Mr. W, would explain why one moment Merkel's attending a 'never again' commemoration of the Holocaust, then signing a deal with the Land of Concentration Camps.
As to more restrictions, AAUI the nation says "bring it on".
I have noticed that if anything mask wearing has increased this week.
That's just the way the UK rolls right now. We are frit and won't be unfrit by the winter.
Eh? Both my pub visits – zero masks. Sainsbury's 50% masks. The notion that mask wearing has increased simply doesn't fit the reality... although you are probably just trolling?
Not at all. Sainsburys and the Co op more masks than previously.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
Seems reasonable to me.
Yes I can see how it would.
Well that is because both you and Fox are deluded right wing conspiracy nuts.
Is he talking about Ronnie Jackson? If so @contrarian might want to investigate his background a bit more before concluding that his opinion adds very much to the “debate”.
There is almost no debate, is there? Biden is fine and lets find out what ice cream he likes. That's the standard at most places, isn't it?
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
That led to a majority of 80 and ended the Brexit crisis that had paralyzed the country for two years.
One could argue that "the Brexit Crisis" is still very much alive and kicking. The result of a majority of 80 under Johnson is not necessarily in the long term interest of the Tory Party. The Tories USP used to be competent government. If he completely blows that USP, which I think he will (and possibly is close to achieving already) then his election as leader may well prove to be a dark day. We will have to see.
This is well worth a read about how the Spectator has captured the Tory party and, in so doing, has severed most of its traditional links:
‘… the Spectator is good at spectating, offering witty, ironic and often well-written commentary on the world, traditionally with the tone of a rather embittered ageing man, a bit drunk in an upmarket London bar, lamenting the ways of the world…’
Everyone does negotiate international treaties in that way. Look at the Swiss, they've been renegotiating and in dispute as to how treaties operate for decades.
Johnson is acting to represent the UK's best interest not the EU's. That's how every country operates around the globe.
Putting a border down the Irish Sea is acting to represent "the UK's best interest" how exactly?
It is doing precisely the opposite. It is undermining the UK.
It allowed Boris to get his feet under the table at Number 10.
It allowed Dominic to establish himself as the Prime Minister's Brain.
One or both of those points was far more important.
Everyone does negotiate international treaties in that way. Look at the Swiss, they've been renegotiating and in dispute as to how treaties operate for decades.
Johnson is acting to represent the UK's best interest not the EU's. That's how every country operates around the globe.
Putting a border down the Irish Sea is acting to represent "the UK's best interest" how exactly?
It is doing precisely the opposite. It is undermining the UK.
It allowed Boris to get his feet under the table at Number 10.
It allowed Dominic to establish himself as the Prime Minister's Brain.
One or both of those points was far more important.
Please refer to the point in one of my posts above.
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
Robert Browning also used it, thinking it was another word for a nun’s wimple:
‘Then owls and bats Cowls and twats Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
So what is the heart of the problem? It is not the great Ulster sausage famine. It does not lie in the complexities of phytosanitary standards or the mechanisms of legal interpretation – all of which could be solved with pragmatism and mutual trust. When this problem is dissected, the message written on its heart will be: Boris Johnson is constitutionally incapable of accepting the relationship between cause and effect
Wrong. What is at the heart of the problem is that the EU and the UK want a good relationship in this new situation but that the EU assumes it is OK for the UK to bend its red lines over UK sovereignty and integrity but not OK for the EU to bend its red lines over the single market forbidding entry to high quality products with equivalent standards.
The RoI and UK are sovereign states, the EU is an elaborate trade association. Its elevation into a body that could give sovereign states the runaround is one of the reasons Brexit won the referendum. They are not learning.
It is far simpler than that. The UK was part of something that has red lines which apply to everyone who isn't part of it. We chose to depart, create our own red lines which clash with the EU's lines, then complain that the EU are being inflexible.
We knew their position when we left. Nothing is new or unknown. We demanded 3rd country status and now complain about our treatment as a 3rd country.
If we want to trade with any trading block whether it be sovereign state or supranational we have to follow the rules of that area. Jaguar have to build cars to American spec to sell them in America. The UK will have to supply products to EEA spec to sell them in the EEA. Why should we expect the other side to change or drop their rules because we say so? Does anyone do that?
Yes.
1 Because Ireland is a special case. 2 Because politics is pragmatic. Machiavelli is a better guide than Buddha or the Quakers over how it is to be done. Sadly. 3 Because there is current equivalence in food production standards. We would not think of questioning EU food products. The opposite is also true. 4 Because the expectation that the UK compromise its internal market over NI in neither more nor less realistic than the EU doing so. And the UK and RoI are states, the EU is a trade association. 5 Because it is in the interests of RoI to compromise.
Even if you were right, surely we had a responsibility to agree these issues before we signed a binding treaty that included the Northern Ireland protocol, rather than after the event? Reneging on the protocol, or expecting it to be renegotiated after seven months, or signing it knowing it could not be implemented, seems to many of us to be pure bad faith rather than Machiavellian.
Absolutely not the case whatsoever.
Renegotiations happen all the time, its part and parcel of how life operates. If you agree a salary last year are you expected to then be bound to the same salary five years later? Or can you renegotiate your package annually seeking pay rises every year - if you're able to get them?
Is the EU still bound by the Treaty of Rome unamended? Or Maastricht Treaty unamended? Or have further treaties like Lisbon, Nice etc amended the rules.
The UK is not bound not to seek renegotiations, its perfectly within its rights to renegotiate whatever it doesn't like, at any time it chooses to do so. The UK is also not bound not to exercise Article 16 - Article 16 is literally a part of the Treaty the EU ratified and it is fully a part of international law on that basis so the UK exercising Article 16 if we choose to do so is a good faith action within the law, not a breach of the law.
If everyone negotiated international treaties in the way that Johnson did this one there would soon be no international treaties.
Everyone does negotiate international treaties in that way. Look at the Swiss, they've been renegotiating and in dispute as to how treaties operate for decades.
Johnson is acting to represent the UK's best interest not the EU's. That's how every country operates around the globe.
Nonsense. A Bad Deal is one you find you can't live with as soon as you've signed it. Johnson thus did a Bad Deal. Why? Because the choice was this Bad Deal or No Deal and No Deal wasn't a real world option. So he did the Bad Deal and now seeks to renege on it. This is the situation. Not interested in hearing any drivel from you or anybody else to the contrary.
Kinabalu is absolutely correct. There was no serious choice in the unique circumstances to do a bad deal. And of course no serious choice but to try to redo it now.
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
Robert Browning also used it, thinking it was another word for a nun’s wimple:
‘Then owls and bats Cowls and twats Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
Yes this is a great story.
Apparently someone did eventually point out twat’s actual meaning to Browning, but by then it was too late.
That led to a majority of 80 and ended the Brexit crisis that had paralyzed the country for two years.
One could argue that "the Brexit Crisis" is still very much alive and kicking. The result of a majority of 80 under Johnson is not necessarily in the long term interest of the Tory Party. The Tories USP used to be competent government. If he completely blows that USP, which I think he will (and possibly is close to achieving already) then his election as leader may well prove to be a dark day. We will have to see.
