Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Brexit & other UK political topics

Dave the Gnome 22 Aug 20 - 02:10 AM
The Sandman 22 Aug 20 - 03:14 AM
Dave the Gnome 22 Aug 20 - 03:32 AM
Mr Red 22 Aug 20 - 03:36 AM
Nigel Parsons 22 Aug 20 - 05:30 AM
Nigel Parsons 22 Aug 20 - 05:43 AM
DMcG 22 Aug 20 - 06:06 AM
Dave the Gnome 22 Aug 20 - 06:43 AM
Nigel Parsons 22 Aug 20 - 10:11 AM
Mr Red 22 Aug 20 - 10:27 AM
Dave the Gnome 22 Aug 20 - 01:28 PM
DMcG 22 Aug 20 - 02:07 PM
Nigel Parsons 22 Aug 20 - 02:51 PM
Nigel Parsons 22 Aug 20 - 02:56 PM
SPB-Cooperator 22 Aug 20 - 04:47 PM
Nigel Parsons 22 Aug 20 - 05:01 PM
SPB-Cooperator 22 Aug 20 - 06:54 PM
The Sandman 23 Aug 20 - 03:16 AM
DMcG 23 Aug 20 - 03:23 AM
Mr Red 23 Aug 20 - 04:57 AM
Dave the Gnome 23 Aug 20 - 05:57 AM
Backwoodsman 23 Aug 20 - 06:40 AM
DMcG 23 Aug 20 - 07:05 AM
DMcG 23 Aug 20 - 10:44 AM
Jos 23 Aug 20 - 04:18 PM
Dave the Gnome 24 Aug 20 - 02:54 AM
DMcG 24 Aug 20 - 03:17 AM
DMcG 24 Aug 20 - 06:39 AM
Nigel Parsons 24 Aug 20 - 07:09 AM
Nigel Parsons 24 Aug 20 - 07:15 AM
DMcG 24 Aug 20 - 07:48 AM
Nigel Parsons 24 Aug 20 - 09:48 AM
DMcG 24 Aug 20 - 10:02 AM
Rain Dog 24 Aug 20 - 11:07 AM
DMcG 24 Aug 20 - 11:29 AM
Nigel Parsons 25 Aug 20 - 05:52 AM
DMcG 25 Aug 20 - 06:07 AM
Nigel Parsons 25 Aug 20 - 06:15 AM
Dave the Gnome 25 Aug 20 - 09:01 AM
Backwoodsman 25 Aug 20 - 04:53 PM
DMcG 25 Aug 20 - 06:11 PM
Dave the Gnome 26 Aug 20 - 02:34 AM
Dave the Gnome 26 Aug 20 - 03:46 AM
DMcG 26 Aug 20 - 03:58 AM
Backwoodsman 26 Aug 20 - 04:33 AM
Nigel Parsons 26 Aug 20 - 04:45 AM
Nigel Parsons 26 Aug 20 - 04:53 AM
Dave the Gnome 26 Aug 20 - 05:51 AM
DMcG 26 Aug 20 - 03:10 PM
DMcG 26 Aug 20 - 03:42 PM
Nigel Parsons 26 Aug 20 - 04:33 PM
Dave the Gnome 27 Aug 20 - 02:24 AM
The Sandman 27 Aug 20 - 03:01 AM
DMcG 27 Aug 20 - 03:19 AM
Dave the Gnome 27 Aug 20 - 03:28 AM
The Sandman 27 Aug 20 - 12:33 PM
DMcG 29 Aug 20 - 07:01 AM
Stilly River Sage 29 Aug 20 - 09:17 AM
Nigel Parsons 29 Aug 20 - 02:04 PM
DMcG 29 Aug 20 - 02:49 PM
SPB-Cooperator 01 Sep 20 - 06:43 AM
Donuel 01 Sep 20 - 06:53 AM
DMcG 01 Sep 20 - 09:18 AM
Backwoodsman 01 Sep 20 - 09:25 AM
Mr Red 02 Sep 20 - 02:54 AM
DMcG 02 Sep 20 - 03:52 AM
The Sandman 02 Sep 20 - 12:49 PM
Raggytash 02 Sep 20 - 12:52 PM
The Sandman 03 Sep 20 - 02:04 AM
Mr Red 03 Sep 20 - 07:28 AM
The Sandman 03 Sep 20 - 01:23 PM
SPB-Cooperator 09 Sep 20 - 02:56 PM
Joe Offer 09 Sep 20 - 03:23 PM
DMcG 10 Sep 20 - 01:57 AM
Backwoodsman 10 Sep 20 - 02:07 AM
peteglasgow 10 Sep 20 - 04:09 AM
Mr Red 12 Sep 20 - 03:14 AM
McGrath of Harlow 13 Sep 20 - 08:05 PM
Nigel Parsons 14 Sep 20 - 05:09 AM
DMcG 14 Sep 20 - 07:38 AM
McGrath of Harlow 14 Sep 20 - 09:35 AM
peteglasgow 15 Sep 20 - 09:04 AM
Dave the Gnome 16 Sep 20 - 03:44 AM
DMcG 16 Sep 20 - 04:25 AM
Mr Red 16 Sep 20 - 07:09 AM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 02:10 AM

As there has been none of the regular infighting, circular arguments or abuse on the UK Labour party thread for weeks now and I have had no objection from the moderation team about starting new political threads I think it is safe to assume the issues have been resolved.

