Corbyn speaking at Labour Party Congress calls for BoJo to resign and for an immediate as possible General Election. I expect more video to be tweeted as he wasn’t near done speaking.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 24 2019 17:03 utc | 3

There is a very concerted attempt to force the government into cancelling Brexit. Whilst the remainers want to stay in the EU, the remainers are unwilling to let a general election take place because they fear that leavers might achieve a majority government. The fixed term parliament law means that a general election can be held off by the remainers until the fixed term is up in 2021. We’re screwed basically.

Posted by: Kaiama | Sep 24 2019 17:22 utc | 5

The problem is the peculiar law passed by the Cameron coalition government to gibe governments a ‘fixed term.’
This is a law that makes nonsense of the basic, foundational, constitutional convention that the Minister has to enjoy the confidence of the Commons.
Clearly Johnson does not have that confidence and ought to resign. Or does he?
It might well be that between the Tory dissenters, the Liberals, the Blairites and the SNP, all of whom fear a Corbyn government almost as much as they fear a General Election, Johnson would be able to survive a vote of Confidence.
There has never been a clearer case for an immediate General Election call. These are difficult days for Britain’s Establishment which has lived in fear of socialism since the 1790s.
Watch as all stops are pulled on that mighty wurlitzer of propaganda the media in an effort to establish that the elites and the cliques, the aristocracy and the financiers, the pundits and the intelligentsia are worthy of every one of their privileges, for which the death of a hundred thousand a year of poverty and malnutrition is a small price. It says much of the lack of patriotism among the poor and the sick, the children and the elderly, that they do not sacrifice themselves more cheerfully for their betters.

Posted by: bevin | Sep 24 2019 17:31 utc | 7

The spectacle of the Queens representatives striding into Parliament like they owned the place was rather disquieting.
Thankfully, the UK Supreme Court made it clear who is sovereign.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 24 2019 17:53 utc | 9

The Supreme Court just made up the law which they claim was broken.
And, given the way that British courts have allowed rampant illegality and unlawfulness in the case of Julian Assange, I would take any argument that British judges make about “lawfulness” with a huge barrel of salt.

Posted by: Tsar Nicholas | Sep 24 2019 18:47 utc | 11

Not only UK Supreme court and Parliament infringed upon supremacy of national referendum… : Kalen | Sep 24 2019 17:34 utc
AFAIK, the referendum was “non-binding” and thus without any “supremacy” over courts and Parliament. UK has three options: accept agreement negotiated by May, with tiny tweaks perhaps, “no agreement exit” and remain. Unfortunately, none of the options got the majority in Parliamentary votes. Having three choices makes it awkward for a referendum as well.
I guess the people on the Continent were happy and making all those plans what to do when EU is liberated of the whiniest member member, now a specter of UK “coming back”, of course under a government promising more effective whining than ever before, is rising again.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Sep 24 2019 18:48 utc | 13

@ el Gallinazo 10
Since Britain has no written constitution, the court is suppose to rule on the basis of precedent. There is absolutely no precedent. . .
There are half a dozen elements to the unwritten constitution here.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 24 2019 18:55 utc | 15

Was there any precedent to this case. If not, a precedent has now been made. Reading a number of court cases in Australia that also went into constitution (aboriginal land title and so forth), the judges also look to what they consider the national interests of the state, what they consider the intention of the constitution and so forth. Becomes laws made by judges.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 24 2019 19:18 utc | 17

Today the Supreme Court ruled – that no man is above the law ! ( in the U.K. )
That’s a good thing.
Parlement is the highest court in the land ! Not the prime minister.
Boris Johnson illegally suspended that parlement.
Since taking office as prime minister Boris Johnson has won not a single vote.
His position is now untenable !
Today he stated that he will not resign, he’l resign within one week ! ( he lie’s )
Boris Johnson neither know’s or cares about Brixit ! Take a look at his filmed interviews, the mans a usefull fool !
So who is pulling his strings ? – – –
Firstly, Jacob Rees mog – an elite deep state pseudo interlectual throw back from 200 years ago who wishes to return there !
Secoundly, Trump has ‘owened’ Boris Johnson for his and America’s benifit not the U.K. benefit think about it the trump brand is all over this. With similar disarsterous results.
Thirdly – – – The Israel lobby groups (say no more )

