threegee

Some supplementary questions: Which international bank is picking up the huge legal bills that both you and the "foreign hairdresser" are running up (rather a lot of perms!)? How close is the Miller business relationship to Goldman Sachs? Have the Millers or their associates had any contact with Tony Blair is recent times? Which of your two faces did you use in your modelling career? If those questions are too difficult then how about: When was the last time you ventured outside the M25?

Amusing to see the discomfort of their lordships (aka Tony's Cronies in the High Court) over the massive press reaction to their judgement on the Article 50 shenanigans. So shaken are the lawyers that they've been leaning on Lord Chancellor, Liz Truss (one of Dodgy Dave's cronies - great how you can get to be THE senior law officer these days with no formal legal experience; alternating around the LibLabCon stitch-up as convenient; and sleeping with a married Tory MP) to condemn:- I'm sure the press would support the last sentence there, except their precise point is that the judiciary isn't seen to be acting independently [of the EU] in this case. In fact the judiciary should be so independent that it keeps its nose entirely out of politics. Their narrative is that this is entirely a matter of correct procedure, and that their deliberations are entirely apolitical. That might have been believable if at least two of their "ludships" had recused themselves as parties with their own fingers in the EU honeypot. What's more, the public is entitled to take a broader view and ask what consideration was given to matters of correct constitutional procedure during the entry process to the then EEC, and at every salami-slicing attack on British sovereignty and democracy since that time. The plain answer to that is sweet FA! Like everything to do with the EU, British constitutional matters have become a one-way street that has no turning, and the cabal that determined that traffic plan is intermingled with the cabal that derives all indirect benefit from traffic flow. Of course the Machiavellian figure of Tony Blair hangs behind the whole affair. Blair not only packed the system out with his mates but made new law on an unprecedented scale. Ironic then that brining to justice the biggest criminal this country has ever known is now "a legal impossibility". How did that happen then? To crown it all, rather than stay the low profile team manager of the EUphiles, Blair is now dancing around on the pitch making no secret of his intention to subvert democratic process by all means at his disposal. These are HIS cronies and placemen - go figure! So... our judiciary demands respect, and if we don't give it to them the price is sure societal breakdown. Well, a lot of us feel that we are heading for societal breakdown quite rapidly, and through their agency! There, and I haven't mentioned Bilderberg once! Do your own research and weep for our country!

Analysis by News Watch of BBC Brexit coverage Well worth scan reading the whole thing - Maggie! http://news-watch.co.uk/bbc-brexit-collection-strong-bias-against-leaving-the-eu/ What we now have is a sustained ideological attack on traditional working people (particularly those in the North) from the state broadcaster, and an attempt to diminish, disparage and sideline their values. The only decent thing the BBC can do is to get rid of Evan Davis and Ian Katz. As long as they hold a senior positions at the BBC nothing can even start to change.

They SAY they learned something from the referendum result - I wonder! BBC sacked me for being a white man... even though I work in radio Maybe it was just that Jon didn't contribute enough to the non-stop wall of hilariously funny anti-Ukip "jokes" before the last GE? You know, the ones that now cheerfully flout both the BBC Charter and electoral law in the six week purdah periods. OK, so he's not a Guardian subscriber, but why would he waste his money when there are so many surplus copies littered around Broadcasting House?

The Guradianistas at the BBC aren't being entirely honest in reporting what Carlos Ghosn the CEO of Nissan UK is saying by selectively reporting him. What Ghosn is looking for is the government to channel some of the revenues from counter-taxing German luxury cars back to Nissan to compensate them for any EU protectionism and Brussels hubris. Obviously no one wants any tariffs, and if sanity prevails there won't be any, but the Brussels bureaucrats are in a hole and their empire threatened, so rationalism may not prevail. Ghosn is being very careful about not issuing any threats, and is only talking about competitiveness, but this doesn't seem to be good enough for elements at the BBC. Nor is he pressing his views, and that he's not mentioning the windfall boost to Nissan's competitiveness from the lower exchange rate is understandable, although it's not understandable for the BBC to completely fail to question him about this aspect! In fact he's doing his duty and acting in the interests of Nissan, its shareholders and it's employees. It a pity that the BBC Guardianistas need to be frequently embarrassed into acting in the interests of their own "shareholders"..

...trade deals. Or at least trade deals negotiated by politicians. Even if you formerly claimed "TTTIPEX" or whatever the best thing since pencils with rubbers on the top; even if it was in your party's manifesto; even if you part negotiated it yourself - right now you want to distance yourself from it, because the practical result for your country has turned out far worse than having no deal at all! (average tariffs under the current WTO regime are only about 3.5%) Now what are our politicos telling us we really really need? What are armies of British bureaucrats readying to spend years and years negotiating? Someone should tell them to make sure they stay right at the end of the queue.

Oh well have one from we whilst we look at the problem.

...or even the Guardian, but the MAIN headline of the Sunday Express HOME page: It's like spelling checkers aren't built in to practically every bit of WP software these days! That's only the start; I hardly get to read any substantial piece where I don't have to reread a sentence several times to try to figure out what the writer intended to say.