This is well worth a read about how the Spectator has captured the Tory party and, in so doing, has severed most of its traditional links:
‘… the Spectator is good at spectating, offering witty, ironic and often well-written commentary on the world, traditionally with the tone of a rather embittered ageing man, a bit drunk in an upmarket London bar, lamenting the ways of the world…’
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
Seems reasonable to me.
Yes I can see how it would.
Well that is because both you and Fox are deluded right wing conspiracy nuts.
Is he talking about Ronnie Jackson? If so @contrarian might want to investigate his background a bit more before concluding that his opinion adds very much to the “debate”.
There is almost no debate, is there? Biden is fine and lets find out what ice cream he likes. That's the standard at most places, isn't it?
Not much. But come back when you see Fox raising doubts about Trump’s mental state - somebody who it appears is being required to take regular basic cognitative tests and boasts in interviews how well he’s been doing in them because they are “pretty tough”.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
Robert Browning also used it, thinking it was another word for a nun’s wimple:
‘Then owls and bats Cowls and twats Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
Yes this is a great story.
Apparently someone did eventually point out twat’s actual meaning to Browning, but by then it was too late.
Apparently he misunderstood a satirical verse from 1660 "They talk’t of his having a Cardinalls Hat / They’d send him as soon an Old Nuns Twat."
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
Mr. Topping, mildly surprised, but of course delighted, to be asked.
First lap Verstappen was on pole, Hamilton started 2nd. The Briton got the better start but it wasn't quite enough to pass, so he was all over the back of the Dutchman.
Come turn 9 (I think) Hamilton was wider than he should have been, and this caused contact, which ended up putting Verstappen out of the race.
I don't view it as malicious, but as a mistake. I do take the view it was Hamilton's fault and find it baffling that some blame Verstappen for being hit from behind (Hamilton's front left made contact with Verstappen's rear right). I do think the 10s penalty was very soft.
This photo compares Hamilton's car placement at the same corner versus Leclerc and Verstappen. The difference is pretty plain to see.
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
Robert Browning also used it, thinking it was another word for a nun’s wimple:
‘Then owls and bats Cowls and twats Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
THat rings a bell, and yes here's another one, Arthur Hugh Clough, making the mistake of believing what a local tells him a Gaelic phrasde means before publishing it without checking
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
Seems reasonable to me.
Yes I can see how it would.
Well that is because both you and Fox are deluded right wing conspiracy nuts.
Is he talking about Ronnie Jackson? If so @contrarian might want to investigate his background a bit more before concluding that his opinion adds very much to the “debate”.
There is almost no debate, is there? Biden is fine and lets find out what ice cream he likes. That's the standard at most places, isn't it?
Not much. But come back when you see Fox raising doubts about Trump’s mental state - somebody who it appears is being required to take regular basic cognitative tests and boasts in interviews how well he’s been doing in them because they are “pretty tough”.
Well, if the standard first orientation question is, who is President of the United States, I can see why he would have a problem.
What both of them show is that this really weird gereatrification of American politics is a serious mistake and it is time they went back to candidates in their late 40s with some experience but also some stamina and energy for a seriously tough job.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Strange indeed. I doubt I have watched hours of BBC this calendar year.
If only Scotland could last longer in the football....
Ouch. In fairness their football coverage was better than ITVs but that is the ultimate low bar. In cricket I chose to watch Sky.
The last thing I really enjoyed that was BBC related was the documentary series OJ Made in America. It was outstanding but I am not sure if it was ever shown on the terrestrial channel, I got it through the iPlayer. Absolutely none of their drama, light entertainment etc attracts me at all. I tried line of duty but gave up in the first series.
I do tend to go to the BBC for major news stories but not often. I wouldn't miss the TV channels at all. The radio I would.
Having been spoiled by Netflix and now Amazon, I agree their drama is rarely any use, too cliched and too much signposting for the audience. "Time" was good but again suffered from those flaws. Their period drama is probably excellent but not something I would ever watch.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
Have you checked out the BBC over the past year or so?
It has been a government channel to disseminate, without criticism or comment, whatever message the government has wanted to put out on Covid.
Err have you heard of iSAGE? BBC have absolutely provided time for and against the govts measures. The criticism should be they have allowed lots of time to partisans on either side, but not enough in depth education of the issues from subject experts.
Mr. Topping, mildly surprised, but of course delighted, to be asked.
First lap Verstappen was on pole, Hamilton started 2nd. The Briton got the better start but it wasn't quite enough to pass, so he was all over the back of the Dutchman.
Come turn 9 (I think) Hamilton was wider than he should have been, and this caused contact, which ended up putting Verstappen out of the race.
I don't view it as malicious, but as a mistake. I do take the view it was Hamilton's fault and find it baffling that some blame Verstappen for being hit from behind (Hamilton's front left made contact with Verstappen's rear right). I do think the 10s penalty was very soft.
This photo compares Hamilton's car placement at the same corner versus Leclerc and Verstappen. The difference is pretty plain to see.
What I think is missing in that photo is where Leclerc and Verstappen were at the beginning of the corner. I believe Verstappen started far further to the left than Leclerc did.
I wonder if there is a figure for the subsample from the 5 million+ who have applied for settled status from the EU countries?
I am doubtful whether Labour can win an election on those figures; if that is the nature of their support it hardly encourages middling patriots to join them.
This is fantastic. Real-world data out of Canada shows just ONE dose of AstraZeneca’s vaccine is highly effective against preventing hospitalization and/or death caused by SARS-CoV-2 VOCs.
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
I don’t agree with this.
The ERG opposed it because they wanted an immediate departure from the customs union.
Remainers opposed it because they wished to see a second referendum.
Both reasons, which you may or may not agree with, are at least logical and presumably advanced to protect the country.
Mr. Topping, mildly surprised, but of course delighted, to be asked.
First lap Verstappen was on pole, Hamilton started 2nd. The Briton got the better start but it wasn't quite enough to pass, so he was all over the back of the Dutchman.
Come turn 9 (I think) Hamilton was wider than he should have been, and this caused contact, which ended up putting Verstappen out of the race.
I don't view it as malicious, but as a mistake. I do take the view it was Hamilton's fault and find it baffling that some blame Verstappen for being hit from behind (Hamilton's front left made contact with Verstappen's rear right). I do think the 10s penalty was very soft.
This photo compares Hamilton's car placement at the same corner versus Leclerc and Verstappen. The difference is pretty plain to see.
Thanks v much. Mistake I have difficulty in believing but you are the expert! Could it be that Hamilton knew exactly what he was doing and might have been fighting fire with fire?
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
Robert Browning also used it, thinking it was another word for a nun’s wimple:
‘Then owls and bats Cowls and twats Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
Does that mean he married one of the Barratts of T**t Street?
I know, I know. I used to work in a building on the corner of Queen Annes St. and Wimpole St.
