politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sewage and sewerage. New media and news
Options
Comments
-
The occupations data is interesting - most occupations see a similar risk to COVID19... excepting...FrancisUrquhart said:Sky News pushing fake news about BAME report not to be released...
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1267797847333879808?s=19
Higher -
Nursing auxiliaries and assistants
Taxi and cab drivers and chauffeurs
Security guards and related occupations
Lower -
Publicans and managers of licensed premises
Primary and nursery education teaching professionals
Farmers
Carpenters and joiners0 -
I didn’t realise that a Spanish policeman’s baton was called ‘a social justice agenda.’Carnyx said:
In fairness Lisa Nandy also recommended "beating" [sic] the SNP with the same methods as used in Catalonia. So maybe HYUFD is a Labourt voter?Philip_Thompson said:
You're backtracking. We have all seen you advocate following Madrid's example, are you retracting that now?HYUFD said:
I have not advocated the above, only no indyref2 for a generation.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I recall that is exactly what you were advocating. So clearly you do regard Scotland as a colony.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
I was merely comparing that as mild compared to Madrid and Beijing's actions
"We should look outwards to other countries and other parts of the world where they have had to deal with divisive nationalism and seek to discover the lessons where, in these brief moments in history in places like Catalonia and Quebec, we have managed to go and beat narrow divisive nationalism with a social justice agenda."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51139519
Is it some kind of idiom?1 -
They are also dual nationality in NI - thougth the UK Gmt seems to have been denying, or trying to deny, this in certain circumstances (e.g. on personal status - there was a test case recently).eek said:
And in fact they can. As, unlike Scotland, a Border Poll has to be called if it looks likely that it would be wonAlanbrooke said:
Im sure the NI voters can decide their future for themselvesTOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF0 -
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway0 -
You cannot get beyond spouting the same repetitive rubbish post after postHYUFD said:
First, no indyref2 will not happen this parliament regardless of what happens next year, the Tories won on a manifesto commitment to no indyref2.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not the point, the point is your lack of respect towards the Scots shows an intolerance that is just crassHYUFD said:
You do realise the Tory manifesto on which the 2019 general election was won ruled out indyref2 for a generation?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You spout the most idiotic nonsense on ScotlandHYUFD said:
If we wanted to make Scotland a colony that is what we would do, we are not so Scotland is not a colony.Richard_Tyndall said:
I hope you are not claiming we should regard Spain and China as positive examples to follow.HYUFD said:
That is exactly what the Spanish government did to Catalan nationalist leaders yes and what Beijing is starting to do to Hong Kong pro independence leaders with its new anti separatism lawMalmesbury said:
You are forgetting - taking control of Police Scotland, arresting officers for obeying orders from Holyrood. And arresting most of the SNP leadership and putting them in prison on treason charges.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
Scots voted to stay in the UK freely and fairly in 2014
For goodness sake show some respect or go and join Trump in the US
You voted for that as much as I did
And Indy 2 will happen this parliament if the SNP win Holyrood 21.
And I do not expect them to win Independence especially since covid 19
Second, if we go to WTO terms Brexit there is clearly a chance Scots vote for independence so any vote must wait until after the next general election and it is settled whether we are still on WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market with Starmer
For someone who spends their spare time getting overwhelmed with excitement over replays of previous general elections, and comment on here as moments happen as if in real time, I would suggest you need to get out more
And 7 days is a week in politics.
Mind you when Indy 2 happens towards the end of next year you will reverse ferret like mad0 -
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
0 -
Source pleasenico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.1 -
Perhaps the police ought to be enquiring into his whereabouts when all those 5G base stations were vandalised ?Pulpstar said:https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1267808798707605504
"Horror" LOLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLL0 -
So? I don't get it, are you wanting to get rid of police unions? Democrats are in most positions of power here so all RPs points seem irrelevant.Alistair said:
Minneapolis (like many American cities) has an all encompassing police union, the head of which - Bob Kroll - is a whack job Trump Supporter who has frequently criticised the Obama administration's "handcuffing" of police.brokenwheel said:
To my knowledge the Police Chief in Minneapolis is not a politician. He's also black mexican IIRC.RochdalePioneers said:
But as I tweeted earlier, people get what they vote for. Americans vote for the rights of the maniac to buy guys and murder their children in their classrooms. Vote for a system where the DA and the Police Chief are politicians worried about votes. Where politicians receive cash from lobbyists and then rig the system to stay in office.
Yes the majority didn't vote for Trump. But they vote for politicians who have no interest in changing the system which elected Trump. If enough Americans wanted to change their laws and their constitution they could do so. But they don't, and you get what you vote for.
And Minneapolis has a Democrat mayor. The governor of Minnesota is a Democrat.
But why let facts get in the way of anything eh?
Tough one for you here. A union is involved, of public sector employees. Who you going to back?
It's not really tough for me because I don't care either way about unions. Just seems to be you assuming my politics.0 -
Since the EU recovery fund is being paid for out of the general EU budget then yes we could be on the hook for such payments during extension.nico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.
The amount the UK would be liable for would need to be negotiated but there is no question we could be liable despite not being a member anymore should we extend during the transition.1 -
Interesting. What is your evidence for this?MaxPB said:In other news, I think the economy is bouncing back a bit. Some sectors are going to be a write off for a while but loads of others seem to be getting back to normal. Whether this results in the kind of rapid growth we need to be able to call this a one off spending event remains to be seen.
0 -
Quebec had a second independence referendum only 15 years after the first.HYUFD said:
Quebec only had a second independence referendum 15 years after the firstCarnyx said:
In fairness Lisa Nandy also recommended "beating" [sic] the SNP with the same methods as used in Catalonia. So maybe HYUFD is a Labourt voter?Philip_Thompson said:
You're backtracking. We have all seen you advocate following Madrid's example, are you retracting that now?HYUFD said:
I have not advocated the above, only no indyref2 for a generation.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I recall that is exactly what you were advocating. So clearly you do regard Scotland as a colony.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
I was merely comparing that as mild compared to Madrid and Beijing's actions
"We should look outwards to other countries and other parts of the world where they have had to deal with divisive nationalism and seek to discover the lessons where, in these brief moments in history in places like Catalonia and Quebec, we have managed to go and beat narrow divisive nationalism with a social justice agenda."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51139519
Perhaps Scotland can improve on that ?0 -
Sorry but did I name a party? So what that Minneapolis and Minnesota both have Democrat representation - the *system* is their problem. When the Democrats get elected they do not change the system any more than the Republicans do.brokenwheel said:
To my knowledge the Police Chief in Minneapolis is not a politician. He's also black mexican IIRC.RochdalePioneers said:
But as I tweeted earlier, people get what they vote for. Americans vote for the rights of the maniac to buy guys and murder their children in their classrooms. Vote for a system where the DA and the Police Chief are politicians worried about votes. Where politicians receive cash from lobbyists and then rig the system to stay in office.
Yes the majority didn't vote for Trump. But they vote for politicians who have no interest in changing the system which elected Trump. If enough Americans wanted to change their laws and their constitution they could do so. But they don't, and you get what you vote for.
And Minneapolis has a Democrat mayor. The governor of Minnesota is a Democrat.
