Oh, and I missed the most important reason from my answer above (bit distracted).
Staying in the EU but more loosely *might* have satisfied both wings, certainly in the soft, floaty centre. Pro-EU types could be glad we were still in, sceptics could be relieved we'd loosened the tentacles.
The referendum to stay or go (whichever side won) was always going to be far more polarising. A looser relationship as a member had the potential to be unifying around a soft-sceptic/pro-EU position.
Unity is not necessarily the hallmark of the current situation.
Importantly, Crown of Blood, by me, comes out 6 April, and you should buy it (and the preceding entries in the trilogy if you haven't yet). The tale of a kingdom riven by conflict may sound familiar, but the competent leaders will make a refreshing change of pace.
Was listening to a short history of Ireland at the weekend to undrerstand why my grandmother left in 1930 or so. The reason was a WTO style plan by Ireland after independence. This devastated the economy and led to a massive brain drain. In the 1980s Ireland became one of the most open markets in the world and is now richer per head than the UK.
Then that was a poor history you listened to
Burning the houses of the people with the capital in the 20s didn’t encourage long term investment
I think the Irish economy did okay in the 1920's. But, when he came to power, De Valera thought it a good idea to adopt autarky.
Was listening to a short history of Ireland at the weekend to undrerstand why my grandmother left in 1930 or so. The reason was a WTO style plan by Ireland after independence. This devastated the economy and led to a massive brain drain. In the 1980s Ireland became one of the most open markets in the world and is now richer per head than the UK.
Then that was a poor history you listened to
Burning the houses of the people with the capital in the 20s didn’t encourage long term investment
Surely not still bearing a grudge, Charles ?
Very recent history in Charlie Towers; six or seven centuries should soothe it.
Was listening to a short history of Ireland at the weekend to undrerstand why my grandmother left in 1930 or so. The reason was a WTO style plan by Ireland after independence. This devastated the economy and led to a massive brain drain. In the 1980s Ireland became one of the most open markets in the world and is now richer per head than the UK.
Then that was a poor history you listened to
Burning the houses of the people with the capital in the 20s didn’t encourage long term investment
Isn't Ireland still in hock to the UK for in effect becoming a large financial conglomerate with a country attached to it? I wonder where the 'history of Ireland' programme was aired - BBC, Sky or Channel 4?
All you lads now bewailing the fact that the result you wanted from a referendum for which you wished is being enacted by a party & pm for which you voted, do any of you feel complicit in the 'Mega clusterfuck of historic proportions'?
Those of us who voted Leave to get rid of a Tory Prime Minister will be doubly delighted if it turns out to be a BOGOF offer.
Maybe some issues with the word independent in their party name?
I don't think the ERG have formally claimed the word "Gits". It is more of a general attribution.
I confess I had a sad epiphany about Jacob Rees Mogg the other day. He’s always come across, to me, as smart, articulate, and cleverly self deprecating, and oddly good at handling TV etc, despite his absurd and half-contrived persona. For me, as a reluctant Brexiteer, it was faintly reassuring to know that he was on my side.
But a couple of days ago I saw an interview (from early 2016 I think) when he was discussing Brexit and he said “The Lords have just released a fascinating analysis, which shows that Article 50 is cleverly designed to reduce economic shocks to both parties, when a nation secedes from the EU”.
You what? Cleverly designed to reduce economic shocks??!! The whole POINT of Article 50 is to make it has hard and painful as possible to quit the EU, so as to deter any such thing happening. Its British author, the vile and treacherous Lord Kerr, happily admits this. And that’s how it has worked out
So how come I, a drunken thriller writer, knew this, and Jacob RM didn’t? I was cognisant of the dangers of A50 from the inception of Lisbon, and certainly hyper aware of it by early 2016. Yet Jacob RM was blissfully UNAWARE?
Either he was lying then, or he was a fool then - and therefore is a fool now...
And either way, you were fooled by him.
Indeed. Tho I wasn’t fooled by the europhiles who tried to sell me Lisbon as a “tidying up exercise”.
How I despise them. From Blair to Brown to Clegg to Cameron. A whole generation of traitors.
Thatcher who said No, No, No, to further integration? Thatcher of the Bruges speech? The same Thatcher who would have baulked at Maastricht and positively handbagged the mere idea of Lisbon?
Yes, I agree. Thatcher knew that the Single Market was good, and it is good, and I wish we weren’t leaving. She also knew that ancient nation states will only take so much forced and undemocratic integration before there is a terrible backlash. She would never have allowed this fuck up on her watch.
Was listening to a short history of Ireland at the weekend to undrerstand why my grandmother left in 1930 or so. The reason was a WTO style plan by Ireland after independence. This devastated the economy and led to a massive brain drain. In the 1980s Ireland became one of the most open markets in the world and is now richer per head than the UK.
Then that was a poor history you listened to
Burning the houses of the people with the capital in the 20s didn’t encourage long term investment
Neither did chasing out the Protestants post-Independence (and I say that as someone from an Irish Catholic background).
Coming from a Irish Unionist family we were first burnt out of our houses and then chased from the country. And now they are asking us to come back 😂
All you lads now bewailing the fact that the result you wanted from a referendum for which you wished is being enacted by a party & pm for which you voted, do any of you feel complicit in the 'Mega clusterfuck of historic proportions'?
You do realise that a Yes victory would have resulted in exactly the same chaos for Scotland, only a hundred times worse? Because: you would have been ejected from the EU at once, and also ejected from the UK, AND your fiscal position would have meant immediate slump, probably a Depression. You didn’t even have a credible position on what currency you would use.