Up in the Cotswolds for a dog event tomorrow; Clarkson’s farm shop has become such an attraction that there is a very long queue to get in even on a weekday afternoon.
This is fantastic. Real-world data out of Canada shows just ONE dose of AstraZeneca’s vaccine is highly effective against preventing hospitalization and/or death caused by SARS-CoV-2 VOCs.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
Seems reasonable to me.
Yes I can see how it would.
Well that is because both you and Fox are deluded right wing conspiracy nuts.
Is he talking about Ronnie Jackson? If so @contrarian might want to investigate his background a bit more before concluding that his opinion adds very much to the “debate”.
There is almost no debate, is there? Biden is fine and lets find out what ice cream he likes. That's the standard at most places, isn't it?
Not much. But come back when you see Fox raising doubts about Trump’s mental state - somebody who it appears is being required to take regular basic cognitative tests and boasts in interviews how well he’s been doing in them because they are “pretty tough”.
I think that is unfair on Trump. Last week he finally completed the really tough jigsaw puzzle he has been working on since losing the election. He was very pleased to get it done so quickly as it said 3-5 years on the box.
Good article from Finlan O'Toole, linked earlier, and good precis from @Gardenwalker on NI.
I must say my faith in the good intentions of the EU towards the island of Ireland have been severely shaken with vaccine border-gate but yes, at its core, the UK chose to separate out NI from GB rather than align with the EU. And yes, Boris is a useless, solipsistic, lying, ignorant twat*.
What does the asterisk signify, pray? A new and improved Mark of twat, or what?
Ha yes sorry I was going to add that I am using this in the sense of not being part of a woman's body because that is not the common usage of twat imo whereas some think that it is a direct reference.
Thank you; I am illuminated. Actually, I wonder if the PB keyboard has a male zoological symbol on it (= astrological Mars symbol)? That would be quite helpful.
Of course I hesitate to google the word "twat".
There is always Twatt in Orkney. Which, as Wikipedia helpfully explains at once, is "Not to be confused with Twatt, Shetland." I think we discussed that particular variety on PB a few years back - including the fact that it was a Fleet Air Arm base, under that name: RNAS Twatt.
The etymological derivation of twat is "clearing in a forest" (the same as the placename Thwaite) which I always find amusing.
Robert Browning also used it, thinking it was another word for a nun’s wimple:
‘Then owls and bats Cowls and twats Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
Yes this is a great story.
Apparently someone did eventually point out twat’s actual meaning to Browning, but by then it was too late.
Apparently he misunderstood a satirical verse from 1660 "They talk’t of his having a Cardinalls Hat / They’d send him as soon an Old Nuns Twat."
And so we ended up with an early version of The Owl and the Pussy.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
Have you checked out the BBC over the past year or so?
It has been a government channel to disseminate, without criticism or comment, whatever message the government has wanted to put out on Covid.
Err have you heard of iSAGE? BBC have absolutely provided time for and against the govts measures. The criticism should be they have allowed lots of time to partisans on either side, but not enough in depth education of the issues from subject experts.
Nah you haven't been looking properly. They repeated verbatim the government's position on this as though it was a Public Information Film. They found instance after instance (perhaps all of them, given the numbers) of fit, healthy 28-yr olds struck down by Covid, they have put forward the government's position wholly as presented.
iSAGE? Weren't they criticising from a more extreme/authoritarian position? So in fact not challenging the government at all.
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
The is opportunism and then there is raw and rabid sociopathic self-aggrandisement.
Up in the Cotswolds for a dog event tomorrow; Clarkson’s farm shop has become such an attraction that there is a very long queue to get in even on a weekday afternoon.
I never understand the public fascination with stuff like this.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
Have you checked out the BBC over the past year or so?
It has been a government channel to disseminate, without criticism or comment, whatever message the government has wanted to put out on Covid.
Not convinced. I don't often hear it disseminating messages without either comment or alternative voices.
I rather wish it would stick more to its news gathering operation and stop treating opinion as news. What a government says/does is news, not opinion, because they have the power to implement it. Voters opinions are the ones which count.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
Have you checked out the BBC over the past year or so?
It has been a government channel to disseminate, without criticism or comment, whatever message the government has wanted to put out on Covid.
Err have you heard of iSAGE? BBC have absolutely provided time for and against the govts measures. The criticism should be they have allowed lots of time to partisans on either side, but not enough in depth education of the issues from subject experts.
Nah you haven't been looking properly. They repeated verbatim the government's position on this as though it was a Public Information Film. They found instance after instance (perhaps all of them, given the numbers) of fit, healthy 28-yr olds struck down by Covid, they have put forward the government's position wholly as presented.
iSAGE? Weren't they criticising from a more extreme/authoritarian position? So in fact not challenging the government at all.
iSAGE not criticising the govt at all, you hear it all on pb.com! Perhaps it is the heat.....
Mr. eek, he was defending, and it's a right hand corner.
I have to admit to being amused by the 'gotcha' line of some on Twitter posting photos showing Verstappen turning right. Into a right hand corner. It's a pretty traditional tactic taken by drivers.
Mr. Topping, I should say that quite a few do think it's purely a racing incident (unworthy of penalty), but disagree with that strongly.
I don't think it was a deliberate collision but I do think Hamilton took a decision to try and be more aggressive. He cocked it up and got extremely lucky in that he suffered no lasting repercussions and his only rival ended up in the wall (with a hefty 51G impact).
Mr. Topping, mildly surprised, but of course delighted, to be asked.
First lap Verstappen was on pole, Hamilton started 2nd. The Briton got the better start but it wasn't quite enough to pass, so he was all over the back of the Dutchman.
Come turn 9 (I think) Hamilton was wider than he should have been, and this caused contact, which ended up putting Verstappen out of the race.
I don't view it as malicious, but as a mistake. I do take the view it was Hamilton's fault and find it baffling that some blame Verstappen for being hit from behind (Hamilton's front left made contact with Verstappen's rear right). I do think the 10s penalty was very soft.
This photo compares Hamilton's car placement at the same corner versus Leclerc and Verstappen. The difference is pretty plain to see.
serlewis was perfectly entitled to go for a gap which was definitely there. BUT - he wasn't going to make the corner as he was too fast and on the wrong line. Not malicious, but a little desperate.
Max probably should have backed out of it, watched Lewis understeer off and then retain the lead. But far easier to say with hindsight than it would be in the midst of battle.
First google and it is only one result. Not read the whole thing through he might be a far right/left loon for all I know. But he agrees with me so here he is!
"I argue that, far from holding the government to account (as it ought to be doing) through asking critical and searching questions at the daily briefings and by undertaking pointed investigative journalism into all manner of questionable activities that have occurred during the period, the BBC has essentially been a lapdog (rather than a watchdog) of the powerful. By so doing, its public service mandate has once again been found wanting."
