Johnson seeks to prorogue Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veg1960

I'm not so sure Eric. It seems certain that there will be an election in the not too distant future, and the only way I can see the Tories avoiding a kicking by the Brexit party is by making a really hard Brexit.

---

Or being forced into an election by those bloody remainers which I think might be the plan. Or maybe all is as it seems and this no deal pressure is because he genuinely thinks he can get a meaningful allowance from the EU.

In a post hard brexit election Boris gets mauled I think. Who actually votes for him? The British public are notoriously good at revising their position historically and pretending they didn't want or vote for that big thing that went wrong. Tory remainers will be ****ing done with the party and he will have served his purpose to the leavers who aren't traditional conservatives.

I think he needs an election before leaving and needs to keep as much of the brexit party support as he can.

Or maybe he has gone wrong in the head and actively wants no deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Or being forced into an election by those bloody remainers which I think might be the plan. Or maybe all is as it seems and this no deal pressure is because he genuinely thinks he can get a meaningful allowance from the EU.

In a post hard brexit election Boris gets mauled I think. Who actually votes for him? The British public are notoriously good at revising their position historically and pretending they didn't want or vote for that big thing that went wrong. Tory remainers will be ****ing done with the party and he will have served his purpose to the leavers who aren't traditional conservatives.

I think he needs an election before leaving and needs to keep as much of the brexit party support as he can.

Or maybe he has gone wrong in the head and actively wants no deal.

---

It's a ducking mess, is what it is.

Politics will never be the same

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

It's a ducking mess, is what it is.

Politics will never be the same

---

It's true. No matter what happens now the country will remain divided and likely bits of it will fall off the map.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

It's true. No matter what happens now the country will remain divided and likely bits of it will fall off the map.

---

If we leave it'll all settle down within a while and people will like the outcomes. If we somehow don't though, it will get worse and we'll face serious civil disorder or worse because historically nationalist and independence movement never go away once they've reached a certain popularity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

If we leave it'll all settle down within a while and people will like the outcomes. If we somehow don't though, it will get worse and we'll face serious civil disorder or worse because historically nationalist and independence movement never go away once they've reached a certain popularity

---

Project Fear

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

There is a worldwide multi billion dollar industry built around political campaigning, to say it has no effect is a bit naive in my view.

---

Lots of industries are built on bullshit. The democrats outspent Donald Trump many times over but it didn't work.
In the matter of whether people wanted to be in the EU, I think most people knew what they intended to vote from the outset and if all the endless bullshit of project fear didn't change their minds I doubt whether anything Boris Johnson said did either.

I mean, everyone knew and still knows that he's not genuine in his beliefs on the matter, but decided to support Leave because he correctly worked out that we'd win. If Gary Lineker had promised ice cream or whiskey running from the taps if we voted to Remain I wouldn't have changed my mind and I doubt whether many people would have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I'm sure he knows that , even the biggest fool would reognise this is not unity .

Either is the opposition ludicrous idea of a unity interim government headed up by JC .


Boris knows both the result in 2016 and the countless parliamentary battles since , sees a huge split in the country.

I find this moment equally as ludicrous than that of a JC clutching at straws unite option ,neither man or thier politics are universally liked so how could they unite the country ???

What he is doing thpugh is forcing the issue, and creating perception enough is enough, we can't go on forever with this Brext battle , pehaps Europe /Eire will deliver some form of amendmen to the backstop to get it through, rather use it as a barrier not to leave .

Its best in my humble view to partion off one's political allegiances, and hatred of the Tories , to get Brexit done ,and the dislodge them on issues that matter to us at home .

We are where we are.

---

The perfect option, but we need a new political that is neither left of right, and which operates at the grassroots level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

And the voting slip did not mention leave or stay with or without a deal .

It appears both the Irish Border and a deal was the remainers back pocket insurance policy if they lost and they are still playing it .

---

Nothing happens by accident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Project Fear

---

Brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I followed that campaign , sorry the two things that got very little traction , discusion was the Irish backstop , and leaving with some sort of deal.