If Brexit has taught us anything, it is that breaking up political unions is painful, protracted and extremely expensive. And the EU has only been around 50 years, the UK has been around 300 years. For Scotland, it would have been ruinous.
ScotNats dancing reels over the complexities of Brexit are the most egregious hypocrites and imbeciles. As your rightful king (see prior thread) I order you to stop or I shall confiscate your remaining neeps. And tatties.
Was listening to a short history of Ireland at the weekend to undrerstand why my grandmother left in 1930 or so. The reason was a WTO style plan by Ireland after independence. This devastated the economy and led to a massive brain drain. In the 1980s Ireland became one of the most open markets in the world and is now richer per head than the UK.
Then that was a poor history you listened to
Burning the houses of the people with the capital in the 20s didn’t encourage long term investment
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
You can cut me out on the grounds that we're in trade, dahling.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
You can cut me out on the grounds that we're in trade, dahling.
As an artiste, I had already considered this. Now I fear it is inevitable. If you come over for Christmas, you can have your eggnog in the hallway with my Thai cleaner, Nok.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
I have thought for a long time now that May has gone about this in the worst possible way, having originally hoped that she might have been boringly competent - if not inspirational. She has been spectacularly incompetent - and I now loathe her with a passion. I was prepared to give Brexit a chance - but the way it has been handled has changed my mind. And I am not, as anyone who has read my posts or headers will have worked out, the EU's greatest fan, by a very long way.
I do not see why the merits or otherwise of Brexit should be judged by the failings of our spectacularly incompetant self serving two faced appeaser of a Remainer PM.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
You can cut me out on the grounds that we're in trade, dahling.
As an artiste, I had already considered this. Now I fear it is inevitable. If you come over for Christmas, you can have your eggnog in the hallway with my Thai cleaner, Nok.
All you lads now bewailing the fact that the result you wanted from a referendum for which you wished is being enacted by a party & pm for which you voted, do any of you feel complicit in the 'Mega clusterfuck of historic proportions'?
You do realise that a Yes victory would have resulted in exactly the same chaos for Scotland, only a hundred times worse? Because: you would have been ejected from the EU at once, and also ejected from the UK, AND your fiscal position would have meant immediate slump, probably a Depression. You didn’t even have a credible position on what currency you would use.
If Brexit has taught us anything, it is that breaking up political unions is painful, protracted and extremely expensive. And the EU has only been around 50 years, the UK has been around 300 years. For Scotland, it would have been ruinous.
ScotNats dancing reels over the complexities of Brexit are the most egregious hypocrites and imbeciles. As your rightful king (see prior thread) I order you to stop or I shall confiscate your remaining neeps. And tatties.
Given your predictive record over Brexit (even with your standard several outcomes for every circumstance m.o.), forgive me if I take a rain check on giving a feck about your post hoc indy maunderings.
Ye'll need to fight an 8 year guerilla campaign, slaughter several of your rivals and take down a fully armoured knight aided only by a pony and an axe before ye can even be considered as our rightful king.
Hang on - the EU suggested a NI only backstop. The UK said no. We're one country; we can't have NI treated differently. So we got a UK-wide backstop to deal with the precious union with NI, at our request.
Then the UK says no - we don't like what we asked for and go. Can you change it please.
How do you negotiate with a country that behaves like that? The EU has very many faults. But Britain voted to leave. It was not - is not - unreasonable to expect the country deciding to leave to have some realistic idea of how to do it, taking into account the realities.
Barnier has done exactly what his principals have asked him to do. Obtain a WA which meets the EU's and Britain's red lines. Only Britain's red lines seem to change depending on who has shouted at May last. And MPs are unwilling to do what they are paid to do - because they don't want to be blamed for not obeying the People's Will and also don't want to be blamed for doing something they don't think is a good idea.
So over the waterfall we go.
The backstop doesn't respect our red lines. Both an NI backstop and a UK backstop are disrespectful and unprecedented and unacceptable. The fact the EU have insisted there must be one, the fact some in the UK are prepared to fold on this doesn't change that fact.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Yes. Odin.
Via my direct descent from Maud Ingelric I am probably directly descended from Alfred the Great, who was descended from Cynewulf of Wessex, who was descended from Odin the God of Death, Frenzy, Poetry, Madness, Sorcery and the Runic Alphabet, which deffo describes my family.
As a direct descendant of Odin, alias Woden, I also own Wednesdays, so I am afraid I will have to charge everyone 10p to exist the day after tomorrow. Hope that’s OK.
Curious snippet in Guardian Live blog. PM was ready to agree a tweaked deal on Saturday, but was "over ruled by London." Who the heck can overrule the PM?
Hang on - the EU suggested a NI only backstop. The UK said no. We're one country; we can't have NI treated differently. So we got a UK-wide backstop to deal with the precious union with NI, at our request.
Then the UK says no - we don't like what we asked for and go. Can you change it please.
How do you negotiate with a country that behaves like that? The EU has very many faults. But Britain voted to leave. It was not - is not - unreasonable to expect the country deciding to leave to have some realistic idea of how to do it, taking into account the realities.
Barnier has done exactly what his principals have asked him to do. Obtain a WA which meets the EU's and Britain's red lines. Only Britain's red lines seem to change depending on who has shouted at May last. And MPs are unwilling to do what they are paid to do - because they don't want to be blamed for not obeying the People's Will and also don't want to be blamed for doing something they don't think is a good idea.
So over the waterfall we go.
The backstop doesn't respect our red lines. Both an NI backstop and a UK backstop are disrespectful and unprecedented and unacceptable. The fact the EU have insisted there must be one, the fact some in the UK are prepared to fold on this doesn't change that fact.
I know it's Blair, but the first part of this video is a good explanation of how the UK's conflicting demands led to this dilemma.