I have copied DMcG's post to kick this one off. Hope that's OK, Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Important issues re UK Labour Party
From: DMcG - PM
Date: 20 Aug 20 - 01:08 PM

Nothing to do with Labour again: another Brexit consequence.

"EU negotiators have rejected a British request for a migration pact that would allow the government to return asylum seekers to other European countries.

When the Brexit transition period expires on 31 December, the government will lose the right to transfer refugees and migrants to the EU country in which they arrived, a cornerstone of the European asylum system known as the Dublin regulation."

Bit of a shame for those concerned about "all these illegal immigrants", I suspect.


I agree. Brexit is nearly on us and while it is just one of the many failings of the Tory government, it does deserve a thread of its own. I may start another on the other disasters.

Nope. This one can run because it has been quieter lately, but several others intended to cause chaos are being thinned out. Mudcat is a music site and the amount of political fighting in the BS threads from the general direction of the UK and environs is too disruptive to much of the membership who come here for music. ---mudelf


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 03:14 AM

why?other disasters, covid 19?
Iwas cycling along yesterday, and stopped to say hello to a walker who used to play trad music, he got on the subject of covid as soon as he could, quote
the trouble began when they restricted congregations of churches t less than 50, it is the house of god, god is all powerful, you are safe inthe house of god unless you are an atheist or communist.
the alternative round here is to talk to sheep, the conversation is equally perplexing


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 03:32 AM

I think there is already a thread on the virus, Dick. It is a worldwide issue after all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 03:36 AM

Goggle Ads posted "the 10 best Casinos on line" at the top of this thread. Goggle knows everything about us, so what are they telling us this time?

I posit they are whispering Brinkmanship - the kind that doesn't have a contingency plan in case of rare but inevitable far reaching serious interventions.

And that intervention happened like shit does, when you leave things to the last minute.

Did they "beware what you wish for"? we have less than 6 months to find out what they** wished for. The bet is we will get just that. Then we will habituate to the new normal, and we will blame Brexshit and they will blame COVID and everyone will think they are correct.

**we should be obvious but who are they ? Fakebook & St Petersberg come into that equation IMNSHO.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 05:30 AM

Mr Red:
You're probably right about 'brinkmanship', but you wording suggest that you seem to think it is only being practised by the UK side of the negotiations.

Dave the Gnome:
Interesting to see that the original quote (whatever its unstated origin) mentions refugees and migrants . It seems someone at least accepts that not all those arriving are actually 'refugees'.

Maybe this time around we will see a discussion based more on facts than on suppositions. We can but hope.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 05:43 AM

As a partial answer to the usual question of why families are risking crossing the English Channel, this quote:

Though it is hard to grasp at first sight why any family would sleep in a wood rather than apply for asylum in France, the families and the charities who support them say the official accommodation centres are dirty, frightening and inappropriate for vulnerable families.
Armed police try to get families on to buses, tearing up tents. After a certain number of days families must apply to stay in France, and many do not want to do that.
One father told Fallowfield: “If the French would give us even basic support, I would go to the accommodation centre for my children’s sake. But they treat us like animals.”
Like other families here, he sees trying to reach the UK as his only option. “I have destroyed my life for my children to have a better future. I don’t want my kids to grow up where someone can brainwash them and make them kill for a living. Islamic State came to our country and that’s why I have come to this shit place. It’s the hardest job in the world being a parent.”

From The Guardian

So maybe they are still refugees, fleeing an oppressive regime. Do we really want to remain part of a Union with such a regime?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 06:06 AM

Firstly, of course I have no objection to copying my post as an introduction to this thread.

I find it a bit of a stretch to imagine many people voting to leave because they were dismayed of what was happening to refugees and migrants in France and thought we should be treating them here and better. So that seems to be rather beside the original issue, which was the loss of the right to send such people who get to the UK back to the EU countries. Even last night on Newsnight one of the Conservative MPs for an area in Kent - I forget which - was stressing the importance of the Dublin Agreement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 06:43 AM

I am happy to have facts quoted and sources credited, Nigel. Let us hope semantics do not enter into the argument when meanings are obvious either. I'm not sure how your quote from the Guardian answers anything though. After the end of this year we will have no right to send anyone entering this country illegally back to their country of EU entry. I think DMcG's point about this ruling being against what some leavers voted for is still valid.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 10:11 AM

So,if we can no longer return failed asylum seekers to France from 1 January, we will need to repatriate them to their homes, which is also an option. BBC: Failed asylum seekers
While this is more difficult than just returning them to France, it does stop them immediately re-joining the camps at Calais and trying again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 10:27 AM

but you wording suggest that you seem to think it is only being practised by the UK side of the negotiations.

