FT: Bojo to override WA

[Streetwalker]

You maybe missed the earlier post regarding termination of treaties where there are a few get out clauses to suit aggrieved states.   One of the pillars of international law is that of self determination and sovereignty of the state .

How is the UK aggrieved, this govt negioated the WA and modified it and signed it. You can't blame the EU for what the UK has done, it's a favourite pastime in the UK to blame the EU on everything, own something for a change.

As we knew the Mayhem version of the WA gave too much clout to the EU in making decisions that effect the UK , Johnson reigned that in a little but not enough
it seems in no deal scenario .
The conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty useless in taking us out of the EU ,hampered by a remoaner parliament but useless all the same .

Johnson is preparing the ground for a no deal scenario , its his last chance to take back control.

The UK has left, what he can do is lift it from the worst scenario which is no deal, he can't do it prob because he's an idiot and has surrounded himself by idiots, honestly who has he appointed wrt brexit that you would trust, I can't think of 1 person.
But instead of trying to better the UK position he has decided to take a course of action that will destroy UK/EU relations but it will also have serious repercussions with UK relations around the world. The USA has all ready said it will not have a trade deal with the UK if the UK damages the GFA, other countries will come to the realisation that the UK is not an honest broker and can't be trusted.

I don't for a minute think this represents the average UK person, I believe the average UK person has integrity and values above most things their honesty and the strength of their word.Johnson is placing that at risk to undo a deal he signed in January beacuse he was too lazy to read the document and resorted to lying as he usually does. The UK deserves so much better.

The withdrawal agreement was a supposed willingness on both sides  for a smooth exit and a  bla bla bla  free trade agreement at its core .. As that is looking as far away as its ever been  I guess you could say the agreement is null and void . Johnson  however is just using a line from the Mayhem agreement of '' room for minor alterations '' it his attempt to make it fit for a no deal brexit
The UK will uphold the GFA  part of which states that all parties recognise that  Northern Ireland is part of  UK  sovereign territory . 

[GerryT]

That's not even close to "the worst scenario".

When leaving the worst position is WTO, any trade deal is an improvement on that. SO yes on day one that is the worst position. After that it can get far worse, ie no country signs a trade deal with the UK, that then makes it far worse.

[Nalaar]

Says one person.

Says two (so far) members of the Executive Cabinet! Minister Brandon Lewis, and Minister Matt Hancock.

Why do you think these ministers are saying very plainly that they are willing to break international if they are not doing so?

[Baff]

You maybe missed the earlier post regarding termination of treaties where there are a few get out clauses to suit aggrieved states.   One of the pillars of international law is that of self determination and sovereignty of the state .

How is the UK aggrieved, this govt negioated the WA and modified it and signed it. You can't blame the EU for what the UK has done, it's a favourite pastime in the UK to blame the EU on everything, own something for a change.

As we knew the Mayhem version of the WA gave too much clout to the EU in making decisions that effect the UK , Johnson reigned that in a little but not enough
it seems in no deal scenario .
The conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty useless in taking us out of the EU ,hampered by a remoaner parliament but useless all the same .

Johnson is preparing the ground for a no deal scenario , its his last chance to take back control.

The UK has left, what he can do is lift it from the worst scenario which is no deal, he can't do it prob because he's an idiot and has surrounded himself by idiots, honestly who has he appointed wrt brexit that you would trust, I can't think of 1 person.
But instead of trying to better the UK position he has decided to take a course of action that will destroy UK/EU relations but it will also have serious repercussions with UK relations around the world. The USA has all ready said it will not have a trade deal with the UK if the UK damages the GFA, other countries will come to the realisation that the UK is not an honest broker and can't be trusted.

I don't for a minute think this represents the average UK person, I believe the average UK person has integrity and values above most things their honesty and the strength of their word.Johnson is placing that at risk to undo a deal he signed in January beacuse he was too lazy to read the document and resorted to lying as he usually does. The UK deserves so much better.