The debate was all about emotional stuff such as :

Independence
Free trade
Dosh we pay in .
Making our laws.
Unelected bureaucratics.
Cost of runnjng the EEC
Free movement.
Fishing quotas.
Farming subsidies .

And the voting slip did not mention leave or stay with or without a deal .

It appears both the Irish Border and a deal was the remainers back pocket insurance policy if they lost and they are still playing it .

---

That's a great point... and it would actually make sense if 'the remainers' who called the referendum stuck around to play their insurance policy after they lost, instead of f**king off in an instant and leaving others to pick up the shit that they'd left behind.

Not much of an 'insurance policy' after all, is it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Project Fear

---

Project Fear was invented by remainers, no food , no medicine,no flights (remember)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

That's a great point... and it would actually make sense if 'the remainers' who called the referendum stuck around to play their insurance policy after they lost, instead of f**king off in an instant and leaving others to pick up the shit that they'd left behind.

Not much of an 'insurance policy' after all, is it?

---

The people who setup the 'insurance policy' had to leave, so that May was untainted when she picked up the baton. Cameron could hardly be the one to bring those issues into play, when he himself was the one who worded the referendum!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Project Fear was invented by remainers, no food , no medicine,no flights (remember)

---

What he really meant to say was Project Sour Grapes :biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Project Fear was invented by remainers, no food , no medicine,no flights (remember)

---

We haven’t left yet. I sincerely hope we get a deal but in case of no deal a lot of of people (not remaining politicians) but experts in their field like those in the haulage industry.

What a lousy, stinking farce. For what??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Project Fear was invented by remainers, no food , no medicine,no flights (remember)

---

Have a whoosh, my friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Have a whoosh, my friend.

---

What a meaningless comment !

Going back to my original post which was erroneously tagged as an alternative "project fear". No , because it was hardly intended to effect public opinion , which was the purpose of "project fear".
What's more, it was and is an objective observation of history and human nature. In Ireland, Cyprus, the USA in comparitvely recent times stretching back to the Classical period, national independence has always been a genie which cannot be put back into the bottle once raised in any significant way. It has often been temporarily resisted though, and the result of that has always been the same.

It's no surprise that Lardy and Heisenberg can't or won't see the distinction between the two concepts, but mine is based upon human experience and history rather than political spin, whilst the other is based upon nothing but interested parties taking it upon themselves to predict future events in a particular way which suits their agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

What a meaningless comment !

Going back to my original post which was erroneously tagged as an alternative "project fear". No , because it was hardly intended to effect public opinion , which was the purpose of "project fear".
What's more, it was and is an objective observation of history and human nature. In Ireland, Cyprus, the USA in comparitvely recent times stretching back to the Classical period, national independence has always been a genie which cannot be put back into the bottle once raised in any significant way. It has often been temporarily resisted though, and the result of that has always been the same.

It's no surprise that Lardy and Heisenberg can't or won't see the distinction between the two concepts, but mine is based upon human experience and history rather than political spin, whilst the other is based upon nothing but interested parties taking it upon themselves to predict future events in a particular way which suits their agenda.

---

For someone who does detailed post analysis, subtleties seem to be a problem for you :hehe:

Yes, project fear was meant to suggest that by saying brexit would have bad effects was simply fear mongering.

Now you're saying that brexit would make everyone happy but remaining would lead to serious civil disorder! If a remainer had made the exact opposite argument they'd rightly be laughed at. Or it would be called... dun dun dun...Project Fear.

The country is too divided for there to be any mutually acceptable outcome, and that includes the outcome that you want.

Attachment 3227

Leavers knew they were voting for no deal?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCS_FvNXoAERVWs.png (link as the image uploaded was small)

Interesting that all our ccmb leavers were in the enlightened 3.7%, who knew we were such an intelligent bunch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Attachment 3227

Leavers knew they were voting for no deal?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCS_FvNXoAERVWs.png (link as the image uploaded was small)

Interesting that all our ccmb leavers were in the enlightened 3.7%, who knew we were such an intelligent bunch.