Really?! We need that technical prob looking at straight away!

Ah, well, I got it wrong (but that was 3.30 in the morning!): New South Row was parallel to the main rows and not at right angles; that one was (quite logically) Cross Row. Got the vicinity right though. So - after many decades - at last an explanation of why New South Row was called "New". But still a mystery as to why it was labelled "South" when it was in fact North of North Terrace. It seems that North Terrace was built long after the rest though, so perhaps not so illogical at the time NSR was named. And, if it was built before the two major rows shown on the 1898 map were even planned, everything would then be explained: it would have been the most southern row at that point in time.

Not one newspaper has anything good to say about him: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/12/david-cameron-had-to-go And, we've already seen him choose. Doubtless a decision made on one of his never-ending holidays for reflection. Can I really be bothered with the little people? Well no, forget that promise to look after the people in my constituency; file it away with all my other "cast iron" promises. May is busily unpicking a lot of what he did. It's clear that she regards both him an Osborne with contempt, and has practically said such. I suppose he's spared us a Ted Heath style super-sulk, so that's something to be grateful for.

So, the real question is will our Mr Lavery get a real job, and if so who would be idiotic enough to employ him?

The same principal needs to be applied to Scotland double quick; it would reduce the number of SNP MPs by about 2/3 and clip the mad fish woman's wings! From what I've just heard on the news it seems about time we took a hatchet to the HoL too - 100 of their lordships now seems too many! In fact the HoL would be a good place to start PR in: one lud for every percent of the national vote I think.

I'd wondered this about the NE too. Maybe Cameron triggered a by-election now so's Boris or Davis couldn't slide into his seat at the 2020 GE? Being forced to campaign for either with a happy face would even be beyond his powers of deception!

David Cameron resigns as MP, triggering by-election in his Witney constituency Pretty much good riddance I think, and a few did see this coming. Alternative headline: Petulant Etonian Schooboy Takes [rugby] Ball Away. So much for your protestations of necessary service to the Tory party, and to our Country. Go practice your lying skills somewhere else Dave!

HUMILIATION FOR ANGELA: Anti-migrant movement trump Merkel's party in German election The equivalent of losing a bye-election in the PMs home county, and AfD has only been going three years! The interesting thing is that only 2% of the migrants have gone to this area. It's pretty clear that most Germans have now had enough, and if her own party doesn't give her the chop they - like her - are history come next year's GE.

Thanks for your concern Maggie. Did my research long ago, and so moved to an area that has no history of problems - well, if you discount fourteen hundred and something! Yes, I know: that must mean there's one overdue! Not felt here, but around the time the dogs got upset, and we had no idea why. We did get the roof tiles loudly rattled by distant shock waves from the Athens one a few years back. That wasn't scary because we didn't know what the strange noise was until a local arrived to ask if we'd felt it, and told us that the town was buzzing with people discussing it.

So much for Brexit doom: IMF in embarrassing climbdown as it admits market turmoil has 'ebbed', while pound hits four-week high

Cameron gave special advisers pay rises of 24% when most of public sector got just 1% ...and on it goes. The more you look into Cameron, his background, and what he got up to, the more you realise what a self-serving lying turd we elected as a PM. It's almost as if we learned nothing from the Blair years. Perhaps this is part of why May is so keen that we should believe that she means what she says, and will actually get on with what she has promised. A long overdue overhaul of the honours system, and a total clean out the House of Lords can't be too big an ask - can it?

Like others, this particular good run obviously started on 23rd June. You'll likely need to thank the very many people in our area who possess excellent political judgement. What a glorious feelin' - I'm happy again

So, Juncker gets his EU Army - it's just about the only thing the Eurocrats can agree on, because it gives them more power! The Leave campaign was absolutely right about this and the Remainers deluding themselves. It's also emerging that there was a secret deal with Dodgy Dave that he wouldn't veto the plans when he won the referendum, whilst assuring us of the exact opposite! Hopefully our new PM isn't a serial liar! What is this army for other than to use against Europe's own peoples, or to have a go at Putin? One thing is for sure: it will grow and grow on every lame excuse, and absorb ever more of the EU GNP. It's a convenient tool to reduce the staggering EU youth unemployment, without actually doing anything positive to improve people's well-being. Our own leaders need to reaffirm our total commitment to NATO, and keep well away from any involvement or cooperation in so-called EU defence. Though, just how many of our politicos can we trust on this?