But why let facts get in the way of anything eh?1 -
He does have a point though. A vote in parliament is not the same as voting for Strictly (or whatever).Nigelb said:
Perhaps the police ought to be enquiring into his whereabouts when all those 5G base stations were vandalised ?Pulpstar said:https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1267808798707605504
"Horror" LOLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLL0 -
Again, I am not making a partisan point against Republicans or Democrats. Try reading what I read. Rather than what you wanted me to say.brokenwheel said:
So? I don't get it, are you wanting to get rid of police unions? Democrats are in most positions of power here so all RPs points seem irrelevant.Alistair said:
Minneapolis (like many American cities) has an all encompassing police union, the head of which - Bob Kroll - is a whack job Trump Supporter who has frequently criticised the Obama administration's "handcuffing" of police.brokenwheel said:
To my knowledge the Police Chief in Minneapolis is not a politician. He's also black mexican IIRC.RochdalePioneers said:
But as I tweeted earlier, people get what they vote for. Americans vote for the rights of the maniac to buy guys and murder their children in their classrooms. Vote for a system where the DA and the Police Chief are politicians worried about votes. Where politicians receive cash from lobbyists and then rig the system to stay in office.
Yes the majority didn't vote for Trump. But they vote for politicians who have no interest in changing the system which elected Trump. If enough Americans wanted to change their laws and their constitution they could do so. But they don't, and you get what you vote for.
And Minneapolis has a Democrat mayor. The governor of Minnesota is a Democrat.
But why let facts get in the way of anything eh?
Tough one for you here. A union is involved, of public sector employees. Who you going to back?
It's not really tough for me because I don't care either way about unions. Just seems to be you assuming my politics.0 -
That was the official Dept of Energy and Climate Change forecast at the time - complaints should be directed to Westminster.CarlottaVance said:
That one cuts both ways....$115 oil, anyone?StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
0 -
Actually, covid or no covid it's exposed the ludicrous situation that Alistair Carmichael for instance has to do a 1400 mile round trip simply for the presenteeism of strolling through a lobby.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
0 -
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.2 -
Why would he even visit without first getting the support of the rector/vicar of the church itself? Politically very very reckless.Philip_Thompson said:
Wow.Nigelb said:The Episcopalian rector of St. John’s, Gini Gerbasi, is not very happy about the riot staged by Donald Trump on their doorstep.
Yeah, even unto ALL CAPS...
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/trump-st-johns-photo-op-church-leader-says-now-force-to-be-reckoned-with.html
The police in their riot gear were literally walking onto the St. John’s, Lafayette Square patio with these metal shields, pushing people off the patio and driving them back. People were running at us as the police advanced toward us from the other side of the patio… We were literally DRIVEN OFF of the St. John’s, Lafayette Square patio with tear gas and concussion grenades and police in full riot gear. We were pushed back 20 feet, and then eventually - with SO MANY concussion grenades - back to K street. By the time I got back to my car, around 7, I was getting texts from people saying that Trump was outside of St. John’s, Lafayette Square. I literally COULD NOT believe it. WE WERE DRIVEN OFF OF THE PATIO AT ST. JOHN’S - a place of peace and respite and medical care throughout the day - SO THAT MAN COULD HAVE A PHOTO OPPORTUNITY IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH!!! PEOPLE WERE HURT SO THAT HE COULD POSE IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH WITH A BIBLE! HE WOULD HAVE HAD TO STEP OVER THE MEDICAL SUPPLIES WE LEFT BEHIND BECAUSE WE WERE BEING TEAR GASSED!!!!
Imagine if President Obama had cleared a Church with tear gas wielding thugs for a photo op.
I'm not religious but for those who are this must surely be absolute heresy. To attack a holy Church and drive the bishop out of it with force?0 -
-
He just can’t see how bad it looks.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.
Should have gone to Barnard Castle.1 -
Another thing which is striking is this bit:Malmesbury said:
The occupations data is interesting - most occupations see a similar risk to COVID19... excepting...FrancisUrquhart said:Sky News pushing fake news about BAME report not to be released...
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1267797847333879808?s=19
Higher -
Nursing auxiliaries and assistants
Taxi and cab drivers and chauffeurs
Security guards and related occupations
Lower -
Publicans and managers of licensed premises
Primary and nursery education teaching professionals
Farmers
Carpenters and joiners
compared with people under 40, the probability of death was about three times higher among those aged 40 to 49, nine times higher among those aged 50 to 59, twenty-seven times higher among those aged 60 to 69, fifty times higher among those aged 70 to 79 and seventy times higher among those aged 80 and over
So not just the very old, by any means.2 -
It won't, the majority of Tory MPs in the Commons will block itBig_G_NorthWales said:
You cannot get beyond spouting the same repetitive rubbish post after postHYUFD said:
First, no indyref2 will not happen this parliament regardless of what happens next year, the Tories won on a manifesto commitment to no indyref2.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not the point, the point is your lack of respect towards the Scots shows an intolerance that is just crassHYUFD said:
You do realise the Tory manifesto on which the 2019 general election was won ruled out indyref2 for a generation?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You spout the most idiotic nonsense on ScotlandHYUFD said:
If we wanted to make Scotland a colony that is what we would do, we are not so Scotland is not a colony.Richard_Tyndall said:
I hope you are not claiming we should regard Spain and China as positive examples to follow.HYUFD said:
That is exactly what the Spanish government did to Catalan nationalist leaders yes and what Beijing is starting to do to Hong Kong pro independence leaders with its new anti separatism lawMalmesbury said:
You are forgetting - taking control of Police Scotland, arresting officers for obeying orders from Holyrood. And arresting most of the SNP leadership and putting them in prison on treason charges.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
Scots voted to stay in the UK freely and fairly in 2014
For goodness sake show some respect or go and join Trump in the US
You voted for that as much as I did
And Indy 2 will happen this parliament if the SNP win Holyrood 21.
And I do not expect them to win Independence especially since covid 19
Second, if we go to WTO terms Brexit there is clearly a chance Scots vote for independence so any vote must wait until after the next general election and it is settled whether we are still on WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market with Starmer
For someone who spends their spare time getting overwhelmed with excitement over replays of previous general elections, and comment on here as moments happen as if in real time, I would suggest you need to get out more
And 7 days is a week in politics.
Mind you when Indy 2 happens towards the end of next year you will reverse ferret like mad0 -
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.0 -
1400 round trip miles for Alistair Carmichael simply to walk through a voting lobby.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.
It's indefensible on
Climate change grounds, value for the taxpayer grounds, virus prevention grounds.0 -
I doubt Indy 2 will happen next year.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You cannot get beyond spouting the same repetitive rubbish post after postHYUFD said:
First, no indyref2 will not happen this parliament regardless of what happens next year, the Tories won on a manifesto commitment to no indyref2.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not the point, the point is your lack of respect towards the Scots shows an intolerance that is just crassHYUFD said:
You do realise the Tory manifesto on which the 2019 general election was won ruled out indyref2 for a generation?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You spout the most idiotic nonsense on ScotlandHYUFD said:
If we wanted to make Scotland a colony that is what we would do, we are not so Scotland is not a colony.Richard_Tyndall said:
I hope you are not claiming we should regard Spain and China as positive examples to follow.HYUFD said:
That is exactly what the Spanish government did to Catalan nationalist leaders yes and what Beijing is starting to do to Hong Kong pro independence leaders with its new anti separatism lawMalmesbury said:
You are forgetting - taking control of Police Scotland, arresting officers for obeying orders from Holyrood. And arresting most of the SNP leadership and putting them in prison on treason charges.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
Scots voted to stay in the UK freely and fairly in 2014
For goodness sake show some respect or go and join Trump in the US
You voted for that as much as I did
And Indy 2 will happen this parliament if the SNP win Holyrood 21.
