j.a.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Seabag Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Vaccine wars are hilarious, where Britn Inc is > > cock-a-hoop at its success, as if this fluke > > situation were in were a design default of > Brexit. > > ? We knew this would happen? > > > > Somehow it reminds me of a You Tube video, where > a > > tramp steps up to play a piano and plays a full > > recital of Bach. It can?t last, the tramp is a > > tramp for a reason. > > > > *waves plastic Union Jack > > I think the issue you raise is one of the reasons > why supporters of the two sides have trouble > seeing eye to eye (amongst many other reasons I'm > sure!)..... > > No, of course this specific situation was not > envisaged. But one of the reasons I voted to leave > (I assume some others may have also) is becuase of > a belief that conceptually being able to make some > decisions in a more nimble fashion (as opposed to > needing to consider the needs of 27 other nations > before a decision can be made) would provide some > potential advantages. Now for some that 'concept' > is too vague, and they want specifics, so found it > hard to take that as a rationale they could get > comfortable with. I was comfortable that at some > point it would be an advantage, but to be fair at > no point did I expect we would get an example of > that concept so soon after brexit, and sadly not > in such unfortunate circumstances as this > pandemic. > Similarly it's not possible to definitivley point > to where or when the next example might come along > (I could list potential areas of focus, but they > would just be speculation), and for some that's > just a level of uncertainty/lack of clarity that > they are uncomfortable with; for others the > confidence in the principle/concept is enough.... > > I've mentioned this quite a few time over the > years in the lead up to brexit, only to be > invariably mocked. But perhaps, with this > unfortuneate vaccine rollout example, some people > can at least acknowledge the validity of the > concept even if they don't agree with it. This is all indeed true, and like many Remain voters I currently gaze at the EU and find myself thinking ?what on earth are you thinking, there?s literally nothing about your behaviour that makes sense and you couldn?t have picked a better way to validate Brexit if you tried?. However, none of that means Boris, Frost, Baker, Forman and all the rest of those lovers on English exceptionalism can yet claim it?s an astounding success, and nor can Cat. We?re a long, long way off knowing what it means for trade and - in many ways more importantly I feel - how it will shape the attitudes and emotions of British citizens. While a lot of the economic factors are too intertwined with Covid, and a certain amount of adjustment shock was inevitable, I find the change in how we see ourselves and our place in the world more worrying. I can concede ground on some stuff where Brexit is concerned, but not in the fact that it seems to have emboldened people with frankly outdated and thuggish views, not on the point that the Leave campaign happily encouraged those views to get their vote and then pretended it hadn?t. That one?s sticking with me. The EU has f?ed up straight out of the gate, no question, but to say this answers everything isn?t correct.

It always makes me laugh how people get up in arms over foie gras, but will happily eat a chicken or pork product (not just raw meat but ready-cooked stuff, salami, sausages, sandwich fillers and so, so much more) without asking where it came from. Spoiler alert - the conditions those animals are raised in are no better than the unethical foie producers. There IS ethical foie out there, it just costs an eye-watering sum of money. But that's true of all meat - the morally acceptable stuff is a lot more than the factory-farmed crap. The other problem with foie is it's astonishingly unhealthy. In a nation that's 80% overweight we probably shouldn't be eating something that's literally 90% fat. If you've ever eaten at Morley's or any other standard high st chicken shop, if you like pepperoni on a pizza - even one of those nice-looking artisan ones on Lordship Lane, if you like greasy spoon cafe full English breakfasts, Yilmaz kebabs or a chicken curry ready meal...you are morally eating on the same level as someone chowing down on a foie gras terrine. This is why plant=based food is increasingly popular and, frankly, good quality (check out Moving Mountains for example), and that's probably a good thing. Personally I love meat, but I've become really picky about what I eat and give to my family. WG Bunting (also known as Muscat) at the top of Peckham Park Road, in case you're wondering. Superb butchers.

Ah, poor Trolley, such a snowflake that he can?t stand the idea of a journalist reviewing the third largest industry in this country. What a melt... I mean, it?s ok for people to spend ?150 on other things they like, but not eating out. Darling, how much effort it must take for you to maintain your hatred that you actually look through Rayner?s columns and read the comments? Maybe better to...you know...just ignore it? Or do you feel that a restaurant review somehow contributes to the downfall of our society? As if ?real people? don?t go anywhere but KFC and Wetherspoons or whatever your laughable justification for ridiculing these reviews is. The next time you?re fuelling that internalised culture war that helps you justify your views, maybe count up the percentage of places Rayner visited in the last year that charges ?150 per head. Doesn?t take long, I just did it. The answer might surprise you. I?ve never quite understood the idea that enjoying eating out is such an awful thing, but given how much it contributes to the economy I?d have to say that I?m glad TrolleyMelt isn?t at the Treasury... ETA - is it just Rayner you loath, or is it all restaurant critics? Giles Coren? Grace Dent? Fay Maschler? Or do you have something specific against Jay? Hmmm...