Where in the UK might St Petersberg be?

they was deliberately vague but there is no doubt it refers to the politically oriented even if there is no nationality stated or (& I can be the authority on that point) ............ implied.
It has been inferred though. And other than my words, I am not in control of that.

There is no doubt that Europe has something to lose by not securing a deal. But the UK has more to lose. So playing my "life ain't binary" card, I am of the opinion that the brinkmanship is more irresponsible when the loss is the greater.

Change costs money, and this change will cost, and payback is ill-defined. Making deals at the last minute means dependent systems/infrastructure will be formulated in a hurry, and mistakes will be made. Which is why change costs more money. Which is why the UK has more to lose.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 01:28 PM

Absolutely, Mr Red. I have nothing against change. Some of my best results in life have come though drastic change. But change for changes sake or, even worse, change when you have no idea what you are changing to is a nightmare.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 02:07 PM

we can repatriate failed asylum seekers. Which means after their case has been reviewed. This is unlike the Dublin Agreement under which we could send them to France immediately, I believe. We cannot return a successful asylum seeker who is recognised as a refugee, but again a number would have been returned to France and the decision taken there, leaving France to host the refugee.

So while we can indeed send failed asylum seekers home, the number remaining in the UK is likely to be higher if we do not get agreement in place. Which is of course why the UK government sought to have something similar to the Dublin Agreement accepted by the EU.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 02:51 PM

Which is of course why the UK government sought to have something similar to the Dublin Agreement accepted by the EU.
And which is why, while negotiations are ongoing, we do not know what will be needed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 02:56 PM

Mr Red:
Where in the UK might St Petersberg be?

they was deliberately vague but there is no doubt it refers to the politically oriented even if there is no nationality stated or (& I can be the authority on that point) ............ implied.
It has been inferred though. And other than my words, I am not in control of that.


At the time you mentioned 'brinkmanship' St Petersburg (sp) hadn't been mentioned. Only those involved in the negotiations, UK & EU, can employ brinkmanship. St Petersburg is a non sequitur


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 04:47 PM

"So maybe they are still refugees, fleeing an oppressive regime. Do we really want to remain part of a Union with such a regime?"

I need to learn bow to do the italics.....

SO maybe if the racist little ****s in the UK were to make a serious and equal commitment to helping with refugee resettlement, countries that are doing far more than us like France and Germany would be under far less economic pressure.

also it is well documented that English is more widley spoken around the tight fisted to pay for French/German/Greek etc tuition for every person who may need to seek asylum in the future?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 05:01 PM

also it is well documented that English is more widley spoken around the tight fisted to pay for French/German/Greek etc tuition for every person who may need to seek asylum in the future?
Any chance we can have that comment in English?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 06:54 PM

also it is well documented that English is more widely spoken around (the world than other European languages. I hope you are not too) tight fisted to pay for French/German/Greek etc tuition for every person who may need to seek asylum in the future?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 03:16 AM

Why? round and round in circles yet another discussion that gets nowhere, entrenched opinions, what a waste of time, bring back Jim, his style of insult was not as imaginative as MGM, but it provided a relief from the ennui of the fellow with his fishing rod .


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 03:23 AM

It seems to me, Nigel, that you are trying too hard to dismiss this issue. There is only one reason why the UK tried to negotiate such a deal and that is that they see it as better than any of the alternatives. And that applies while the negotiations are ongoing.

You have been prepared in the past to accept their may be short term damage to the UK because of Brexit but that in the long term that is an acceptable cost to get the benefits*. I don't see why you can't say the same here: it is less than we wanted but in the long term we can absorb any disadvantages. Instead you seem to be suggesting it is not significant.

* With no estimate of the likelihood of that 'may' or hint of what 'short term' might be in practice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 04:57 AM

At the time you mentioned 'brinkmanship' St Petersburg (sp) hadn't been mentioned

We can all nitpick when we favour parts not the whole. Which, let's face it, is why we have Brexshit.

And external parties pushing propaganda via social media.
Who has the most to gain from a divided Europe?
Who has the effrontery to poison people in other countries?
Manipulating Fakebook barely registers on the poison scale.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 05:57 AM

St Petersburg is a non sequitur

Have you not seen the report on Russian involvement in British politics, including the Brexit debacle, Nigel? Your illustrious leader hushed it up before the election but it is out now.