That's not even close to "the worst scenario".

[Baff]

Says one person.

I doubt that is what it says on the .gov website anywhere.


What does the head of government say, the PM?
Does he say it is breaking "international law".
I don't think he does.

Somehow I doubt that the official government line is this.
I'm sure you can find a remoaner who works there who will share this view however.

[Nalaar]

But this is not a law.

The official line from the government is that they are breaking international law.

[GerryT]

You maybe missed the earlier post regarding termination of treaties where there are a few get out clauses to suit aggrieved states.   One of the pillars of international law is that of self determination and sovereignty of the state . 

How is the UK aggrieved, this govt negioated the WA and modified it and signed it. You can't blame the EU for what the UK has done, it's a favourite pastime in the UK to blame the EU on everything, own something for a change.

As we knew the Mayhem version of the WA gave too much clout to the EU in making decisions that effect the UK , Johnson reigned that in a little but not enough
it seems in no deal scenario .
The conservatives have shown themselves to be pretty useless in taking us out of the EU ,hampered by a remoaner parliament but useless all the same .

Johnson is preparing the ground for a no deal scenario , its his last chance to take back control.

The UK has left, what he can do is lift it from the worst scenario which is no deal, he can't do it prob because he's an idiot and has surrounded himself by idiots, honestly who has he appointed wrt brexit that you would trust, I can't think of 1 person.
But instead of trying to better the UK position he has decided to take a course of action that will destroy UK/EU relations but it will also have serious repercussions with UK relations around the world. The USA has all ready said it will not have a trade deal with the UK if the UK damages the GFA, other countries will come to the realisation that the UK is not an honest broker and can't be trusted.

I don't for a minute think this represents the average UK person, I believe the average UK person has integrity and values above most things their honesty and the strength of their word.Johnson is placing that at risk to undo a deal he signed in January beacuse he was too lazy to read the document and resorted to lying as he usually does. The UK deserves so much better.

[Baff]

Laws can be broken.
Laws can be interpreted differently.
Laws can be argued.

But this is not a law.
No one has authority over either party.

This is an agreement.
When either side does not agree. There is no agreement.
It becomes a disagreement.


Bad deals don't last.
If either the UK or the EU considers the WA to be a bad agreement, it won't last long.

[Good old]

Quiet honestly Thomas, I don't know what your point ever was ..

Read my previous posts.

That law can not be ignored  by parliament to suit any attempt to creat a different set of circumstances.

Parliament can rescind  , or remake any law.

....and no current parliament can bind a future parliament so what are you talking about now?

Basically you are waffling on about words like sovereignty and bleating when it doesnt apply uk wide or have the desired effect in stopping brexit.

but it was not the advent of referendum being used to undermine parliamentary ability to maintain its sovereignty .

Yet more pish.

Cameron , davis and duncan smith among others said back in 2015 , that the yookay parliament was going to delegate its "sovereignty " to the people in a referndum to get them to decide on the uk`s future on the EU.

Just like the queen delegates her sovereignty to parliament to decide on the day to day running of the yookay.

So quite obviously in this instance , the referendum clearly undermined parliaments ability on the subject of brexit with the houses approval. So what are you waffling about now?

The uk public didnt hold a gun to parliaments head did it?

Parliament delegated responsibility by referendum on eu membership , the public gave you an answer you didnt like , so palriament spent four years using parliamentary process to overturn that answer till the english publics patience snapped with you.

Dont ask a feckin question if you dont like the answer.

so the people got their way  but parliament won because it's GEs that control Parliament ,not referendum.

more pish.

Parliament won?

G.E do indeed control parliament , and the people control G.E as we saw last december when the public cleared out all the dishonest remain politicians who had tried to thwart democracy.

Nearly a year on remainers like you are still bleating about it.

Doesn't stop Boris, trying though does it?

Trying to use parliament for his own ends?

No shit sherlock. You have just described every politicians and prime minister since year dot.

