wife's business to "shut me up". Hayden, who has a history of commencing legal actions against those who cross her, has sued.
She claims that Linehan is a transphobe who publicised confidential information by referring to her former male identities in his tweets. She told RollOnFriday, "My right to not reveal that link has been removed from me forever now". Hayden maintains a public YouTube channel which included several videos featuring her as a man and which included her male name in their titles. However she deleted them from the platform this week. Hayden told RollOnFriday, "The videos were published many years ago long before my formal transition", and that until recently "nowhere within the public domain was there any document saying Tony Halliday/Steven Hayden is now Stephanie Hayden".
The transgender lawyer who sued a transsexual solicitor is now suing Father Ted writer Graham Linehan for defamation and harassment, as well as for misuse of private information.
Linehan has been a vocal opponent of transgender activists' attempts to expand the definition of 'woman' to include people with penises. After clashing with Stephanie Hayden on Twitter, last week he told The Times that Hayden was a "dangerous troll" who tweeted details about his wife's business to "shut me up". Hayden, who has a history of commencing legal actions against those who cross her, has sued.
She claims that Linehan is a transphobe who publicised confidential information by referring to her former male identities in his tweets. She told RollOnFriday, "My right to not reveal that link has been removed from me forever now". Hayden maintains a public YouTube channel which included several videos featuring her as a man and which included her male name in their titles. However she deleted them from the platform this week. Hayden told RollOnFriday, "The videos were published many years ago long before my formal transition", and that until recently "nowhere within the public domain was there any document saying Tony Halliday/Steven Hayden is now Stephanie Hayden".
F1: just a reminder I've made exactly the same bet as last time, Bottas each way for fastest qualifier, 5.5 (third the odds top 2), or 5.75 with boost. Doubt he'll get pole but a decent shot of being second.
Also interesting, though I didn't tip it, is Hamilton top third practice at 2.5. Given he topped both prior sessions by some distance, it may be a little short.
Who has someone they know in their contacts as Michael Gove MP?? Not like there are lots of them
I think you set your own name in that app?
You set everyone's display names (although it suggests one). You can see what that looks like with Vicky Ford. The person who took the screenshot included the Mp in their contact.
The transgender lawyer who sued a transsexual solicitor is now suing Father Ted writer Graham Linehan for defamation and harassment, as well as for misuse of private information.
Linehan has been a vocal opponent of transgender activists' attempts to expand the definition of 'woman' to include people with penises. After clashing with Stephanie Hayden on Twitter, last week he told The Times that Hayden was a "dangerous troll" who tweeted details about his wife's business to "shut me up". Hayden, who has a history of commencing legal actions against those who cross her, has sued.
She claims that Linehan is a transphobe who publicised confidential information by referring to her former male identities in his tweets. She told RollOnFriday, "My right to not reveal that link has been removed from me forever now". Hayden maintains a public YouTube channel which included several videos featuring her as a man and which included her male name in their titles. However she deleted them from the platform this week. Hayden told RollOnFriday, "The videos were published many years ago long before my formal transition", and that until recently "nowhere within the public domain was there any document saying Tony Halliday/Steven Hayden is now Stephanie Hayden".
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Yes, the key difference is that Roger and Edmund aren't advocating, on a daily basis, a course of action which would visit a substantial economic shock on the UK.
Who has someone they know in their contacts as Michael Gove MP?? Not like there are lots of them
I think you set your own name in that app?
You set everyone's display names (although it suggests one). You can see what that looks like with Vicky Ford. The person who took the screenshot included the Mp in their contact.
I thought the Vicky entry was the app matching a number with an existing contact in your phone book, hence the tilde?
Who has someone they know in their contacts as Michael Gove MP?? Not like there are lots of them
I think you set your own name in that app?
You set everyone's display names (although it suggests one). You can see what that looks like with Vicky Ford. The person who took the screenshot included the Mp in their contact.
I thought the Vicky entry was the app matching a number with an existing contact in your phone book, hence the tilde?
P(lays on phone)
The bit after the tilde is the details they've put in to their own profile. Effectively Whatsapp prompts you to add the number as a contact or attach it to an existing contract, at which point it wakes the name of your contact.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
I didn't realise that 2 CV stood for 'deux (2) chevaux' till I went to France recently.
The most shocking thing about that post is that you're obviously completely unacquainted with the Lloyd Cole & The Commotions album Rattlesnakes, which is a stone cold classic.
Name a Lloyd Cole album that isn't a stone cold classic !
Who has someone they know in their contacts as Michael Gove MP?? Not like there are lots of them
I think you set your own name in that app?
You set everyone's display names (although it suggests one). You can see what that looks like with Vicky Ford. The person who took the screenshot included the Mp in their contact.
I thought the Vicky entry was the app matching a number with an existing contact in your phone book, hence the tilde?