Dick, up to now no one is insulting anyone. Apart from you. It is not necessary, it is counter productive and it gets threads closed. We can now, hopefully, have a serious discussion where people disagree but respect each other's views and have threads without the rancour that has plagued earlier attempts.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 06:40 AM

Good post, Dave.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 07:05 AM

I agree. I will not push the Dublin Agreement issues furthwr unless something changes. Those who wish have set out their views and that ahiykd be enough.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 10:44 AM

Wow, what was that word supposed to be? 'should', believe it or not.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Jos
Date: 23 Aug 20 - 04:18 PM

I'm getting the hang of these typos now - just look at the letters to the right or left on the keyboard. It gets confusing though when the 'words' include some correct letters. You just need to guess which ones.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 02:54 AM

I spotted it, Dave :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 03:17 AM

I'd being staying at a Premier Inn after visiting my children. My wife called out out that we need to leave for breakfast now to get to them, so "I'll just finish this post before we dash off"...


I do make far fewer typos when I use my laptop, but the phone is a bit of a disaster for them, I am afraid. And I rarely think my posts have enough merit to justify the sort of attention a thesis, job or application or report would get.


Meanwhile, back to Brexit. This comment from the EU that the negotiations are going backwards seems to have stirred some Brexiteers I read elsewhere into action.   They interpret it as saying what the EU wanted is not being achieved but the UK is holding firm and the EU is gradually realising it. Seems unlikely to me: the 'going backwards' phrase to me would be saying that things that had been agreed were not longer being agreed to. To what extent that is talking about things in the WA that the UK is trying to get out of, as opposed to things agreed in principle at the start of this batch of negotiations but no longer accepted is hard to tell. Certainly, there is plenty of the former.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 06:39 AM

Interesting remark in "The New European" from Alistair Campbell - I know, ad hominem away! - but I think it it true. It has been a long time since I heard this myself:


As for Brexit, even its high priests have given up singing its praises. I cannot for the life of me remember the last time I heard anyone saying how great it was going to be for the country. It has taken on the feel of a trip to the dentist, or filling in your tax form.

Just got to be done.


Your experiences may differ, of course.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 07:09 AM

DMcG:
It seems to me, Nigel, that you are trying too hard to dismiss this issue. There is only one reason why the UK tried to negotiate such a deal and that is that they see it as better than any of the alternatives. And that applies while the negotiations are ongoing.
I am not dismissing the issue. But it is not as yet something which is 'set in stone'. Despite the initial post with an uncredited quote:
EU negotiators have rejected a British request for a migration pact that would allow the government to return asylum seekers to other European countries.
When the Brexit transition period expires on 31 December, the government will lose the right to transfer refugees and migrants to the EU country in which they arrived, a cornerstone of the European asylum system known as the Dublin regulation."


"The EU negotiators have dismissed". Yes, they've also dismissed the UK keeping its own (internationally agreed) fishing rights, and the UK have dismissed EU claims to UK fishing rights. This is all still under negotiation. To choose one particular 'dismissal' by EU as final is a poor starting point for any discussion.

And yes, I still accept that there will be costs to the UK of leaving the EU, but there would also be costs in remaining. I still believe the vote on leaving had the correct result.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 07:15 AM

Dave the Gnome
Have you not seen the report on Russian involvement in British politics, including the Brexit debacle, Nigel? Your illustrious leader hushed it up before the election but it is out now.

Yes, I saw reports on "Russian involvement in British politics". I did not see that it included (even in the Guardian) involvement in Brexit. In fact there were complaints that involvement in Brexit was excluded from the remit of the reports.
Perhaps you saw different reports.

Guardian:Russian intervention didn't sway the Brexit referendum – our rightwing press did


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 07:48 AM

And yes, I still accept that there will be costs to the UK

Last time we discussed this, Nigel, you objected to a use of 'will' and insisted on a 'may'. Has that changed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 09:48 AM

It may be that I was responding to something more specific.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 10:02 AM

I could dig out the exact quotation, which was much longer ago than I thought (Jan 19!) but I am more interested whether you now think, whoever is responsible, that costs to the UK are (almost) inevitable. The Jan 19 post said you thought they may arise but would be worth it to achieve Brexit.

Also in the news: The EU and US have signed a trade deal (without needing to accept thes2 pesky chlorinated chickens!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Rain Dog
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 11:07 AM

Well I would think that most people would agree that there will be extra cost involved in the immediate future. Of course we will have to wait and see if the cost of leaving works out cheaper down the line.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Aug 20 - 11:29 AM

Yes, Rain Dog, they do now. That doesn't mean they did before.

Of course, as soon as you admit costs, it is reasonable to expect some sort of cost benefit analysis, preferably with more depth than 'perhaps it will work out in the end.'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Aug 20 - 05:52 AM

DMcG
I could dig out the exact quotation, which was much longer ago than I thought (Jan 19!) but I am more interested whether you now think, whoever is responsible, that costs to the UK are (almost) inevitable. The Jan 19 post said you thought they may arise but would be worth it to achieve Brexit.
I hate to suggest that you haven't actually quoted me because I didn't insist, as claimed: that costs only 'may' occur. If I've found the same quote as you (27 Jan 2019) it says: "And I don't think I said "There will be some short term hardship". I think I accepted that there 'may' be, but that it was worth it to get out."   The 'possibility' of 'hardships' is different to the 'need' for 'costs'.