Posted by: Mark2 | Sep 24 2019 19:26 utc | 19

People here are wasting their time focusing on legal technicalities of the British system.
The real battle that is happening is between classes: the faction of the Conservative and Unionist Party that represents small and medium businesses took power after the fall of Theresa May and is now trying to viabilize Brexit and is led by Boris Johnson. Meanwhile, the faction of the Labour Party that represents the interests of big British capital (specially in the financial sector) is trying to defeat the socialist faction, led by Jeremy Corbyn. In the Commons, the faction that represents big British capital of the Conservative and Unionist Party — led today by speaker John Bercow — is maneuvering with the Liberal Democratic Party and its analogous in Labour Party to block Brexit by any means necessary.
The Gordian Knot here is that big business still has very powerful factions of the two main parties (Labour and Conservative & Unionist) plus the absolute control of the unelected portion of the British State (the Monarchy + Judiciary + Lords) but lost their legitimacy after June 2016. So they can stall the popular will, but not stop and overrule it. The working class, on its side, is weak and had to make an unholy alliance with the petit bourgeoisie in order to inflict a historical defeat to the dominant classes in June 2016, but still cannot do the final blow. Between these two flanks, the bourgeoisie, in a desperate move, sought the support and got it, of the upper middle class (the “metropolitan elites”) and the MSM is burning whatever is left of its credibility in order to implode Brexit.
There are two other problems with this unusual alliance on both sides: the working class had to give in to far-right ideologies and narratives in order to cater to the petit bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie has to tolerate the liberal rhetoric of the upper middle class. The upper-middle class is not really a class, but a mass of meneuver, and cannot, alone, decide any election because it is concentrated in London, Manchester and Liverpool: it has a subordinate role in British society and its members know it, that’s why they play the game along with their eloquent and elitist rhetoric on the internet and the streets. These weird alliances are only possible for one reason: socialism is the absolute limit, the absolute red line for the British as a whole. Anti-socialism is the only ideology that could unite all British classes right now. But why doesn’t this alliance happen? Because anti-socialism implies the continuity of capitalism, and it is capitalism, not socialism, that destroyed the British social contract in the aftermath of 2008.
So, the British don’t want Corbyn — but Corbyn is necessary in order for the working class/petit bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie/upper middle class to do their game within the Conservative and Unionist Party. That’s why neither side want a GE before this whole Brexit imbroglio is solved: Corbyn may and must dispute a GE, but he must lose and not by much. However, the longer this game is played, the longer this stasis continues, which further erodes the British economy.
Brexit represents the absolute failure of capitalism in the UK. But it also represents the absolute limits of social-democracy (“center-left”): it doesn’t want to achieve socialism through revolution but through reforms, but the system they sworn to reform self-destructed.

Posted by: vk | Sep 24 2019 20:03 utc | 21

Echoing Mina at #16, the EU surely has never stopped caring a lot about Britain’s remaining a member. With its vast maze of vested interests and obscure €0.5trn budget, Brussels has just got itself a fresh horse after May foundered.
And Project Fear remains ramped up to 11 – haven’t you heard that Thomas Cook and its 650,000 stranded customers fell victim to “Brexit Uncertainty”? It’s all over the news here.

Posted by: Leser | Sep 24 2019 20:12 utc | 23

Leser | Sep 24 2019 20:12 utc | 22
Just to clarify, there are around 150,000 customers who are stranded with another 500,000 who are no longer having a Thomas Cook holiday, so I suppose they could be called stranded without a holiday, but at home. Those 150,000 are not actually stranded as the UK taxpayers are paying for them to get back to the UK.
I have not heard it claimed to be a victim of Brexit.

Posted by: JohninMK | Sep 24 2019 20:31 utc | 25

Mina | Sep 24 2019 19:01 utc | 16:

Would they be obliged to return to their own languages and have super-teams of translators? I doubt it unfortunately.

It depends on the economic situation.   IF China becomes that economic powerhouse many economists believe, then maybe Mandarin would be the language of business.   But, it’ll take several decades to switch over.   IMO, it’ll be a mix of many languages.

Posted by: Ian2 | Sep 24 2019 20:47 utc | 27

Many thanks vk #20
A mighty clear analysis. I am uncertain of your words Corbyn may and must dispute a GE general election. Corbyn and the socialist momentum may not be confronted with the best timing but tactically they must seize this time to secure as much control within their party as possible. Prevaricating now will terminally weaken their progress and gut their energy to reform.
A GE now will see the old Tories routed and Brexit party perhaps achieve a majority (but likely need a coalition). The Labour Party of socialist brexit supporters (maybe) could be part of such a coalition. Not that I am any supporter of Farage. Politics is the art of the possible and my experience has necessitated strange partnerships to achieve the possible against extreme odds.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 24 2019 20:56 utc | 29

@ Piotr Berman 23 : Why limit vocabulary to Irish ? Add aslso Scott & Wales to Eu vocabulary.