And I do not expect them to win Independence especially since covid 19
Second, if we go to WTO terms Brexit there is clearly a chance Scots vote for independence so any vote must wait until after the next general election and it is settled whether we are still on WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market with Starmer
For someone who spends their spare time getting overwhelmed with excitement over replays of previous general elections, and comment on here as moments happen as if in real time, I would suggest you need to get out more
And 7 days is a week in politics.
Mind you when Indy 2 happens towards the end of next year you will reverse ferret like mad
My guess if there will be an Indy 2 then it will be 2022.
If the SNP win a clear mandate to hold Indy 2 then there will need to be time to negotiate the parameters of it, then time for the debate etc to be held. 2022 is far enough after the Holyrood elections for it to happen, far enough after Brexit transition ends for Scots to make an educated choice, far enough after COVID to not risk a new spike, and early enough before the next UK General Election for it to not interfere.0 -
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.0 -
he still insists that the border being installed in the Irish Sea isn't a borderTOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.0 -
I refuse to believe that to be true for those purposes. Why would they do that? its 5g covid cell towers level of madness. Though it doesnt mean it isnt true.Alistair said:
The mental stuff is the video of police in Boston systematically putting out piles of bricks around and about the town.RochdalePioneers said:On America I will believe literally any video anyone can conceive of showing cops arresting kneeled "I live you" protestors, beating foreign journalists on live TV, shooting rubber bullets to maim, shooting reporters, whatever. Literally nothing that sounds like an exaggeration is possible. Its literally mental the stuff I am seeing on Twitter.
0 -
Well, it's what he wanted, basically. all because the man loves the union.Pulpstar said:
Actually, covid or no covid it's exposed the ludicrous situation that Alistair Carmichael for instance has to do a 1400 mile round trip simply for the presenteeism of strolling through a lobby.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
1 -
EU citizens living in the UK in 2016 would doubtless agree.kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.0 -
Off topic but WTAF
https://twitter.com/intermezzoHR/status/1266292282782703617
Surely if you have more work to do you unfurlough a member of staff and not bring in an outsourcer?0 -
He's a complete muppet, you'll get no argument from me.RochdalePioneers said:
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.1 -
Though the church had been damaged by the protests firstClassicDom said:
Why would he even visit without first getting the support of the rector/vicar of the church itself? Politically very very reckless.Philip_Thompson said:
Wow.Nigelb said:The Episcopalian rector of St. John’s, Gini Gerbasi, is not very happy about the riot staged by Donald Trump on their doorstep.
Yeah, even unto ALL CAPS...
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/trump-st-johns-photo-op-church-leader-says-now-force-to-be-reckoned-with.html
The police in their riot gear were literally walking onto the St. John’s, Lafayette Square patio with these metal shields, pushing people off the patio and driving them back. People were running at us as the police advanced toward us from the other side of the patio… We were literally DRIVEN OFF of the St. John’s, Lafayette Square patio with tear gas and concussion grenades and police in full riot gear. We were pushed back 20 feet, and then eventually - with SO MANY concussion grenades - back to K street. By the time I got back to my car, around 7, I was getting texts from people saying that Trump was outside of St. John’s, Lafayette Square. I literally COULD NOT believe it. WE WERE DRIVEN OFF OF THE PATIO AT ST. JOHN’S - a place of peace and respite and medical care throughout the day - SO THAT MAN COULD HAVE A PHOTO OPPORTUNITY IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH!!! PEOPLE WERE HURT SO THAT HE COULD POSE IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH WITH A BIBLE! HE WOULD HAVE HAD TO STEP OVER THE MEDICAL SUPPLIES WE LEFT BEHIND BECAUSE WE WERE BEING TEAR GASSED!!!!
Imagine if President Obama had cleared a Church with tear gas wielding thugs for a photo op.
I'm not religious but for those who are this must surely be absolute heresy. To attack a holy Church and drive the bishop out of it with force?0 -
Hubris it seems.ClassicDom said:
Why would he even visit without first getting the support of the rector/vicar of the church itself? Politically very very reckless.Philip_Thompson said:
Wow.Nigelb said:The Episcopalian rector of St. John’s, Gini Gerbasi, is not very happy about the riot staged by Donald Trump on their doorstep.
Yeah, even unto ALL CAPS...
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/trump-st-johns-photo-op-church-leader-says-now-force-to-be-reckoned-with.html
The police in their riot gear were literally walking onto the St. John’s, Lafayette Square patio with these metal shields, pushing people off the patio and driving them back. People were running at us as the police advanced toward us from the other side of the patio… We were literally DRIVEN OFF of the St. John’s, Lafayette Square patio with tear gas and concussion grenades and police in full riot gear. We were pushed back 20 feet, and then eventually - with SO MANY concussion grenades - back to K street. By the time I got back to my car, around 7, I was getting texts from people saying that Trump was outside of St. John’s, Lafayette Square. I literally COULD NOT believe it. WE WERE DRIVEN OFF OF THE PATIO AT ST. JOHN’S - a place of peace and respite and medical care throughout the day - SO THAT MAN COULD HAVE A PHOTO OPPORTUNITY IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH!!! PEOPLE WERE HURT SO THAT HE COULD POSE IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH WITH A BIBLE! HE WOULD HAVE HAD TO STEP OVER THE MEDICAL SUPPLIES WE LEFT BEHIND BECAUSE WE WERE BEING TEAR GASSED!!!!
Imagine if President Obama had cleared a Church with tear gas wielding thugs for a photo op.
I'm not religious but for those who are this must surely be absolute heresy. To attack a holy Church and drive the bishop out of it with force?0 -
Stefaan De Rynck head of the EUs UK taskforce .Big_G_NorthWales said:
Source pleasenico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.
And the method of agreeing the payment is in the WA .0 -
0
-
Wrong, all the polling shows only a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would push Northern Irish voters towards a United Ireland.TOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.
Boris avoided that0 -
Why stop there? I mean who really cares what Alistair Carmichael thinks anyway?Pulpstar said:
1400 round trip miles for Alistair Carmichael simply to walk through a voting lobby.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.
It's indefensible on
Climate change grounds, value for the taxpayer grounds, virus prevention grounds.0 -
That's democracy. Carmichael is supposed to be in the Commons participating in and listening to the debate too not just strolling through a lobby.Pulpstar said:
Actually, covid or no covid it's exposed the ludicrous situation that Alistair Carmichael for instance has to do a 1400 mile round trip simply for the presenteeism of strolling through a lobby.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
0 -
No , it’s legally in the WA .Philip_Thompson said:
Since the EU recovery fund is being paid for out of the general EU budget then yes we could be on the hook for such payments during extension.nico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.