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
So what is the heart of the problem? It is not the great Ulster sausage famine. It does not lie in the complexities of phytosanitary standards or the mechanisms of legal interpretation – all of which could be solved with pragmatism and mutual trust. When this problem is dissected, the message written on its heart will be: Boris Johnson is constitutionally incapable of accepting the relationship between cause and effect
Wrong. What is at the heart of the problem is that the EU and the UK want a good relationship in this new situation but that the EU assumes it is OK for the UK to bend its red lines over UK sovereignty and integrity but not OK for the EU to bend its red lines over the single market forbidding entry to high quality products with equivalent standards.
The RoI and UK are sovereign states, the EU is an elaborate trade association. Its elevation into a body that could give sovereign states the runaround is one of the reasons Brexit won the referendum. They are not learning.
It is far simpler than that. The UK was part of something that has red lines which apply to everyone who isn't part of it. We chose to depart, create our own red lines which clash with the EU's lines, then complain that the EU are being inflexible.
We knew their position when we left. Nothing is new or unknown. We demanded 3rd country status and now complain about our treatment as a 3rd country.
If we want to trade with any trading block whether it be sovereign state or supranational we have to follow the rules of that area. Jaguar have to build cars to American spec to sell them in America. The UK will have to supply products to EEA spec to sell them in the EEA. Why should we expect the other side to change or drop their rules because we say so? Does anyone do that?
Yes.
1 Because Ireland is a special case. 2 Because politics is pragmatic. Machiavelli is a better guide than Buddha or the Quakers over how it is to be done. Sadly. 3 Because there is current equivalence in food production standards. We would not think of questioning EU food products. The opposite is also true. 4 Because the expectation that the UK compromise its internal market over NI in neither more nor less realistic than the EU doing so. And the UK and RoI are states, the EU is a trade association. 5 Because it is in the interests of RoI to compromise.
Even if you were right, surely we had a responsibility to agree these issues before we signed a binding treaty that included the Northern Ireland protocol, rather than after the event? Reneging on the protocol, or expecting it to be renegotiated after seven months, or signing it knowing it could not be implemented, seems to many of us to be pure bad faith rather than Machiavellian.
Absolutely not the case whatsoever.
Renegotiations happen all the time, its part and parcel of how life operates. If you agree a salary last year are you expected to then be bound to the same salary five years later? Or can you renegotiate your package annually seeking pay rises every year - if you're able to get them?
Is the EU still bound by the Treaty of Rome unamended? Or Maastricht Treaty unamended? Or have further treaties like Lisbon, Nice etc amended the rules.
The UK is not bound not to seek renegotiations, its perfectly within its rights to renegotiate whatever it doesn't like, at any time it chooses to do so. The UK is also not bound not to exercise Article 16 - Article 16 is literally a part of the Treaty the EU ratified and it is fully a part of international law on that basis so the UK exercising Article 16 if we choose to do so is a good faith action within the law, not a breach of the law.
If everyone negotiated international treaties in the way that Johnson did this one there would soon be no international treaties.
Everyone does negotiate international treaties in that way. Look at the Swiss, they've been renegotiating and in dispute as to how treaties operate for decades.
Johnson is acting to represent the UK's best interest not the EU's. That's how every country operates around the globe.
Nonsense. A Bad Deal is one you find you can't live with as soon as you've signed it. Johnson thus did a Bad Deal. Why? Because the choice was this Bad Deal or No Deal and No Deal wasn't a real world option. So he did the Bad Deal and now seeks to renege on it. This is the situation. Not interested in hearing any drivel from you or anybody else to the contrary.
Kinabalu is absolutely correct. There was no serious choice in the unique circumstances to do a bad deal. And of course no serious choice but to try to redo it now.
Fine. Spin it that way. We negotiated in bad faith to get out from behind the 8 ball. Question then being what put us there in the first place? Was it the laziness and short termism of Boris Johnson? Or was it the concept of Brexit itself given the GFA? Yesterday's header referring.
Up in the Cotswolds for a dog event tomorrow; Clarkson’s farm shop has become such an attraction that there is a very long queue to get in even on a weekday afternoon.
Spoke to some friends whose family is the next door farm. They say the crowds have been absolutely crazy.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
You're not good at this. This logic is that Fox is not providing useful information on Biden's mental state. Other than for propaganda purposes.
No. If Fox wanted to spread propaganda they should be proclaiming Biden's mental acuity from the rooftops.
I mean, You and KJH would never believe that, because it came from Fox.
Your logic is rather screwed. The scenario you pose would never happen because Fox is extremely right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff. I assume you agree with this? Consequently any right minded person does not take any notice of anything they spew out. So they are never going to say Biden is a mental whizz kid are they, but if they did my next thought would be why are they doing this?
After all they never ever suggested Trump had a screw loose did they and he has a bucket full of loose screws.
a) Do you agree Fox is right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff?
b) if you agree with a) do you agree that anything they say about Biden might just be somewhat suspect?
If you don't agree with a) and b) and believe Fox is some mainstream independently reliable media source you are definitely in the Trump cult box of believing any old tripe.
Mr. Pioneers, that gap was always going to close. The error was purely Hamilton's. The pain was entirely Verstappen's.
Backing out of it when ahead is not only contrary to a driver's nature and job, it's very dangerous. The corner was Verstappen's. Hamilton screwed up and got lucky, not for the first time this season (his gravel expedition at one race, and the magic paddle failing when Verstappen also DNFed that race).
Edited extra bit: apologies, but I have to be going.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
You're not good at this. This logic is that Fox is not providing useful information on Biden's mental state. Other than for propaganda purposes.
No. If Fox wanted to spread propaganda they should be proclaiming Biden's mental acuity from the rooftops.
I mean, You and KJH would never believe that, because it came from Fox.
Your logic is rather screwed. The scenario you pose would never happen because Fox is extremely right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff. I assume you agree with this? Consequently any right minded person does not take any notice of anything they spew out. So they are never going to say Biden is a mental whizz kid are they, but if they did my next thought would be why are they doing this?
After all they never ever suggested Trump had a screw loose did they and he has a bucket full of loose screws.
a) Do you agree Fox is right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff?
b) if you agree with a) do you agree that anything they say about Biden might just be somewhat suspect?
If you don't agree with a) and b) and believe Fox is some mainstream independently reliable media source you are definitely in the Trump cult box of believing any old tripe.
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
What’s a ‘top’ uni? And what about in the UK? If (say) you do Classics at Oxford or English at Cambridge, would that count the same as chemistry at ICL?
By adding my three groupings and dividing by three I am a whisker under a mean of 49%, does that still make me a traitor? (Thank God for the "older Britons" category).
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
Great mistake not to recognise that Johnson is a supreme charlatan by all standards including those of politicians. Otherwise you give him a pass and become a collaborator in the debasement of public life that he is doing his level best to accelerate to warp factor 10.
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
Another beautiful day in God's country, warm with a little breeze, just perfect and I am off today. Lazy day in the garden with a good book and a few refreshments beckons.
Mr. Topping, mildly surprised, but of course delighted, to be asked.
First lap Verstappen was on pole, Hamilton started 2nd. The Briton got the better start but it wasn't quite enough to pass, so he was all over the back of the Dutchman.