---

Thanks for posting this very interesting info which is a record of what people were thinking just before the Referendum as opposed to what they now say they were thinking. Over 78 per cent of those intending to vote Leave thought it very unlikely, fairly unlikely or didn't know when it came to us losing access to the single market.

Data like this shows the hoops Brexiteers have had to jump though in the past three and a bit years, whether it was the no deal Brexit which virtually everyone in the main parties was saying would never happen in June 2016 or the proroguing of Parliament that Hancock, Rudd, Morgan, Gove and Johnson were all heard denouncing at the beginning of Newsnight on Wednesday.

On the subject of Newsnight, what cowardice from the Government not to send a representative to appear on there on the last two nights - Labour have often been just as bad when it comes to antisemitim mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

For someone who does detailed post analysis, subtleties seem to be a problem for you :hehe:

Yes, project fear was meant to suggest that by saying brexit would have bad effects was simply fear mongering.

Now you're saying that brexit would make everyone happy but remaining would lead to serious civil disorder! If a remainer had made the exact opposite argument they'd rightly be laughed at. Or it would be called... dun dun dun...Project Fear.

The country is too divided for there to be any mutually acceptable outcome, and that includes the outcome that you want.

---

No. You're not getting this are you ?
Brexit is about national independence and all the rest is incidental.
Historically , once a substantial group start demanding independence , it eventually comes to be, often by military means.

You might not be aware, for example , that opinion in Ireland was pretty evenly split before Home Rule, however when independence happened , those who'd wanted to remain under British rule soon accepted it - this is because they would be the less adventurous people who feared change and wanted to maintain the status quo, ( that means the way things are ).

Had the republicans, or nationalists been defeated on the Bill, they wouldn't have forgotten their aims, as we see and have seen in Northern Ireland, which remained in the UK, but where despite being a minority, the Nationalists have continued an armed struggle to this very day.

Similar events can be observed in the former 'American Colony', Kenya, Cyprus, India etc etc ad inf. Nor is it new thing - Dace, Palmera or Germania in the Ancient World would tell the same story and exhibit the same patterns.

It's what invariably happens in the affairs of man, and what I want to happen has nothing to do with it.

The whole point of studying History , ( properly), is to observe these patterns of human behaviour, which don't alter, and perhaps avoid some of the unpleasant outcomes which happen when uneducated men take the helm and steer us back toward war and carnage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

No. You're not getting this are you ?
Brexit is about national independence and all the rest is incidental.
Historically , once a substantial group start demanding independence , it eventually comes to be, often by military means.

You might not be aware, for example , that opinion in Ireland was pretty evenly split before Home Rule, however when independence happened , those who'd wanted to remain under British rule soon accepted it - this is because they would be the less adventurous people who feared change and wanted to maintain the status quo, ( that means the way things are ).

Had the republicans, or nationalists been defeated on the Bill, they wouldn't have forgotten their aims, as we see and have seen in Northern Ireland, which remained in the UK, but where despite being a minority, the Nationalists have continued an armed struggle to this very day.

Similar events can be observed in the former 'American Colony', Kenya, Cyprus, India etc etc ad inf. Nor is it new thing - Dace, Palmera or Germania in the Ancient World would tell the same story and exhibit the same patterns.

It's what invariably happens in the affairs of man, and what I want to happen has nothing to do with it.

The whole point of studying History , ( properly), is to observe these patterns of human behaviour, which don't alter, and perhaps avoid some of the unpleasant outcomes which happen when uneducated men take the helm and steer us back toward war and carnage.

---

HE WAS MAKING A JOKE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Thanks for posting this very interesting info which is a record of what people were thinking just before the Referendum as opposed to what they now say they were thinking. Over 78 per cent of those intending to vote Leave thought it very unlikely, fairly unlikely or didn't know when it came to us losing access to the single market.

