GrahamH wrote:

Teague wrote:FFS you both read that as NOT a joke?

You guys need to take a step back.

You should take the replies in the same spirit as your post.

Could you explain where you "joke" sits in your reply above then?

Teague wrote:
Could you explain where you "joke" sits in your reply above then?

Nu huh. You just have to take the reply as a joke.

You need to take a step back.

Sendraks wrote:

Teague wrote:
Could you explain where you "joke" sits in your reply above then?

Nu huh. You just have to take the reply as a joke.

You need to take a step back.

I keep forgetting that over here, when writing something completely ridiculous, preceeded by a star wars quote (that I got slightly wrong but corrected it), that there are still people here who take things literally all the time.

What a weird little world to live in.

Teague wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Teague wrote:FFS you both read that as NOT a joke?

You guys need to take a step back.

You should take the replies in the same spirit as your post.

Could you explain where you "joke" sits in your reply above then?

You are joking again, aren't you?

Pointing out that those are indeed the three leading options was the only semi-serious bit. If your crossing them out was supposed to be a 'joke' you failed. I think we should call all the rest sarcasm rather than humour.

Teague wrote:


I keep forgetting that over here, when writing something completely ridiculous, preceeded by a star wars quote (that I got slightly wrong but corrected it), that there are still people here who take things literally all the time.

What a weird little world to live in.

And yet here you are, failing to applying this reasoning to Graham's comment. The problem for not seeing Graham's comment as a joke is entirely your own.

Sendraks wrote:

Teague wrote:


I keep forgetting that over here, when writing something completely ridiculous, preceeded by a star wars quote (that I got slightly wrong but corrected it), that there are still people here who take things literally all the time.

What a weird little world to live in.

And yet here you are, failing to applying this reasoning to Graham's comment. The problem for not seeing Graham's comment as a joke is entirely your own.

It wasn't a joke.

You are, of course, the arbiter of such things.

Teague wrote:

Sendraks wrote:

Teague wrote:


I keep forgetting that over here, when writing something completely ridiculous, preceeded by a star wars quote (that I got slightly wrong but corrected it), that there are still people here who take things literally all the time.

What a weird little world to live in.

And yet here you are, failing to applying this reasoning to Graham's comment. The problem for not seeing Graham's comment as a joke is entirely your own.

It wasn't a joke.

Oh. I stand corrected!

Is there some sign you would like me to include in any posts involving sarcasm to hep you out in future?

The UK appears to be following Trumps example - fatuous claims made again and again are the new facts:


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/21/jacob-rees-mogg-says-uk-is-heading-for-no-deal-brexit
Presenting a phone-in on LBC, the prominent Tory MP and hardline Brexiter said: “I think we are heading to WTO and I think WTO is nothing to be frightened of.

The problem for the 'other' side of the argument - is that allowing its warnings to be labelled 'project fear' now means it is trying to be too reasonable - so first the sound bites are just not as good, second getting people to accept they got it wrong is much harder than keeping them as believers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44904619
Well, some of them are pretty obvious. To ensure the supply of basic services, for example.
At a hearing of the House of Commons Public Administration Committee on Thursday the chief executive of the civil service, John Manzoni, highlighted the need to protect "supply chains for food and medicines" under the "almost unimaginable" scenario of a cliff-edge departure.
The Department of Health, he said, had already announced that it would stockpile medicines.
Mr Manzoni also mentioned transport - there would be a need to try to negotiate a series of bilateral agreements with individual countries to allow planes to fly, if the UK left the European Aviation Safety Agency with no new deals in place.
Another example emerged this week in a report from the National Audit Office.
Currently, it says, 100,000 International Driving Permits are issued every year by 89 post offices around the country. In the first year after a no-deal Brexit, those numbers would rise to an estimated 4,500 post offices issuing up to seven million permits - to take into account journeys into the EU.


Makes it all sound as if there will be bureaucratic issues to sort, and what has that to do with someone in a council estate in Birmingham? Bland reassurance that your previous decision was right is much more effective.