Come turn 9 (I think) Hamilton was wider than he should have been, and this caused contact, which ended up putting Verstappen out of the race.
I don't view it as malicious, but as a mistake. I do take the view it was Hamilton's fault and find it baffling that some blame Verstappen for being hit from behind (Hamilton's front left made contact with Verstappen's rear right). I do think the 10s penalty was very soft.
This photo compares Hamilton's car placement at the same corner versus Leclerc and Verstappen. The difference is pretty plain to see.
serlewis was perfectly entitled to go for a gap which was definitely there. BUT - he wasn't going to make the corner as he was too fast and on the wrong line. Not malicious, but a little desperate.
Max probably should have backed out of it, watched Lewis understeer off and then retain the lead. But far easier to say with hindsight than it would be in the midst of battle.
I don't think that there is any doubt that MV was coming across the track to close the door on Lewis and force him to break as he went into the corner. Lewis didn't and that caused the accident. The question is really whether Max was entitled to shut the door in that way. I think on balance he probably was. He was ahead, Lewis was not, as he claimed, half way up the length of this car, and he effectively had right of way. But it was typically aggressive driving by Max and Lewis decided this time not to back off.
If there was blame to be allocated Lewis gets the major part but it seems a pretty typical first lap racing incident to me. Max will need to think a little more carefully before he tries to do that to Lewis again.
Mr. Pioneers, that gap was always going to close. The error was purely Hamilton's. The pain was entirely Verstappen's.
Backing out of it when ahead is not only contrary to a driver's nature and job, it's very dangerous. The corner was Verstappen's. Hamilton screwed up and got lucky, not for the first time this season (his gravel expedition at one race, and the magic paddle failing when Verstappen also DNFed that race).
Edited extra bit: apologies, but I have to be going.
If the corner was so obviously Verstappen's, why did he go defensive?
This is fantastic. Real-world data out of Canada shows just ONE dose of AstraZeneca’s vaccine is highly effective against preventing hospitalization and/or death caused by SARS-CoV-2 VOCs.
Up in the Cotswolds for a dog event tomorrow; Clarkson’s farm shop has become such an attraction that there is a very long queue to get in even on a weekday afternoon.
I never understand the public fascination with stuff like this.
My route took me near the farm so I thought I would drive past and have a look. But not to queue for half an hour to get into a farm shop when we have very good farm shops on the island.
I expect he can sell any old rubbish in the shop and it is doubtless a very nice earner.
Apologies if this has already been flagged, but if you haven't watched this clip of a 1991 G7 drinks reception, with HM the Queen, Margaret Thatcher, Ted Heath, John Major, James Baker, Princess Di, Francois Mitterand, Helmut Kohl, do so. It's quite remarkable:
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
What’s a ‘top’ uni? And what about in the UK? If (say) you do Classics at Oxford or English at Cambridge, would that count the same as chemistry at ICL?
Cambridge and Hull count, not sure about Oxford... (with apologies to Ben Elton)
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
Mr. Pioneers, that gap was always going to close. The error was purely Hamilton's. The pain was entirely Verstappen's.
Backing out of it when ahead is not only contrary to a driver's nature and job, it's very dangerous. The corner was Verstappen's. Hamilton screwed up and got lucky, not for the first time this season (his gravel expedition at one race, and the magic paddle failing when Verstappen also DNFed that race).
Edited extra bit: apologies, but I have to be going.
A racing incident Morris. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
Mr. Pioneers, that gap was always going to close. The error was purely Hamilton's. The pain was entirely Verstappen's.
Backing out of it when ahead is not only contrary to a driver's nature and job, it's very dangerous. The corner was Verstappen's. Hamilton screwed up and got lucky, not for the first time this season (his gravel expedition at one race, and the magic paddle failing when Verstappen also DNFed that race).
Edited extra bit: apologies, but I have to be going.
If the corner was so obviously Verstappen's, why did he go defensive?
because he was too far over going into the corner so needed to tighten things up.
Apologies if this has already been flagged, but if you haven't watched this clip of a 1991 G7 drinks reception, with HM the Queen, Margaret Thatcher, Ted Heath, John Major, James Baker, Princess Di, Francois Mitterand, Helmut Kohl, do so. It's quite remarkable:
The Queen's line of questioning about Saddam Hussein was quite interesting and it's a shame Ted Heath cut her off. Essentially she asked how he could cling onto power after having been defeated militarily and morally.
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
What’s a ‘top’ uni? And what about in the UK? If (say) you do Classics at Oxford or English at Cambridge, would that count the same as chemistry at ICL?
Cambridge and Hull count, not sure about Oxford... (with apologies to Ben Elton)
I was thinking more that those are weak departments in prestigious unis. In my experience, which admittedly is anecdotal rather than exhaustive, an English degree from Cambridge isn’t worth much in intellectual terms, nor a Classics degree from Oxford. But they might be rated at the same level as their scientific departments, which are undoubtedly world class.
And all unis have weak departments, while most unis have really strong departments as well. I don’t think anyone will ever get a job for being a graduate of Aber’s Maths department, but its International Politics department was regarded as the best in Europe.
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
"Boris" as you affectionately call him, is a particular type of politician. And, no, they are not all the same, thank God. There are honest politicians on both sides of the house. There are perhaps none who are so malignantly narcissistic and dishonest as Boris Johnson, certainly this side of the Atlantic. In that unique area, he is most definitely world class.
Anyway enough pungent punditry. Lovely day and I've just played golf. Best form for ages. 5 pars and 2 birdies in there. That's massive for me. Just a total 🙂🙂
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
"Boris" as you affectionately call him, is a particular type of politician. And, no, they are not all the same, thank God. There are honest politicians on both sides of the house. There are perhaps none who are so malignantly narcissistic and dishonest as Boris Johnson, certainly this side of the Atlantic. In that unique area, he is most definitely world class.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
You're not good at this. This logic is that Fox is not providing useful information on Biden's mental state. Other than for propaganda purposes.
No. If Fox wanted to spread propaganda they should be proclaiming Biden's mental acuity from the rooftops.
I mean, You and KJH would never believe that, because it came from Fox.
Your logic is rather screwed. The scenario you pose would never happen because Fox is extremely right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff. I assume you agree with this? Consequently any right minded person does not take any notice of anything they spew out. So they are never going to say Biden is a mental whizz kid are they, but if they did my next thought would be why are they doing this?
After all they never ever suggested Trump had a screw loose did they and he has a bucket full of loose screws.
a) Do you agree Fox is right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff?
b) if you agree with a) do you agree that anything they say about Biden might just be somewhat suspect?
If you don't agree with a) and b) and believe Fox is some mainstream independently reliable media source you are definitely in the Trump cult box of believing any old tripe.
No I agree that Fox is a right wing news channel, just as CNN is left leaning. I wouldn't dismiss a news item on either out of hand, simply because of the channel's affiliation, however.
I don't think that either CNN or Fox are propaganda, because these are commercial stations and people do not generally pay for propaganda, whatever their political affiliation.