I have thought for a long time now that May has gone about this in the worst possible way, having originally hoped that she might have been boringly competent - if not inspirational. She has been spectacularly incompetent - and I now loathe her with a passion. I was prepared to give Brexit a chance - but the way it has been handled has changed my mind. And I am not, as anyone who has read my posts or headers will have worked out, the EU's greatest fan, by a very long way.
I do not see why the merits or otherwise of Brexit should be judged by the failings of our spectacularly incompetant self serving two faced appeaser of a Remainer PM.
Can we at least agree that, Remainer or Leaver, we all disclaim May?
That should have been the PMs attitude to the EU for the last 4 months. That the backstop was impossible and if the EU continues to insist upon it then it is choosing No Deal.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Curious snippet in Guardian Live blog. PM was ready to agree a tweaked deal on Saturday, but was "over ruled by London." Who the heck can overrule the PM?
Mr. Dean, speculation earlier was that it was Cox.
Which raises the obvious question. Who is running the show? Not May obviously. Not the Brexit Secretary, who is out of the loop and can't face a Committee. I can't believe it's Not Brian Blessed is steering. If Johnny Foreigner doesn't understand, speak louder.
All you lads now bewailing the fact that the result you wanted from a referendum for which you wished is being enacted by a party & pm for which you voted, do any of you feel complicit in the 'Mega clusterfuck of historic proportions'?
You do realise that a Yes victory would have resulted in exactly the same chaos for Scotland, only a hundred times worse? Because: you would have been ejected from the EU at once, and also ejected from the UK, AND your fiscal position would have meant immediate slump, probably a Depression. You didn’t even have a credible position on what currency you would use.
If Brexit has taught us anything, it is that breaking up political unions is painful, protracted and extremely expensive. And the EU has only been around 50 years, the UK has been around 300 years. For Scotland, it would have been ruinous.
ScotNats dancing reels over the complexities of Brexit are the most egregious hypocrites and imbeciles. As your rightful king (see prior thread) I order you to stop or I shall confiscate your remaining neeps. And tatties.
Given your predictive record over Brexit (even with your standard several outcomes for every circumstance m.o.), forgive me if I take a rain check on giving a feck about your post hoc indy maunderings.
Ye'll need to fight an 8 year guerilla campaign, slaughter several of your rivals and take down a fully armoured knight aided only by a pony and an axe before ye can even be considered as our rightful king.
Slightly off topic but are you watching Outlander?
It’s the most utter piffle. A time travelling Englishwoman married to a sexy ginger Highlander who ends up in Paris, Culloden, South Carolina..
Yet somehow - great scripting, good acting, fine actors, serious production values - they make this absurd bollox highly watchable, even moving. It is quite the achievement. Indeed I think I will watch an episode now. Ye dinnae ken, Sassenach!
Curious snippet in Guardian Live blog. PM was ready to agree a tweaked deal on Saturday, but was "over ruled by London." Who the heck can overrule the PM?
The cabinet.
Or, in effect, members of it with sufficient seniority that it amounts to the same thing.
My churchmanship might not be the same as Mrs May's, but wearing a hat in church - except at weddings - has always struck me as very bad form. Especially one like that. It says "look at me", which is hardly a very Protestant notion in a service context.
Surely betting against us leaving on 29th March is now free money?
I'm balls deep on us leaving at the end of the month.
I just don't see how that is possible now. Even if by some miracle May's deal passed there is no way that the relevant legislation could be passed in time. A short delay to allow the government to reconstitute their homework from the family hound will be inevitable. As May's deal is not going to pass an extension with further confusion, economic damage and uncertainty seems certain, whether for Referendum II, an election or a change of PM or any combination thereof.
Unless the EU refuse to extend...
Then May goes and whoever replaces has to revoke. A no deal Brexit would have been quite manageable if we had been seriously preparing for it over the last 2 years. But we haven't even got into the starting gates. From here it would be genuinely disruptive.
Insufficient preparations were made by government because No10 and No11 did not believe them necessary. The PM believed her advisors that a minimum impact pragmatic deal would be struck. The Brexiteers were given the FO (no EU involvement) and Brexit (Crayoning) department where they thought they were doing Important Things but were actually isolated from No 10. The PM and Hammond own this and in time they will bear the blame
Except that as late as July 2017 Boris Johnson is quoted as saying: “There is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal.
All you lads now bewailing the fact that the result you wanted from a referendum for which you wished is being enacted by a party & pm for which you voted, do any of you feel complicit in the 'Mega clusterfuck of historic proportions'?
You do realise that a Yes victory would have resulted in exactly the same chaos for Scotland, only a hundred times worse? Because: you would have been ejected from the EU at once, and also ejected from the UK, AND your fiscal position would have meant immediate slump, probably a Depression. You didn’t even have a credible position on what currency you would use.
If Brexit has taught us anything, it is that breaking up political unions is painful, protracted and extremely expensive. And the EU has only been around 50 years, the UK has been around 300 years. For Scotland, it would have been ruinous.
ScotNats dancing reels over the complexities of Brexit are the most egregious hypocrites and imbeciles. As your rightful king (see prior thread) I order you to stop or I shall confiscate your remaining neeps. And tatties.
Given your predictive record over Brexit (even with your standard several outcomes for every circumstance m.o.), forgive me if I take a rain check on giving a feck about your post hoc indy maunderings.
Ye'll need to fight an 8 year guerilla campaign, slaughter several of your rivals and take down a fully armoured knight aided only by a pony and an axe before ye can even be considered as our rightful king.
Slightly off topic but are you watching Outlander?