Posted by: murgen23 | Sep 24 2019 21:21 utc | 31

” The EU no longer cares about Britain. It wants the whole Brexit issue to come to an end, either way, as soon as possible.”
I’m afraid that’s Brussels PR. This is about as edgy as it gets for Brussels.
What we are watching is a massive gamble the outcome of which will affect livelihoods all over the European continent and could well cost more lives in Northern Ireland.
Brussels is attempting to force through a treaty, the “Withdrawal Agreement”. In an impressive display of chutzpah it’s claiming the treaty has already been “negotiated”. That is Brussels talk for a treaty that, far from being agreed, has been decisively rejected three times by the British Parliament. Brussels is hoping fourth time lucky.
But what is making it nerve-wracking for them is that to force this treaty through they are dependent entirely on the majority group of “remainer” MP’s in the British Parliament. And this group may or may not get its act together either to stop Brexit or to accede to Brussels’ demands.
The group can’t, at least so far, get its act together because most of the remainer MP’s in the House of Commons were elected on a manifesto commitment to carry Brexit through. To turn round and renege on that commitment requires a little more nerve than the remainer MP’s have been able to summon up, at least to date.
So Brussels’ gamble depends on the unpredictable actions of a House of Commons in disarray.
The stakes are high. Brussels has consistently pursued a risky policy of threatening to disrupt cross-channel trade if Britain leaves on terms it doesn’t like. If the remainer MP’s fail Brussels then Brussels will either have to lose face and hastily make arrangements not to disrupt trade, or it will have to allow trade to be disrupted.
On the Irish border the stakes are even higher. Obviously there must be a full customs border between the EU and the UK in Ireland. It’s not possible for the UK to become independent without diverging from EU regulations and therefore for its own protection the EU must install customs posts. The Single Market is at risk if it doesn’t.
Because of the tense security situation those customs posts should be set back from the border and the whole monitored through close liaison between the British and Irish authorities. That Brussels has been refusing to countenance. It wants parts of the UK, or even the entire UK, to effectively remain within the Single Market. The Irish border is therefore the EU’s lever to keep the UK in or very close.
But should the UK reject the WA and leave anyway, Brussels is going to have to set up customs posts for its own protection. Further loss of face and, because of the way the problem has been handled, inevitably a worsening of the security position. That could well lead to more deaths.
Under Mrs May the EU had the situation well in hand. The UK negotiators were compliant and fell in with the EU’s wish to keep the UK close, and therefore still effectively under EU control. That’s not so certain with Mr Johnson. He might try to get a cosmeticised version of the WA through. He may consider that electorally risky and attempt to simply take the UK out.
So all that at risk and the EU can do nothing but wait it out until the House of Commons manages to work out what it wants to do.
A failure of statesmanship all round. If I had to allocate blame I’d allocate the bulk of it to the House of Commons. They daren’t stay in and won’t allow leave.
It was always going to be difficult for us getting out of what Mr Verhofstadt terms the EU “Empire”. Empire’s don’t usually let bits go willingly. But to get out with the House of Commons wanting to stay in or close means another hoop to jump through before we get our independence.
But “b” – yours is a site that remorselessly calls errant governments to account. Given the UK government’s dismal performance so far you are right to call HMG to account. But why does Brussels, similarly incompetent and similarly heedless of the welfare of those under its control, get a free pass?

Posted by: English Outsider | Sep 24 2019 21:31 utc | 33

JohninMK @24
The company blamed the £1.5bn loss that preceded the forced liquidation (over which it then didn’t have a say anymore) on Brexit Uncertainty. I saw that picked up again in several news places over the collapse – indeed not as the one and only reason, rather mentioned en passant, echoed. Steady repetition for propaganda value, not necessarily always front and centre. You’re also right on the 150/500k.
The current direction of Project Fear is “Every day the uncertainty continues, it erodes the economy further. The Brexiters have made their point very clear and perhaps they aren’t all wrong, but for the greater good this must stop now.”
Thomas Cook and its 650,000 “every-day British” victims makes this abstract danger that much more tangible.

