UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Once again, what he actually said...

It wasn't question of what was said in public AFTER the allegation, but what was actually said in the meetings/discussions.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I do wonder if the slur at the EU was a classic dead cat distraction technique. Laura Kuenssberg noted:

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak

*Lord Keen has indeed resigned, citing concerns with BoJo's amendments to the Withdrawal Agreement https://www.thenational.scot/news/18...bill-concerns/

I don't care how many resignations you count or rack up Andrew, the IMB is required to curb the EU's disgusting stance on threatening a blockade of goods to NI.

You need to stop sucking up to the corrupted EU Andrew and stop thinking they can do no wrong, they can, they have and they continue to do so.

---------- Post added at 18:34 ---------- Previous post was at 18:20 ----------

Brexiteers 2016: "We need to vote leave because the EU wants more power to become a Federal entity, wants it's own army."

Remainers 2016: "Don't be so ridiculous, there will never be an EU Army, there will always be the Veto power we can use".

EU 2020:-

From BBC's Katya Adler:

In her State of the Union address, European Commission President calling for bigger, swifter role for EU on world stage - call for qualified majority voting instead on unanimity on foreign policy issues #SOTU

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

I don't care how many resignations you count or rack up Andrew, the IMB is required to curb the EU's disgusting stance on threatening a blockade of goods to NI.

You need to stop sucking up to the corrupted EU Andrew and stop thinking they can do no wrong, they can, they have and they continue to do so.

---------- Post added at 18:34 ---------- Previous post was at 18:20 ----------

Brexiteers 2016: "We need to vote leave because the EU wants more power to become a Federal entity, wants it's own army."

Remainers 2016: "Don't be so ridiculous, there will never be an EU Army, there will always be the Veto power we can use".

EU 2020:-

From BBC's Katya Adler:

Call me old fashioned but I struggle to see how we can exercise our veto on something we're no longer a member of! Talk about cake and eat it!

I urge you to accept we've left the EU! Pull up a chair, grab some popcorn and join the rest of us in watching BoJo stumble from one crisis to another. Heck, even The Spectator which he used to edit has found the courage to call him out.
https://twitter.com/lukemcgee/status...139137/photo/1

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Call me old fashioned but I struggle to see how we can exercise our veto on something we're no longer a member of! Talk about cake and eat it!

I urge you to accept we've left the EU! Pull up a chair, grab some popcorn and join the rest of us in watching BoJo stumble from one crisis to another. Heck, even The Spectator which he used to edit has found the courage to call him out.
https://twitter.com/lukemcgee/status...139137/photo/1

Read what I wrote again FFS.

In 2016 we still had the veto power because we were still in the EU!

In 2020, the EU is talking about the elimination of the Veto power by going for majority voting!

Hence, thank god we have left. Which is why I was highlighting the bullshit you Remainers were saying would never happen, is now happening!

I wasn't talking about using the veto power now, so wake up for goodness sake Andrew and do stop talking utter bollocks!

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

Read what I wrote again FFS.

In 2016 we still had the veto power because we were still in the EU!

In 2020, the EU is talking about the elimination of the Veto power by going for majority voting!

Hence, thank god we have left.

I wasn't talking about using the veto power now, so wake up for goodness sake Andrew and do stop talking utter bollocks!

A Commission President putting out feelers on making majority decisions on foreign policy matters does not constitute an EU army in the making.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

A Commission President putting out feelers on making majority decisions on foreign policy matters does not constitute an EU army in the making.

Yes it does Andrew. Like I said, wake the hell up.

They already have a stance to get one in place anyway.

Are the EU doing anything that looks like creating a European army?


Well, yes. They now have an EU Military Staff and an EU Military Committee, both part of the 'Command Structure' of the EU Common Security and Defence Policy. They have created the EU Peace Fund, a military intervention fund of 10.5 billion euros.

https://briefingsforbritain.co.uk/wi...-its-own-army/

[Pierre]

If it is being argued that international treaties cannot be amended, adjusted, tweaked etc.

Then could Germany please pay us the £234 Billion they owe us, before the treaty of Versailles was amended?

