[Mr Mercury]

dart in the crossbar, on 16 September 2019 - 07:38 PM, said:

There do seem to be some facts regarding Yellow Hammer. One being that the description was changed before it was released. Dunno who said it was total fact. It was described as the base position. Seems reasonable to assume therefore that it was or is.

I see that Cummings/ Johnson's latest ploy is to act like Billy Big Boll@x with the EU. A bit like your 'meet them head on' comment.

It sounds more like a last roll of the dice relying on the notion that the EU needs us more than we need them.

When you've been backed into a corner by a pm who never believed in Brexit and quite literally layed down and accepted anything, when Parliament itself tries every trick in the book to keep delaying Brexit, the outcome that the people of this country voted for, then what's left to do but try and force the issue, yes so meet them head on Boris and do everything in your power to leave on Oct31, and if you do then I'd say 17m voters will be very pleased with him.

[dart in the crossbar]

17M who voted for a no deal brexit?

17M who voted in the knowledge that the base scenario Yellow Hammer could even be a possibility?

[Mr Mercury]

They voted to leave, so let's leave, of course it might not be plain sailing from the off, but it won't be yellow hammer day after day after day, surely you can admit that. Negotiations will continue and it will all get sorted, it just needs the MPs to stop blocking what the public voted for.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 16 September 2019 - 08:50 PM

[Wooden Spoon]

dart in the crossbar, on 16 September 2019 - 08:19 PM, said:

<br />17M who voted for a no deal brexit?<br /><br />17M who voted in the knowledge that the base scenario Yellow Hammer could even be a possibility?<br />

<br /><br /><br />



Why do you keep saying base scenario for yellow hammer. Paragraph 6, on the gov website says it’s is NOT A BASE SCENARIO, but a worse case?












https://brexitfacts....ASAAEgJdZ_D_BwE













“Is Yellowhammer a base scenario or a reasonable worst case scenario?

Yellowhammer has always been a reasonable worst case scenario and never a ‘base’ or ‘central’ scenario. This was confirmed in the NAO report, published in March 2019, which said that in Operation Yellowhammer “Departments are working on the basis of a reasonable worst case scenario.”

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Two equally hypocritical candidates today.

The first are all those demanding a 'no deal' remain on the table as some nuclear option that'll scare the sh*t out of an EU - whilst at the same time insisting it'll be just a 'bump in the road' for the British public.

The second is that bastion of balanced and unbiased reporting The Sun.

English Sun: https://www.thesun.c...embourg-brexit/

Irish Sun: https://www.thesun.i...-xavier-bettel/

But hey, at least there's one Englishman whose eyes they can't pull the wool over: https://www.bbc.co.u...ricket/49726913

[Wooden Spoon]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 17 September 2019 - 04:34 PM, said:

<br />Two equally hypocritical candidates today.<br /><br />The first are all those demanding a 'no deal' remain on the table as some nuclear option that'll scare the sh*t out of an EU - whilst at the same time insisting it'll be just a 'bump in the road' for the British public.<br /><br />The second is that bastion of balanced and unbiased reporting The Sun. <br /><br />English Sun: <a href='https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9940097/empty-chairing-boris-johnson-skip-press-conference-luxembourg-brexit/' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>https://www.thesun.c...embourg-brexit/</a><br /><br />Irish Sun: <a href='https://www.thesun.ie/news/4555227/boris-johnson-luxembourg-prime-minister-xavier-bettel/' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>https://www.thesun.i...-xavier-bettel/</a><br /><br />But hey, at least there's one Englishman whose eyes they can't pull the wool over: <a href='https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49726913' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>https://www.bbc.co.u...ricket/49726913</a><br />

<br /><br /><br />



Good old Boris.










Never fails to disappoint does he.

[dart in the crossbar]

DEATH, on 17 September 2019 - 01:38 PM, said:

<br /><br /><br />



Why do you keep saying base scenario for yellow hammer. Paragraph 6, on the gov website says it’s is NOT A BASE SCENARIO, but a worse case?

There are a number of sources that have stated that YH was base not worst case. These include the senior reporter from the Sunday Times and at least one MP who claimed to have seen the document.

