Labour - the party of Remain

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Aug 19 - 01:38 PM

Not fully familiar with the jargon but as far as I can see all Iains is doing is tweeting this forum
Jim

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Aug 19 - 01:46 PM

Jim - I can't be sure if you had chance to read my earlier post before it was deleted.
It refered to your now deleted post outing the history of a particular blogger...

here's a brief extract...

"Jim's response is a great example of vital evidence being brought into this thread,
that many would have otherwise been completely unaware of...

Sadly, that is the kind of positve material and links that also get deleted,
along with all the noxious propaganda that Jim is exposing
and resisting..."

Just a reminder, we are working independantly in the same direction...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Aug 19 - 02:26 PM

Let's see
Below is an article linking Britain's Prime Minister's long term promoter with with one of Britain's most notorious ultra-right groups
Is this really the level the UK has sunk to in order to leave Europe ?
Jim Carroll


Tory student leader in 'racist’ party link: David Rose reports on a...
Rose, David
The Guardian (1959-2003): May 31. 1986:
ProQuesl Historical Newspapers: The Guardian and The Observer
A leader erf the Federation of Conservative Students wrote to an organiser of. the British National Party proposing Joint "dlrect action " to disrupt the meetings of leftwing subjects.
Secrecy, he emphasised, essential: “The Reds would simply go wild if they got to hear of a BNF-FCS link. I would personally be in danger of being expelled from the Conservative party"
The author of the letter is Mr Paul Delarte-Staines, the chairman of the federation’s 50-strong branch at the Humberside college of Higher Education. Mr Delarte-Staines. who is in his first year of a degree course- in business information studies, wrote on May 22 to Mr lan Walker, a BNT organiser in Hull.
David Rose reports on a secret attempt to form a pact with the British National Party
He was, he said, against several of the aims of the BNP, which campaigns for the repa¬triation of black citizens. Several of rta members have been convicted of offences under the Race Sections Act, and others for crimes of violence against ethnic minorities. Its leader, Mr John Tyndall, Is a former chairman of the National Front Mr Delarie-Staines' said he did not share the BNP view on. immigration: as a member of the Hanitarian " faction of the PCS he advocated the free movement of labour, albeit with the caveat that “you come here to work — or starve. ”
He went on: "I share a lot of your objectives. '* These In¬cluded a return to leadership, and statesmanahip, the aboli¬tion of the welfare state, and '"the elimination of Communism in Britain in the mass media, the trade unions, and the schoolroom.”
Mr Delaire-Staines continued:         
" Nevertheless, even though we have our differ¬ences, I know a lot of BNP people at college do support the FCS (some are members of the FCS). I can certainly envisage some degree of cooperation.
" For instance, we are moving away, from just the normal political debate and towards more direct action — anti-Communist slogans on bridges, disrupting the leftist meetings by posing as leftists and then causing trouble, ‘and also convincing individual leftists of the error of their ways.
“Perhaps members of the BNP would care to join us in our anti-leftist activities. We can arrange a meeting to dis¬cuss possible joint future activities. ’

Other examples of Mr Delaire Staines work reached the Guardian, including a number of songs'.
One entitled FCS Bootboys, reads:

"Gas them all, gas them all, the Tribune group trendies’ and all.
Crush Wedgwood Benn and make glue from his bones.
Burn the broad left in their middle class drone,
“Yes-we’re saying goodbye to the Left, as safe in their graveyards they rest.
'Cos we they’ll get no farther. We'll stop with murder, the bootboys of-FCS

In a letter to a friend, Mr Delairé'Staines said that he had been on a "community arts course — well, not exactly community arts, more spray- painting a. bridge at 3am. ' Quite Good fun really, ducking out of sight of passing police cars'.
Mr Delaire-Staines told, the Guardian that. he had not meant violence by direct action at leftist meetings, only "causing as much noise as possible”.
He said that he had tried to forge a link with the BNP because "to; share their anti-Communist view," He added: “'They're not. far- right They're Just racists/ they believe in one colour"
Mr John Barcow. the nations! chairman of FCS and a Lambeth councillor, said that Mr Delaire-Staines was “a bit silly. I wouldn’t hold it against him. I'm sure he'll grow out of it.
After hearing extracts from the letter to the BNP he added, "He's absolutely right that he’s in danger of being thrown out of the Conservative Party. ”
Mr James Goodman, the Conservative Central Office of' offcial responsibility for the FCS, said: "The evidence comes my way I will certainly look into it.”

