Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

cossieuk

Members
  • Content Count

    3,756
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

Posts posted by cossieuk

  1. Dont count on this being the last extension.  The EU does not want a no deal Brexit but if that is to happen they will want to make sure that it the UKs choice and not because they would give an extension.  If the UK leaves with no deal because of the EU not giving an extension then the EU will get the blame for everything bad that happens after that point and they dont want that

  2. 3 minutes ago, Doro said:

    No, he's right, there won't be any checks. The exit declaration isn't a check, it's a form. You've got to pay attention to wording on this sort of shit, it's very particular.

    So there will be no checks done on these companies to ensure that they are filling in these forms.  Of course there are checks

  3. Another reason to not trust Boris, he has just said in PMQs that there will be no checks between the NI and GB which is the opposite of what the Brexit secretory confirmed yesterday and the opposite of what is actually stated in the deal he has agreed.  If he is going to lie about something that was confirm yesterday by his own cabinet why should anyone believe anything he says about Brexit

  4. 14 minutes ago, Doro said:

    As I said, they're a traitor for preventing the will of the people. Until a general election happens, the will of the people is to Leave.

    A general elections should not and must not be all about Brexit.  If if only about the will of the people on Brexit then have a referendum.  A general election should be about all issues that affect the country

  5. 16 minutes ago, Doro said:

    Look through it, it really hasn't changed much beyond the backstop. Their impact assessments covered these possibilities already.

    NI trading with the rest of the UK is 5 times that of it trade with ROI but there is now a boarder in the Irish Sea that only affects companies on one side, that has a massive affect on the NI economy.  When the deal can unite both the Unionist and the Nationalist in NI in saying it is bad then something is wrong.  The DUP want to leave the EU but not on a deal that hurts NI.

    20 minutes ago, Doro said:

    Because it's tied up with the "level playing field" concept, which (similar to a customs union) means you have to agree to follow the same terms as another country. Removing it means keeping a competitive edge available.

    Removing it just allows the Tories to scrap worker rights.  

    25 minutes ago, Doro said:

    I haven't called people with different positions traitors. I'm calling the MPs blocking the will of the people traitors, because that's what they are.

    How are they traitor, they have a different opinion on the future of the country.  The referendum was advisory, Parliament is not bound by the result.  Well both parties had it in the manifesto o respect the result, manifesto pledges are worth jack shit, all parties break them and people dont care.  As for the will of the people that can and does change often, that is why we have elections every 5 years or so so people can express their will.   Now we know what the deal to leave is, as opposed to the thousands of promises made before the referendum, in which we were told by all the main players in the leave campaign that we would get a deal and that no deal would not happen, lets see if it is what the people want,.   Surely that is a reasonable thing to do. 

  6. 3 hours ago, Doro said:

    They did. It happened in 2018. It still covers it.

    Yep, there'll be more traitors trying to undermine Brexit, but that's been happening since the referendum results were announced.

    But this deal is not the same, so the impact will not be the same. 

    As for what the Government says about the deal, I dont trust them at all.  Hell the Brexit Secretory didnt even know that this deal will make NI firm submit declaration forms in order to sell goods to the rest of the UK, this puts them at a disadvantage when competing with other firms in the UK as they now have an added layer of red tape and expense.  It is his job to know what is in the deal and he failed at it on a straight forward question that he should have known about.

    Also why has the protection of working rights been removed from the deal and moved to the political declaration, which is meaningless.  The Tories have long been against many workers rights and once we leave they will start stripping them back.

    As for calling people with a different position on Brexit and what to do traitors is just stupid.  People can have different opinions and can even change their minds about what they think is the best way forward for the whole country not just for now but for the next few decades.

  7. If it is mostly the same as before, why has the government not done an impact assessment.  There are on 60000 impact assessments on the governments website but none for this deal as there has not been time to do one yet.  On the BBC earlier they mentioned a government adviser saying that a bill like this would require 4 weeks for proper scrutiny.

    Also lets not get started with the number of amendments that will be put forward for this bill, and depending on what passes Boris will need to go back to the EU and ask then to renegotiate the deal which could make it harder to get Parliament to pass the withdrawal bill

  8. On 10/20/2019 at 6:15 PM, Almagnus1 said:

    Fun fact about the tax returns, Trump has zero legal reason to do it, as it was a political move started by Nixon.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/03/want-your-presidential-candidates-to-release-their-taxes-theres-a-bill-for-that/

    So why are you so intent on prying into the private life of a person?

    Didn't Trump promise that he would release them.  For that reason alone he should do it.  Why say you will if you are not going to.  Yet another lie by Trump

  9. 11 minutes ago, Doro said:

    Yup, traitor Letwin has succeeded in fucking the country over. Here's hoping the EU reject the extension request. The irony that our democracy now rests on the decision of the very organisation we want to leave, because our own MPs have chosen to once again put the UK through months of uncertainty for no reason at all. Hang the lot of them.