I think it?s fair to say TheCat is insulated from the adjustment shocks that Brexit has so far produced, and insofar as that?s true he?s able to step back and see the ?big picture?, and only time will tell if it turns out to be accurate; certainly I hope these are just teething problems, though I think their more akin to having wisdom teeth yanked without anaesthetic and not a vague promise of painkillers and antibiotics afterwards. It?s very easy to be as sanguine as he is when you don?t currently have skin in the game, and I hope he recognises that. Certainly the vaccine roll-out has been superb so far and it turns out Kate Bingham was up to the job. However I don?t think anyone could be criticised for thinking this was another story crony appointment; certainly Dido Harding and others could take lessons because T+T has been an unmitigated F-up and the amount we spent on PPE last year was criminal. Perhaps the vaccine is an example of things are going to be. I hope so. It?s what we were promised. But already we?ve got Brexiters reverting to blaming the EU for things we knew would happen (see Lance Forman) and govt blaming the fishing community for not filling out forms properly when it was Boris and Frost who openly sold them out. It hasn?t started as badly as it could?ve, but let?s not pretend it?s gone as well as was promised. Let?s hope these problems will get solved quickly. But it?s already starting to look like we went for a barebones thin gruel of a meal-deal just to get it over the line and claim victory. Not the greatest of starts, and as I say, very easy for those not exposed to the problems to claim it?s no big deal. It?s a huge deal for people watching their business crumble in front of them.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Seabag Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ThatCat just won?t leave it alone > > > > Me me me meooow! > > Have another look Seabag, I wasn't the one to > raise Brexit and shoehorn it into this thread. > > I thought we were just all raising contrived and > tenuous links between trump and brexit, so just > wanted to join in with the cool kids. No, I think Seabag?s got it right here. You didn?t have to go down that route, you just wanted to because it makes you feel better. But hey, you do you - you always have. Don?t know why anyone?s surprised.

Hit the sherry already mate? You seem to be counting those chickens awfully early... Give it a rest...it?s Christmas.

jazzer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Agreed Amazon is a dirty word. > > The Govt can't do right for doing wrong. No one > expected the virus and just as they thought the > vaccine was going to start being rolled out a > variant of the virus appears and the number of > infections radically increases. Throughout this crisis Boris has consistently ignored scientific advice until the last possible moment. Of course no one saw this coming (except for all the experts - remember them - who pointed out that Chinese wet markets would inevitably lead to exactly this), but the UK govt has not performed well. > Had Sadiq done his job and enforced and I mean > ENFORCED mask wearing (never seen a single Covid > Marshall) we wouldn't be in the current mess we > are in now. Right, so it?s all Sadiq?s fault? Exclusively? Hmmm, interesting take. Have you got a link to the legislation that allows him to ENFORCE mask wearing? I?ll wait... When I was last out on Thursday people > on buses were still NOT wearing masks, getting on > without one on and then after getting seated maybe > putting a mask on. It is a joke. Until we have > proper enforcement things will not improve. How > long will tier 4 last, I'm guessing till at least > the end of January and potentially till after 14th > Feb. That sound very much like individuals exercising that ?personal responsibility? the govt has placed so much faith in. If they?d passed binding legislation that enforced mask-wearing, could be a different story... > > It didn't help with the ridiculous scenes of > selfish people rushing to mainline stations in > London to "escape" tier 4 last night, even though > Chris Witty when asked about unpacking a travel > bag said yes, don't travel. At some stage all > these people will return over the coming weeks. Ah, now you?re getting it! Boris desperately, desperately doesn?t want to tell people they can?t do this or that. Yeah. I get it. No one wants to be that person. But he was elected to do something very different and as Harold Wilson famously didn?t actually say ?Events, dear boy, events!? have steamrollered all over his bumbling ?man of the people? schtick - Christ, the poor guy got it himself - and the ideologically driven cabinet he?d already installed to drive other political forces was utterly unsuited to the demands of 2020. He?s only now figuring out what kind of PM he has to be get through this, but whether he can actually *be* that person remains to be seen. Blame Sadiq if you want, but he isn?t the one making the decisions or passing laws. Neither is Andy Burnham or any other regional mayor. You want Covid marshals? Go tell Downing Street.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think we are seeing the delayed result of the > 'Eat Out to Help Out' Promotion. > The 'Tenner Off' campaign . > > Local Restaurants were Rammed.. Social Distancing > virtually non-existent.. > > Foxy So you think they Covid has a *14 week* incubation period? Ooookay then... I mean, cases started during while hospitality was shut down during November, but whatever. https://mobile.twitter.com/PeterBorgNeal/status/1339827633824083969/photo/1