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 10:19 AM

Harland and Woolf about to go into receivership - another British Industry
JOINS THE TITANIC with STILL MORE TO COME
Bet those about to be redunded are really looking forward to Brave New Brexit
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 10:29 AM

Interestingly enough, even The Guardian: Here does not appear to be blaming this on Brexit. The only mention of Brexit comes at the end of the article:
This latest shipyard closure underscores a wider British failure from the 1980s on. End of empire need not have meant an end of British shipbuilding. But it was allowed to happen. Tough, government-led decisions to target new commercial shipping markets for fishing vessels, ferries and cruise ships were never taken. Governments focused instead on naval needs alone; R&D defaulted to the defence agenda. The result is that a post-Brexit Britain would have no shipbuilding sector adapted to 21st-century markets. Instead, it would be closed for business.


And the comment in the last post: Harland and Woolf about to go into receivership - another British Industry It is not a "British industry" the Guardian makes it clear that the business is Norwegian owned.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 10:52 AM

So the shipyard is populated by hordes of Norwegians then, is it? I think we all know the sense in which that comment was made, Nigel. An industry that employs British workers. Anything else you need explaining, Nigel, you know where I am.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 11:04 AM

Norway...!!!???

Bloody Vikings... don't they ever stop invading and conquering our coastal towns...

But if we leave the EU, it'll be just us on our own against the Vikings again...!!!!!!!!

Who'll protect our monastries and women folks, if all we have in reserve is a tory Dad's Army...???

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 11:05 AM

"Here does not appear to be blaming this on Brexit. "
I'm not sure anybody is Nigel - but that doesn't alter the fact that a Britain "standing on it's own feet" is about to lose one of it major (and one of the last) British shipyards
Added to this, of course, is the overhanging threat to the Irish Peace agreement which is already being undermined by the effects and threatened effects that Brexit has already been responsible for.
I worked in the shipping industry for a time in Liverpool and was very quickly made aware of how shortage of work adversely affected the otherwse good relationship of the different religious communities - and that was way-way back before the troubles
You really can't keep dodging this issue and blaming others for the problems being caused
A decision by a minority of the British people as a whole is the sole have severely jeopardised the futures of both Britain and its neighbours
This needs to be discussed in those terms
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 01:14 PM

Off topic in the main, but my Irish passport arrived today!

Does anyone know whether the systems cope if I go into Ireland on my Irish passport (and so go in the faster queue) but return into the UK on my UK passport (and so go in the faster queue?)

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 04:18 PM

You have to enter and leave Ireland with your Irish passport and enter and leave the UK with your UK passport. Thats how it works with dual UK/Australian nationality anyway.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 04:24 PM

Thanks, David C. I don't think I would risk such an experiment anyway. Too much scope for   problems with enthusiastic border staff.

Although it is an Irish passport, I think of it more as a European passport: I am European as well as British, and am happy to do whatever is my power to stay both

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 04:24 PM

"Here does not appear to be blaming this on Brexit. "
I'm not sure anybody is Nigel - but that doesn't alter the fact that a Britain "standing on it's own feet" is about to lose one of it major (and one of the last) British shipyards
Then why bring it up here in a discussion about "Labour - the party of Remain", although this seems to have become the default Brexit thread.