I originally posted that item on Fox because it is indicative that the political volume about Biden's mental state is growing louder. It is becoming a bigger issue. And frankly, it is easy to see why, if you look at Biden's appearances (sadly - I feel sorry for the guy).
This has implications in betting terms. My reading of the situation is that the democrats put so much into simply beating Trump anyway and anyhow they did not think about how their candidates would perform in office.
And here we are, with a very poor President and an unpopular veep. Meanwhile the Republicans have seemingly hung together much better than I expected, and I think the Dems are very vulnerable to a counter attack now.
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
What’s a ‘top’ uni? And what about in the UK? If (say) you do Classics at Oxford or English at Cambridge, would that count the same as chemistry at ICL?
Cambridge and Hull count, not sure about Oxford... (with apologies to Ben Elton)
I was thinking more that those are weak departments in prestigious unis. In my experience, which admittedly is anecdotal rather than exhaustive, an English degree from Cambridge isn’t worth much in intellectual terms, nor a Classics degree from Oxford. But they might be rated at the same level as their scientific departments, which are undoubtedly world class.
And all unis have weak departments, while most unis have really strong departments as well. I don’t think anyone will ever get a job for being a graduate of Aber’s Maths department, but its International Politics department was regarded as the best in Europe.
When I was at Cardiff, we had Political theorist Dr Andrew Vincent, International politics Professor and friend of Hannah Arendt, Roy Jones (who really didn't like me). We had top SDP mover and shaker, the late, great Barry Jones (who did) and of course Dr Ann Robinson, later to become a bigwig at the IOD. All except Ann, at the top of their game.
But honestly, a politics degree from the University of Wales (pre-UDI) had a use? Torn up and hung from a nail in the outside privvy perhaps!
If you have graduated from a top global university then you will be free to move to the UK without a job offer under the new 'High Potential Individual Visa'.
It is a good idea in general, but probably needs refining. There are better ways to test high potential than just where someone went to University, which in most parts of the world is largely a function of how well off your parents are.
Mr. Pioneers, that gap was always going to close. The error was purely Hamilton's. The pain was entirely Verstappen's.
Backing out of it when ahead is not only contrary to a driver's nature and job, it's very dangerous. The corner was Verstappen's. Hamilton screwed up and got lucky, not for the first time this season (his gravel expedition at one race, and the magic paddle failing when Verstappen also DNFed that race).
Edited extra bit: apologies, but I have to be going.
If the corner was so obviously Verstappen's, why did he go defensive?
because he was too far over going into the corner so needed to tighten things up.
Just to be clear, by defensive I mean he weaved across to block the inside of the track. That's usually a sign that a driver isn't confident that they can just take the corner normally. Verstappen tried to have it both ways by taking the racing line at the end of the straight thinking that would have deterred Hamilton from having a go up the inside.
Apologies if this has already been flagged, but if you haven't watched this clip of a 1991 G7 drinks reception, with HM the Queen, Margaret Thatcher, Ted Heath, John Major, James Baker, Princess Di, Francois Mitterand, Helmut Kohl, do so. It's quite remarkable:
The Queen's line of questioning about Saddam Hussein was quite interesting and it's a shame Ted Heath cut her off. Essentially she asked how he could cling onto power after having been defeated militarily and morally.
Yes, amazing how Heath and Baker talk over her (especially as she was the most interesting of the three).
1. Is the agreement itself. It clearly doesn’t work, was never likely to work, and is punitive to GB-NI trade which from memory is the great a majority of trade relating to NI.
It urgently needs to replaced, and given that the U.K. has conceded a regulatory border in its own territory I have much sympathy with @Charles and @Philip_Thompson’s solutions which is effectively to leave it to the U.K. to police by exception.
2. Is the brazen bad faith of Johnson to: a) agree an unworkable deal b) ignore predictable warnings on said deal c) sell it to the country as “oven-ready” d) lie that it would avoid any kind of border between GB and NI e) u-turn on all of the above and blame the remainer parliament for making him do it.*
The EU are not innocent in this affair. They will need to move, if they care about the people on the island of Ireland.
But it is hard for them to do so as well when Boris and “Frosty” are pissing on their leg and telling them it is raining.
Remainers need to be more acute in their criticisms of the NIP. Leavers need to be more aware that Boris’s “Millwall diplomacy” is likely to be sub-optimal.
*Boris created his own trap by trashing May’s (better) deal; and refusing to concede any further delays. He therefore left new deal or no deal on the table, and Parliament was naturally keen to avoid a ruinous and democratically obscene “no deal”.
Not often agreeing with Gardenwalker, I am delighted to agree that most of the above is pretty much on the ball, if you assume a point of view and accept the style is somewhat adversarial to Boris.
So just two qualifications, neither very important now; Parliament trashed May's deal. Not Boris. That doesn't matter now but it is true.
Secondly, further delay was, at the time, politically impossible. Boris privately (IMHO) made the big and fairly noble call to reject No Deal, at huge personal cost. Since the only deal on the table was one with a bad Ireland deal.
Boris is a Machiavelli politician anyway. Circumstances since getting a bad but only available Brexit through a parliament that never wanted one mean he has to act in ways which are Machiavelli squared.
I wonder how anyone else would be faring by now? Politically? Polling? Personally? It is worth thinking about. The current marmite Boris - everyone either loves him or loathes him is not quite true to the complex situation. Less uncritical support and opposition and more nuance would be a worthwhile project.
While Parliament did trash the deal, Boris had the option of turning round and making slight changes to May's scheme and going "take it or No Deal" or creating a new deal and going "new deal or no deal". The fact he took the latter option was his choice / mistake.
I remember the evening when the deal was first announced and Theresa May did her speech in the dark on the steps of Downing Street, and Boris was immediately denouncing it on all the news channels before the text had even been made public.
I am often blamed on here (as a former Remainer) for my failure to back Mrs May's deal in favour of the ultimate wet-dream of a second referendum, and as such I am responsible for Johnson's oven-ready pig-in-a-poke.
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
Parliament rejected Mrs May's deal. Hundreds of Labour MPs voted against it. Boris only had the power of being a single vote among MPs. Yes, he was opportunist. Yes, the pope is a Catholic. Boris is a politician.
"Boris" as you affectionately call him, is a particular type of politician. And, no, they are not all the same, thank God. There are honest politicians on both sides of the house. There are perhaps none who are so malignantly narcissistic and dishonest as Boris Johnson, certainly this side of the Atlantic. In that unique area, he is most definitely world class.
Please, what hyperbole.
Well, hyperbole can sometimes be a useful tool for illustration, but in this case I must disagree that I have used it . Please tell me mainstream politicians with worse rep's for telling porkies?
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Or the BBC criticising Russia Today for being a mouthpiece of the state.
Strange, I manage to watch hours of BBC without Russia Today getting a mention most weeks.
Allow me to rephrase. Whenever the BBC interviews Russia Today they point out to the hapless representative that nothing could be believed because it is an arm of the Russian state.