The only difference is boris is doing something you dont like , so you bleat about it. If starmer was pm ( god forbid) and was doing the same thing to take the uk back into the eu , you would be cheering him on.

1. Your previous posts , held no water.
2. Law can be changed, not ignored . I don't say in this case the law can not be changed. Another of your diversions.
3. Oh, dear the phish, is all yours. That Crew had no right to make such promises ,no right in law, so no right ,it was a false promise , that has led to the total mess the country has been plunged into.  Parliament allowing a referendum, may have given the impression ,Cameron's promise held water , so not blameless, it never did, all that held water was the people had a say. The debate was always going to happen. No rights were ever being dished out. So that's the bollocks that has , created what is without doubt a frigging mess .
4 I want to leave with honour. And parliament , confirmed all that said in 3. Referendum , has the status it always had. So parliament won.
5. No, trying to trample on and even avoid the laws that support the good governance of this country.
6. Complete rubbish , I have made it clear on previous pages , I want out, for me there is no deal, Starmers or anybody else ,s that would satisfy me. There is no way I would lower myself to ask anybody for something they can not give, and that's what we do. So as usual you grasp the wrong end of the pole.

[Sheepy]

Hang on, I will tell the Israelis, Americans,Russians, Chinese about International law, they laughed.

tell good old while you are at it. According to him , johnson is the only one who has ever broken internaitonal law.

It has nothing to do with whether Johnson is the only one to break international law.  If your uncle was a bank robber , would that excuse you doing likewise. ?  All Johnson achieves ,is to join a rogues gallery. And you appear to support him.
Anything goes for Brexit.  It seems. A very Stalin, type attitude.

Well you know what they say, people who live in glass houses and all that, I am sure the EU has never broken International law have they?

[Good old]

Hang on, I will tell the Israelis, Americans,Russians, Chinese about International law, they laughed.

tell good old while you are at it. According to him , johnson is the only one who has ever broken internaitonal law.

It has nothing to do with whether Johnson is the only one to break international law.  If your uncle was a bank robber , would that excuse you doing likewise. ?  All Johnson achieves ,is to join a rogues gallery. And you appear to support him.
Anything goes for Brexit.  It seems. A very Stalin, type attitude.

[Sheepy]

As many are also saying it could just be brinkmanship  on the part of johnson , and i suppose it depends what amwerica allows him to do regarding the GFA.

The powerfull irish american community wont be happy if bojo dishonurs the GFA.

American politics is polarised beyond belief, the GFA was a democrat victory, At the same time they are having a bit of a black and white civil war, The South actually voted out of the EU once, Although were manipulated back in. Politics eh!

[Thomas]

As many are also saying it could just be brinkmanship  on the part of johnson , and i suppose it depends what amwerica allows him to do regarding the GFA.

The powerfull irish american community wont be happy if bojo dishonurs the GFA.

[Thomas]

Hang on, I will tell the Israelis, Americans,Russians, Chinese about International law, they laughed.

tell good old while you are at it. According to him , johnson is the only one who has ever broken internaitonal law.

[Thomas]

International law is broken all over the world by various countries which doesnt make us doing it anything to be proud of but lets just see  exactly what Johnson is planning and wether it falls within the scope of  any of the get out clauses before we shout foul

i know mate ,thats what i said to good old earlier on in this thread. I think there is that de gaulle quote that there isnt a treaty in existence England hasnt broken .

Countries do it all the time.

Im simply pointing out good olds hypocrisy as ever.

Tony blair broke more internation treaties than i had hot dinners. He confiscated 6000 miles of scottish waters against UNCLOS , of which the uk is a signatory , for years we had the demands he face trial for breaking international law over iraq , and so on , yet we dont hear good old say a cheep about anything like that.

Posters like good old certainly arent the arbitrers over right and wrong regarding political process and international law. His moral standpoint appears to be its good when it suits , and its bad when it doesnt.

I did warn our friends gerry and conor over the WA and the northern irish border , but they wouldnt listen.