Also in the news: The EU and US have signed a trade deal (without needing to accept thes2 pesky chlorinated chickens!)
So much for the numerous arguments, made many times on these threads (by remainers) that such a deal would never be accepted by the US.

My full quote, in context, is here: Here


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Aug 20 - 06:07 AM

We are trying to avoid arguments on this generation of the many threads, so I will simply say that if a cost is not a hardship, you are in a very fortunate position.

Let's move on!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Aug 20 - 06:15 AM

A cost is certainly not the same thing as a hardship, and to try to conflate the two in order to get away with a misquote is misleading. Everyone has 'costs' every day, that does not mean that they are suffering from 'hardships'.
However, as you say, Let's move on.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Aug 20 - 09:01 AM

From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 06:43 AM

I am happy to have facts quoted and sources credited, Nigel. Let us hope semantics do not enter into the argument when meanings are obvious either.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 25 Aug 20 - 04:53 PM

A very interesting piece by Brendan Donnelly Here. I wonder how the Leave-Brigade will dress up the impending shit-show to make it appear as a resounding success?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Aug 20 - 06:11 PM

For those who have not heard about it, worst case planning document was leaked to The Sun. Although other news sources have reported on this, it seems appropriate to link to The Sun's article.

Yes, it is a worst case planning document. But some.of the key risks- no trade deal and a second wave, for example - are not unlikely.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 02:34 AM

I wonder why these worse cases were not explained in 2016.

Well, not really.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 03:46 AM

Nigel. Going back to a point you made earlier. The report on Russian intervention did not include the Brexit referendum because it was told not to investigate that. So it doesn't mention Russian involvement in that not because there was none but because the government was embarrassed by it.

Howver, something else about the headline you reerence, "Russian intervention didn't sway the Brexit referendum – our rightwing press did", has been bothering me.

Are you really saying that the right wing press swaying the referendum is any better than the Russians doing it? The right wing press who are owned, in the main, by a dysfunctional Australian billionaire, a tax-exile Lord and a Russian family with close links to the KGB. These people have their own agenda and you can be sure that the welfare of the British people is not on it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 03:58 AM

I think many of them were, but were dismissed as 'Project Fear'. The main difference this time is that it is the current government considering them, which is of course very much a "Leave" government.

How likely they are will vary. A shortage of some foodstuffs in December seems very likely to me, as we all remember the Great Pasta Shortage at the start of the virus outbreak. I can see that being repeated with a much wider set of foods fairly easily. Power cuts seem less likely to me.

===

I have been thinking a little about the fabled cliff edge, which has not been mentioned for some time. As with so much to do with Brexit, it is remarkably ill defined, so let me tell you how I think of it.

Let's start with the concept of a 'transition'. In the ideal world, we start with a known situation (for example set of rules and regulations) and a destination (with its spelled out set of rules and regulations.) During the transition, firms have, say, two years to implement the IT systems, carry out staff training and whatever so that at the end of the transition period they are ready to go under the new system.   The less time they have to do this - one year rather than two, say - the more difficult it is.   We are currently in the position that with four months to go, very little is known about the final state. Consequently, it is extremely difficult for anyone to have the appropriate IT, training and other preparation.

It turns out that whatever we have called it, we have not had a 'transition period', as few if any firms has had a chance to transition. We have simply had an extended negotiation period and called it a 'transition period'.

This to me is 'the cliff edge': it is not primarily economic. It is the need for firms to adapt to a substantially different way of working with little or no notice. An announcement on 31 December of the new rules that people have to follow from 1st Jan, or even with three months holiday from one side but not the other or whatever, is a cliff edge.

Trying to cope with such changes will almost certainly have significant economic effects, but they are consequences of the regulatory cliff edge.

Given we are still trying to negotiate a trade agreement, the regularity cliff edge is looking inevitable to me. Others may, of course, disagree.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 04:33 AM

”Given we are still trying to negotiate a trade agreement, the regularity cliff edge is looking inevitable to me. Others may, of course, disagree.”

And, without doubt, they will disagree - having voted for Christmas, the turkeys are very unlikely to want to face the fact that, in the near future, their silly, easily-led heads will be separated from their Union-Flag-bedecked bodies (metaphorically speaking, of course!).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 04:45 AM

From DMcG:
For those who have not heard about it, worst case planning document was leaked to The Sun. Although other news sources have reported on this, it seems appropriate to link to The Sun's article.
Yes, it is a worst case planning document. But some of the key risks- no trade deal and a second wave, for example - are not unlikely.


Immediately followed by Dave the Gnome:
I wonder why these worse cases were not explained in 2016.

Possibly because they weren't understood at the time, particularly the risk of a second wave of Coronavirus when we hadn't had a first wave. To what extent may that second wave exacerbate any possible problems at borders, how could that have been foretold?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 04:53 AM

Dave the Gnome:
Nigel. Going back to a point you made earlier. The report on Russian intervention did not include the Brexit referendum because it was told not to investigate that. So it doesn't mention Russian involvement in that not because there was none but because the government was embarrassed by it.
My post was a direct response to your claim that the report had detailed involement in Brexit.
"Have you not seen the report on Russian involvement in British politics, including the Brexit debacle, Nigel? Your illustrious leader hushed it up before the election but it is out now".
Which you now appear to accept that it didn't.