It’s the most utter piffle. A time travelling Englishwoman married to a sexy ginger Highlander who ends up in Paris, Culloden, South Carolina..
Yet somehow - great scripting, good acting, fine actors, serious production values - they make this absurd bollox highly watchable, even moving. It is quite the achievement. Indeed I think I will watch an episode now. Ye dinnae ken, Sassenach!
I've tried to persevere with it but it just doesn't do it for me, dunno why (It's not the absurd bollox factor as that's never stopped me before). It does seem to have a very strong following among both outlanders and Scots, though many seem to be women of a certain age.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Yes. Odin.
Via my direct descent from Maud Ingelric I am probably directly descended from Alfred the Great, who was descended from Cynewulf of Wessex, who was descended from Odin the God of Death, Frenzy, Poetry, Madness, Sorcery and the Runic Alphabet, which deffo describes my family.
As a direct descendant of Odin, alias Woden, I also own Wednesdays, so I am afraid I will have to charge everyone 10p to exist the day after tomorrow. Hope that’s OK.
Well to be really classy you need the Quadruple Crown (Brian Boru, Llewellyn Iowerth, David II and Edward Longshanks - bonus points for Mark of Cornwall, although there is some doubt as to whether he actually existed) and the Three Saints (St. Louis of France, St. Edward the Confessor, and Mohammed).
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Yes. Odin.
Via my direct descent from Maud Ingelric I am probably directly descended from Alfred the Great, who was descended from Cynewulf of Wessex, who was descended from Odin the God of Death, Frenzy, Poetry, Madness, Sorcery and the Runic Alphabet, which deffo describes my family.
As a direct descendant of Odin, alias Woden, I also own Wednesdays, so I am afraid I will have to charge everyone 10p to exist the day after tomorrow. Hope that’s OK.
Virtually every white north European can probably claim the same, my distant deitically-descended cousin.
Surely betting against us leaving on 29th March is now free money?
I'm balls deep on us leaving at the end of the month.
I just don't see how that is possible now. Even if by some miracle May's deal passed there is no way that the relevant legislation could be passed in time. A short delay to allow the government to reconstitute their homework from the family hound will be inevitable. As May's deal is not going to pass an extension with further confusion, economic damage and uncertainty seems certain, whether for Referendum II, an election or a change of PM or any combination thereof.
Unless the EU refuse to extend...
Then May goes and whoever replaces has to revoke. A no deal Brexit would have been quite manageable if we had been seriously preparing for it over the last 2 years. But we haven't even got into the starting gates. From here it would be genuinely disruptive.
No one in their right minds would take the job just to revoke. It is political suicide. Nor would they get elected by the Tory party to do so.
I don't know what is going to happen but I do know that is simply not realistic.
While I agree that the Tory party is unlikely to elect someone to do this, there is one Tory politician who would do it and wouldn't care about it being political suicide. Ken Clarke.
I am not sure that is true. Clarke has been consistent in supporting May and also in abiding by Parliamentary procedure - particularly giving Parliament the final say in everything. I am not sure he would revoke without Parliament agreeing to it.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
They are all turnips. Swedes only appear in Nordic Noir.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Swedes are called Neeps and are yellow in colour and slightly sweet in taste. Turnips are white in colour and very tasteless unless they are pickled. Occasionally turnips are also called neeps but this is nonsense. Turnips are really a root crop for feeding animals. Some varieties can be used in soup.
Maybe some issues with the word independent in their party name?
I don't think the ERG have formally claimed the word "Gits". It is more of a general attribution.
I confess I had a sad epiphany about Jacob Rees Mogg the other day. He’s always come across, to me, as smart, articulate, and cleverly self deprecating, and oddly good at handling TV etc, despite his absurd and half-contrived persona. For me, as a reluctant Brexiteer, it was faintly reassuring to know that he was on my side.
But a couple of days ago I saw an interview (from early 2016 I think) when he was discussing Brexit and he said “The Lords have just released a fascinating analysis, which shows that Article 50 is cleverly designed to reduce economic shocks to both parties, when a nation secedes from the EU”.
You what? Cleverly designed to reduce economic shocks??!! The whole POINT of Article 50 is to make it has hard and painful as possible to quit the EU, so as to deter any such thing happening. Its British author, the vile and treacherous Lord Kerr, happily admits this. And that’s how it has worked out
So how come I, a drunken thriller writer, knew this, and Jacob RM didn’t? I was cognisant of the dangers of A50 from the inception of Lisbon, and certainly hyper aware of it by early 2016. Yet Jacob RM was blissfully UNAWARE?
Either he was lying then, or he was a fool then - and therefore is a fool now...
And either way, you were fooled by him.
Indeed. Tho I wasn’t fooled by the europhiles who tried to sell me Lisbon as a “tidying up exercise”.
How I despise them. From Blair to Brown to Clegg to Cameron. A whole generation of traitors.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
They are all turnips. Swedes only appear in Nordic Noir.
Yep that is the feedback I get from my wife and her family. Not at all confusing.
Surely betting against us leaving on 29th March is now free money?
I'm balls deep on us leaving at the end of the month.
I just don't see how that is possible now. Even if by some miracle May's deal passed there is no way that the relevant legislation could be passed in time. A short delay to allow the government to reconstitute their homework from the family hound will be inevitable. As May's deal is not going to pass an extension with further confusion, economic damage and uncertainty seems certain, whether for Referendum II, an election or a change of PM or any combination thereof.
Unless the EU refuse to extend...
Then May goes and whoever replaces has to revoke. A no deal Brexit would have been quite manageable if we had been seriously preparing for it over the last 2 years. But we haven't even got into the starting gates. From here it would be genuinely disruptive.