The amount the UK would be liable for would need to be negotiated but there is no question we could be liable despite not being a member anymore should we extend during the transition.
The UK one off payment will have nothing whatsoever to do with the EU budget and therefore nothing to do with the EU recovery fund .
0 -
That the government is whipping over this suggests some political reason, which is poor show at a time of crisis. Nevertheless the counter-argument is that it would look pretty poor for parliament to be sending people back to work and children back to school and yet be afraid of returning themselves.RochdalePioneers said:
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.0 -
An extreme action will result in an extreme reaction, lootings lead to shootings.
https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/CBOT-ZR1!/
These are rice futures. Last week's candle is practically vertical.
We've got a lot of extreme actions and reactions to come, and then a decade-long depression. There's going to be plenty of lootings and plenty of shootings and a lot more besides.
We're thinking too small. We still have normalcy bias.
0 -
It certianly is in construction in southern HampshireDavidL said:
Interesting. What is your evidence for this?MaxPB said:In other news, I think the economy is bouncing back a bit. Some sectors are going to be a write off for a while but loads of others seem to be getting back to normal. Whether this results in the kind of rapid growth we need to be able to call this a one off spending event remains to be seen.
0 -
"Boris" avoids anything that involves detail or hard work. Have you worked out he is shit yet, or are you in one of the stages of mourning? It must be very difficult for you knowing that someone you have seen as the next messiah is just a phoney, and possibly, with the exception of winning an election against a very weak opposition he is as useless as the proverbial chocolate teapot.HYUFD said:
Wrong, all the polling shows only a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would push Northern Irish voters towards a United Ireland.TOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.
Boris avoided that0 -
Wow, that's wild. I've found reports of the same in Dallas and Manhattan.Alistair said:
The mental stuff is the video of police in Boston systematically putting out piles of bricks around and about the town.RochdalePioneers said:On America I will believe literally any video anyone can conceive of showing cops arresting kneeled "I live you" protestors, beating foreign journalists on live TV, shooting rubber bullets to maim, shooting reporters, whatever. Literally nothing that sounds like an exaggeration is possible. Its literally mental the stuff I am seeing on Twitter.
0 -
He was not the Messiah, he was a very naughty boy, many, many times over.Nigel_Foremain said:
"Boris" avoids anything that involves detail or hard work. Have you worked out he is shit yet, or are you in one of the stages of mourning? It must be very difficult for you knowing that someone you have seen as the next messiah is just a phoneyHYUFD said:
Wrong, all the polling shows only a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would push Northern Irish voters towards a United Ireland.TOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.
Boris avoided that0 -
Thinking about the corona legislation employers must make efforts to facilitate their employees to work from home.
Now I can already see the get out that MPs aren't employees but the abandonment of the hybrid parliament would rather go against the Gov'ts own legislation I think ?1 -
Tuesdays and Thursdays would suffice – and make sure they are staffed by senior punters rather than the flotsam and jetsam of the Tory front benchFrancisUrquhart said:
They should have been ended at weekends ages ago, there isn't enough new information to make them a worthwhile exercise.Scott_xP said:
I would prefer they moved to 5 days, each day a specific area and have appropriate minister asked by relevant correspondents.0 -
Even by Trump standards, the clear the protestors for a photo op with a bible infront of the church was up there with the maddest spectacles. Did he not think with all the media present they would show the lead up? It isn't the Apprentice where you get to edit out the bits that dont fit the narrative you want.0
-
So much of the entertainment industry is going to be completely broken by all this. They rely on people being in close proximity to each other for long periods of time, and travelling to different places. All of the above good for both the company and the audiences. There must be hundreds of thousands of jobs at risk around the country.FrancisUrquhart said:The Royal Shakespeare Company has postponed or cancelled all performances and events until at least the end of year due to the coronavirus crisis.
The only exceptions are going to be the very top level professional sports, where the revenue comes mostly from television - F1 have a completely bonkers 'travel bubble' plan, to keep everyone safe as they move around, it involves dozens of private planes and busses (all booked for months and quarantined), hotel take-overs for each team and tens of thousands of Covid tests with their own processing lab. Apart from the Premier League, no-one else can do anything similar.0 -
https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1267641851215036416RochdalePioneers said:On America I will believe literally any video anyone can conceive of showing cops arresting kneeled "I live you" protestors, beating foreign journalists on live TV, shooting rubber bullets to maim, shooting reporters, whatever. Literally nothing that sounds like an exaggeration is possible. Its literally mental the stuff I am seeing on Twitter.
0 -
That's not what it says: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/3/2018/EN/C-2018-9001-F1-EN-ANNEX-3-PART-1.PDFnico67 said:
No , it’s legally in the WA .Philip_Thompson said:
Since the EU recovery fund is being paid for out of the general EU budget then yes we could be on the hook for such payments during extension.nico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.
The amount the UK would be liable for would need to be negotiated but there is no question we could be liable despite not being a member anymore should we extend during the transition.
The UK one off payment will have nothing whatsoever to do with the EU budget and therefore nothing to do with the EU recovery fund .
If the EU thinks we're desperate to extend (which we must be if we're stupid enough to do so) then the amount that we pay is to be "negotiated".
The EU have no reason not to put our 'share' of recovery costs into what they demand from us as payment. And you no doubt would be eager for us to just sign on the dotted line.1 -
Sweden just overtook France on deaths/capita. Spain next, maybe in 6 weeks.1
-
I often hear this argument on PB. 'How can you be on the side of Farage/Orange marchers/people who put St George flags on their houses/people who put awful posters up about immigrants?'. When the issue in question is a binary choice, I am always puzzled by this. How can anyone be so morally unconvinced of a conclusion that they have come to that they would reverse this view because it picked up a fellow traveller who they found less than savoury?kinabalu said:
This is true as a general rule. But we're talking Trump here. If he is pro something that is in and of itself a strong piece of evidence in the debit column. Not to say it can't be outweighed by the credit side but it's off to a bad start and has some catching up to do.Luckyguy1983 said:
Well that's utterly stupid isn't it? If something is a positive development, who cares if it happens for negative reasons? It's probably the way things happen more often than not.kinabalu said:
Yes. It might be a good move but the fact that Trump is considering it purely because he himself is in a spat with Twitter rather undermines its appeal.Malmesbury said:Biden and some of the left want the 230 protection removed as well - they see it as protecting Twitter et al from the consequences of their publishing material.
The traditional media see removing the protection as levelling the playing field.