P(lays on phone)
The bit after the tilde is the details they've put in to their own profile. Effectively Whatsapp prompts you to add the number as a contact or attach it to an existing contract, at which point it wakes the name of your contact.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I’m no longer with it when it comes to modern gizmos.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Yes, the key difference is that Roger and Edmund aren't advocating, on a daily basis, a course of action which would visit a substantial economic shock on the UK.
So what? PB posters aren't in public office, by and large. Nor is this community particularly 'of the people'. If our criteria is that all postings must both make sense and be beneficial to the UK, we'd have to ban all the Corbynites for starters.
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
I didn't realise that 2 CV stood for 'deux (2) chevaux' till I went to France recently.
The most shocking thing about that post is that you're obviously completely unacquainted with the Lloyd Cole & The Commotions album Rattlesnakes, which is a stone cold classic.
Name a Lloyd Cole album that isn't a stone cold classic !
Rattlesnakes has to be one of the greatest debut albums of all time.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Yes, the key difference is that Roger and Edmund aren't advocating, on a daily basis, a course of action which would visit a substantial economic shock on the UK.
So what?
The point is you can only post from abroad if I agree with what you are saying.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Contributions from overseas are of course welcome; sometimes even it is easier to see things in a more balanced perspective from a distance.
What is peculiarly objectionable about archer's incessant urging of us to take the riskiest path is that he continually uses phrases such as "we..." this and "we.." that, as if he is somehow in the thick of things, whereas the reality is that he could hardly be less affected by the fallout from Brexit.
He is akin to the fellow at the clifftop urging his friend to jump off by saying "don't worry, we'll be fine", when he has no intention himself of going anywhere near the edge,
If the position of James Bond is vacant, I note merely that I scrub up well in a dinner suit.
Not sure your driving skills are quite up to chasing the baddies in an Aston Martin on a mountain road with a glamorous blonde tied up in the passenger seat, though.
I don't recall ever seeing James Bond reverse.
Frequently, and at speed. God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
I didn't realise that 2 CV stood for 'deux (2) chevaux' till I went to France recently.
The most shocking thing about that post is that you're obviously completely unacquainted with the Lloyd Cole & The Commotions album Rattlesnakes, which is a stone cold classic.
Name a Lloyd Cole album that isn't a stone cold classic !
Rattlesnakes has to be one of the greatest debut albums of all time.
A rare degree of consensus emerges on pb. Lloyd Cole must have one of the most subterranean cult followings of any music act out there.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Contributions from overseas are of course welcome; sometimes even it is easier to see things in a more balanced perspective from a distance.
What is peculiarly objectionable about archer's incessant urging of us to take the riskiest path is that he continually uses phrases such as "we..." this and "we.." that, as if he is somehow in the thick of things, whereas the reality is that he could hardly be less affected by the fallout from Brexit.
He is akin to the fellow at the clifftop urging his friend to jump off by saying "don't worry, we'll be fine", when he has no intention himself of going anywhere near the edge,
I grasp the thrust of the objection. However, it's still a dumb argument to make. No poster here is doing anything more than howling into the ether (satisfying though it might be). I might place more credence in peoples' opprobrium if our Antipodean friend was a serving member of HMG. As it happens, I don't particularly care for Mr Archer's posts simply on the basis of didacticism alone. However, I defend etc.
It's worth remembering that one doesn't have to be geographically distant from these shores to avoid the consequences of either Brexit or a Corbyn government.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Yes, the key difference is that Roger and Edmund aren't advocating, on a daily basis, a course of action which would visit a substantial economic shock on the UK.
So what?
The point is you can only post from abroad if I agree with what you are saying.
The issue is not necessarily the DUP. It is the 'UK to concede that backstop cannot be time-limited'. That will doom any deal May tries to execute. It will be all too easy (and true) to say that it is a deliberate ploy to make sure we never can actually leave.
As before, Leavers are now putting their hopes in Barnier continuing to be an unreasonable little prick. Ireland may like the all-UK backstop because it gets them off the hook they crafted for themselves, but Barnier has always hated it, because it basically offers backdoor UK access into the SM without respecting the four 'freedoms' (inverted commas necessary when saying that!). Olly Robbins plan all along was to use the backstop to achieve backdoor SM access and Barnier knows it.
So I will expect that Barnier will insist that if the backstop is executed the UK will have to observe FOM and pay money which will make it impossible for May to pass off - not that it will be possible anyway.
May's announcements over the last few weeks on adopting the Migration Advisory Council's changes to end FOM after the transition surely makes never-ending FOM impossible politically?
It won’t happen now. If May signs this ‘deal’ Barnier will spend the next two years messing about on the trade deal. Then, at the end of the transition, we will threaten another cliff edge (remember the backstop is ONLY at the EUs option, not the UKs). He will say that if he implements the backstop there will be no trade deal for GB because it is once again cherry picking the SM.
