|
Post by bancroft on Dec 4, 2022 13:43:05 GMT
There are always groups trying to destroy countries post WWII we had the Russians and their influence on unions.
Now we have the EU and Islamic terror which comes and goes and lastly the ultra-progressive clique that act covertly through charities.
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Dec 4, 2022 14:15:15 GMT
There are plenty enough home-grown nation-wreckers on the job without having to resort to fantasies about the EU. Britain is very much a minority interest on the continent these days. Nobody cares. I'm astonished at that statement. What do you think the last 5 or 6 years of negotiation with the EU have been about? This has been the modern form of warfare - i.e. the EU have been doing everything they can to destroy Britain by cutting off trade. In WWII, of course, the Nazis did it by using their U-boats to sink ships delivering supplies to us. The EU have been trying to the same thing via a trade war. So they tried to screw up the trade negotiations by demanding that we sign a "withdrawal agreement" - and pay money - before any negotiations on trade could begin. This is completely against the rules where we can leave at any time we like without signing any agreement at all. And the idea of the Transition Period was to allow negotiation of trade before we left. But the EU Commission would not allow this and Mrs May agreed to their conditions, when she should have told them to fuck off. And now the EU Commission are trying to use the NI protocol to cut off trade between us and NI. The EU will NEVER stop trying to attack the UK until they're finally destroyed by the implosion of the euro. They have to prove that members who leave are damaged. Wake up.
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Dec 4, 2022 14:26:11 GMT
The unions are weaker than yesterday. You are correct in that they both have a political objective .Being naive suits you . Not so sure they are weaker today, they have come on a long way. They have a goal of a fair deal for workers across the country, that is not political it is social. Do you disagree with workers having a fair deal? Do you agree they should have below inflation pay deal, they are not a rise, while bosses pay millions to their shareholders? Todays unions are nowhere near as powerful as the unions were before Thatcher. Nothing I have posted suggest that I disagree with workers having a fair deal…another strawman ..yawn..
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Dec 4, 2022 14:32:26 GMT
No. It's an accurate appraisal of all the political and financial forces that are trying to take the UK back to being a colony of the EU (with no rights). And if we were forced to join the euro we would end up as bad as Greece. I suspect that it's all caused by the Remoaners and the EU. That's the only theory that fits the facts. Wake up. Why did you forget to mention the US?
Sunak banned fracking in an energy crisis where we pay 5x the price for gas from the US.
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Dec 4, 2022 14:32:38 GMT
I've simply pointed out who the people are who are controlling - or trying to control - our political and financial direction. I think I've got it mainly right. And I think that their agenda is very bad for the UK - and in some cases deliberately so, although in the case of Andrew Bailey it's just incompetence. And IMO a lot of it is being controlled by the EU. This is a concerted attack on Britain. Did you really challenge yourself before posting that OP? Take your attack on the Civil Service. They're there to serve the express wishes of the monarchy - in practice the laws that Parliament have passed and the monarch approved. So when repeatedly we see here today gone tomorrow politicians demanding they do something that contradicts those laws, the Civil Service tends to say 'no' (or to be more exact 'not until you get the law changed' and rightly so. And do you ever learn anything about a subject before posting? Apparently not. The Civil Service are there to do the bidding of the Executive - the government. They're fuck all to do with the monarchy. They cannot say "no" to anything that they're told to do. They can try to point out any problems, but ultimately it's up the Executive what they should do. But of course the Civil Service are very adept at doing fuck all. And that seems to be increasingly what they do - i.e. Nothing.
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Dec 4, 2022 14:38:43 GMT
No. It's an accurate appraisal of all the political and financial forces that are trying to take the UK back to being a colony of the EU (with no rights). And if we were forced to join the euro we would end up as bad as Greece. I suspect that it's all caused by the Remoaners and the EU. That's the only theory that fits the facts. Wake up. Why did you forget to mention the US?
Sunak banned fracking in an energy crisis where we pay 5x the price for gas from the US.
I thought that was mainly down to Russia - and the Russians are intervening to screw up many countries, not just the UK. But I agree it's another attack on the UK. Add Russia to the list. In particular they are probably funding these daft ecomentalists who want us to stop using fossil fuels. So we have to buy gas from Russia instead of using our own, which would have a much smaller carbon footprint and benefit our economy.
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Dec 4, 2022 14:48:25 GMT
Don’t talk daft yourself . The Unions are fighting to achieve a Labour government in the next election . They know that what they can achieve for their members will be minimal. It’s all about weakening the Tories . YOU..”Of course, a few people causing disruption is more important than the message. 🤣” I never said that . Second Strawman is noted . Having a Labour government is not the priority, it is their members that is their priority. You called the climate activist 'barmy' if you support the idea of the government doing something you should be agreeing with them, not trying to ridicule them. The Unions are trying to bring down the Tories. That's obvious. Same goes for Pat Cullen at the RCN. The RCN hasn't ever gone on strike before but this Irish woman seems determined on ruining their reputation. Mick Lynch of course is virtually always trying to organise strikes. Strangely the rail workers and nurses are very highly paid for what they do. In fact the train drivers are on such a cushy number that their union is a closed shop and whenever a job comes vacant it has to be offered to friends and relatives of the RMT. Money for old rope. Sack the lot of them.