Sounds quite sensible to me.
Because your bias is such that you evidently can't see the equivalence and hence hypocrisy.
There is no equivalence. BBC is state funded and does have a UK perspective, it is not immune from bias but its aim is not primarily propaganda. Russia Today is primarily a propaganda organisation, as is Fox news.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
Have you checked out the BBC over the past year or so?
It has been a government channel to disseminate, without criticism or comment, whatever message the government has wanted to put out on Covid.
The same BBC that consistently gave a platform to Gupta, even long after her ridiculous statements on Covid's lethality and herd immunity were debunked by bitter real-world experience, solely to have someone criticise the government from the Spectator liberty point of view? That BBC?
I don't think it was exactly to the BBC's credit to give a platform to a whole bunch of people who were peddling obvious nonsense, but it does at least show that they weren't simply unthinking government stooges.
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
Not so much an indication of patriotism but possibly the relationship between demographic and the amount of travel that said demographics have experienced. Also if it is a recent survey it is possible a lot of people who are not populist Conservatives are less enthusiastic about their country than they used to be.
Apologies if this has already been flagged, but if you haven't watched this clip of a 1991 G7 drinks reception, with HM the Queen, Margaret Thatcher, Ted Heath, John Major, James Baker, Princess Di, Francois Mitterand, Helmut Kohl, do so. It's quite remarkable:
The Queen's line of questioning about Saddam Hussein was quite interesting and it's a shame Ted Heath cut her off. Essentially she asked how he could cling onto power after having been defeated militarily and morally.
Yes, amazing how Heath and Baker talk over her (especially as she was the most interesting of the three).
But what a magnificent royal riposte to the grumpy old Grocer..."But you're expendable" with a gleaming smile and a touch on the forearm.
The only possible solution is, as always in NI, a very large dollop of fudge.
There was no "fudge" in the GFA. The obligations and occasionally painful compromises of all parties were clear. That's why it worked.
Is not compromise itself an example of a fudge?
Not in the context of this discussion which appears to be signing an agreement with the EU then trying to get them to do something else in practice that is to their detriment because that's more convenient for the UK.
All parties lived up the commitments they signed up to in the GFA.
AIUI the EU agreed to collaborate to find a work around. They haven’t done so at all. So the UK is coming up with its own approach.
More generally: I don’t give a flying fuck. If the protocol is endangering peace and community harmony in Northern Ireland then the only right thing to do is bin it.
No surprise you would prefer troubles kicked off again. Damn colonies.
I suspect it would take the actual troubles to kick off in style again (remember we've already seen death threats) before the EU thinks about compromising.
Only one side will be compromising , when trouble starts and Biden phones Bozo with orders.
I know people on here have reservations about Biden’s mental acuity, but I don’t think he’ll be taking orders from Johnson. Heck, even most of us aren’t.
Last night Fox had a former White House Doctor to both Obama and Trump expressing big concerns about Biden's mental state.
Every day Fox have someone expressing concerns about Biden's mental state. It is almost as predictable as Russia Today having someone criticise the West within 2 minutes of watching.
Ah I see so if someone is on Fox, they must be lying. Even if they were Obama's doctor.
No, they might be right or wrong, honest or liars. But their content is extremely biased and unreliable regardless.
So facts are variously reliable or unreliable, depending on the news service. Even if its the same fact.
The opinions of some medic are opinions, not a fact. That they are given an airing of Fox as opposed to anywhere else does indeed tell you something about them.
So the logic is that Biden must be compos mentis, because Fox is investigating whether he is or not....
You're not good at this. This logic is that Fox is not providing useful information on Biden's mental state. Other than for propaganda purposes.
No. If Fox wanted to spread propaganda they should be proclaiming Biden's mental acuity from the rooftops.
I mean, You and KJH would never believe that, because it came from Fox.
Your logic is rather screwed. The scenario you pose would never happen because Fox is extremely right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff. I assume you agree with this? Consequently any right minded person does not take any notice of anything they spew out. So they are never going to say Biden is a mental whizz kid are they, but if they did my next thought would be why are they doing this?
After all they never ever suggested Trump had a screw loose did they and he has a bucket full of loose screws.
a) Do you agree Fox is right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff?
b) if you agree with a) do you agree that anything they say about Biden might just be somewhat suspect?
If you don't agree with a) and b) and believe Fox is some mainstream independently reliable media source you are definitely in the Trump cult box of believing any old tripe.
No I agree that Fox is a right wing news channel, just as CNN is left leaning. I wouldn't dismiss a news item on either out of hand, simply because of the channel's affiliation, however.
I don't think that either CNN or Fox are propaganda, because these are commercial stations and people do not generally pay for propaganda, whatever their political affiliation.
I originally posted that item on Fox because it is indicative that the political volume about Biden's mental state is growing louder. It is becoming a bigger issue. And frankly, it is easy to see why, if you look at Biden's appearances (sadly - I feel sorry for the guy).
This has implications in betting terms. My reading of the situation is that the democrats put so much into simply beating Trump anyway and anyhow they did not think about how their candidates would perform in office.
And here we are, with a very poor President and an unpopular veep. Meanwhile the Republicans have seemingly hung together much better than I expected, and I think the Dems are very vulnerable to a counter attack now.
Oh dear... One can only hope that you don’t actually watch much Fox “News” and are basing this opinion on the Fox News of 20 years ago, when, for all it’s criticism of its “opinion” based output, it was actually seen as having quite a decent news desk for fact based reporting.
Something which absolutely cannot be said today. It has basically ceased to exist as a serious news organisation.
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
This is fantastic. Real-world data out of Canada shows just ONE dose of AstraZeneca’s vaccine is highly effective against preventing hospitalization and/or death caused by SARS-CoV-2 VOCs.
Golly - I'm just one week into my second dose so that really does cheer. At the risk of sounding too patriotic for some and also betraying my alma mater - well done Oxford!
Comments
‘… the Spectator is good at spectating, offering witty, ironic and often well-written commentary on the world, traditionally with the tone of a rather embittered ageing man, a bit drunk in an upmarket London bar, lamenting the ways of the world…’
@Leon? 😂😂😂
Until they decided to shaft their viewers by funnelling the sport towards Sky so a terrestrial rival (Channel 4) wouldn't get it.
It allowed Dominic to establish himself as the Prime Minister's Brain.
One or both of those points was far more important.
Who was to blame, why, what, and who got what wrong and right.
TIA.
‘Then owls and bats
Cowls and twats
Monks and nuns in a cloister's moods
Adjourn to the oak-stump pantry.’
Despite incessant claims of schools driving this wave, and Delta disproportionately affecting children scaring parents...
Kids age 2 - 11y now lowest estimated prevalence of all ages<35, despite being totally unvaccinated, no masks anywhere and full time school for 4 months</i>
https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1418550657854939140?s=20
With the benefit of hindsight, I was wrong, not least because what came next was substantially worse, although it was sold by Johnson and many on here as a fault-free, compromise- free alternative to Mrs May's far from perfect shambles.