Posted by: Leser | Sep 24 2019 21:40 utc | 35

Postmodernism becomes reality: Brexit season 3
Season three got off to a good start with the appointment of Bojo as PM. After the sickly May with her chain-smoking face and fancy shoes this lying, conniving, incompetent lazy toff now has the reins. Just when viewers were beginning to get sick and tired of the series the scriptwriters bring in the explosive Bojo. And they’ve given Bojo a real head case of a henchman, in comparison with whom moderate Tories seem almost saint-like. Last weeks episoide ended with the cliffhanger of the imminent Supreme Court ruling and today we have the decision. Boris has been trashed and even Farage is calling for his henchman’s head. Surely Bojo cannot survive this? How can the writers spin this one out? Can he really bluff his way through?

Posted by: Lochearn | Sep 24 2019 21:50 utc | 37

Well done Lochearn #36, sometimes I see it all as a Herge cartoon with Boris as Captain Haddock, Farage as Jolyon Wagg and Corbyn as Tintin?. Feel free to juxtapose according to prejudice.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 24 2019 22:17 utc | 39

Bercow is a Ziocon turd.
His colourful language disguises his manoeuvres in favour of the unelected European aristocracy of money.

Posted by: Cortes | Sep 24 2019 23:12 utc | 41

Brexit Queen:
There’s some interesting points raised over on CraigMurray.org.uk in both the article and the comments. The one that grabbed me is how the Queen gets a free pass in letting the Prime Minister waltz in and ask to suspend parliament which then turns out to be an illegal move, the queen who signed off on this move is legally protected by royal prerogative and immune, yet is paid GDP 83 Million to be the protector of the constitution – which was just legally proven that she just failed to do. Its the most expensive and worst form of consultant that I’m aware of, and one that’s – apparently impossible to fire.
She also, I would guess signed off on waterboarding and renditions, which is a family tradition just relocated from the dungeons? Whatever next, it’s getting more Falcon Crest everyday.
PS What Century is this?

Posted by: dennis | Sep 24 2019 23:33 utc | 43

Thanks all, but, quite frankly, all this makes my head spin. I get the distinct impression
this Brexit discussion is nothing more, nothing less, than another class struggle between the working classes and the entitlement class.
Too simplistic? Maybe, but, it seems this struggle is global.

Posted by: ben | Sep 24 2019 23:52 utc | 45

Johnson and the tories gaud Corbyn for not agreeing Johnsons general election proposal some weeks ago. “Youre running scared because you’ll lose” they say. That may be the case IF the general election had been BEFORE Brexit day (which is what Johnson wanted). The reason is that brexit party voters would switch to the tories in such an election, believing johnson would deliver on Oct 31st, thus ensuring a tory victory. The opposition, however, sussed this out via polling which showed tory voters switching to the Brexit party in an election AFTER Brexit day if Johnson had failed to leave…thereby ensuring a split right wing vote and a likely LABOUR victory. So, far from running scared from an election, the opposition leader has forced a date on his choosing when he is most likely to split johnsons vote and sail into number 10. Quite canny manouvering by mr corbyn.

Posted by: Hermius | Sep 25 2019 0:49 utc | 47

errr, I should have written “coalition of Remain + Repeat Referendum”, obviously not Leave+RepeatRef. long day…

Posted by: ptb | Sep 25 2019 1:04 utc | 49

@42 dennis.. when this first happened a few of us at moa – the poster BM and myself anyway – wanted the queens ass for her act condoning bojos bullshite… so, it isn’t only now that some are picking up on the queens malfeasance…

Posted by: james | Sep 25 2019 1:57 utc | 51

The main issue that needs solving is the “hard border” required by the EU. Perhaps not many people will remember, but decades ago with a “soft border”, there was a thriving market in the northern part in smuggling pigs over the border to sell at the higher EU prices. No wonder they want a hard border now.
The fact is, the United Kingdom isn’t all that united, and is in danger of falling apart. So why not go with the flow and let it? Northern Ireland could stay in the EU if they don’t want a hard border, and Scotland could stay in too, as they voted to. England and Wales want to brexit, and they can, as long as they realise there will be hard borders between them and Scotland and Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland. New referendum, done.

Posted by: Palloy | Sep 25 2019 4:42 utc | 53

This was interesting also “There are two legal systems in the UK. The Supreme Court in this case was following Scots law.”