Simon Heffer in today's Telegraph speaks for me:

Yes I have; I told you quite clearly I'm happy with it, and like to point out you were wrong about it recovering! It couldn't be simpler. So that's a value is it? It will be an unfortunate consequence of our business turn-around that the pound will recover the value it had against the Euro in a few short years of having left. Meanwhile, it's more than likely that there will be at least one (and likely several) Eurozone crises which will weaken the Euro against other currencies. October could turn out a very bad month for the EZ (and Italian banks). But it is non binding; it was a referendum, not a legal vote. You're well aware of this. I'm aware that the will of the people is sovereign in this country (it's not continental Europe), and that any government that flouts it will be consigned to history. Fortunately, so is Mrs May, but a few parties like the Liberal non-Democrats (still) believe the people can be conned. I'm not annoyed. You sound very annoyed at the result of democratic process, else why are you urging a democratic decision should be ignored? Great questions; I worked for many years for a company that benefited greatly from EU trade arrangements. That affected me as we did more business, grew as a result, and I got to earn more money, buy a house, a car and so on. I don't see how a North-East based print and packaging company would have been able to sustain such business (and it still does) without the input of the EU in terms of financial grants and benefits, which were forthcoming at the time. Now, of course, those deals are not going to go away - they are solid - but will more be forthcoming? I can't say for sure yes or know as I am no longer employed by them, but I can say that there is considerable uncertainty at present as to how their business is to go forward until the buttons are pressed. You know as ell as I do the influence the EU has had on working conditions and so on, although if you want to try and make me believe there has been absolutely no benefit across 41 years than that's fine, but that doesn't really wash, does it? What would change from now on to make our stay worthwhile? What has changed to make us leave? I just don't get it. Back to what I've said many times: why did people vote to leave? Was it for the major economic benefits you tell me of? You know also that the majority of people who voted - and this is for both sides - did so in a state of confusion, of not actually understanding what the EU is, or what it does or doesn't do. How can anyone consider a decision made in such circumstances to be a sensible one? I maintain this is not a decision to be taken by 'the people' as we - by and large - are not suitably qualified. You are heavily conflating the Common Market with the EU here. We all agreed to the Common Market (including a naive me). What has change is that the lies of Heath have been exposed, and the salami slicing euro politicians are now driving their own agenda with vigour toward a European superstate. You've actually unwitting hit the nail on the head here when you say "did so in a state of confusion, of not actually understanding what the EU is" It's actually a prime requirement of the elites that ordinary people don't understand how the EU works. If they did they'd be even less likely to support it. What ordinary people have come to understand is that the loss of sovereignty means that our politicos have a ready excuse not to act on just about every significant problem You are actually a Mandleson type post-democrat. He'd have done well as a Soviet apparatchik. You fail to understand that the elites have no monopoly on wisdom, and the fact their mistakes are often bigger and deeper than those of the so-called uneducated That's partly because they are often compounded by group-think confirmation. Business proves that common sense and life-experience is the prime indicator of success; most trained accountants make an utter mess of running enterprises, though they can always tell you why they failed! One thing does bother me, though: if, as some tell me - yourself included - leaving the EU is such an obvious benefit to the country, it's economy, it's people, why hasn't Article 50 been invoked? I mean, I don't buy that May needs to get her teams in place before such a decision can be made - if that is so, then her predecessors really weren't prepared - and as she is an un-elected Prime Minister who will at some point come up against an election, surely getting things underway right now - of before now - would have been a sensible and clever political move, that would stand her in good stead for when she faces the music? Why the delays? You - and others - reckon before Christmas; I read something the other day saying next spring; I read another piece citing further delays. Why any delay? If it's the future, and so good for us, get it done! Until we do, one way or the other, these amazing trade deals that are being touted remain on the back-burner, as nobody is going to commit until the government do. So, 'we' voted; leave; let's leave, and stop fannying around. There are many parties praying that May does not call an election right now because she'd undoubtedly increase her majority. The delays are because dodgy Dave made no provision for the eventuality, in fact he positively ordered that there must be no work at all on Brexit preparations. The result is that no one in government has a clue as to how to approach matters, and they are having to recruit from wherever they can. Trade goes on regardless, because trade doesn't depend on deals by politicos in the apocryphal smoke-filled-rooms; it depends on people with enterprise - willing buyers and willing sellers. Mostly, politicos get in the way of this, and the EU has getting in the way in spades. Sooner or later even the people who think that getting part of our own money back, with strings attached, is a great deal will come around to seeing that being part of a rapidly fading trade cartel wasn't a "progressive" move, and that trade should be distanced from politicos as far as is possible. It's now looking like February, but it could be a month or two either way, depending on political pressure etc.

You still haven't answered the so simple simple question about what value the pound should have? Far from being annoyed I'm very happy to see it where it is today. The only person I've encountered who is annoyed about Sterling is a retired HMRC Tax Inspector, who - of course - is one of your fellow Remonians. Though, quite unlike yourself, he does have a genuine reason to be annoyed - his pension doesn't buy anything like as much as it did when he relocated. I assured him that relief was in sight from the overvalued (by 35%) Euro he has to pay his bills in. He still wasn't happy though - Remonians will never be happy living in the real world! I didn't try to explain to him that his house is now (notionally) worth more, as (being in the bombed-out EZ) in reality he'd have to sell it for less than he paid. Ah, that "non-binding" result of the referendum. Dream on! Oh, another question: as we've been in the EEC/EU for 41 years now, what exactly has it done for the ordinary working person in all this time? Supplementary: If we were to remain what exactly would change from now on to make our stay worthwhile? Some plain answers please, and not bald statements about how you suppose I feel.