Makes you wonder what the gain is for the Brexit cheerleaders?

Is it being a big fish in a small pond is better? Or are they making a fortune by controlling the pounds slide and aim to do the same with the demise of manufacturing to come?

I suspect only if one could lay bare their motives could one begin to change the mood of the public, but as Trump has shown, they can simply continue ducking and diving

It's a clusterfuck of unprecedented proportions.

The PM is in an unwinnable position. Hopeless, you might say. Partly because she is hopeless, but mostly just as a result of circumstance. She's the one who has been landed with the unwinnable situation.

She can't go for a real soft brexit, which is what she and most MPs and business and sensible people all over UK want. Because the lie has taken hold that brexit must mean leaving the single market and customs union. (not true of course). She doesn't want a no deal scenario, which would be a disaster, but it will be the outcome those who are controlling her govt want - the DUP, the nutter Tory MPs and some nutter Labour MPs.

I cant even say what i think she should do. She, and we, are fucked. There's no way out.

Ironically, and stick with me here, the actual BEST chance for this to all be sorted might be if we are heading for no deal, that goes back to parliament (thank fuck for the lords, the only time I will ever say that) for the so-called "meaningful vote", and our MPs turn out to have backbone and simply decide no, this can't be, we will need a new vote to work out what the fuck we do now we know the sorry state we are in.

I'm not holding my breath. I heard Dominic Grieve suggest on Newsnight last week he thought something like this would happen, a no deal, a vote in parliament, and MPs would prevent the no deal happening. Im not so optimistic.

I think that post is just a longer way of saying we're fucked.

ronmcd wrote:
Ironically, and stick with me here, the actual BEST chance for this to all be sorted might be if we are heading for no deal, that goes back to parliament (thank fuck for the lords, the only time I will ever say that) for the so-called "meaningful vote", and our MPs turn out to have backbone and simply decide no, this can't be, we will need a new vote to work out what the fuck we do now we know the sorry state we are in.

Although there remains the possibility that a second referendum also produces a leave result, that the 52% simply don't believe "project fear" and follow Boris' Brexit Dream over the cliff.

Is that something akin to a death cult?

ronmcd wrote:I think that post is just a longer way of saying we're fucked.

Well no deal can happen by accident or design. Half a dozen Brexiteers is sufficient to force May into making an offer to the EU that it must refuse!

GrahamH wrote:

ronmcd wrote:
Ironically, and stick with me here, the actual BEST chance for this to all be sorted might be if we are heading for no deal, that goes back to parliament (thank fuck for the lords, the only time I will ever say that) for the so-called "meaningful vote", and our MPs turn out to have backbone and simply decide no, this can't be, we will need a new vote to work out what the fuck we do now we know the sorry state we are in.

Although there remains the possibility that a second referendum also produces a leave result, that the 52% simply don't believe "project fear" and follow Boris' Brexit Dream over the cliff.

Is that something akin to a death cult?

I don't know, I'd like to think the whole endeavour (and govt) would have been so discredited another win for the leave vote would be unthinkable.

But then ... *sigh*

With a little help from the Russians anything is possible. Ask Trump.

btw The tories once again at this late stage still do not understand what the EU is:

Mr Manzoni also mentioned transport - there would be a need to try to negotiate a series of bilateral agreements with individual countries to allow planes to fly, if the UK left the European Aviation Safety Agency with no new deals in place.

They just dont get it.

Scot Dutchy wrote:
btw The tories once again at this late stage still do not understand what the EU is:

Mr Manzoni also mentioned transport - there would be a need to try to negotiate a series of bilateral agreements with individual countries to allow planes to fly, if the UK left the European Aviation Safety Agency with no new deals in place.

They just dont get it.

What's wrong with that?

You dont see it?

It's the chief exec of the civil service saying something that appears to be correct.

Perhaps you could say what's wrong with it and how it reflects on the Tories?

What does the word "bilateral" means to you in the EU context which is also valid for the EASA.