Data like this shows the hoops Brexiteers have had to jump though in the past three and a bit years, whether it was the no deal Brexit which virtually everyone in the main parties was saying would never happen in June 2016 or the proroguing of Parliament that Hancock, Rudd, Morgan, Gove and Johnson were all heard denouncing at the beginning of Newsnight on Wednesday.

On the subject of Newsnight, what cowardice from the Government not to send a representative to appear on there on the last two nights - Labour have often been just as bad when it comes to antisemitim mind.

---

Grant Shapps appears to have drawn the short straw and is doing the rounds putting the Governments case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

No. You're not getting this are you ?
Brexit is about national independence and all the rest is incidental.
Historically , once a substantial group start demanding independence , it eventually comes to be, often by military means.

You might not be aware, for example , that opinion in Ireland was pretty evenly split before Home Rule, however when independence happened , those who'd wanted to remain under British rule soon accepted it - this is because they would be the less adventurous people who feared change and wanted to maintain the status quo, ( that means the way things are ).

Had the republicans, or nationalists been defeated on the Bill, they wouldn't have forgotten their aims, as we see and have seen in Northern Ireland, which remained in the UK, but where despite being a minority, the Nationalists have continued an armed struggle to this very day.

Similar events can be observed in the former 'American Colony', Kenya, Cyprus, India etc etc ad inf. Nor is it new thing - Dace, Palmera or Germania in the Ancient World would tell the same story and exhibit the same patterns.

It's what invariably happens in the affairs of man, and what I want to happen has nothing to do with it.

The whole point of studying History , ( properly), is to observe these patterns of human behaviour, which don't alter, and perhaps avoid some of the unpleasant outcomes which happen when uneducated men take the helm and steer us back toward war and carnage.

---

Where's Dace? Palmera is a place near Valencia! You're not getting yourself confused with Dacia and Pannonia, are you?

Just a friendly tip; it's often useful to wear glasses when cursorily inspecting Wikipedia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Where's Dace? Palmera is a place near Valencia! You're not getting yourself confused with Dacia and Pannonia, are you?

Just a friendly tip; it's often useful to wear glasses when cursorily inspecting Wikipedia.

---

QUOTE=Dorcus;5001458]Where's Dace? Palmera is a place near Valencia! You're not getting yourself
Just a friendly tip; it's often useful to wear glasses when cursorily inspectiDacia and Pannonia, are you?

Just a friendly tip; it's often useful to wear glasses when cursorily inspecting Wikipedia.[/QUOTE]


Well, thank you for your unsolicited advice. You can spell it Palmyra if you like, depending on how you'd like to express Judeo Arameic letters in English, but it's the same place, and it was on the other side of Syria. It went to war with Rome after its agreement with them for independence was not kept to , and that you see is why I drew the comparison.
Pannonia, on the other hand was located roughly where Hungary is today and, as you will know as an accomplished classical scholar, did not go to war with Rome for independence , but was conquered by the Magyars.

I should think it's easy to confuse these two very distant and different places if you're relying on Google, but fortunately I don't have to.

Now, Dacia is the name of a province in the modern Romanian language which overlaps, but does not exactly correspond with the province which the Romans called "Daci", the ablative of which is "Dace".


-Non ducor, duco !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

QUOTE=Dorcus;5001458]Where's Dace? Palmera is a place near Valencia! You're not getting yourself
Just a friendly tip; it's often useful to wear glasses when cursorily inspectiDacia and Pannonia, are you?

Just a friendly tip; it's often useful to wear glasses when cursorily inspecting Wikipedia.

---

Well, thank you for your unsolicited advice. You can spell it Palmyra if you like, depending on how you'd like to express Judeo Arameic letters in English, but it's the same place, and it was on the other side of Syria. It went to war with Rome after its agreement with them for independence was not kept to , and that you see is why I drew the comparison.
Pannonia, on the other hand was located roughly where Hungary is today and, as you will know as an accomplished classical scholar, did not go to war with Rome for independence , but was conquered by the Magyars.