And it was you, and the Guardian, who described this as a British industry. I thought you knew better exactly what the difference is between Britain and UK.
Steve Shaw seems to be suffering from the same misunderstanding, while offering to explain it: So the shipyard is populated by hordes of Norwegians then, is it? I think we all know the sense in which that comment was made, Nigel. An industry that employs British workers. Anything else you need explaining, Nigel, you know where I am.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 06:07 PM

That particular piece of nitpicking was vexatious. A British industry can mean either a British-owned industry or an industry in the UK which overwhelmingly employs British citizens irrespective of who owns it. You are not interested in normal debate, Nigel, and contributors here are not bound to type nothing but legalese. You yourself are pretty easy to catch out, Nigel, as I've occasionally shown, but, quite frankly, the approach is infra dig for me. I have better things to do, but I do sometimes look out for mild entertainment here...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 06:40 PM

Anyway back to brexit and compo's machinations:
One line Labour are particularly trying to sell is on Boris’s background and supposedly ‘wealthy friends’, with Corbyn putting a post out on Saturday claiming “Boris Johnson and his millionaire friends won’t be affected by rising food prices in a No Deal Brexit“.

It does need pointing out of course that Jeremy Bernard Corbyn’s own personal net worth is reportedly a very tidy £3 million.
Thus continuing the proud tradition of revolutionary leaders being much wealthier than their loyal proletariat followers'
Others include: Ed Miliband with a £2.5m house in Dartford Park, London and his ex-deputy Harriet Harman who owns a £2.3m house in Dulwich.
Wealthy Labour members of Mr Corbyn’s inner circle include his chief aide Seumas Milne who has a £1.5m house in Richmond, shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn with a £3m house in Chiswick and shadow justice secretary Lord Faulkner with a £17.5m mansion in Westminster. While shadow international development secretary Diane Abbott owns a £1m pad in Hackney and shadow defence secretary Emily Thornberry has a £3m home in Islington and Kier Starmer with a £1.4m home in Kentish Town.
I wonder how many Labour supporters realise how many Labour MPs are millionaires?

More unpalatable facts.
I wonder how long this post lasts before the snowflakes insist on its deletion with the aid of their tame mod?

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 06:50 PM

A £1.5 million house in Richmond can be two-bedroom, Lord Haw-Haw. :-)

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 03:08 AM

Does it need pointing out that no MPs are likely to be affected by a no deal brexit yet those who care about their constituents more than themselves are still fighting it? Or that Corbyn, who is described as useless by his detractors, has managed to make more more money than his Tory counterparts? As wealth seems to be the measure of success amongst capitalists I guess this means that Corbyn is better than both May and Johnson?

Does it also need pointing out that, yet again, our resident propagandist has cut and pasted a large chunk of an article from the Daily Express rather than post anything original? Without even crediting his source?

Best just to ignore it but it is worth pointing out the obvious until such a time as the propaganda is deleted. I am happy for the responses to go as well.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 03:45 AM

”Does it also need pointing out that, yet again, our resident propagandist has cut and pasted a large chunk of an article from the Daily Express rather than post anything original? Without even crediting his source?”

It’s a perfect illustration of the depths he’s prepared to plumb in his deceit. Why anyone wastes their time and bandwidth responding is beyond my comprehension.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 04:19 AM

The argument that anything the cabal disagrees with is propaganda is getting rather old. It is time to change the record. And of course if people did not quote directly, or paraphrase material from the media, this thread could not exist.
The real argument here is the referendum result where leave won.
Where article 50 was voted for by 420 votes to 110
In the last election both labour and tory stood on leave tickets.
Time you all accepted you lost.(and Trump will win a second term)

Interesting news off the FT: McDonnell ruled out Labour supporting any sort of ‘national unity’ Government to try to stop No Deal that wasn’t led by Jeremy Corbyn.
That is one in the eye for grieve and co. Back to the blasted heath for them I am afraid. They may well betray everyone and vote for compo, but how many others would follow? In the ensuing election their careers would be dust.
Tic toc, on the home straight now!