However, something else about the headline you reference, "Russian intervention didn't sway the Brexit referendum – our rightwing press did", has been bothering me.

Are you really saying that the right wing press swaying the referendum is any better than the Russians doing it?

No, I am not making that claim, I was just emphasising that the left wing press had already accepted that the report did not include Brexit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 05:51 AM

Nigel, accepted that the report did not include Brexit does not mean that there was no Russian involvement. The government hushed it up so, going back to my original point, it does seem that there was Russian involvement in the Brexit debacle. Your attempt at derailing the issue is blatant and will not work.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 03:10 PM

I agree the risks due to the near simultaneous end of transition and the virus could not have been foretold specifically in 2016. There was, of course, a more generalised concern about a pandemic, but obviously at a much lower probability.

On the other hand the presentation is dated June and it was the 13th of July that Gove formally announced the transition would end in January 2021. So this government consciously accepted all the risks that have been outlined. A risk is not a certainty, of course, but the increased risk is a deliberate choice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 03:42 PM

Scrap that, sorry. The document is labelled July, not June. So we cannot be certain whether the government saw the document and then announced the end of transition, or the other way around.   If it is the other way round, though, it would seem rather lackadaisical to make an announcement and then only get a presentation on the consequences sometime over the next two weeks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 26 Aug 20 - 04:33 PM

Nigel, accepted that the report did not include Brexit does not mean that there was no Russian involvement. The government hushed it up so, going back to my original point, it does seem that there was Russian involvement in the Brexit debacle. Your attempt at derailing the issue is blatant and will not work.

I'm not trying to derail the discussion, your original claim was that Russian involvement in Brexit was in the report. Which you now seem to accept it was not.

Accepting that the statement was in error is a much better way of getting the discussion to move on than trying to justify your original claim.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Aug 20 - 02:24 AM

Everyone but you understood my point, Nigel. The Russian involvement in British politics was the point behind the real original post mentioning St Petersberg. Nitpicking at its very best. Well done, Nigel, you win. I shall not take the thread any further off track.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Aug 20 - 03:01 AM

I reckon johnson is preparing to use ill health as an excuse to run away from responsiblities regarding Brexit in JAN FEB 2021.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Aug 20 - 03:19 AM

You may well be right, Sandman, through it is also possible the party 'persuades' Johnson to quit. The more I think abut it, though, the more complications I see and so I am very loathe to make any predictions on the matter.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Aug 20 - 03:28 AM

The whole brexit debacle has been a fiasco from the start and I cannot see it being any different at the end. Not that it will end in December. The effects will be with us forever. The one lesson that we can come away with is that this is what you get by pandering to right wing xenophobes. I only hope that future governments will take heed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Aug 20 - 12:33 PM

imo johnson is a political opportunist who plays the populist card. Mussolini did this and ended upside down hanging ignominously with his mistress.
for our USA friends. Mussolini [IL DUCE] was an italian fascist Right wing xenophobe


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Aug 20 - 07:01 AM

I talked above about a 'cliff edge' being less about a direct economic one but much more a consequence of a regulatory cliff edge where what needs to be done is not known until just before it needs to be implemented.

That the government apparently released changed guidance for schools on Friday which is the last normal working day before they need to be in place this coming week is exactly the sort of 'cliff edge' impact I mean: it is impossible to act on anything in this guidance that differs from what went before - as it presumably does or there would be no point in issuing it.

I think that is a good indicator that is what we might look forward to at the end of December.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 29 Aug 20 - 09:17 AM

The old history stuff is completely understood, Dick. No need to patronize. It's the modern stuff that is an incomprehensible tangle. But then, who are we to criticize until we get the current occupant out of the White House? We see your clown and raise you a sociopath.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Aug 20 - 02:04 PM

That the government apparently released changed guidance for schools on Friday which is the last normal working day before they need to be in place this coming week is exactly the sort of 'cliff edge' impact I mean: it is impossible to act on anything in this guidance that differs from what went before - as it presumably does or there would be no point in issuing it.