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Sep 25 2019 5:53 utc | 55

The verdict came at a convenient time for Corbyn. He had just won the brexit policy vote – that if in government the party will negotiate the ‘best possible” deal – this is likely to be different from the May deal in that it will include england staying in at least part of the single market, but Corbyn will argue for and probably get the right to nationalise railways and energy reticulation (currently not allowed by the EU – unless like France you already have it) and restrictions on freedom of movement.
The ‘new deal’ and a “remain as we are” option will then be put to a referendum according to Labour Policy.
That is as Corbyn wanted but the lawyers and london bourgeoisie portion of the party wanted a simple ‘remain only’ ticket which was madness since they would have lost about 60 constituencies in the Midlands and further North and that was the basis Corbyn got it thru on – that there is not much point in any policy if it means being kept outta government for a generation.
After the verdict Corbyn grabbed the slot which had been reserved for the slug Tom Watson to speak that afternoon. Now the conference will be deprived of MP’s from wednesday, Watson will not get to speak and the remainers plan to spend the conference pushing remain has been totally disrupted.
Although the anti-semite nonsense has had little effect on Labour viability among voters, it did prevent the left from deselecting many of those zionists who didn’t jump ship a few months back, so if Corbyn can win a GE, he is in for a tough time from the blatantly tory-remainer section of the party which needless to say is mainly old NuLabour zionists.
They are all greed heads – many likely only jumped into the friends of israel thing for the quids on offer, so if Corbyn is PM, he is in a position to out-bid the israelis if he chooses to.
The dodgy polls give Corbyn no chance but they did that last time too, before the tories fell completely apart.
The tory campaign will be so riven with feuding from the last 18 months of brexit coshing the media won’t be able to hush it. Sure labour remainers will try to do the same but most of them need their seat to eat, where-as the Jacob Rees-Moggs and Dominic Grieves do not and will claw each other’s lungs out with scant regard for their polling.
Corbyn can sell leave as being a process rather than something instant to those who want to leave, by saying this is just the first step then many remainers will like the idea of a second referendum which it must be said remain won’t get up in if the alternative is ‘leaving’ albeit only half way out the door.
The bulk of pols understand (despite refusing to admit this) there can be no complete turn back to pre the first referendum, that unless england does leave in some shape or form civil unrest would not be containable.
No deal at all, would be a disaster under a tory government who would use it to destroy Jo/Joe Blow’s income even worse than they already have, let alone all the stuff no one has really thought through properly which would make it hard for any party in government.
Johnson has done one good turn for leavers in that he got euro car manufacturers, big pharma etc, to sh1t their pants, they in turn have been pressuring EU pols both MEP & national governments, to give the english a better deal and Corbyn can pick up on that.
I don’t believe a no confidence vote that doesn’t make Labour plus some others, a caretaker government has a sh1t show of getting up before Oct 31st cos that would cause there to be a no deal brexit by default.
Jezza can win this – the big polls esp YouGov have done nothing to improve their processes since the last election which they screwed up bad.
When it gets down to a campaign and the media are forced to give space to Corbyn, he will win votes especially potential lib dem votes by pointing out that Lib Dem have no chance of winning government outright and they have an awful history of joining with tories to install austerity.
Farage’s party is devoting it’s time to attacking the tory party, and the conservatives will get bogged down fighting off the right in the form of Farage. A well planned Labour campaign can win in spite of the media.

Posted by: A User | Sep 25 2019 6:26 utc | 57

Call me a dumb,thick, stupid Brexiteer but isn’t the whole Brexit issue actually really, really simple. Cupla facts – there was a democratic vote to leave the EU (Remoaners can whinge about it being ‘advisory’ but nobody told the voters that at the time and in the government’s own communications on the subject they said ‘your government will ensure your decision is acted on, whatever it is’)….that should be upheld because if you start picking and choosing what votes are valid or not valid, then that way lies fascism (the EU loves making decisions about valid/not valid votes and getting people to vote again, it being a fascist organisation an’ all…).
Next, the whole ‘we can’t make a trade agreement’ bollox. Mmm…it’s bollox. The UK purchased last year about 380 billion euros worth of goods and services from other EU countries…it’s a prosperous nation of 60 million + consumers, the fifth largest economy in the world and the second largest in the EU. The EU can’t afford NOT to do a trade deal with the UK – the Halle Institute in Dusseldorf posits that 22,000 jobs would be lost in the UK as a result of a no deal Brexit, but 470,000 would be lost in the EU – including 100,000 in Germany. Germany is already sliding into recession and if you really, really think that on day 1 of a mythical ‘no deal’ Brexit German car manufacturers, appalled at the thought of their second largest export market going up in smoke, aren’t going to pick up the phone to Angela Merkel and say ‘Angela, sort it out or your out..’ then you completely do not understand that politicians represent big business, not you, you don’t matter…oh, and you probably have a pet unicorn.
One last point – if you’re going to mention the ‘backstop’, don’t….the words mountains, molehills and fairy stories come to mind. Underneath all the layers and layers of nonsense, middle class prejudice and bigotry against the working class, the pathetic bleatings of privilege and the propaganda of the BBC et al, Brexit is, and always, simple…you just do it because it’s all about money and money rules politics and if the UK did ‘just do it’ EU governments (kicked up the ass by their corporate/bankster owneres) would negotiate a deal with the UK quicker than a rat up a drain pipe. Deal with it, that’s the truth.
https://richardhennerley.com/2019/09/05/jeremy-corbyn-class-traitor-and-fake-socialist/