Ironically, because DT has trodden on the issue with his fat feet, everyone else has gone quiet on this.1 -
The instructions to people who can work from home is clear - continue to work from home. I can't see that being rescinded for a long time. We know that MPs can work from home as they have successfully been doing, so there is no reason now to be ending this.IanB2 said:
That the government is whipping over this suggests some political reason, which is poor show at a time of crisis. Nevertheless the counter-argument is that it would look pretty poor for parliament to be sending people back to work and children back to school and yet be afraid of returning themselves.RochdalePioneers said:
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.0 -
Trump & Johnson
"Dr Dettol and Mr Hide"0 -
You are not very good at politics are youHYUFD said:
It won't, the majority of Tory MPs in the Commons will block itBig_G_NorthWales said:
You cannot get beyond spouting the same repetitive rubbish post after postHYUFD said:
First, no indyref2 will not happen this parliament regardless of what happens next year, the Tories won on a manifesto commitment to no indyref2.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not the point, the point is your lack of respect towards the Scots shows an intolerance that is just crassHYUFD said:
You do realise the Tory manifesto on which the 2019 general election was won ruled out indyref2 for a generation?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You spout the most idiotic nonsense on ScotlandHYUFD said:
If we wanted to make Scotland a colony that is what we would do, we are not so Scotland is not a colony.Richard_Tyndall said:
I hope you are not claiming we should regard Spain and China as positive examples to follow.HYUFD said:
That is exactly what the Spanish government did to Catalan nationalist leaders yes and what Beijing is starting to do to Hong Kong pro independence leaders with its new anti separatism lawMalmesbury said:
You are forgetting - taking control of Police Scotland, arresting officers for obeying orders from Holyrood. And arresting most of the SNP leadership and putting them in prison on treason charges.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
Scots voted to stay in the UK freely and fairly in 2014
For goodness sake show some respect or go and join Trump in the US
You voted for that as much as I did
And Indy 2 will happen this parliament if the SNP win Holyrood 21.
And I do not expect them to win Independence especially since covid 19
Second, if we go to WTO terms Brexit there is clearly a chance Scots vote for independence so any vote must wait until after the next general election and it is settled whether we are still on WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market with Starmer
For someone who spends their spare time getting overwhelmed with excitement over replays of previous general elections, and comment on here as moments happen as if in real time, I would suggest you need to get out more
And 7 days is a week in politics.
Mind you when Indy 2 happens towards the end of next year you will reverse ferret like mad0 -
Saw that. Makes complete sense, just nick anyone you can. You can spot the troublemakers, they're the ones not in police uniformNigelb said:
https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1267641851215036416RochdalePioneers said:On America I will believe literally any video anyone can conceive of showing cops arresting kneeled "I live you" protestors, beating foreign journalists on live TV, shooting rubber bullets to maim, shooting reporters, whatever. Literally nothing that sounds like an exaggeration is possible. Its literally mental the stuff I am seeing on Twitter.
0 -
Most of the big theatres are streaming archived plays online for a fee or donationSandpit said:
So much of the entertainment industry is going to be completely broken by all this. They rely on people being in close proximity to each other for long periods of time, and travelling to different places. All of the above good for both the company and the audiences. There must be hundreds of thousands of jobs at risk around the country.FrancisUrquhart said:The Royal Shakespeare Company has postponed or cancelled all performances and events until at least the end of year due to the coronavirus crisis.
The only exceptions are going to be the very top level professional sports, where the revenue comes mostly from television - F1 have a completely bonkers 'travel bubble' plan, to keep everyone safe as they move around, it involves dozens of private planes and busses (all booked for months and quarantined), hotel take-overs for each team and tens of thousands of Covid tests with their own processing lab. Apart from the Premier League, no-one else can do anything similar.1 -
I presume the story of Boris popping over to see Trump is now off.0
-
But they are the 'enemy of the people', so why not ?FrancisUrquhart said:Even by Trump standards, the clear the protestors for a photo op with a bible infront of the church was up there with the maddest spectacles. Did he not think with all the media present they would show the lead up? It isn't the Apprentice where you get to edit out the bits that dont fit the narrative you want.
0 -
Does passing counterfeit money to the tune of $20 count as violent crime?LordWakefield said:1 -
What has Quebec got to do with the price of mince, we don't count ourselves as naughty schoolkids to be ordered about by Headmaster. You cannot be as obtuse as you make out.HYUFD said:
Quebec only had a second independence referendum 15 years after the firstCarnyx said:
In fairness Lisa Nandy also recommended "beating" [sic] the SNP with the same methods as used in Catalonia. So maybe HYUFD is a Labourt voter?Philip_Thompson said:
You're backtracking. We have all seen you advocate following Madrid's example, are you retracting that now?HYUFD said:
I have not advocated the above, only no indyref2 for a generation.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I recall that is exactly what you were advocating. So clearly you do regard Scotland as a colony.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
I was merely comparing that as mild compared to Madrid and Beijing's actions
"We should look outwards to other countries and other parts of the world where they have had to deal with divisive nationalism and seek to discover the lessons where, in these brief moments in history in places like Catalonia and Quebec, we have managed to go and beat narrow divisive nationalism with a social justice agenda."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-511395190 -
Clearly you are not are you.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are not very good at politics are youHYUFD said:
It won't, the majority of Tory MPs in the Commons will block itBig_G_NorthWales said:
You cannot get beyond spouting the same repetitive rubbish post after postHYUFD said:
First, no indyref2 will not happen this parliament regardless of what happens next year, the Tories won on a manifesto commitment to no indyref2.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not the point, the point is your lack of respect towards the Scots shows an intolerance that is just crassHYUFD said:
You do realise the Tory manifesto on which the 2019 general election was won ruled out indyref2 for a generation?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You spout the most idiotic nonsense on ScotlandHYUFD said:
If we wanted to make Scotland a colony that is what we would do, we are not so Scotland is not a colony.Richard_Tyndall said:
I hope you are not claiming we should regard Spain and China as positive examples to follow.HYUFD said:
That is exactly what the Spanish government did to Catalan nationalist leaders yes and what Beijing is starting to do to Hong Kong pro independence leaders with its new anti separatism lawMalmesbury said:
You are forgetting - taking control of Police Scotland, arresting officers for obeying orders from Holyrood. And arresting most of the SNP leadership and putting them in prison on treason charges.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
Scots voted to stay in the UK freely and fairly in 2014
For goodness sake show some respect or go and join Trump in the US
You voted for that as much as I did
And Indy 2 will happen this parliament if the SNP win Holyrood 21.
And I do not expect them to win Independence especially since covid 19
Second, if we go to WTO terms Brexit there is clearly a chance Scots vote for independence so any vote must wait until after the next general election and it is settled whether we are still on WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market with Starmer
For someone who spends their spare time getting overwhelmed with excitement over replays of previous general elections, and comment on here as moments happen as if in real time, I would suggest you need to get out more
And 7 days is a week in politics.
Mind you when Indy 2 happens towards the end of next year you will reverse ferret like mad
There will be no indyref2 unless Starmer becomes PM, the Tories will block it0 -
Almost all of seem to be hosted by the PM, the Health Secretary, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the First Secretary of State or the Education Secretary or the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.Anabobazina said:
Tuesdays and Thursdays would suffice – and make sure they are staffed by senior punters rather than the flotsam and jetsam of the Tory front benchFrancisUrquhart said:
They should have been ended at weekends ages ago, there isn't enough new information to make them a worthwhile exercise.Scott_xP said:
I would prefer they moved to 5 days, each day a specific area and have appropriate minister asked by relevant correspondents.
All of whom are in the Cabinet and very, very relevant to this, not flotsam and jetsam.0 -
Interesting polling.HYUFD said:
Wrong, all the polling shows only a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would push Northern Irish voters towards a United Ireland.TOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.