No one in their right minds would take the job just to revoke. It is political suicide. Nor would they get elected by the Tory party to do so.
I don't know what is going to happen but I do know that is simply not realistic.
The. Deal.
I hope you are right but I lack the understanding of MP's minds to say that with the sort of certainty you are claiming.
Cox has been crystal clear that he will not change his legal advice unless there is a change of substance. Without his support May's prospects fall from close to zero to why bother?
Presumably Cox doesn't want to be seen as the Lord Goldsmith of Brexit.
Yes but it also gives him some credibility if he says that there has been a change. That might prove important. Unlikely but possible.
Indeed, if at 1am tonight the EU gives some legally binding obligation to end the backstop after "x" and the attorney general accepts it I think the party (and maybe even the DUP) will fall in line.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Swedes are called Neeps and are yellow in colour and slightly sweet in taste. Turnips are white in colour and very tasteless unless they are pickled. Occasionally turnips are also called neeps but this is nonsense. Turnips are really a root crop for feeding animals. Some varieties can be used in soup.
Turnips are only tasteless because they are picked too late, and then further wrecked in the cooking in Scotland (and indeed in England). Small, young turnips cooked properly are delicious, for example glazed or as used in the classic Canard aux navets.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Swedes are called Neeps and are yellow in colour and slightly sweet in taste. Turnips are white in colour and very tasteless unless they are pickled. Occasionally turnips are also called neeps but this is nonsense. Turnips are really a root crop for feeding animals. Some varieties can be used in soup.
My wife (and her family) call Swedes turnips (as well as neeps).
I can't believe I'm having this discussion! I think Morris Dancer is right - we need a thread.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Perhaps, but what care I, as a direct descendant of Malcolm II, King of Scotland, alias The DESTROYER
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Yes. Odin.
Via my direct descent from Maud Ingelric I am probably directly descended from Alfred the Great, who was descended from Cynewulf of Wessex, who was descended from Odin the God of Death, Frenzy, Poetry, Madness, Sorcery and the Runic Alphabet, which deffo describes my family.
As a direct descendant of Odin, alias Woden, I also own Wednesdays, so I am afraid I will have to charge everyone 10p to exist the day after tomorrow. Hope that’s OK.
Well to be really classy you need the Quadruple Crown (Brian Boru, Llewellyn Iowerth, David II and Edward Longshanks - bonus points for Mark of Cornwall, although there is some doubt as to whether he actually existed) and the Three Saints (St. Louis of France, St. Edward the Confessor, and Mohammed).
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
As far as I can see (its early days for me as I always thought of my family as mere humble tinning folk) if you can get a direct descent from the Conqueror then you can pretty much claim a descent from everywhere, as these royal lines are the only provable lineages, but they are multiple and clearly interlinked
Anyway. Season 4 of Outlander, then maybe an episode of Vikings (also about my great grandfather Rollo and Ragnar) then sleep.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Swedes are called Neeps and are yellow in colour and slightly sweet in taste. Turnips are white in colour and very tasteless unless they are pickled. Occasionally turnips are also called neeps but this is nonsense. Turnips are really a root crop for feeding animals. Some varieties can be used in soup.
My wife (and her family) call Swedes turnips (as well as neeps).
I can't believe I'm having this discussion! I think Morris Dancer is right - we need a thread.
I think that is right, if a little confusing. "Swede" is short for Swedish Turnip. It is technically rutabaga. The turnip is brassica rapa. They are related but not the same as the colour most obviously shows.
Cox has been crystal clear that he will not change his legal advice unless there is a change of substance. Without his support May's prospects fall from close to zero to why bother?
Presumably Cox doesn't want to be seen as the Lord Goldsmith of Brexit.
Yes but it also gives him some credibility if he says that there has been a change. That might prove important. Unlikely but possible.
Indeed, if at 1am tonight the EU gives some legally binding obligation to end the backstop after "x" and the attorney general accepts it I think the party (and maybe even the DUP) will fall in line.
My churchmanship might not be the same as Mrs May's, but wearing a hat in church - except at weddings - has always struck me as very bad form. Especially one like that. It says "look at me", which is hardly a very Protestant notion in a service context.
Do we reckon that the ERG are ready to accept they've pushed this as far as possible and will accept the latest fudge from Strasbourg? Massive pressure on the Tory Remainers if they do to do likewise.
Surely betting against us leaving on 29th March is now free money?
I'm balls deep on us leaving at the end of the month.
I just don't see how that is possible now. Even if by some miracle May's deal passed there is no way that the relevant legislation could be passed in time. A short delay to allow the government to reconstitute their homework from the family hound will be inevitable. As May's deal is not going to pass an extension with further confusion, economic damage and uncertainty seems certain, whether for Referendum II, an election or a change of PM or any combination thereof.
Unless the EU refuse to extend...
Then May goes and whoever replaces has to revoke. A no deal Brexit would have been quite manageable if we had been seriously preparing for it over the last 2 years. But we haven't even got into the starting gates. From here it would be genuinely disruptive.
No one in their right minds would take the job just to revoke. It is political suicide. Nor would they get elected by the Tory party to do so.
I don't know what is going to happen but I do know that is simply not realistic.
While I agree that the Tory party is unlikely to elect someone to do this, there is one Tory politician who would do it and wouldn't care about it being political suicide. Ken Clarke.
I am not sure that is true. Clarke has been consistent in supporting May and also in abiding by Parliamentary procedure - particularly giving Parliament the final say in everything. I am not sure he would revoke without Parliament agreeing to it.
Even if it were true - and I agree with you that it's very probably not - how does someone willing to revoke A50 become PM in the next fortnight?