    MPs wanting to actually scuritinise the deal is not a bad thing in any way.  Time must be given to see what MPs are being asked to vote for.  Letwin is actually pro Brexit.  He just wants to have a deal.  We were told Brexit was about Parliament taking back control, well Parliament has spoken, now Johnson must comply with the law or we may as well shut down Parliament  

  10. The Letwin amendment has passed, so Johnson must but law sent a letter by 11 pm tonight.  He is saying he will not negotiate an extension and the BBC is reporting that an unnamed source in the Downing Street says the PM will not ask for an extension.

    Surely if by 11 pm tonight he has not sent the letter he will have to be prosecuted for breaking the law.  In that case he would surely have to resign as PM

  11. So now Gove and Raab are giving assurances that if we have no trade deal done by the end of 2020 we will leave with no deal.

     

     

    So even voting for this deal means there is a chance of no deal and I suspect that many Tories would be happy for this to happen and may even attempt tp make this happen by ensuring that no trade deal is reach, which would not be hard given that it took 7 years for the EU to get a deal with the US

    Also Oliver Letwin has an amendment that will ensure that we get an extension even if the deal passes tomorrow.  This will ensure that there is sufficient time to pass the necessary legislation to leave and again ensure that the clock is not run down forcing a no deal Brexit

  12. 3 minutes ago, Doro said:

    No, because the surrender bill doesn't specify succeeding in getting an extension. It just says that the letter must be sent as written. Asking outside of that letter to not get an extension doesn't frustrate that the letter was sent as the surrender bill demands. That's the loophole.

    The Benn act is to ensure that we dont leave on the 31st unless Parliament votes to do so

    From the article I linked

    So, in the context of Brexit, where there is now the Benn Act obliging the Prime Minister to seek an extension of the Article 50 period so as to avoid a No Deal Brexit, this principle means:

    a minister cannot send a side letter to the European Union saying that the UK does not really want an extension and asking EU to reject the application

    the government cannot use delegated or secondary legislation (or Orders in/of Council) to rob the Benn Act of effect

     

    There is no way this is not going back in front a the courts on Monday

  13. 29 minutes ago, Doro said:

    There's a loophole, though. The surrender bill only states that the government must ask for an extension in the exact wording of the letter, not that it must secure an extension. There's nothing that says there can't be an accompanying text stating that this letter needs to be accepted under specific grounds, and those grounds could easily be termed as unacceptable in some form to the EU in order to prevent them accepting an extension. The government could just outright say "this is a letter we have to send because of the surrender bill, but in all honesty we don't actually want it" and it would still be following what was put into place to try to overturn democracy.

    Actually the Padfield Principle does not allow ministers to do someone or not do something that frustrates and act of Parliament.  Writing the letter and then saying to ignore the letter frustrates the Benn act .

  14. 59 minutes ago, ZaklanoSrce said:

    If a women doesnt want a child then she should use a fucking pill . 

    This is not always an option for some women as they have adverse reactions to the pill, but where possible I agree women have a role in using contraception.  Sadly there are large parts of the US that is against contraception and go out of their way to make it hard for both men and women to get easy access to it.

    • Like 1
  15. 5 minutes ago, ZaklanoSrce said:

    If technology one day allows growing babies in vats i guess that would be one way to solve this problem,but in that case i would support " mother " loosing any right to that child after " turning into human " .If you didn't want it inside you,you don't any right to it afterwards .

    Irony is that " pro-choice " movement completely ignores and discriminates against other gender .How about you give man right to " financial abortion " - if a man doesn't want that child he shouldn't be forced to pay child support ( and sure in that case take away his right to ever see that child ) .

    If women decides that she wants a child - man is a financial slave .

    If man wants that child and women doesn't - he can fuck himself .

    Doesn't seem very " equal " right ?

    If a man doesnt want a child then he should use a fucking condom. 

    • Like 1
  16. 21 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

    Pathetic... 

    If you're going to shill (and lie) for Biden, at least own it.

    And yet, this exact behavior is why I will vote Trump, because fuck you that's why. 

    I have never understood the idea of voting for someone just because it pisses other people off.  Surely having someone that knows how to do the job is better that someone that is a laughing stock.

    As for what Biden did or didnt do, investigate him, but lets not pretend that we should ignore what Trump did because someone else may have done the same thing in the past

    It should also be noted that the investigation in the company the Biden's some worked for focused on a time period before he got the job and he was never under investigation

  17. 21 hours ago, Amenhir said:

    The reporting says that this second whistle blower actually has first hand knowledge of the call.  They can't use the whole hearsay argument to deflect.  I honestly believe that Trump is so stupid that he could very well have stated directly that an investigation would help his reelection.

    The hearsay argument is flawed

     

×
×
  • Create New...