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sigh....chalk that up as the 3000th time in the > past 4 years when the remain crew on this forum > can't gets their head around someone else's > perspective, they resort to the trusty old 'troll' > label... > > There's no debate here ja, there's you guys all > circle jerking about how self-righteous you are > and how stupid people who voted leave are. > Occasionally some of us try to engage, but it's > really not worth it to be honest as most of you > don't want to hear a different view, you just want > to hear something that you can mock. So you can > smugly sit and reflect on how stupid the other > side is.... You?ve completely missed the point, but ok. He?s trolling, pure and simple. I think I?ll leave social media alone again. It?s just a toxic as the last time. There was a reason my initial post - directed at you - said I was going to only post once, because it was something I felt strongly about. I got sucked in to posting online again and I thought I was asking questions and discussing but according to you I?m not. Ok then. I?ll point out you and Keano are guilty of what you accuse others of, in my view, but it doesn?t really matter anyway. None of this does. You?re as deep in your echo chamber as I am in mine, and frankly we?re all just caught in the churn anyway.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > j.a. Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > keano77 Wrote: > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > Stop being a @#$%&. Don?t bring people?s family > > into it. Not cool. > > Another 15 hour day j.a? You really are a pompous prick. Not worth arguing with, life is too short. ETA - basically what Alan said in both his posts. You?re just being a troll now. It?s pretty tiresome, but I guess if it makes you happy...? Saddens me somewhat. I thought there was a debate going on here - a spiky one maybe, but a debate at least. But it?s just you getting your kicks by trolling Remainers.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > j.a. Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > --- > > > > So you?re saying that we don?t have to ?police? > > (for want of a better word) goods that cross > the > > border from the Republic to UK territory? We > just > > wave them through? > > > Au contraire j.a. (See what I did there, I?m > pro-funny foreign languages). > > I?m saying UK goods going from NI to RoI should be > waved through given our superior standards. I asked you about ROI to UK. You dodged the question.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Still waiting for that letter from your mother to > start your deprogramming treatment Sephiroth. Stop being a wanker. Don?t bring people?s family into it. Not cool.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > J.a and Sephiroth > > No sane person would give two damns whether a > chlorinated chicken left Belfast and arrived in > Monaghan or Co Cavan, especially as it might be > more hygienic than salmonella infected E.U. > standard fayre. > > But the E.U. (algorithms on legs therefore not > sane) will take issue and insist on a border. > > Therefore EU?s fault. What?s difficult to grasp > about that? So you?re saying that we don?t have to ?police? (for want of a better word) goods that cross the border from the Republic to UK territory? We just wave them through? (Also, not for nothing, but chicken has to be hit with chlorine when the basic butchering process is not sanitary enough to guarantee safety. You might want to think about that.)

So you?re saying that the UK would, and indeed should, have no customs border of any kind in between the EU and us? Have I misunderstood?

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... In other words, Britain has to either > institute an internal border or try to avoid one > altogether by staying tied to EU rules in > perpetuity, even after it has left the bloc... > > Tom McTague in The Atlantic... > > Strange. > > When I mention the E.U. trying to tie us to its > rules in perpetuity (above) the usual suspects > full of indignation all pooh-poohed the very > idea. > > However when a lad from County Durham who uses a > curious mix of British/America spelling states the > bleeding obvious you?re all swooning. > > Pass the sick bag ... Keano, when you?re done chucking up your indignation, could you tell us please where you think the border should go? No deflection, no fudging, just a straight answer. There has to be a customs border *somewhere*. If David Frost whatsapped you tonight to get your view on it, what would you tell him to do? Where would you advise the border should go? Because we have to have one somewhere. Unless you *like* smuggling?

?people are questioning these experts.? Aaaaand there it is. The core of what you think is a coherent argument. Your experts are ok, other people?s are somehow ?wrong?. I?m really enjoying how you can?t see the flaw in your own position. Please continue!