It's not even clear that the PM has the legal power to issue a revocation notice. As the law stands, he or she would either be doing so on the basis of either the crown prerogative (which is iffy given that the notification was explicitly provided for by Act of Parliament), or an implied power in the Act that the power to notify naturally encompasses the power to revoke (even though the Act doesn't say so). Perhaps one or both of those legal foundations is/are strong enough but it's not a given.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Swedes are called Neeps and are yellow in colour and slightly sweet in taste. Turnips are white in colour and very tasteless unless they are pickled. Occasionally turnips are also called neeps but this is nonsense. Turnips are really a root crop for feeding animals. Some varieties can be used in soup.
Turnips are only tasteless because they are picked too late, and then further wrecked in the cooking in Scotland (and indeed in England). Small, young turnips cooked properly are delicious, for example glazed or as used in the classic Canard aux navets.
Well I am not clever enough to embedded the videos but Guido has a couple of official French Govt videos about the smart digital border they have implemented for 29th March. Electronic customs declarations, barcodes tied to number plates meaning no checks required and no delay at the border. As they say delay at the border means France is less attractive for businesses to use.
It also shows it working UK to France which is interesting.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
Except they are not are they. My wife is a Scot and I could never understand the desire to eat turnips (neeps). Swede however - lovely! Then only to find out that Scots call Swedes turnips and all is made clear. After 25 years of marriage however I still haven't found out what Scots call a turnip.
Swedes are called Neeps and are yellow in colour and slightly sweet in taste. Turnips are white in colour and very tasteless unless they are pickled. Occasionally turnips are also called neeps but this is nonsense. Turnips are really a root crop for feeding animals. Some varieties can be used in soup.
My wife (and her family) call Swedes turnips (as well as neeps).
I can't believe I'm having this discussion! I think Morris Dancer is right - we need a thread.
I think that is right, if a little confusing. "Swede" is short for Swedish Turnip. It is technically rutabaga. The turnip is brassica rapa. They are related but not the same as the colour most obviously shows.
I think we went through several years of me wondering why she claimed to like the horrid white things, until I cooked Swede and found out that was what she was referring to when she said Turnip. A bit like calling everyone Colin to avoid confusion.
Well I am not clever enough to embedded the videos but Guido has a couple of official French Govt videos about the smart digital border they have implemented for 29th March. Electronic customs declarations, barcodes tied to number plates meaning no checks required and no delay at the border. As they say delay at the border means France is less attractive for businesses to use.
It also shows it working UK to France which is interesting.
I was sent this earlier. The technology really doesn't sound that far fetched so I had no idea why certain wags denounced it as 'unicorns' and all that logic. It sounds entirely plausibly, though cost and rollout time would be an issue certainly.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
es from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Well to be really classy you need the Quadruple Crown (Brian Boru, Llewellyn Iowerth, David II and Edward Longshanks - bonus points for Mark of Cornwall, although there is some doubt as to whether he actually existed) and the Three Saints (St. Louis of France, St. Edward the Confessor, and Mohammed).
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
As far as I can see (its early days for me as I always thought of my family as mere humble tinning folk) if you can get a direct descent from the Conqueror then you can pretty much claim a descent from everywhere, as these royal lines are the only provable lineages, but they are multiple and clearly interlinked
Anyway. Season 4 of Outlander, then maybe an episode of Vikings (also about my great grandfather Rollo and Ragnar) then sleep.
Kapkap from bangers.
My Dad traced our history back to some minor Welsh aristocrat, and hence (since these things are reasonably well-documented) to the Plantagenet kings. I was mildly excited by this, until some back of the envelope maths revealed that the chances of being of English heritage and NOT being descended from William the Conqueror - and indeed from every eleventh century Englishman with descendents - is infinitesimal I assume, on that basis, I have at least the Triple Crown - I certainly have English Scottish and Welsh descendants, to whom the same logic would apply. I don't know of any Irish ancestry but it would seem unlikely that there isn't any. But just as we are all descended from kings, we are all descended from far more peasants, vagabonds, ruffians and other ne'er-do-wells. Mores startlingly, though, we were able, via the same approach to trace our ancestry to the Dpanish artist Velasquez. But again, by the same logic, there will be millions in Britain for whom that is true.
Do we reckon that the ERG are ready to accept they've pushed this as far as possible and will accept the latest fudge from Strasbourg? Massive pressure on the Tory Remainers if they do to do likewise.
Even if they are does that give May a majority or a rather more respectable defeat?
Do we reckon that the ERG are ready to accept they've pushed this as far as possible and will accept the latest fudge from Strasbourg? Massive pressure on the Tory Remainers if they do to do likewise.
Even if they are does that give May a majority or a rather more respectable defeat?
Depends how easilly the Labour MPs in Leave seats are bribed......
My churchmanship might not be the same as Mrs May's, but wearing a hat in church - except at weddings - has always struck me as very bad form. Especially one like that. It says "look at me", which is hardly a very Protestant notion in a service context.
It's probably because all the Royals are there.
Still, a bloody awful hat, though.
It is traditional for ladies to wear a hat in church and frankly, having open season on her over a hat is utterly irrelevant when it comes to the crisis we are in.
Have a go at her on policy but why on earth bring it down to such utter irrelevance
Well I am not clever enough to embedded the videos but Guido has a couple of official French Govt videos about the smart digital border they have implemented for 29th March. Electronic customs declarations, barcodes tied to number plates meaning no checks required and no delay at the border. As they say delay at the border means France is less attractive for businesses to use.
It also shows it working UK to France which is interesting.
How many ways can a lorry travel from France to the UK and vice versa compared to from Ireland to NI?
