The Return of Brexit

[Protheroe]

I'm not defending it. I'm pointing out that there is another side to this story that doesn't fit your narrative. These aren't little things either that the EU has broken its own rules on - if you took time to do a little research.

The EU has no moral or legal high ground on this issue.

I think the government is wrong to threaten breaking the WA, but equally the EU promised a free trade deal if we signed the WA. Instead it has spent the last year attempting to impose its protectionism on a sovereign state. On that basis if you're accusing me of being a selfish cunt then I suggest you're looking in the wrong direction.

[baggy1]

Of course you are defending it, purely by saying 'they did it as well miss'. This is very simple, the EU may not have any moral high ground on this issue but they definitely have a legal high ground because we signed up to the treaty and are now reneging on that signature. The bunch of muppets you helped put into power said it was oven ready - what has happened to that analogy? They also promised to take no deal off the table if a GE was agreed, it is now back on the table, what happened to that promise?

The irony is that you on one thread are bemoaning the liberties being taken away from us, and on the next are saying this government can do what they want - that is simply hypocritical at best.

[Protheroe]

I say I'm not defending it (I'm not) yet you're inside my head and know I'm defending it.

Unless you can see both sides of the story (you rarely do)there's very little point debating with you.

[Borin' Baggie]

Let's not mention how the EU breaks its own Treaties to protect the project when it suits Germany or France shall we? There's plenty of exmaples.

This is a deflection and a false equivalence.

The EU offering flexibility with respect to breaking and delaying implementation of internal EU agreements to member states is not in any way the same thing as breaking a signed international agreement between two separate parties. The UK was afforded flexibility itself as a member, notably with air pollution regulations, but it is not going to be given that flexibility as a third country for obvious reasons.

[baggy1]

So basically Proth is bullshitting again as a deflection to the real issue. What a surprise.

And as for seeing both sides of the story, when a government consistently lie, treat international law as optional in specific cases, and plunder the public purse to benefit their suporters, they are normally seen as criminal across the world. They really haven't got a side, it is all about covering their arses before then real fuck up that is Brexit hits.

[Protheroe]

Let's not mention how the EU breaks its own Treaties to protect the project when it suits Germany or France shall we? There's plenty of exmaples.

This is a deflection and a false equivalence.

The EU offering flexibility with respect to breaking and delaying implementation of internal EU agreements to member states is not in any way the same thing as breaking a signed international agreement between two separate parties. The UK was afforded flexibility itself as a member, notably with air pollution regulations, but it is not going to be given that flexibility as a third country for obvious reasons.

That's not what I was referring to. Try again.

[Derek Hardballs]

Teresa May - no one is going to be as awful as me as PM...

Hold my beer Govey, Boris coming through!

[Protheroe]

It's quite amusing that none of the EU experts on here appear to know how the EU has consistently broken its own rules in a most fundamental manner to protect the project, yet are scathing when our own country suggests doing the same to protect the union.

[Derek Hardballs]

It's quite amusing that none of the EU experts on here appear to know how the EU has consistently broken its own rules in a most fundamental manner to protect the project, yet are scathing when our own country suggests doing the same to protect the union.

Please don’t conflate country with this awful governments actions who you are still defending through subtle as a brick whataboutery. 

When you have the likes of Micheal Howard and Norman Lamont criticising what we are doing and yet you still try and say but, but, but what about them? They’re just as bad! Then you’re so far down the Brexit rabbit hole I’m thinking I will rename you Alice.

[baggy1]

It's quite amusing that none of the EU experts on here appear to know how the EU has consistently broken its own rules in a most fundamental manner to protect the project, yet are scathing when our own country suggests doing the same to protect the union.

Hardly doing it to protect the Union, the option for doing that was 12 months ago and more. We said at the time that this could lead to a unified Ireland because of the hamfisted way the muppets tried to force it through. Maybe if they read legally binding documents before signing them they might not have got into this latest fuck up.

And instead of your whataboutery why don't you focus on things that actually affect us - I want to remind you that we are not part of the EU any more, what they do isn't our business. The UK government is threatening to break International law which has far wider implications than getting our own way in a trade negotiation. It also highlights to the rest of the world (who we are about to enter into trade agreements with) how we treat these negotiations.