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There?s talk of possible life on Venus. If > confirmed God help ?em. There?ll be an E.U. > delegation trying to charge them billions a year > and telling them what do. I suppose it depends on whether the microbes on Venus actually read the agreement before they sign it? Presumably if they do that, and they realise it?s not in their interests, they?ll tell the EU to do one? That all assumes they don?t agree to something first, of course.

Because they've spent 40 years blaming the EU and literally have no other playbook. They've never actually analysed the 'how' of extricating the UK from the EU, focusing only on the emotional idea of it. As people are already tired of me pointing out, there's no single description of Brexit that can command a majority, so they focused on the emotional aspect of it, the blind faith necessary to make such a leap without knowing where we will land exactly.

Yeah, that was bad. Looks like Gove is going to step in and salvage it. (See my post yesterday at 3.23pm)

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > j.a. Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > uncleglen Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > You might want to listen to some home truths, > remaniacs united > > (TL:DR, there?s a LOT of people who disagree with Homophobe Hoey.) Ah! Kate Hoey! I mean, why do you make it so easy? Didn?t she vote for the WA? Are you telling me - shock horror! - she didn?t understand it?s implications?! Can?t be! Here?s an actual trade expert pointing out the problem nearly a year ago... A woman more at home with UKIP than Labour, who told Remain-supporting MP?s in Leave constituencies what they should listen to their voters, but couldn?t square that circle when it came to representing 70% Remain Vauxhall, and jumped before she was pushed when it became apparent she wasn?t going to get re-elected. She?s a massive homophobe, by the way, amongst other unsavoury attitudes she holds. Kate Hoey is one of the Irish people who thinks the UK should have primacy over Ireland. She?s just your kind of person! Ah, sweet, you?ve got a crush on someone who just got an unelected position in the House Of Lords because she helped Boris. Unelected crony?s making laws whom you can?t remove. I could?ve sworn you had a problem with that? Still, when it?s a racist homophobe you like, I guess it?s ok?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah blah blah waaah waaah waaah I don?t like democracy and constitutional law or the fact that my hero has f*^%ed up and shown everyone that he didn?t understand the reality of the situation and I think those uppity foreigners should give us good British folk whatever we want because EMPIRE! Whaaaaaagh! Shhhh, Uncle. The grown-ups are talking. Go and play with your train set.

My worry is more around folk like Kate Hoey, who are merrily telling anyone who pays attention that the GFA can be ignored. They?ve got a lot of grass roots followers who seem to think Ireland can do what it?s told. I doubt it?ll come to violence - for all his grossness Gove isn?t going to want to piss off the Irish-American community. Any trouble in NI and they?ll be reading us the riot act. However, there?s plenty more who seem to think that Ireland, north or south, can submit to the will of the mainland. We?ve been messing with that island for hundreds of years, personally I think that should stop.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > J.a. Seriously I think you need help. Be careful > if you behave and ttalk like you are on here you > may have to try to avoid being committed, but I > expect not. Ahahaaahaha! Like you know me... I?d happilly tell you to your face that being an anti-vaxxer makes you a clear and present danger to the human race, and your insistence in believing crackpot theories you cherry pick off the web over solid science (see every post Blah Blah has made) demonstrates and emotional attachment to a view of the world which you can?t begin to question. Your a conspiracy theorist. Fine, it?s your problem. If it was limited to Covidiocy I?d probably ignore you but, as I say, anti-vaxxer, and people like you have to be opposed at every turn. What is it about smallpox, polio, German measles, cervical cancer and tetanus (to name but a few) you like so much, anyway? I?ve heard of medical fetishes but that?s just weird. Don?t bother answering, I?m gonna ignore you for a while. Got a family and all that. I?m sure I?ll swing past your drivel at some point soon though. Kisses.

Gotta say TE44, crackpot though you are, the way you avoid answering direct questions is admirable. Great dedication to your cult there. You?re still an idiot, but at least you?re committed.

I?ve long suspected Gove of playing the long, long game here. He knew Johnson was unfit to be PM in 2016. After that he throws his weight behind him, knowing that it?s just a matter of when - not if. When the axe falls it?ll be Gove?s greasy little mitts wielding it (and his horrendous partner, Sarah Vine, nasty pieces of work both of them). For a long time he?s reckoned he?ll be the next PM, but Sunak?s gonna give him a run for his money. Gove knows the truth, that Boris is a bluffer who?s never actually dug in on delivering policy.