Given the importance of the title, I'm surprised that Cummings/ Johnson / Gove have not responded more strongly to the claim that it was changed.










https://brexitfacts....ASAAEgJdZ_D_BwE













“Is Yellowhammer a base scenario or a reasonable worst case scenario?

Yellowhammer has always been a reasonable worst case scenario and never a ‘base’ or ‘central’ scenario. This was confirmed in the NAO report, published in March 2019, which said that in Operation Yellowhammer “Departments are working on the basis of a reasonable worst case scenario.”

[Wooden Spoon]

As I said recently I hadn’t read anything on YH, so when I did, the official govt report supported by the National Audit Office seemed to strongly contradict what you had said.Can you post a link to your source material that supports your earlier claims so I can have a look? It would be remiss of me to comment without having seen this.

[Wooden Spoon]

Mr Mercury, on 16 September 2019 - 08:46 PM, said:

<br />They voted to leave, so let's leave, of course it might not be plain sailing from the off, but it won't be yellow hammer day after day after day, surely you can admit that. Negotiations will continue and it will all get sorted, it just needs the MPs to stop blocking what the public voted for.<br />

<br /><br /><br />and that the rub.



It was leave or remain part of the EU





The deal wasn’t with caveats, it was a simple leave or remaiiu.






Parliament has failed utterly to deliver.

[Wooden Spoon]

I saw a video of Farage talking today. He said he thinks we should have an insurance based healthcare system, as it will be more efficient than the NHS.No mention of people such as the elderly or unemployed etc who rely on the “free at point of use” . Well Nigel, if you want private healthcare, pay into BUPA and leave us to fund the NHS via our national insurance and PAYE etc.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

DEATH, on 18 September 2019 - 04:28 PM, said:

I saw a video of Farage talking today. He said he thinks we should have an insurance based healthcare system, as it will be more efficient than the NHS.No mention of people such as the elderly or unemployed etc who rely on the “free at point of use” . Well Nigel, if you want private healthcare, pay into BUPA and leave us to fund the NHS via our national insurance and PAYE etc.

It's summat he's been advocating a long time, Rob.

Though it joined pretty much everything else in being absent from the Brexit Party manifesto...

But anyway, as you mention Mr 'voice of the ordinary people - just please ignore my wealthy lifestyle' Farage, I see he's been talking of 'good faith' between the EU and Britain - directly before dubbing the Luxembourg PM a 'pipsqueak'.

Here y'go: https://www.youtube....h?v=3_2qrwFcBOs

And that's after decades of vilifying the very establishment from whom he's still happy to accept hundreds of grand.

Which means he gets yet another nomination on this thread.

For what it's worth there's also talk of him getting increasingly jittery at the prospect of a deal acceptable to all sides actually happening - to the point of having meetings with ERG members to discuss blocking it.

How ironic would it be if the very characters who've been shouting longest and loudest for Brexit end up the only ones opposing it...

[Wooden Spoon]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 18 September 2019 - 05:44 PM, said:

<br />It's summat he's been advocating a long time, Rob.<br /><br />Though it joined pretty much everything else in being absent from the Brexit Party manifesto...<br /><br />But anyway, as you mention Mr 'voice of the ordinary people - just please ignore my wealthy lifestyle' Farage, I see he's been talking of 'good faith' between the EU and Britain - directly before dubbing the Luxembourg PM a 'pipsqueak'.<br /><br />Here y'go: <a href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_2qrwFcBOs' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>https://www.youtube....h?v=3_2qrwFcBOs</a><br /><br />And that's after decades of vilifying the very establishment from whom he's still happy to accept hundreds of grand.<br /><br />Which means he gets yet another nomination on this thread.<br /><br />For what it's worth there's also talk of him getting increasingly jittery at the prospect of a deal acceptable to all sides actually happening - to the point of having meetings with ERG members to discuss blocking it. <br /><br />How ironic would it be if the very characters who've been shouting longest and loudest for Brexit end up the only ones opposing it...<br />

No idea when the video was made, just that I saw it today.