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 04:30 AM

"I am happy for the responses to go as well."
Totally agree (sez one of the worst offenders) "Loose lips sink ships" to borrow a wartime slogan
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 04:37 AM

but that doesn't alter the fact that a Britain "standing on it's own feet" is about to lose one of it major (and one of the last) British shipyards.
That is because it is cheaper to buy them overseas and EU regulations insist such contracts are put out to international tender, apart from warships

https://fullfact.org/economy/did-conservatives-refuse-support-6500-british-shipbuilding-jobs/

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:07 AM

If there was ever a time for parliament to be recalled this is surely it. If it could be done for the trivial matter of paying tribute to Thatcher it should be done now without delay. Johnson is all too aware that the timetable as it stands is on his side, even if an election has to be called. Arguably, we are in a far more dire situation for the country that we were for any other recent recall. Allowing four more weeks to tick away in a state of stasis may not be unconstitutional but it's bloody undemocratic. Of course, the Speaker can recall parliament only if the government asks him to. No need to ask why that won't happen.

Failing that, I wonder if the EU can insist unilaterally that we have another extension, perhaps if they're bombarded by petitioning from an ad hoc "progressive alliance" of MPs. It would be claimed by the Daily Mail as being undemocratic, of course, but Johnson being forced to go along with that would be evidence that he's serious about not leaving with no deal. Haven't looked into that...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:20 AM

”I wonder if the EU can insist unilaterally that we have another extension, perhaps if they're bombarded by petitioning from an ad hoc "progressive alliance" of MPs. It would be claimed by the Daily Mail as being undemocratic, of course, but Johnson being forced to go along with that would be evidence that he's serious about not leaving with no deal.”

That question was asked a few minutes ago on BBC News. According to a lady from the Institute of Government, they can’t - neither side can act unilaterally, there has to be an approach from one side, and agreement by the other.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:28 AM

Main backer of "Full Eact"
Omidyar Network is a self-styled "Propaganda investment firm," composed of a foundation and an impact investment firm. Established in 2004 by eBay founder Pierre Omidyarand his wife Pam
Just thought I'd mention it in passing, apropo of nothing
Jim

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:51 AM

Only buffoons try to discredit the message by attacking the messenger.
This has been pointed out innumerable times. but the same buffoon predictably always takes the bait

As Michelle would say: "Listen very carefully, I shall say zis only once"

https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/public-contracts/public-tendering-rules/index_en.htm

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:57 AM

Sky News were out with the cameras to doorstep Dominic Cummings this morning. Boris’s top adviser sportingly gave a brief but polite interview – considerably more so than many elected politicians. “Mr Grieve will see what he is right about…”

This is close on the heels of McDonnell rubbishing any idea of a National unity government.
Seems the wheels are coming off the bus containing Grieve's cunning plan. DEMOCRACY RULES!!!! Toc tic!

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 06:13 AM

Some interesting comments from Murdoch's Times bumwipe on Johnson's take on democracy
A wonderful pictire is conjured up of Johnson being led into The Guildhall for a terminal haircut
Jim Carroll


JOHNSON’S THREAT TO DEFY A NO-CONFIDENCE VOTE
Sir, Further to your report “Johnson to defy any vote of no confidence”
Aug 6), if most MPs do not want a No-deal Brexit, or an election after October 31 that might produce it, they could resort to the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011. A vote of no confidence would give 14 days for an alternative government to be constructed; a separate resolution opposing prorogation would also be needed. If the Commons passed a motion of confidence in the new team within those two weeks Mr Johnson would have to resign. If, incredibly, he refused the Queen could dismiss him using her reserve prerogative power. She would want a prior Commons resolution, passed by a clear majority of MPs, nominating a new prime minister and cabinet, and stating the Brexit policy. The Queen could then install that administration.
Rodney Brazier
Emeritus professor of constitutional law, University of Manchester