I should think it's easy to confuse these two very distant and different places if you're relying on Google, but fortunately I don't have to.

Now, Dacia is the name of a province in the modern Romanian language which overlaps, but does not exactly correspond with the province which the Romans called "Daci", the ablative of which is "Dace".


-Non ducor, duco ![/QUOTE]
I'm glad you don't feel yourself to be lead Sir Jim!

You are correct on two assumptions: yes my response was unsolicited because I am not a solicitor and yes, being a classical scholar is one amongst many of my personas.

However, as you are clearly so knowledgeable about Latin, I'm curious as to why you employed the ablative case in your earlier post when referring to Dacia when there was clearly no agency involved. Surely you should have used the Nominative case in that instance, don't you agree Philip?

Well, of course it's quite possible to solicit without being a lawyer. Indeed I have seen many young ladies convicted of it at the Marylebone Magistrates Court.
You're probably right about using the nominative if you're going to submit it to the Latin master for marks, but I really didn't expect such thorough scrutiny in a reference to Brexit. I think the point remains and I'd have thought a classical scholar would be unlikely to confuse Palmyra with Pannonia.
Interesting that you use the term "persona" , which I assume should have " dramatis" after it. Which other parts have you played I wonder - did I see you in that thing where they put the whole " Shropshire Lad" into a series of short mimes ?

Anyway, I'm not going to attack you too much because it's a refreshingly intelligent post in a desert of ****ing ignorance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

HE WAS MAKING A JOKE.

---

Post analysis: fail

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

Well, of course it's quite possible to solicit without being a lawyer. Indeed I have seen many young ladies convicted of it at the Marylebone Magistrates Court.
You're probably right about using the nominative if you're going to submit it to the Latin master for marks, but I really didn't expect such thorough scrutiny in a reference to Brexit. I think the point remains and I'd have thought a classical scholar would be unlikely to confuse Palmyra with Pannonia.
Interesting that you use the term "persona" , which I assume should have " dramatis" after it. Which other parts have you played I wonder - did I see you in that thing where they put the whole " Shropshire Lad" into a series of short mimes ?

Anyway, I'm not going to attack you too much because it's a refreshingly intelligent post in a desert of ****ing ignorance.

---

I think you meant "dramatis personae"; I didn't choose that epithet because I'm not playing the role of actor in this instance.

I was genuinely confused by your reference to "Palmera" and in the context of your allusion to Dacia I was willing to ascribe the error to autocorrect in deference to your stated knowledge, in view of Pannonia's proximity to Dacia. I'm afraid your analysis does not alter my opinion that nationalism is evil.

No, cause that'd be plural and in this case it's only the one actor.

Of course I could have claimed a typo or auto correct, but as I've told you, I don't tell lies.

Leaving all that bollocks aside, that's a very broad statement about Nationalism being evil you know. Is Scottish nationalism evil ?
What about Welsh nationalism ?

I'm a bit shocked actually that anyone regards Mahatma Ghandi , who was an Indian Nationalist , as evil, but I suppose you must if that's what you think about nationalism.
Do you disapprove of the nations who fought to free themselves from the Nazi Empire and the Warsaw Pact as evil too , insisting as they were upon nationalism ?

Well I'm quite surprised that you take this view of these people and nations I must say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Thanks for posting this very interesting info which is a record of what people were thinking just before the Referendum as opposed to what they now say they were thinking. Over 78 per cent of those intending to vote Leave thought it very unlikely, fairly unlikely or didn't know when it came to us losing access to the single market.

Data like this shows the hoops Brexiteers have had to jump though in the past three and a bit years, whether it was the no deal Brexit which virtually everyone in the main parties was saying would never happen in June 2016 or the proroguing of Parliament that Hancock, Rudd, Morgan, Gove and Johnson were all heard denouncing at the beginning of Newsnight on Wednesday.

On the subject of Newsnight, what cowardice from the Government not to send a representative to appear on there on the last two nights - Labour have often been just as bad when it comes to antisemitim mind.