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 4, 2022 15:26:34 GMT
Did you really challenge yourself before posting that OP? Take your attack on the Civil Service. They're there to serve the express wishes of the monarchy - in practice the laws that Parliament have passed and the monarch approved. So when repeatedly we see here today gone tomorrow politicians demanding they do something that contradicts those laws, the Civil Service tends to say 'no' (or to be more exact 'not until you get the law changed' and rightly so. And do you ever learn anything about a subject before posting? Apparently not. The Civil Service are there to do the bidding of the Executive - the government. They're fuck all to do with the monarchy. They cannot say "no" to anything that they're told to do. They can try to point out any problems, but ultimately it's up the Executive what they should do. But of course the Civil Service are very adept at doing fuck all. And that seems to be increasingly what they do - i.e. Nothing. That is right the government is the Crown in parliament and the government is HM government. The civil service are there as the processors and enablers of HM government policies. They can by all means advise and give opinions but the decision on what to do rests solely with the Minister of the Crown.
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Dec 4, 2022 16:26:38 GMT
Why did you forget to mention the US?
Sunak banned fracking in an energy crisis where we pay 5x the price for gas from the US.
I thought that was mainly down to Russia - and the Russians are intervening to screw up many countries, not just the UK. But I agree it's another attack on the UK. Add Russia to the list. In particular they are probably funding these daft ecomentalists who want us to stop using fossil fuels. So we have to buy gas from Russia instead of using our own, which would have a much smaller carbon footprint and benefit our economy. It was not Russia's fault. They were happy to supply us and anyone else who wanted gas and oil according to the contracts. It is how it normally works that a country has a contract of a supply with the Russian state-owned energy firms. Russia were keen to keep to contracted obligations but the Nato alliance received energy and then the money for it was not paid to Russia due to the bank sanctions, so that was a breach of contract and the other party is quite within their rights to withhold further supply if payment is not received. A further problem was that prior to the conflict, Russia relied on Western energy firms for their expertise. Much of the energy infrastructure in Russia has been designed by Western firms such as Shell were involved in a lot of it. Then all of a sudden all this help was withdrawn and all supply of spares and whatever else you need to keep such a system running and so it developed problems. We can't prove anything here, but this is the most likely reason why it was not running at full capacity. If they could have run it and they were paid, then they would wish to pump as much as possible to keep their economy good. This is Russia's main line of income, much like a Gulf state. Also recall that the pipeline was then blown up.
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 4, 2022 18:40:03 GMT
Did you really challenge yourself before posting that OP? Take your attack on the Civil Service. They're there to serve the express wishes of the monarchy - in practice the laws that Parliament have passed and the monarch approved. So when repeatedly we see here today gone tomorrow politicians demanding they do something that contradicts those laws, the Civil Service tends to say 'no' (or to be more exact 'not until you get the law changed' and rightly so. And do you ever learn anything about a subject before posting? Apparently not. The Civil Service are there to do the bidding of the Executive - the government. They're fuck all to do with the monarchy. They cannot say "no" to anything that they're told to do. They can try to point out any problems, but ultimately it's up the Executive what they should do. But of course the Civil Service are very adept at doing fuck all. And that seems to be increasingly what they do - i.e. Nothing. Oh the irony Here educate yourself: www.civilservant.org.uk/information-definitions.html 'Civil servants are those who are employed by 'the Crown'.
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 4, 2022 18:42:07 GMT
And do you ever learn anything about a subject before posting? Apparently not. The Civil Service are there to do the bidding of the Executive - the government. They're fuck all to do with the monarchy. They cannot say "no" to anything that they're told to do. They can try to point out any problems, but ultimately it's up the Executive what they should do. But of course the Civil Service are very adept at doing fuck all. And that seems to be increasingly what they do - i.e. Nothing. That is right the government is the Crown in parliament and the government is HM government. The civil service are there as the processors and enablers of HM government policies. They can by all means advise and give opinions but the decision on what to do rests solely with the Minister of the Crown. Look at the constitutional position again. The monarch acts on the advice of his government and gives them some powers as if they were acting with the monarch's authority but he is the monarch in a constitutional monarchy.
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 4, 2022 21:46:54 GMT
That is right the government is the Crown in parliament and the government is HM government. The civil service are there as the processors and enablers of HM government policies. They can by all means advise and give opinions but the decision on what to do rests solely with the Minister of the Crown. Look at the constitutional position again. The monarch acts on the advice of his government and gives them some powers as if they were acting with the monarch's authority but he is the monarch in a constitutional monarchy. I repeat the government is the Crown in parliament, that is the Constitutional position. Each Minister is a Minister of the Crown and the Civil Service are employed by the Crown to act as enablers of the Minsters of the Crown's policies as these are the policies of the Crown. The Crown is different from the Monarch
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Dec 5, 2022 0:07:49 GMT
The Crown is different from the Monarch. Why is that not obvious?
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Dec 5, 2022 8:26:30 GMT
You could go to the Civil Service's own website and ask them.. Civil servants are those who are employed by 'the Crown'.
The “Crown” fulfils the same role at the national level that the “State” fulfils on the international plane. The Executive (the government of the day) represents the Crown/State. The Crown and State endure; governments come and go. 'The Crown', for this purpose at least, does not include Her Majesty herself - so those employed by the Monarch are not civil servants.
link
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Dec 5, 2022 9:02:01 GMT
And do you ever learn anything about a subject before posting? Apparently not. The Civil Service are there to do the bidding of the Executive - the government. They're fuck all to do with the monarchy. They cannot say "no" to anything that they're told to do. They can try to point out any problems, but ultimately it's up the Executive what they should do. But of course the Civil Service are very adept at doing fuck all. And that seems to be increasingly what they do - i.e. Nothing. Oh the irony Here educate yourself: www.civilservant.org.uk/information-definitions.html 'Civil servants are those who are employed by 'the Crown'.
You're the perfect example of someone who tries to use the internet (and google) to learn about a subject. But you end up totally confused because you don't have any grounding in the subject.
|
|