Do we reckon that the ERG are ready to accept they've pushed this as far as possible and will accept the latest fudge from Strasbourg? Massive pressure on the Tory Remainers if they do to do likewise.
Even if they are does that give May a majority or a rather more respectable defeat?
Depends how easilly the Labour MPs in Leave seats are bribed......
Under other circumstances probably pretty easily but it is blindingly obvious that this Tory government is on the point of total collapse. A Labour MP who votes to prevent that is going to face a reckoning. They won't even have to be Jewish.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
es from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Well to be really classy you need the Quadruple Crown (Brian Boru, Llewellyn Iowerth, David II and Edward Longshanks - bonus points for Mark of Cornwall, although there is some doubt as to whether he actually existed) and the Three Saints (St. Louis of France, St. Edward the Confessor, and Mohammed).
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
As far as I can see (its early days for me as I always thought of my family as mere humble tinning folk) if you can get a direct descent from the Conqueror then you can pretty much claim a descent from everywhere, as these royal lines are the only provable lineages, but they are multiple and clearly interlinked
Anyway. Season 4 of Outlander, then maybe an episode of Vikings (also about my great grandfather Rollo and Ragnar) then sleep.
Kapkap from bangers.
My Dad traced our history back to some minor Welsh aristocrat, and hence (since these things are reasonably well-documented) to the Plantagenet kings. I was mildly excited by this, until some back of the envelope maths revealed that the chances of being of English heritage and NOT being descended from William the Conqueror - and indeed from every eleventh century Englishman with descendents - is infinitesimal I assume, on that basis, I have at least the Triple Crown - I certainly have English Scottish and Welsh descendants, to whom the same logic would apply. I don't know of any Irish ancestry but it would seem unlikely that there isn't any. But just as we are all descended from kings, we are all descended from far more peasants, vagabonds, ruffians and other ne'er-do-wells. Mores startlingly, though, we were able, via the same approach to trace our ancestry to the Dpanish artist Velasquez. But again, by the same logic, there will be millions in Britain for whom that is true.
We all have William the Conqueror in our ancestry, but more of our genes will come from Hogg the Dung Cleaner, Ilbert the Pig Gelder, and Maud the Harlot of Grope Cunt Street.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
es from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Well to be really classy you need the Quadruple Crown (Brian Boru, Llewellyn Iowerth, David II and Edward Longshanks - bonus points for Mark of Cornwall, although there is some doubt as to whether he actually existed) and the Three Saints (St. Louis of France, St. Edward the Confessor, and Mohammed).
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
As far as I can see (its early days for me as I always thought of my family as mere humble tinning folk) if you can get a direct descent from the Conqueror then you can pretty much claim a descent from everywhere, as these royal lines are the only provable lineages, but they are multiple and clearly interlinked
Anyway. Season 4 of Outlander, then maybe an episode of Vikings (also about my great grandfather Rollo and Ragnar) then sleep.
Kapkap from bangers.
My Dad traced our history back to some minor Welsh aristocrat, and hence (since these things are reasonably well-documented) to the Plantagenet kings. I was mildly excited by this, until some back of the envelope maths revealed that the chances of being of English heritage and NOT being descended from William the Conqueror - and indeed from every eleventh century Englishman with descendents - is infinitesimal I assume, on that basis, I have at least the Triple Crown - I certainly have English Scottish and Welsh descendants, to whom the same logic would apply. I don't know of any Irish ancestry but it would seem unlikely that there isn't any. But just as we are all descended from kings, we are all descended from far more peasants, vagabonds, ruffians and other ne'er-do-wells. Mores startlingly, though, we were able, via the same approach to trace our ancestry to the Dpanish artist Velasquez. But again, by the same logic, there will be millions in Britain for whom that is true.
We all have William the Conqueror in our ancestry, but more of our genes will come from Hogg the Dung Cleaner, Ilbert the Pig Gelder, and Maud the Harlot of Grope Cunt Street.
And those are just the ones you've been able to trace.
Mr. T, a real king would know it's the turnip that's most prized.
es from my address book, as an arriviste.
Can't you find a less obscure mini-tyrant to claim descent from?
Well to be really classy you need the Quadruple Crown (Brian Boru, Llewellyn Iowerth, David II and Edward Longshanks - bonus points for Mark of Cornwall, although there is some doubt as to whether he actually existed) and the Three Saints (St. Louis of France, St. Edward the Confessor, and Mohammed).
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
As far as I can see (its early days for me as I always thought of my family as mere humble tinning folk) if you can get a direct descent from the Conqueror then you can pretty much claim a descent from everywhere, as these royal lines are the only provable lineages, but they are multiple and clearly interlinked
Anyway. Season 4 of Outlander, then maybe an episode of Vikings (also about my great grandfather Rollo and Ragnar) then sleep.
Kapkap from bangers.
My Dad traced our history back to some minor Welsh aristocrat, and hence (since these things are reasonably well-documented) to the Plantagenet kings. I was mildly excited by this, until some back of the envelope maths revealed that the chances of being of English heritage and NOT being descended from William the Conqueror - and indeed from every eleventh century Englishman with descendents - is infinitesimal I assume, on that basis, I have at least the Triple Crown - I certainly have English Scottish and Welsh descendants, to whom the same logic would apply. I don't know of any Irish ancestry but it would seem unlikely that there isn't any. But just as we are all descended from kings, we are all descended from far more peasants, vagabonds, ruffians and other ne'er-do-wells. Mores startlingly, though, we were able, via the same approach to trace our ancestry to the Dpanish artist Velasquez. But again, by the same logic, there will be millions in Britain for whom that is true.