Sir, It is a convention, and not part of any act, that the government has to resign if defeated in a confidence vote, and that a general election is the ultimate way in which a constitutional crisis can be resolved. It is also the case that the Supreme Court cannot enforce respect for conventions that are not incorporated in an act of parliament.
It is, however, also “only” a convention, not a law, that the Queen can act only on the advice of her ministers. It is “only” a convention that the Queen cannot dismiss her prime minister even if he is flouting the constitution. If the prime minister refused to respect the normal consequence of losing a confidence vote and if he sought to prevent both parliament and the electorate having a final say on no deal, he would create the gravest constitutional crisis since the actions of Charles 1 led to the Civil War.
I have great confidence that the prime minister will ignore the advice of Dominic Cummings. King Charles lost his head by flouting the constitution. Mr Johnson will wish to keep his, while some around him are, clearly, losing theirs.
Sir Malcolm Rifkind Former foreign secretary

Sir, You report that “constitutional experts” are warning that a refusal by the prime minister to resign should he lose a vote of confidence would risk the Queen being “dragged into politics”. These experts need to remind themselves that the Queen, though neutral in politics, has never in fact been “above” politics, as the dismissal of the Australian prime minister Gough Whitlam in 1975 demonstrated only too clearly. The UK is a constitutional monarchy rather than a parliamentary democracy. As such it is the Queen alone who appoints prime ministers and has the authority to dismiss them.
Professor Geoffrey Alderman University of Buckingham

Sir, Until the 17th century it was not unusual for people in positions of power to claim to be above the law. It was the temptation of kings. We have centuries of experience of telling kings, and their successors, that the law always has the last word, and finally controls the legality of all government acts through the courts. That is the meaning of the Rule of Law in liberal democratic societies. The Queen in parliament can change the law, and the courts can re-interpret the law but, until then, the law is the law.
Philip Allott
Trinity College, Cambridge

Sir, In suggesting that he would not respect a parliamentary vote of no confidence, Boris Johnson is acting like a dictator. Were we not told that the purpose of Brexit was to uphold the sovereignty of parliament? Whatever else inspired Leave voters, it was not an undemocratic and tyrannical destruction of British parliamentary power, as is now proposed.
Cynthia Hall Oxford

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 06:34 AM

Should the Queen be dragged in who is she most likely to support?
A democratic majority who voted for leaving the EU?
or a bunch of treasonous rebel MPs?

It really is a no brainer!

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 07:27 AM

For what it is worth, I think it crazy for Labour to decline to take part in a unity government. It need only be one lasting a few days, sufficient to put legislation in place for an extension, and then to call a general election. Refusing to do so does, in the words of Rebecca Long-Bailey "give Boris some sort of get out of jail free card."

Reading more closely, though, the argument is not as much about whether there could be a unity government as about who leads it. Again, that would be a stupid thing over which to wreck the idea.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 07:36 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 06 Aug 19 - 06:07 PM

That particular piece of nitpicking was vexatious. A British industry can mean either a British-owned industry or an industry in the UK which overwhelmingly employs British citizens irrespective of who owns it. You are not interested in normal debate, Nigel, and contributors here are not bound to type nothing but legalese. You yourself are pretty easy to catch out, Nigel, as I've occasionally shown, but, quite frankly, the approach is infra dig for me. I have better things to do, but I do sometimes look out for mild entertainment here...