Boris avoided that
However, a border between the island of Ireland and Great Britain, which Boris instituted, and which he also said no British Prime Minister could ever contemplate doing, actually creates a de facto united Ireland.0 -
Trouble is it turns out plays are rubbish. There's a reason they don't make television drama by pointing a camera at a fixed stage.HYUFD said:
Most of the big theatres are streaming archived plays online for a fee or donationSandpit said:
So much of the entertainment industry is going to be completely broken by all this. They rely on people being in close proximity to each other for long periods of time, and travelling to different places. All of the above good for both the company and the audiences. There must be hundreds of thousands of jobs at risk around the country.FrancisUrquhart said:The Royal Shakespeare Company has postponed or cancelled all performances and events until at least the end of year due to the coronavirus crisis.
The only exceptions are going to be the very top level professional sports, where the revenue comes mostly from television - F1 have a completely bonkers 'travel bubble' plan, to keep everyone safe as they move around, it involves dozens of private planes and busses (all booked for months and quarantined), hotel take-overs for each team and tens of thousands of Covid tests with their own processing lab. Apart from the Premier League, no-one else can do anything similar.0 -
What makes a referendum illegal then , regale with your knowledge of the law and explain why the government of Scotland cannot call a referendum on anything it wants. Where is that written in the constitution as per your heroes in Madrid.HYUFD said:
We can certainly ignore an illegal independence referendum, Madrid has set the precedent, even if we do not go as far as themPhilip_Thompson said:
You're backtracking. We have all seen you advocate following Madrid's example, are you retracting that now?HYUFD said:
I have not advocated the above, only no indyref2 for a generation.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I recall that is exactly what you were advocating. So clearly you do regard Scotland as a colony.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
I was merely comparing that as mild compared to Madrid and Beijing's actions0 -
The police came cold to the situation, they needed to contain it first. They didnt have the advantage of five minutes of TV footage.RochdalePioneers said:
Saw that. Makes complete sense, just nick anyone you can. You can spot the troublemakers, they're the ones not in police uniformNigelb said:
https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1267641851215036416RochdalePioneers said:On America I will believe literally any video anyone can conceive of showing cops arresting kneeled "I live you" protestors, beating foreign journalists on live TV, shooting rubber bullets to maim, shooting reporters, whatever. Literally nothing that sounds like an exaggeration is possible. Its literally mental the stuff I am seeing on Twitter.
Must be hard to asses the situation safely when you know any one of the people could have firearms.0 -
Three times now, senator Tom Cotton has publicly called for Trump to do something specific and envelope-moving and Trump has then done it: pull out of Iran agreement, blame China for Covid, threaten to quell riots in US cities using the federal army. That's enough for me to have placed a wager on Cotton winning the 2020 election (at decimal odds 1000) in five months' time. Five months!0
-
And unless you are a sixteen year old child, the world is not binary.Luckyguy1983 said:
I often hear this argument on PB. 'How can you be on the side of Farage/Orange marchers/people who put St George flags on their houses/people who put awful posters up about immigrants?'. When the issue in question is a binary choice, I am always puzzled by this. How can anyone be so morally unconvinced of a conclusion that they have come to that they would reverse this view because it picked up a fellow traveller who they found less than savoury?kinabalu said:
This is true as a general rule. But we're talking Trump here. If he is pro something that is in and of itself a strong piece of evidence in the debit column. Not to say it can't be outweighed by the credit side but it's off to a bad start and has some catching up to do.Luckyguy1983 said:
Well that's utterly stupid isn't it? If something is a positive development, who cares if it happens for negative reasons? It's probably the way things happen more often than not.kinabalu said:
Yes. It might be a good move but the fact that Trump is considering it purely because he himself is in a spat with Twitter rather undermines its appeal.Malmesbury said:Biden and some of the left want the 230 protection removed as well - they see it as protecting Twitter et al from the consequences of their publishing material.
The traditional media see removing the protection as levelling the playing field.
Ironically, because DT has trodden on the issue with his fat feet, everyone else has gone quiet on this.0 -
Lots of people are working from home, those that can't are working at a workplace. That's the entire legislation !IanB2 said:
That the government is whipping over this suggests some political reason, which is poor show at a time of crisis. Nevertheless the counter-argument is that it would look pretty poor for parliament to be sending people back to work and children back to school and yet be afraid of returning themselves.RochdalePioneers said:
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.
MPs can demonstrably work from home.0 -
Well, objets trouves on the shore and similar flotsam, such as bits of artisticallu shaped wood, would do a better job. The jellyfish for sure are no more invertebrate than some of the denizens of the Front Bench. And whelk eggcases are less spongy and impalpable than some of the statements we have seen recently.Philip_Thompson said:
Almost all of seem to be hosted by the PM, the Health Secretary, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the First Secretary of State or the Education Secretary or the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.Anabobazina said:
Tuesdays and Thursdays would suffice – and make sure they are staffed by senior punters rather than the flotsam and jetsam of the Tory front benchFrancisUrquhart said:
They should have been ended at weekends ages ago, there isn't enough new information to make them a worthwhile exercise.Scott_xP said:
I would prefer they moved to 5 days, each day a specific area and have appropriate minister asked by relevant correspondents.
All of whom are in the Cabinet and very, very relevant to this, not flotsam and jetsam.0 -
Back to the ridiculous international pissing competition I seeHYUFD said:
As Spain is still ahead of the UK on deaths per capita it would overtake us as well, leaving Belgium and Sweden as most deaths per head in the worldAndrew said:Sweden just overtook France on deaths/capita. Spain next, maybe in 6 weeks.
0 -
So what you're saying is we can have a de facto united Ireland, while de jure having Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom?TOPPING said:
Interesting polling.HYUFD said:
Wrong, all the polling shows only a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would push Northern Irish voters towards a United Ireland.TOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.
Boris avoided that
However, a border between the island of Ireland and Great Britain, which Boris instituted, and which he also said no British Prime Minister could ever contemplate doing, actually creates a de facto united Ireland.
Sounds like a tremendous masterstroke made capable by a master statesman, wouldn't you agree?1 -
That does not make it true.LostPassword said:
Wow, that's wild. I've found reports of the same in Dallas and Manhattan.Alistair said:
The mental stuff is the video of police in Boston systematically putting out piles of bricks around and about the town.RochdalePioneers said:On America I will believe literally any video anyone can conceive of showing cops arresting kneeled "I live you" protestors, beating foreign journalists on live TV, shooting rubber bullets to maim, shooting reporters, whatever. Literally nothing that sounds like an exaggeration is possible. Its literally mental the stuff I am seeing on Twitter.
0 -
Page 14 of the Covid risk report should finally put to bed any idea that this is a significant danger to death for the under 50s.