And some people claim that the government's instructions are indecipherable.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Aug 20 - 02:49 PM

If anyone else agrees it is indecipherable I will happily rewrite it. I accept the sentence is quite long and elaborate, but it is hardly of the complexity of Ulysses.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 01 Sep 20 - 06:43 AM

The government's instruction do not provide clear instruction on how to gauatnatee freedom of movement, which only pathetic racists and wannabe neo-****s are against.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Donuel
Date: 01 Sep 20 - 06:53 AM

cliff edge? More like freefall.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Sep 20 - 09:18 AM

Brexit: Boris Johnson signals no-deal increasingly likely and hits out at EU for refusing to compromise

So much for an 'over ready deal'. Or was the deal just assuming the EU would give up and let the UK have whatever it wanted?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Sep 20 - 09:25 AM

If Johnson was a character in Game of Thrones, his name would be ‘Boris the Blame-Shifter’. It’s the only thing he and Rasputin Cummings are any good at. And lying, of course.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 02 Sep 20 - 02:54 AM

and that ahiykd be enough

ahiykd we call that a micro-coffefe ?

and

I am getting a de ja vu moment or is it an analogue? When the resurrectors** of Adderbury Morris spoke to the old boys who had been Morris dancers before WW1, they found that the reason the Morris faded was that their agenda had changed. There were more important things to address. So the relatively slow progress of this thread looks to show how much COVID has trumped the debate.

**as reported in "They Way of the Morris"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Sep 20 - 03:52 AM

Yes and no, Mr Red. One important difference is that it is very likely that we will find a vaccine for covid in a year or two at most, if it is possible at all. After that point, it will be of much lower concern, though there will be more awareness of the risks of similar diseases, with a bit of luck.

The consequences of the trade agreements we reach will have effects lasting decades. The Brexit supporting Professor Minford said this included major reductions, or even elimination, of the UK industrial and farming sectors, for example.

So it is completely understandable that the majority of most people's attention is on covid. Mine is as well. But that does not make the trade deals we come up with unimportant.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 02 Sep 20 - 12:49 PM

Brexit, is appearing to be a big mistake.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Raggytash
Date: 02 Sep 20 - 12:52 PM

some of us realised that four years ago.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Sep 20 - 02:04 AM

yes,raggytash you were not the only one 49 per cent thought so, but with the addition of covid it appears to be an even bigger mistake


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 03 Sep 20 - 07:28 AM

Yes and no, Mr Red.

But after a year's testing and trickle feeding out the vaccine to the most deserving in society, assuming the world can produce enough effective vaccine in a year. Do you have any idea of the logistics involved? Do we have enough chickens to make all the eggs? And if we do, less eggs for eating & up goes the price of eggs on the retail market.

Brexshit will be a reality and the price of eggs (et al) will be rising as a result. And which will be the more scary?
1) The UK out on a limb with few deals in place and new systems in place like customs deflating the excitement of foreign travel.
2) Or Travel abroad pretty scary on its own, with uncertainty if getting home un-plannable ahead and how much quarantine necessary on return. Not to mention the long term affects of surviving the virus!

My point was: Brexshit will be a lesser concern by comparison, and it can be endured, and enduring it will be. History tells us. If we listen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Sep 20 - 01:23 PM

IF IRELAND gains unification an extra cost would be placed on europe and a financial burden would betaken off the uk economy, maybe the uk should rejoin europe?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: BS: Breaking International Law
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 09 Sep 20 - 02:56 PM

I am reluctant to begin a new thread on UK politics, but I cannot find another thread to post this to. If their is an active thread, maybe the mods can move this post.

In the UK, the Northern Island Secretary stated that it is fine for the government to go against international law and pass legislation that goes against an internationally agreed treaty and therefore international law for the sake of domestic expediency.

What is telling is the following question and answer at the beginning of Prime Minister's question time. (source Hansard)

Munira Wilson
If Ministers think it is acceptable for this Government to not obey the law, how on earth can the Prime Minister expect the public at home to do so?

The Prime Minister
We expect everybody in this country to obey the law.

The hypocrisy of the reply says everything.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Breaking International Law
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Sep 20 - 03:23 PM

It does seem that hypocrisy is the Rule of Law these days, doesn't it? I heard a radio program the other day about a wonderful new museum that opened recently near Gdansk. It was intended to tell the story of the history of Poland during World War II. The current government completely repurposed the museum, so that nothing negative is said about the conduct of Poland or the Polish people during the war.

It seems that too many countries have been following this path recently. Honesty is no longer important.

Trump has just cancelled all racial healing classes that were being taught for government employees, saying that is "unAmerican" to teach that there is racism in our country.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Sep 20 - 01:57 AM

The latest wheeze of Johnson to try to unilaterally alter an international agreement - i.e. break the international law - is being criticised is the House of Representatives, where several representatives are making clear they have no intention of agreeing a US-UK Trade deal if there is any threat to the Good Friday Agreement.

Heaven knows the USA has bigger issues to deal with at the moment that they need to focus on, but that's the thing about international law: it has international effects.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Sep 20 - 02:07 AM

What’s puzzling me is, whatever happened to the ‘Oven-Ready Deal’ that, during the GE Campaign, Johnson claimed he had negotiated, and which was ready to go?