Johnson didn't accept Mrs May's compromise, because doing so didn't give him the keys to number 10. So surely along with me, Johnson and Frost should shoulder some of the blame.
In my defence I genuinely believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, and a second referendum win for Remain, that would have been of benefit to our nation. Johnson believed in the event of Mrs May's deal falling, it would have been of benefit to him. Yet public perception is; I am the traitor and Johnson is the patriot.
More seriously, I wonder how many of those children already have antibodies from the waves in October/November?
Apparently someone did eventually point out twat’s actual meaning to Browning, but by then it was too late.
Just because things may share some characteristics it does not make them equivalent, the extent and influence of those characteristics is key.
This chart feels about right and has Russia Today similar to Fox News, with BBC in the top league but not at the top which is AP and Reuters.
https://www.adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/
It has been a government channel to disseminate, without criticism or comment, whatever message the government has wanted to put out on Covid.
First lap Verstappen was on pole, Hamilton started 2nd. The Briton got the better start but it wasn't quite enough to pass, so he was all over the back of the Dutchman.
Come turn 9 (I think) Hamilton was wider than he should have been, and this caused contact, which ended up putting Verstappen out of the race.
I don't view it as malicious, but as a mistake. I do take the view it was Hamilton's fault and find it baffling that some blame Verstappen for being hit from behind (Hamilton's front left made contact with Verstappen's rear right). I do think the 10s penalty was very soft.
This photo compares Hamilton's car placement at the same corner versus Leclerc and Verstappen. The difference is pretty plain to see.
https://twitter.com/BradGroux/status/1416838993371619338/photo/1
Conservatives 78%
Leavers 72%
Older Britons 64%
ALL VOTERS 54%
Under-45s 43%
Labour 43%
Remainers 41%
Ipsos-MORI
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1418556653469933570?s=20
https://laudatortemporisacti.blogspot.com/2019/09/an-ancient-highland-toast.html
What both of them show is that this really weird gereatrification of American politics is a serious mistake and it is time they went back to candidates in their late 40s with some experience but also some stamina and energy for a seriously tough job.
Perhaps why the prevalence is so low ?
The vaccination debate is about 12 - 17. 'Wow' followed by schools followed by a para about primary schools...
I am doubtful whether Labour can win an election on those figures; if that is the nature of their support it hardly encourages middling patriots to join them.
•Alpha (B.1.1.7): 90%
•Delta (B.1.617.2): 87%
•Gamma (P.1): 82%
•Beta (B.1.351): 82%
https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1418562834791899136?s=20
The ERG opposed it because they wanted an immediate departure from the customs union.
Remainers opposed it because they wished to see a second referendum.
Both reasons, which you may or may not agree with, are at least logical and presumably advanced to protect the country.
Boris opposed because he wanted rid of May.
https://twitter.com/misszing/status/1418551597307777032?s=19
I know, I know. I used to work in a building on the corner of Queen Annes St. and Wimpole St.
iSAGE? Weren't they criticising from a more extreme/authoritarian position? So in fact not challenging the government at all.
I rather wish it would stick more to its news gathering operation and stop treating opinion as news. What a government says/does is news, not opinion, because they have the power to implement it. Voters opinions are the ones which count.
I have to admit to being amused by the 'gotcha' line of some on Twitter posting photos showing Verstappen turning right. Into a right hand corner. It's a pretty traditional tactic taken by drivers.
Mr. Topping, I should say that quite a few do think it's purely a racing incident (unworthy of penalty), but disagree with that strongly.
I don't think it was a deliberate collision but I do think Hamilton took a decision to try and be more aggressive. He cocked it up and got extremely lucky in that he suffered no lasting repercussions and his only rival ended up in the wall (with a hefty 51G impact).
Max probably should have backed out of it, watched Lewis understeer off and then retain the lead. But far easier to say with hindsight than it would be in the midst of battle.
First google and it is only one result. Not read the whole thing through he might be a far right/left loon for all I know. But he agrees with me so here he is!
"I argue that, far from holding the government to account (as it ought to be doing) through asking critical and searching questions at the daily briefings and by undertaking pointed investigative journalism into all manner of questionable activities that have occurred during the period, the BBC has essentially been a lapdog (rather than a watchdog) of the powerful. By so doing, its public service mandate has once again been found wanting."
https://www.ntu.ac.uk/about-us/news/news-articles/2021/03/expert-blog-coronavirus-propaganda-in-search-of-the-bbcs-public-service-mandate
https://twitter.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/1418559832949460997?s=20
After all they never ever suggested Trump had a screw loose did they and he has a bucket full of loose screws.
@Contrarian a few questions for you:
a) Do you agree Fox is right wing and puts out conspiracy stuff?
b) if you agree with a) do you agree that anything they say about Biden might just be somewhat suspect?
If you don't agree with a) and b) and believe Fox is some mainstream independently reliable media source you are definitely in the Trump cult box of believing any old tripe.
Backing out of it when ahead is not only contrary to a driver's nature and job, it's very dangerous. The corner was Verstappen's. Hamilton screwed up and got lucky, not for the first time this season (his gravel expedition at one race, and the magic paddle failing when Verstappen also DNFed that race).
Edited extra bit: apologies, but I have to be going.
a) do you agree that it would be a good idea to stop beating your wife?
If there was blame to be allocated Lewis gets the major part but it seems a pretty typical first lap racing incident to me. Max will need to think a little more carefully before he tries to do that to Lewis again.
I expect he can sell any old rubbish in the shop and it is doubtless a very nice earner.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1418515443883692034
And all unis have weak departments, while most unis have really strong departments as well. I don’t think anyone will ever get a job for being a graduate of Aber’s Maths department, but its International Politics department was regarded as the best in Europe.
Special visa for grads of the world’s best universities. Other visa loosening too.
https://twitter.com/sam_dumitriu/status/1418559832949460997?s=21
I don't think that either CNN or Fox are propaganda, because these are commercial stations and people do not generally pay for propaganda, whatever their political affiliation.
I originally posted that item on Fox because it is indicative that the political volume about Biden's mental state is growing louder. It is becoming a bigger issue. And frankly, it is easy to see why, if you look at Biden's appearances (sadly - I feel sorry for the guy).
This has implications in betting terms. My reading of the situation is that the democrats put so much into simply beating Trump anyway and anyhow they did not think about how their candidates would perform in office.
And here we are, with a very poor President and an unpopular veep. Meanwhile the Republicans have seemingly hung together much better than I expected, and I think the Dems are very vulnerable to a counter attack now.
But honestly, a politics degree from the University of Wales (pre-UDI) had a use? Torn up and hung from a nail in the outside privvy perhaps!
Also this should have been announced in Parliament which is very conveniently not meeting for the next X weeks.
I don't think it was exactly to the BBC's credit to give a platform to a whole bunch of people who were peddling obvious nonsense, but it does at least show that they weren't simply unthinking government stooges.
Something which absolutely cannot be said today. It has basically ceased to exist as a serious news organisation.