There have been very few deaths nation-wide for the under 50s.0 -
I think it is because if those people also believe in one side of that binary choice then it is an indication for caution and question. Therefore when someone like Farage uses hate filled messages against immigrants to try to persuade people to vote Brexit, and the other advocates of Brexit do not clearly and unequivocally condemn it, it is an indicator that many people on that side secretly, if not overtly approve of the message. Therefore it is my opinion that most (tho not all) people who voted Brexit are racist to some degree or other. The real reason to vote for it is the dislike of most things foreign.Luckyguy1983 said:
I often hear this argument on PB. 'How can you be on the side of Farage/Orange marchers/people who put St George flags on their houses/people who put awful posters up about immigrants?'. When the issue in question is a binary choice, I am always puzzled by this. How can anyone be so morally unconvinced of a conclusion that they have come to that they would reverse this view because it picked up a fellow traveller who they found less than savoury?kinabalu said:
This is true as a general rule. But we're talking Trump here. If he is pro something that is in and of itself a strong piece of evidence in the debit column. Not to say it can't be outweighed by the credit side but it's off to a bad start and has some catching up to do.Luckyguy1983 said:
Well that's utterly stupid isn't it? If something is a positive development, who cares if it happens for negative reasons? It's probably the way things happen more often than not.kinabalu said:
Yes. It might be a good move but the fact that Trump is considering it purely because he himself is in a spat with Twitter rather undermines its appeal.Malmesbury said:Biden and some of the left want the 230 protection removed as well - they see it as protecting Twitter et al from the consequences of their publishing material.
The traditional media see removing the protection as levelling the playing field.
Ironically, because DT has trodden on the issue with his fat feet, everyone else has gone quiet on this.1 -
Fair commentPhilip_Thompson said:
I doubt Indy 2 will happen next year.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You cannot get beyond spouting the same repetitive rubbish post after postHYUFD said:
First, no indyref2 will not happen this parliament regardless of what happens next year, the Tories won on a manifesto commitment to no indyref2.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not the point, the point is your lack of respect towards the Scots shows an intolerance that is just crassHYUFD said:
You do realise the Tory manifesto on which the 2019 general election was won ruled out indyref2 for a generation?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You spout the most idiotic nonsense on ScotlandHYUFD said:
If we wanted to make Scotland a colony that is what we would do, we are not so Scotland is not a colony.Richard_Tyndall said:
I hope you are not claiming we should regard Spain and China as positive examples to follow.HYUFD said:
That is exactly what the Spanish government did to Catalan nationalist leaders yes and what Beijing is starting to do to Hong Kong pro independence leaders with its new anti separatism lawMalmesbury said:
You are forgetting - taking control of Police Scotland, arresting officers for obeying orders from Holyrood. And arresting most of the SNP leadership and putting them in prison on treason charges.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
Scots voted to stay in the UK freely and fairly in 2014
For goodness sake show some respect or go and join Trump in the US
You voted for that as much as I did
And Indy 2 will happen this parliament if the SNP win Holyrood 21.
And I do not expect them to win Independence especially since covid 19
Second, if we go to WTO terms Brexit there is clearly a chance Scots vote for independence so any vote must wait until after the next general election and it is settled whether we are still on WTO terms Brexit with Boris or back in the single market with Starmer
For someone who spends their spare time getting overwhelmed with excitement over replays of previous general elections, and comment on here as moments happen as if in real time, I would suggest you need to get out more
And 7 days is a week in politics.
Mind you when Indy 2 happens towards the end of next year you will reverse ferret like mad
My guess if there will be an Indy 2 then it will be 2022.
If the SNP win a clear mandate to hold Indy 2 then there will need to be time to negotiate the parameters of it, then time for the debate etc to be held. 2022 is far enough after the Holyrood elections for it to happen, far enough after Brexit transition ends for Scots to make an educated choice, far enough after COVID to not risk a new spike, and early enough before the next UK General Election for it to not interfere.0 -
Under the terms of devolution as agreed in the late 90s.malcolmg said:
What makes a referendum illegal then , regale with your knowledge of the law and explain why the government of Scotland cannot call a referendum on anything it wants. Where is that written in the constitution as per your heroes in Madrid.HYUFD said:
We can certainly ignore an illegal independence referendum, Madrid has set the precedent, even if we do not go as far as themPhilip_Thompson said:
You're backtracking. We have all seen you advocate following Madrid's example, are you retracting that now?HYUFD said:
I have not advocated the above, only no indyref2 for a generation.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I recall that is exactly what you were advocating. So clearly you do regard Scotland as a colony.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
I was merely comparing that as mild compared to Madrid and Beijing's actions
If you don't mind me asking, where you old enough to vote then? Do you mind if I ask how you voted in that referendum? If you were old enough and voted Yes then you endorsed a devolution settlement which wrote that into the constitution.0 -
The analogy is growing between this and Islamic terrorism. We end up accusing everyone else, pointing fingers, congratulating ourselves, whereas we are a hotbed of the very thing we are criticising others for mishandling.CarlottaVance said:0 -
David, surely you are not pretending MP's are key workers, that would be an incredible whopperDavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
0 -
And the written confirmationnico67 said:
Stefaan De Rynck head of the EUs UK taskforce .Big_G_NorthWales said:
Source pleasenico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.
And the method of agreeing the payment is in the WA .
'If it is not in writing it has not been said'0 -
Actually, Big-G, he is right about that. The Scottish Parliament is devolved, not federal. So whereas in the USA (for example) any powers not transferred to the centre remain with the states, in the UK any powers not transferred to the Scottish Parliament remain with Westminster. In fact Schedule 5 of the 1998 act creating the Scottish Parliament specifically says constitutional matters are reserved and particularly mentions that Scotland cannot unilaterally secede from the union.malcolmg said:
What makes a referendum illegal then , regale with your knowledge of the law and explain why the government of Scotland cannot call a referendum on anything it wants. Where is that written in the constitution as per your heroes in Madrid.HYUFD said:
We can certainly ignore an illegal independence referendum, Madrid has set the precedent, even if we do not go as far as themPhilip_Thompson said:
You're backtracking. We have all seen you advocate following Madrid's example, are you retracting that now?HYUFD said:
I have not advocated the above, only no indyref2 for a generation.Richard_Tyndall said:
As I recall that is exactly what you were advocating. So clearly you do regard Scotland as a colony.HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
I was merely comparing that as mild compared to Madrid and Beijing's actions
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/schedule/5
So a referendum held without Westminster’s approval would be illegal. Whether that would make it wise to refuse one, or to ignore the result if one was held, is another question entirely.2 -
Hasn;t the government asked people to return to work if their work environment is safe?Pulpstar said:
Lots of people are working from home, those that can't are working at a workplace. That's the entire legislation !IanB2 said:
That the government is whipping over this suggests some political reason, which is poor show at a time of crisis. Nevertheless the counter-argument is that it would look pretty poor for parliament to be sending people back to work and children back to school and yet be afraid of returning themselves.RochdalePioneers said:
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.
MPs can demonstrably work from home.
Is the work environment Rees Mogg is proposing unsafe either for MPs or their families?
0 -
And that, Laydeez and Gennlemen is why proper Conservatives are so furious at the behaviour of the current government. They are so inward looking, self-centred, solipsistic and inept that they are making the country a laughing stock internationally.TOPPING said:
The analogy is growing between this and Islamic terrorism. We end up accusing everyone else, pointing fingers, congratulating ourselves, whereas we are a hotbed of the very thing we are criticising others for mishandling.CarlottaVance said:
Why the UK? True exceptionalism. For all the wrong reasons. And these muppets, lead by the muppet in chief and his "advisor", are to blame.0 -
Not really controversialCarlottaVance said:0 -
The thing is, the ECJ has form in deciding that yes we do owe money for things were we thought we did not (the brilliantly timed decision that the shadow economy of drug dealing and prostitution had to be taken into account when deciding the size of the UK contribution comes to mind). This means that, even if you are correct, it is not that unreasonable a statement to make and is certainly plausible.nico67 said:If the UK extends the transition period it will not be liable for any future contributions that go towards the MFF including anything in relation to the EU recovery fund .