What part of 'British' do you not understand?
By your definition: A British industry can mean either a British-owned industry or an industry in the UK which overwhelmingly employs British citizens irrespective of who owns it.
Harland & Woolf is Norwegian owned
Its employees are predominantly from Northern Ireland (so not British)
So by your definition Harland & Woolf is not a British Industry.


contributors here are not bound to type nothing but legalese
No, but you don't have to continually type crap either.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 08:21 AM

And the inanity rolls on. Don't talk to me, Nige.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 09:05 AM

Everyone but the most vociferous pedant understands that a company with such a long track record in the UK as Harland and Woolf can and will be referred to as British. You are now nitpicking the difference between Britain, Great Britain, the British Isles and the United kingdom of Britain and northern Ireland. Look up the definition of "British Isles" then tell us that Harland and Woolf is not located there and is not a major employer in these isles. If all you can pick holes is is nomenclature then you must be short of decent arguments.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 11:48 AM

To have a unity government requires that the existing government is replaced. Could present a problem if they do not wish to go. Meanwhile tickety tock.
This is of rather more concern than the closure of an uncompetitive shipyard. After all closure is hardly a new event.Harland & Wolff established shipyards at Bootle in Liverpool, North Woolwich in London and Southampton. However, these shipyards were all eventually closed from the early 1960s when the company opted to consolidate its operations in Belfast.
The joint administrators of Harland and Wolff.had this to say:

"Founded in 1861, the Belfast-based company has in recent years specialised in wind energy and marine engineering projects.

"After a long sales process, in which a buyer could not be found, the business has been unable to continue trading due to having insufficient funds following the recent insolvency of its ultimate parent. This was Norway's Dolphin Drilling that according to the Financial Times filed for bankruptcy back in Jun 26, 2019.
No widgets and no cash = no company. The unions can sit in as much as they like, it will change nowt.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 01:20 PM

Vast empty ship yard buildings and yards
repurpose well as movie studio sound stages and back lots...

That's a positive for N.Ireland,
but only as long as they can attract more big productions now that G.O.T has finished...

How does the uncertainty of brexit help that venture flourish...???

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 01:37 PM

"Its employees are predominantly from Northern Ireland (so not British)"
I'm afraid if you said that in parts of Northern Ireland you'd find yourself kneecapped by the majority who regard themselves British
"The Northern Irish are British, both politically and geographically. Politically, because they are citizens of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, for whom the generalised ethnonym is British.Jun 25, 2018"
I suggest you (do not) visit there
What on earth do you think a century of conflict has been about ?

The International nature of business has long removed the antiquated view you seem to hold
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 01:56 PM

A majority, Iains, is a majority in Parliament. In a parliamentary democracy, that is the only majority which matters.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:00 PM

"In a parliamentary democracy, that is the only majority which matters."
Now when worker band together to give their vies on something like workers rights or unemployment or Nuclear weapons or Apartheid they becme "rentamob scum" to people like our incumbent
He said it himself - those who aren't "successful" are to be pitied
The people's voice is only important whan it makes the RIGHT noises
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:00 PM

brexit might be a bit difficult for the Queen..

She'd have to be cautious about falling out with her German relatives...

We wouldn't want a repeat of last time...???

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:09 PM

"Its employees are predominantly from Northern Ireland (so not British)"

Harland and Wolff once employed more than 30,000 people and led the world in the production of cruise liners.

But it now employs just over 120, so it's demise is unfortunate for the remaining employees but hardly a major catastrophe that some would like to paint it. It also needs to be said that the The 22,000-tonne Anvil Point was the last vessel launched from the shipyard 16 years agoCanberra the last cruise liner was launched in 1960

"The Northern Irish are British, both politically and geographically.
This if true would suggest reunification is unlikely in the immediate future.

As for the assertion the company is/was British Mt Wolfe was a German!

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:18 PM

A majority, Iains, is a majority in Parliament. In a parliamentary democracy, that is the only majority which matters.

That may well be put to the test. When parliament willfully defies the clearly stated wishes of the people wherein lies the democracy? With the people or a bunch of lowlife turncoat MPs?
A majority voted for brexit
A majority of MPs voted for article 50
Both parties entered a general election on a leave ticket.