We all have William the Conqueror in our ancestry, but more of our genes will come from Hogg the Dung Cleaner, Ilbert the Pig Gelder, and Maud the Harlot of Grope Cunt Street.
Comments
Staying in the EU but more loosely *might* have satisfied both wings, certainly in the soft, floaty centre. Pro-EU types could be glad we were still in, sceptics could be relieved we'd loosened the tentacles.
The referendum to stay or go (whichever side won) was always going to be far more polarising. A looser relationship as a member had the potential to be unifying around a soft-sceptic/pro-EU position.
Unity is not necessarily the hallmark of the current situation.
Importantly, Crown of Blood, by me, comes out 6 April, and you should buy it (and the preceding entries in the trilogy if you haven't yet). The tale of a kingdom riven by conflict may sound familiar, but the competent leaders will make a refreshing change of pace.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07PLFC2PB/
https://twitter.com/GrandPrixDiary/status/1105132152159637504
I'd be tempted to look at Verstappen's odds if it's very wet.
That turned out as well as you might expect.
Yes, I agree. Thatcher knew that the Single Market was good, and it is good, and I wish we weren’t leaving. She also knew that ancient nation states will only take so much forced and undemocratic integration before there is a terrible backlash. She would never have allowed this fuck up on her watch.
https://twitter.com/MrSteerpike/status/1105132290408153088
You do realise that a Yes victory would have resulted in exactly the same chaos for Scotland, only a hundred times worse? Because: you would have been ejected from the EU at once, and also ejected from the UK, AND your fiscal position would have meant immediate slump, probably a Depression. You didn’t even have a credible position on what currency you would use.
If Brexit has taught us anything, it is that breaking up political unions is painful, protracted and extremely expensive. And the EU has only been around 50 years, the UK has been around 300 years. For Scotland, it would have been ruinous.
ScotNats dancing reels over the complexities of Brexit are the most egregious hypocrites and imbeciles. As your rightful king (see prior thread) I order you to stop or I shall confiscate your remaining neeps. And tatties.
Edited extra bit: ahem. Just realised what 'neeps' are
As you were
https://www.ballynahinch-castle.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIweqombv64AIVTLftCh0jqAR8EAAYAyAAEgJiQ_D_BwE
I confess I am finding my newly discovered lineage unexpectedly agreeable. It is irritating people who need to be irritated (e.g. my sister’s slightly wanky Scot Nat in laws, who are failing to disguise their chagrin). I also have a few friends who will, in their cups, say “oh but my family came over with the Conqueror” etc etc
I have now given them the obvious reply.
Ah, the pleasures of snobbery. I may have to excise Charles from my address book, as an arriviste.
One learns something new every day.
Barclay is entirely unpalatable, grilled or otherwise.
A humble shopkeeper.
Ye'll need to fight an 8 year guerilla campaign, slaughter several of your rivals and take down a fully armoured knight aided only by a pony and an axe before ye can even be considered as our rightful king.
Via my direct descent from Maud Ingelric I am probably directly descended from Alfred the Great, who was descended from Cynewulf of Wessex, who was descended from Odin the God of Death, Frenzy, Poetry, Madness, Sorcery and the Runic Alphabet, which deffo describes my family.
Odin even looks like me, after a few vodkatinis.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin
As a direct descendant of Odin, alias Woden, I also own Wednesdays, so I am afraid I will have to charge everyone 10p to exist the day after tomorrow. Hope that’s OK.
Who the heck can overrule the PM?
https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1104037505865826305
I can't believe it's Not Brian Blessed is steering.
If Johnny Foreigner doesn't understand, speak louder.
It’s the most utter piffle. A time travelling Englishwoman married to a sexy ginger Highlander who ends up in Paris, Culloden, South Carolina..
Yet somehow - great scripting, good acting, fine actors, serious production values - they make this absurd bollox highly watchable, even moving. It is quite the achievement. Indeed I think I will watch an episode now. Ye dinnae ken, Sassenach!
Or, in effect, members of it with sufficient seniority that it amounts to the same thing.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1105089755589550080
https://www.axios.com/joe-biden-2020-presidential-election-imminent-4e9500d1-6873-45b8-9a89-7f1afe2c4121.html
Especially as said option killed Boris's opportunity.
Fallen gods don't score highly - pretty much anyone can get there if they try.
It's a huge gamble, though.
https://twitter.com/stevebrookstein/status/1103653524678864896
I can't believe I'm having this discussion! I think Morris Dancer is right - we need a thread.
Anyway. Season 4 of Outlander, then maybe an episode of Vikings (also about my great grandfather Rollo and Ragnar) then sleep.
Kapkap from bangers.
For some reason, I'm getting adverts for a Japanese homosexual love story "He's my Princess" when I log into this site.
you've got nothing to lose.
Still, a bloody awful hat, though.
It's not even clear that the PM has the legal power to issue a revocation notice. As the law stands, he or she would either be doing so on the basis of either the crown prerogative (which is iffy given that the notification was explicitly provided for by Act of Parliament), or an implied power in the Act that the power to notify naturally encompasses the power to revoke (even though the Act doesn't say so). Perhaps one or both of those legal foundations is/are strong enough but it's not a given.
It also shows it working UK to France which is interesting.
Session 1: Delicious vegetables your mother never cooked properly (or at all): cabbage, broad beans, turnips, celeriac, parsnips.
But just as we are all descended from kings, we are all descended from far more peasants, vagabonds, ruffians and other ne'er-do-wells.
Mores startlingly, though, we were able, via the same approach to trace our ancestry to the Dpanish artist Velasquez. But again, by the same logic, there will be millions in Britain for whom that is true.
Have a go at her on policy but why on earth bring it down to such utter irrelevance