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Another bold and brave call for a Diamond Hard WTO NI border-building Brexit, delivered from the safe pulpit of suburban Alice Springs.
Please stop this shit. We have Roger pontificating from France, Edmund in Japan and so forth. We even have occasional contributions from Johnny Foreigner, and all are welcome to do so.
Yes, the key difference is that Roger and Edmund aren't advocating, on a daily basis, a course of action which would visit a substantial economic shock on the UK.
They don't see it that way. And even if they did, perfectly reasonable to prioritise non-economic criteria.
Personally, I enjoy reading the contributions of non UK resident posters. Good to have an international perspective.
Comments
I see your obsession with the Scottish housing market carries on unabated. Strangely there doesn't seem to be any mention in the piece of increased income tax rates for higher earners as a cause.
Any theories on the London downturn?
'London house prices fall again as stamp duty and Brexit fears bite'
https://tinyurl.com/y9qh3n2r
So he will force the Government to adopt FOM and payments for access. And the outcome will be EEA/CU as planned.
That is why May’s strategy is both stupid and dishonest. There should never be any agreement until the EU provide a binding trade deal. Until then we need to trade on WTO.
Sophistry really.
even in common-law systems, the hearsay rule only applies to actual trials. Hearsay is admissible as evidence in many other judicial proceedings, such as grand jury deliberations, probation hearings, parole revocation hearings, and proceedings before administrative bodies...
I think when Kavanaugh says "This is a smear, plain and simple" he is doing more than saying the event as described did not happen. He is saying that Ramirez is deliberately making this up to damage him, which is rather more than just saying she is mistaken.
God lord, he even drove a 2CV once. Wrecked it, of course.
The entire thing was shite from start to finish.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/05/europe/interpol-president-meng-hongwei-disappearance-intl/index.html?adkey=bn
I note Chris Evans has just hung up his Captain America shield... how’s his English accent ?
Gillian Anderson (as Scully) sometimes had to stand on a box to be in the same shot as Fox Mulder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfmChkOXgvw
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/05/labour-asks-regulator-reopen-cemetery-coverage-complaint-ipso
1 cm shorter than Daniel Craig.....
Why did they not make HIM stand on a box? Sexist, misogynistic so and sos.......
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1048200001959153664
(Though Moore’s tailoring seemed to be stuck in the late 70s)
Clever, but obvious.
The transgender lawyer who sued a transsexual solicitor is now suing Father Ted writer Graham Linehan for defamation and harassment, as well as for misuse of private information.
Linehan has been a vocal opponent of transgender activists' attempts to expand the definition of 'woman' to include people with penises. After clashing with Stephanie Hayden on Twitter, last week he told The Times that Hayden was a "dangerous troll" who tweeted details about his wife's business to "shut me up". Hayden, who has a history of commencing legal actions against those who cross her, has sued.
She claims that Linehan is a transphobe who publicised confidential information by referring to her former male identities in his tweets. She told RollOnFriday, "My right to not reveal that link has been removed from me forever now". Hayden maintains a public YouTube channel which included several videos featuring her as a man and which included her male name in their titles. However she deleted them from the platform this week. Hayden told RollOnFriday, "The videos were published many years ago long before my formal transition", and that until recently "nowhere within the public domain was there any document saying Tony Halliday/Steven Hayden is now Stephanie Hayden".
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-transgender-lawyer-sues-father-ted-writer-graham-linehan
F1: just a reminder I've made exactly the same bet as last time, Bottas each way for fastest qualifier, 5.5 (third the odds top 2), or 5.75 with boost. Doubt he'll get pole but a decent shot of being second.
Also interesting, though I didn't tip it, is Hamilton top third practice at 2.5. Given he topped both prior sessions by some distance, it may be a little short.
I thought the Vicky entry was the app matching a number with an existing contact in your phone book, hence the tilde?
https://twitter.com/talkSPORT/status/1048165908395384832
The bit after the tilde is the details they've put in to their own profile. Effectively Whatsapp prompts you to add the number as a contact or attach it to an existing contract, at which point it wakes the name of your contact.
Rattlesnakes has to be one of the greatest debut albums of all time.
To alleged tax evasion, for example:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/oct/04/fan-bingbing-mysterious-disappearance-chinese-film-star-elite
What is peculiarly objectionable about archer's incessant urging of us to take the riskiest path is that he continually uses phrases such as "we..." this and "we.." that, as if he is somehow in the thick of things, whereas the reality is that he could hardly be less affected by the fallout from Brexit.
He is akin to the fellow at the clifftop urging his friend to jump off by saying "don't worry, we'll be fine", when he has no intention himself of going anywhere near the edge,
https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1048220468480757760
It's worth remembering that one doesn't have to be geographically distant from these shores to avoid the consequences of either Brexit or a Corbyn government.
Personally, I enjoy reading the contributions of non UK resident posters. Good to have an international perspective.