Yet another no brainer and of course removing the incumbent PM could be a problem.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:29 PM

If we were still tied to every word [ no matter how narowly ] agreed by politicians
at a particular moment in time,
I could nip up to Bristol tomorrow to buy a slave...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:31 PM

Bit more time now
Mad Maggie coined the perfect phrase to sum up the people's voice when is sang off its own hymn sheet "The Enemy Within" -
She much preferred 'The Pinochette answer and was not afraid to say so - gawl luv 'er

It seems we can't remove the PM but he has the right to silence the voice of Parliament by suppressing it's vote - doesn't that perfectly sum up a dictatorship
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:32 PM

Even some politicians can over time and further developments
come to their senses and change their minds...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 02:59 PM

I would have expected better constructed arguments than I am seeing here. Leave won the referendum. The only reason it has not yet occurred is because of MPs who put their sinecure above honesty and loyalty.
Where was their honesty and integrity when they signed up for Brexit?
Where was their honesty when the stood for re-election?
where was their honesty to their electorate? They are all conniving shysters putting their security of income above all else.
Those fighting brexit need to understand the majority will not take further frustration of the implementation of brexit lying down.

Just remember you lost. If you wish to post on the subject of frustrating brexit do not come up with tripe about a dictatorship. It portrays you as fresh out of the kindergarten or like one of my kids at two and a half having a screaming tantrum in a supermarket. You cannot get your own way so throw a paddy
The enemy of democracy is the majority posting here that simply refuse to accept that they lost. Constantly deleting my posts does not alter that fact one iota.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 03:10 PM

I have no more certainty about what will happen between now and the end of Octber than anyone else (and definitely less than some.)

But it is possible that Brexit is stopped or delayed further. If so, then Those fighting brexit need to understand the majority will not take further frustration of the implementation of brexit lying down sounds very threatening. Especially remembering what happened to Jo Cox.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 03:46 PM

Let's hope any brexit fanatics making threats now are being monitored by security services...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 03:46 PM

It isn't a question of who won or lost. It is a question of what is best for the country and its people. And those like me who believe that this is to remain in the EU have a duty to fight for such an outcome.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 04:08 PM

I've had the exact same thoughts, DMcG.

David, please don't respond to Iains. A few of us here are guilty of keeping him going by rising to his bait. Several of us have been informed that the mods are seriously on his case, but they tell us that we weaken the case by responding. Not just you I'm addressing here. Anyone who feels the ire when you see his stupid postings, just remember that it's only us select few that are reading them...He really doesn't matter...

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Iains
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 04:36 PM

It is only a select few on this forum that think they have a godgiven right to dictate what arguments may be presented. You just cannot accept that democracy voted to leave the EU. That it sticks in your craw and you refuse to accept it is not my problem. Patting yourselves on the back by conspiring to have a mod delete most of my posts merely demonstrates you cannot accept that my view is that of the majority that voted for brexit. You merely demonstrate your own insecurities by insisting my posts are deleted, simply because you cannot even convince yourselves of the validity of your counter arguments.
To label my links as propaganda is really quite asinine. The facts can be checked from multiple sources.
It would be more accurate to call your arguments propaganda because they are indefensible and are proposed as an attempt to thwart democracy. Again the majority share my viewpoint. You should know by now that being a leftard does not confer either credibility or validity to your arguments. The more you squawk the more you corroborate my observations. Forming a little like minded gang to bully your way to dominance on this forum actually means jackshit in the big wide world. Prepare for disappointment.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Jeri
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:10 PM

Iains, I completely disagree with your views, but what I believe is

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." - Thomas Paine in First Principles of Government (1795)

If this continues to happen - deletions based only on disagreement with you - send a PM or an email to Max. He doesn't approve. Personally, it would just be easier to close threads where it continues, but then, I find the fighting (will not deign to call it "debate") a complete and disagreeable use of Mudcat's bandwidth.

Thank you. My involvement related to biased deletions ends here.

Subject: RE: Labour - the party of Remain
From: Mossback
Date: 07 Aug 19 - 05:23 PM

I have a better quote for you, Jeri, re: Iains:

'How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?'

          -- Samuel Johnson

Think on it.