Originally Posted by Pierre

If it is being argued that international treaties cannot be amended, adjusted, tweaked etc.

Then could Germany please pay us the £234 Billion they owe us, before the treaty of Versailles was amended?

Germany and Merkel need to stfu.

Germany has a Constitution that it would put first over International treaties.

Here is a very good article from the Spectator from a few days ago...

"Why didn't the EU punish Germany, when it broke international law?"

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...rnational-law-

Boris Johnson's proposal to break international law 'in a specific and limited way' has sparked uproar. But do you remember when the UK broke the Geneva Convention? Oh. Well we did. The government ratified the Geneva Convention on the Sea on 10 September 1964. From then the UK was bound forever by the treaty and bound by international law. On 25 September 1964, we were not. No explanation was given. No explanation was asked.

Our Judge who ruled in favour of the government when it broke the Geneva Convention of the Sea, said this:

'the Crown [The Government] has a sovereign right, which the court cannot question, to change its policy, even if this involves breaking an international convention to which it is a party and which has come into force so recently as fifteen days before'.

That Judge became Lord Diplock and he was, one of our very best judges. He was utterly silent on whether or not he thought that example of breaking international law was good or bad – silent because it is a question of politics. Obeying this law is part of our Rule of Law. In a way some may find confusing, that may mean we must obey this law – that we can break international law.

Most of us know the experience. At a party or at the school gate, someone says 'I really must tell you my political opinion'. Though the eyes may thin a smile is forced. The words 'must you?' are never said out loud.

It had been the policy of lawyers to avoid politics when discussing the law – to be free to give a personal political opinion of course, but to also keep our legal opinions free of our politics. It is extremely difficult to do regarding international law. What then is a possible solution?

There are endless examples of breaches of international law by the 193 nations. The UK is, rightly, one of the good guys. It is my view that the solution is to simply copy Germany. Germany’s constitution puts international law on the highest footing – at least expressly, because if I am right and ours moves to copy it them then ours will too.

Similarly, the United States and the US Supreme Court does not regard the findings of international courts of justice as binding.

[1andrew1]

A likely future leader of the US* lets BoJo know where the US will stand on a trade deal.

Joe Biden We can’t allow the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland to become a casualty of Brexit.

Any trade deal between the U.S. and U.K. must be contingent upon respect for the Agreement and preventing the return of a hard border. Period.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1306334039557586944

*Source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...eral/national/

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

A likely future leader of the US* lets BoJo know where the US will stand on a trade deal.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1306334039557586944

*Source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...eral/national/

Democrats siding with the IRA as usual.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

A likely future leader of the US* lets BoJo know where the US will stand on a trade deal.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1306334039557586944

*Source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...eral/national/

The GFA isn’t in jeopardy with Boris’s actions. Sleepy Joe is still asleep. 💤

But as usual, siding With the EU again. You really are a disgrace Andrew.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

A likely future leader of the US* lets BoJo know where the US will stand on a trade deal.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1306334039557586944

*Source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...eral/national/

ooooh, links to a twitter tweet and a polling page, I was going to say you can do better than that . . . maybe you're giving up?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Carth

ooooh, links to a twitter tweet and a polling page, I was going to say you can do better than that . . . maybe you're giving up?

Pesky me, linking to orginal source materials. I'm deffo on my way out and you've worked it out!

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Pesky me, linking to orginal source materials. I'm deffo on my way out and you've worked it out!

I also noticed the tumbleweed passing by when I highlighted above about Germany breaking International law, U.S not recognising anything other than it’s own Constitution.

Just Fake outrage from you, when the UK intends to to protect the integrity of all the UK from the grips of the corrupted EU.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

I also noticed the tumbleweed passing by when I highlighted above about Germany breaking International law, U.S not recognising anything other than it’s own Constitution.

Just Fake outrage from you, when the UK intends to to protect the integrity of all the UK from the grips of the corrupted EU.

I don't have time to research every claim made on this forum. I could dive in there and say it's nonsense but that's not my style. My comments are as I see things.

I've posted previously how we could better have handled matters if we it did not want a close relationship with the EU after Brexit. Instead, as that earlier Atlantic article shows we've weakened our position on every possible occasion.