---

I think it adds to the debate. Our no deal enthusiasts don't appear to be so interested though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elwood Blues

Grant Shapps appears to have drawn the short straw and is doing the rounds putting the Governments case.

---

Yes, I listened to a recording of his interview with Nicky Campbell as I was driving to the game yesterday- it was a pretty friendly affair in which he was asked "your heart's not really in this is it?".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I think it adds to the debate. Our no deal enthusiasts don't appear to be so interested though.

---

Strange isn't it.

My own favourite is ‘bring on WTO’
A request for an explanation is usually then bluffed and blustered away.

Tory’s are a bunch of lying dictators. Summed up perfectly here.

https://twitter.com/lbc/status/1167528494303252480?s=21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

HE WAS MAKING A JOKE.

---

Thats the problem these days you can't tell folks jokes from their child like insults.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Thats the problem these days you can't tell folks jokes from their child like insults.

---

You know that you don't have to try to defend RB all of the time, don't you? If he doesn't respond, it's because he knows he's been shown up again for not being as intelligent as he likes to keep telling everyone of the 'fluoride generation'.

He still hasn't responded to the gun control post that he "promised" that he would... because he can't. He answer whether he thought the NHS was evil, like he thinks everything remotely related to socialism inherently is... Because he can't. It's a clear pattern of not being able to back himself up when he gets stuck. You're making yourself look a bit sad by trying to defend him, to be honest.

Also, if posters can't differentiate between an obvious (and witty) joke and a "child like insult" (which simply saying 'Project Fear' wouldn't be anyway, would it?), then that's their problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Strange isn't it.

---

It's almost like they are trying to avoid it because it tells a different story to the one they dreamed up in their heads, can't be that though, must be busy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Thats the problem these days you can't tell folks jokes from their child like insults.

---

If you think that was an insult, you may be a snowflake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

You know that you don't have to try to defend RB all of the time, don't you? If he doesn't respond, it's because he knows he's been shown up again for not being as intelligent as he likes to keep telling everyone of the 'fluoride generation'.

He still hasn't responded to the gun control post that he "promised" that he would... because he can't. He answer whether he thought the NHS was evil, like he thinks everything remotely related to socialism inherently is... Because he can't. It's a clear pattern of not being able to back himself up when he gets stuck. You're making yourself look a bit sad by trying to defend him, to be honest.

Also, if posters can't differentiate between an obvious (and witty) joke and a "child like insult" (which simply saying 'Project Fear' wouldn't be anyway, would it?), then that's their problem.

---

WB, RB and Lom always look out for each other. I'm going to start calling them The Squad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

You know that you don't have to try to defend RB all of the time, don't you? If he doesn't respond, it's because he knows he's been shown up again for not being as intelligent as he likes to keep telling everyone of the 'fluoride generation'.

He still hasn't responded to the gun control post that he "promised" that he would... because he can't. He answer whether he thought the NHS was evil, like he thinks everything remotely related to socialism inherently is... Because he can't. It's a clear pattern of not being able to back himself up when he gets stuck. You're making yourself look a bit sad by trying to defend him, to be honest.

Also, if posters can't differentiate between an obvious (and witty) joke and a "child like insult" (which simply saying 'Project Fear' wouldn't be anyway, would it?), then that's their problem.

---

To be frank Heisenberg - and I told you this once- I'm not going to bother trying to discuss stuff with you because you've got a nasty little mouth on you and in any case you can't learn anything from me or anyone else because you think you already know everything.

Yeah, I would have explained the 2nd amendment and my views upon it because at the time I thought you had an intelligent interest in the matter, but then you had one or two outbursts of adolescent abuse and so I'm not going to waste my time - I'm not your special needs teacher or your probation officer .

I'm not sure whether LOM was defending me as such , rather than commenting on the loutish jibbering which some people come out with instead of conversation. In any case , my views and conclusions don't need to be defended against judgement by you because I'm perfectly entitled to hold them whether or not you approve and the purpose of setting them out would be discussion , not to seek vindication or permission from you to disagree .