Leavers need to stop peddling the lie that the UK will be liable for that.
The WA states in clear terms how the process works . It will be a one off payment , that’s it.1 -
Yes, a very apt comparison. The UK has probably had one of the worst responses to the virus on the stated goal of saving lives.TOPPING said:
The analogy is growing between this and Islamic terrorism. We end up accusing everyone else, pointing fingers, congratulating ourselves, whereas we are a hotbed of the very thing we are criticising others for mishandling.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Possibly. I think it is more likely that HYUFD is desperately trying to say that a couple of the others are worse than UK, therefore suggesting that the Bozo and Dom Act are not that incompetent. It must be awful when you realise someone you have idolised is actually a crock of shit. Perhaps HY is not quite there yet, though I think he is still just about in the denial phase.nichomar said:
Back to the ridiculous international pissing competition I seeHYUFD said:
As Spain is still ahead of the UK on deaths per capita it would overtake us as well, leaving Belgium and Sweden as most deaths per head in the worldAndrew said:Sweden just overtook France on deaths/capita. Spain next, maybe in 6 weeks.
0 -
Or somebody who is incapable of thinking coherently, most certainly.Philip_Thompson said:
So what you're saying is we can have a de facto united Ireland, while de jure having Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom?TOPPING said:
Interesting polling.HYUFD said:
Wrong, all the polling shows only a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would push Northern Irish voters towards a United Ireland.TOPPING said:
Exactly. Because the EU said that was its red line and Boris caved.HYUFD said:
As the EU would not agree the Withdrawal Agreement otherwise or else GB would have had to stay indefinitely in a customs union.TOPPING said:
Boris has put a border down the Irish Sea. Something he said that no British Prime Minister could ever do. Why did he do that?HYUFD said:
Wrong.TOPPING said:
Poor them. You voted for a party which has established a pathway to a united Ireland. The PM did something he himself said no British Prime Minister could do. And you are cheering him on.HYUFD said:
Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland now after the Withdrawal AgreementTOPPING said:
5. Is such a passionate Unionist that he wants NI to stay a part of the United KingdomAnabobazina said:
You position on Scotland seems to be as follows:HYUFD said:
Indeed, if Scotland was truly a colony we would have done what Madrid has done, banned any indyref in 2014 and also scrapped Holyrood and imposed direct rule from Westminster and not even allowed Scottish MPs in the CommonsNigel_Foremain said:
You are not a colony you dipshit. Scotland has been massively overrepresented in both the modern British state and the British Empire. Scotland is just as much part of Britain as England is. Your colony crap is just chippy nonsense and definitely is "absolute and utter bollox of the highest order". You clearly do not know the history of the country that you claim your own. Typical Little Scotlander, so like your nationalistic small minded Little Englander cousins.malcolmg said:
Absolute and utter bollox of the highest order. If the majority in Scotland want it then under any rule of law ( dictatorship maybe excluded) then they are entitled to vote , become independent etc. Just because some English want to retain us as a colony it does not make the case for Britain to stay as a union, Britain is not ONE country. How fe***ng dumb can people on here be.LostPassword said:
One of the complications is that whether you're consisted a Scot for the purpose of the referendum is a matter of timing.Time_to_Leave said:
I think our only contribution should be to be clear on what we would do/not do in response. But the basic line should be that we’d do what we could to make it as painless and easy as possible. Of course if the Scots really wanted independence I think the quickest way is to support a vote on it in ONLY the rest of the U.K....kle4 said:
But while the decision is only between those two groups (and those who dont care) the rest of the UK is a legitimately interested party, affected by the outcome, with many for and many against, and how the rest of the UK might react to plans of an indy Scotland or plans for a continuing Union might be of some relevance to those actually making the decision in Scotland, particularly those on the fence.Time_to_Leave said:
It would be nice to think we could have an actual debate between those Scots with an understandable wish to be independent and those Scots who wish to be in the Union; and that the rest of the U.K. would stay out of it.StuartDickson said:IndyRef2 is going to be fun if media starts actually fact-checking the BritNat guff.
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Perhaps you've recently moved away for a job - no longer able to vote in the referendum and vice versa. There are so many people who wouldn't be able to vote, but would be directly affected by the outcome, that it makes the case for Britain remaining one country.
1. You don't care a fig about Scots
2. You are head over heels in love with the Union (despite point 1)
3. You think Yes would lose IndyRef 2
4. You want desperately to block IndyRef2 (despite point 3)
Do I have this right?
6. Is entirely happy that the party he voted for has set in motion a pathway to a united Ireland via the institution of a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUKKBN20C0WF
Northern Irish voters are very happy with no hard border with the Republic of Ireland while still technically part of the UK.
Best of both worlds
However if the EU refuse a FTA with GB I would not put it past Boris to refuse to impose checks in the Irish Sea as we will be on WTO terms Brexit anyway
Doesn't bode well for the future. And there is much that I wouldn't put past Boris but in the upcoming negotiations he will find himself up against treaties and agreements. Not a tricky question or two from Beth Rigby.
But the point is, Boris agreed to a measure which establishes a pathway to a united Ireland and I would have thought that as "a unionist", this was something you disagreed with.
Boris avoided that
However, a border between the island of Ireland and Great Britain, which Boris instituted, and which he also said no British Prime Minister could ever contemplate doing, actually creates a de facto united Ireland.
Sounds like a tremendous masterstroke made capable by a master statesman, wouldn't you agree?0 -
.
Yes.contrarian said:
Hasn;t the government asked people to return to work if their work environment is safe?Pulpstar said:
Lots of people are working from home, those that can't are working at a workplace. That's the entire legislation !IanB2 said:
That the government is whipping over this suggests some political reason, which is poor show at a time of crisis. Nevertheless the counter-argument is that it would look pretty poor for parliament to be sending people back to work and children back to school and yet be afraid of returning themselves.RochdalePioneers said:
Doing something this inherently stupid is right up JRM's street. His own side are telling him that its stupid. The speaker says that its stupid. But Jacob thinks he can win favour by ignoring the "Work from Home" advice put out by his government to put the cheering mob on the benches behind the PM.DavidL said:
Not if they are not allowed to vote from there.Carnyx said:
No, because they could demonstrably WFH.DavidL said:
It wouldn't be breaking the Scottish rules because it would be necessary for them to travel to do their job.malcolmg said:I hope Sturgeon has the bollox to ban all SNP MP's travelling to London and breaking the Scottish Government rules, will not hold my breath though.
None of this doesn't mean that this isn't the stupidest idea that the government has had since JRM last thought of something.
MPs can demonstrably work from home.
Is the work environment Rees Mogg is proposing unsafe either for MPs or their families?0
This discussion has been closed.