Could it possibly have been a lie, perhaps dreamed up by Rasputin Cummings for Johnson to spout, in order to confuse feeble-minded people into voting for him?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: peteglasgow
Date: 10 Sep 20 - 04:09 AM

i never realised what differences there were between theresa windrush may's deal and boris f***in lying idiot johnson's deal. except that the latter had the approval of a rabid group of fascists on the tory benches. but apparently with johnson's version he has the right to just dump parts of it he doesn't like and ignore or insult our allies.

those who voted for this crew have no excuses - just saying you were inspired to leave the EU because of your racist feelings is far more creditable than saying it is because you believe that boris arrogant idiot johnson is capable of being a good prime minister and leading a competent government


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Mr Red
Date: 12 Sep 20 - 03:14 AM

History will judge Theresa May, and 'King Boris. And Mrs May will be looked on far more kindly by comparison. Yes she was ineffectual, but not because of her intellect, but because she was pushing a leviathan uphill that she didn't believe in for the sake of her tribe's unity.
Whereas Boris Turncoat Johnson just wanted to be Prime Minister.

Compare those if you will with someone who didn't even want to be leader of his party. (Was he actually ever?)

Popular vote eh? What's that worth to a pandemic ravaged principality?

And FWIW even the most optimistic pundits now forecast the financial nuclear winter I have been predicting. It ain't rocket science, change costs money, and there are now two major changes surrounding the UK. All it takes is an inevitable cold winter that must descend one day, and the mild weather we have become habituated to will throw us.
And the cry will be "The government should............."

Tell you what - my supply of non-perishables is constantly topped-up now. Against more severe lockdown &/or snow or even a personal COVID. Siege mentality maybe, but at least it is while panic-buying has faded from public consciousness.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Sep 20 - 08:05 PM

Pretty clearly the UK government made the agreement in bad faith. The fallback position that it follows if there was no agreed free trade agreement was clearly understood by everyone. It was vociferously emphasised by the DUP in the Commons as the reason they had broken their alliance with the Tories, along with others.

There is no possibility that the government was no fully aware of the implications ofwhat they were signing.

But why should anyone be surprised at an English government acting in bad faith when it sees that as convenient? There's an expression "Albion perfide" which was first used as far back as the 13th century?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Sep 20 - 05:09 AM

Pretty clearly the UK government made the agreement in bad faith. The fallback position that it follows if there was no agreed free trade agreement was clearly understood by everyone.

"Under duress" rather than "In bad faith". Despite Article 50 clearly stating that "Nothing can be agreed until everything is agreed" (wording not checked, but the meaning is there). EU negotiators refused to even start discussing trade terms without an agreed payout, and other restrictions. That is what became the "Withdrawal agreement". Now that the EU (or at least Mr. Michel Barnier) are refusing to discuss trade unless we first give way on fisheries and government aid, we can see the same happening again. Article 50 (part of an international agreement) is clearly being ignored by the EU. Fortunately Boris Johnson is willing to fight fire with fire.

From the above it should be clear that I don't believe that the EU can claim the moral high ground when it comes to keeping aligned with international treaties.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 14 Sep 20 - 07:38 AM

I love this 'nothing agreed until everything is agreed' line. Some people are interpreting 'everything' to mean absolutely everything, including perhaps whether God exists.

That sentence has a scope: "everything" refers the negotiation of the Withdrawal agreement and an agreed text of the Political Declaration. Which have been agreed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Sep 20 - 09:35 AM

The EU did indeed insist on necessary guarantees before it was willing to enter into negotiations, true enough. So if the UK was unwilling to give those guarantees the right thing would have been to accept that, and leave without a trade deal.

The problem with that would have been that, while that was fine with the clique in charge under Johnson, they could never have sold it. It would not have been acceptable to Parliament, and in fact would not have lost an awful lot of votes in the subsequent election, and they¡d never have got that stonking majority of yesmen and women.

Signing the agreement with no intention of keeping it was primarily a way of conning the British people rather than the EU. Now it looks very much as if the Johnson Mob has succeeded in enginering the no deal exit that was intended all along.

Very clever bit of management, a classic con-trick. What Baldrick would have called "a cunning plan". And we know how well those always worked out in the end...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: peteglasgow
Date: 15 Sep 20 - 09:04 AM

after the disgraceful decision (presumably born of jealousy) that the bbc were to stop broadcasting nicola sturgeon's daily information to scots about her government's covid strategy,we now hear that bbc 'stars' are to be stopped commenting on political matters. this is just suppression of free speech, decency and competent government . what has england become? and some people like this stuff? if you enable fascism - what are you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Sep 20 - 03:44 AM

Suppression of free speech
Curfews
Rat on your neighbours

It all sounds frighteningly familiar...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Sep 20 - 04:25 AM

There are other things I would add to that as well, Dave. For example movement of powers from Parliament to ministers is a very disturbing trend. In several bills recently, including the Internal Market, Parliament has voted not to have the authority to review minister's decisions. Obviously in the Internal market that has not yet completed, but those clauses are there.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics
From: Mr Red
Date: 16 Sep 20 - 07:09 AM

We see your clown and raise you a sociopath.

SRS - would you have accepted the third Bush? Instead of the one in your hand.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 25 September 4:11 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.