I’m also of the view that Boris will get some tweaks to the back stop, and Mays deal will be reheated and served up to parliament, has Farage gambled a lot of money on sterling dropping in the event of a no deal

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Despite a queue of candidates defending tory trash talk in a schoolyard 'They started it!' kinda way, their failed leader Ian Duncan-Smith wins today's 'HOTD' title hands down with his 'There's been a lot of pompous nonsense about parliamentary sovereignty' (Sky News).

Yes Ian, there has.

Infact we've had three years of you and your brextremist buddies demanding we regain what you're now bizarrely bemoaning...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 29 September 2019 - 10:25 AM

[isleaiw1]

Surely Arthur Scargill defending Johnson has to figure as hypocrit of the day somewhere? The man of the people defending an eton educated toff, now you know Brexit defies party politics...

[Mr Mercury]

Does Tom Watson deserve a mention on this thread?
On one hand trying to force the democratic hand by wanting to have another "people's vote", whilst on the other being blatantly menitioned in the failed and now totally discredited investigation in to the Westminster peadophile ring. I totally agree that peadophiles are the lowest of the low along with murderers and rapists and any form of abusers deserve all that's coming to them. But did he use this as a political tool to openly persue an investigation and destroy many people's lives rather than let the authorities look at themselves on a political basis?

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 04 October 2019 - 09:12 PM

[mr. smith]

Mr Mercury, on 04 October 2019 - 09:12 PM, said:

Does Tom Watson deserve a mention on this thread?
On one hand trying to force the democratic hand by wanting to have another "people's vote", whilst on the other being blatantly menitioned in the failed and now totally discredited investigation in to the Westminster peadophile ring. I totally agree that peadophiles are the lowest of the low along with murderers and rapists and any form of abusers deserve all that's coming to them. But did he use this as a political tool to openly persue an investigation and destroy many people's lives rather than let the authorities look at themselves on a political basis?

Tom Watson has always advocated a confirmatory vote, the only difference between him & current labour policy is he thinks we should have it before a general election rather than after (labour wants the election, then negotiate a deal, then have a vote).
the paedophile ring case? he was a backbench mp back in 2014. he obv believed beech when he wrote the letter to the met encouraging them to look into his case (he had done the same with many abuse claimants at the mets behest. if they caved in to that 'pressure' then questions have to asked of the met not a backbench mp. would you rather he'd done nothing & the case turn out to be true?
leon Brittan had been interviewed before the met received his letter, confirmed by ex director of public prosecution Alison saunders.

where is the hypocrisy?

[Mr Mercury]

mr. smith, on 05 October 2019 - 09:42 AM, said:

Tom Watson has always advocated a confirmatory vote, the only difference between him & current labour policy is he thinks we should have it before a general election rather than after (labour wants the election, then negotiate a deal, then have a vote).
the paedophile ring case? he was a backbench mp back in 2014. he obv believed beech when he wrote the letter to the met encouraging them to look into his case (he had done the same with many abuse claimants at the mets behest. if they caved in to that 'pressure' then questions have to asked of the met not a backbench mp. would you rather he'd done nothing & the case turn out to be true?
leon Brittan had been interviewed before the met received his letter, confirmed by ex director of public prosecution Alison saunders.

where is the hypocrisy?

Probably agree with you, posted after a few drinks..
Back to hypocrisy what's with the Sun and Mirror being embroiled with possible phone hacking again after the issues which forced the closure of the News of the World.

[Johnnyspireite7]

Mr Mercury, on 05 October 2019 - 11:16 AM, said:

Probably agree with you, posted after a few drinks..
Back to hypocrisy what's with the Sun and Mirror being embroiled with possible phone hacking again after the issues which forced the closure of the News of the World.

Because they never learn?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

'Leverson' was first opposed, then watered down before being all but ignored by a government who, surprise-surprise, enjoy the support of those it targeted...

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Easy winner today - the Ian Duncan Smith who voted AGAINST Brexit no fewer than three times accusing a Philip Hammond who voted FOR Brexit three times...

..of trying to prevent Brexit.

https://www.express....-dominic-grieve

But of course we're now seeing all sorts of Olympian contortions as those who've been furiously advocating no deal as the only true Brexit - to the point of insisting seventeen million people voted for nothing else - celebrate Johnson's re-jigged version of May's plan.