Posted by: Richard | Sep 25 2019 6:38 utc | 59

A #56, demanding satisfaction for your narcissistic tendencies I see. Or was your entire rant just sarcasm?
I share the blame for not knowing how the Supreme Court would judge the issue along with millions. So b is not blameworthy really, just a mere journalist.
I guess you would blame Julian Assange for murdering all those civilians in Iraq that got filmed and leaked.
I would send a bouquet to the Supreme Court if I could afford it.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 25 2019 7:56 utc | 61

Maybe a UK referendum should ask the people if they prefer to pay for their Queen or for the technocrat army in Brussels? Since the one percent is too costly to afford for a society, some drastic measures have to be taken!

Posted by: Mina | Sep 25 2019 8:51 utc | 63

…
People, stop making wild comments that have no basis in reality. And you B, you are to blame. You had no idea how the Supreme Court would rule but let your bias speak. I don’t know what’s happening to you.
Posted by: A | Sep 25 2019 6:23 utc | 56
One suspects that you’ve overlooked a couple of factors.
1. UK law arrives at decisions based on what is perceived as “fair and reasonable” and includes such oddities as “benefit of the doubt”.
2. UK law advocates for certain classes of crime to be tried by a judge and a jury of Common Folk i.e. legal ignoramuses capable of evaluating evidence and arriving at a conclusion. If the Defense Lawyer doesn’t ask the right questions morons get onto juries. The existence of a jury system entitles any citizen to form an opinion about a particular case and to express it. That’s not b’s fault.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 25 2019 9:12 utc | 65

> to prorogue Parliament for five weeks
i would say, that i’d side with Court this time. 5 freaking weeks, really? why not 5 months or 5 years then? There will always be some future governments and some next Queen Speech some day, so why not stop Parliament once and forever?

Posted by: Arioch | Sep 25 2019 9:41 utc | 67

Mina @ 67
Our Eton groomed PM is spooked at the UN and so he should be!!!
Bojo: “…You may keep secrets from your friends, from your parents, your children, your doctor – even your personal trainer – but it takes real effort to conceal your thoughts from Google.
And if that is true today, in future there may be nowhere to hide.
Smart cities will pullulate with sensors, all joined together by the “internet of things”, bollards communing invisibly with lamp posts
So there is always a parking space for your electric car,
so that no bin goes unemptied, no street unswept, and the urban environment is as antiseptic as a Zurich pharmacy.
But this technology could also be used to keep every citizen under round-the-clock surveillance.
A future Alexa will pretend to take orders.
But this Alexa will be watching you…”
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-24-september-2019
Reminded me of your Eisenhower moment when he warned us about the Military Industrial Complex…? We obviously didn’t listen. Might be about time to Wake Up…
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/eisenhower001.asp

Posted by: Jayne | Sep 25 2019 10:33 utc | 69

Let’s stop pussyfooting around. There are two salient issues emerging from this gigantic kerfuffle.
A) Boris is proving to be a devious and stealth autocrat.
B) The Zionist wings of both parties will eat shet if necessary to keep Jeremy Corbyn from becoming the next Prime Minister.
If Brits don’t react against these two undemocratic elements in their government, then they deserve an even bigger mess just like Amerikkkans are sinking into.

Posted by: Circe | Sep 25 2019 11:16 utc | 71

An interesting development of the Brexit (or the BoJo?) crisis
is that a lot of MPs are asking for a written constitution
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-49807552

Posted by: Mina | Sep 25 2019 11:44 utc | 73

Posted by: Jayne | Sep 25 2019 10:33 utc | 70
Boris Johnson’s speech is rambling idiocy. In the triangle of the French revolution, freedom, equality, solidarity, he opted for emphasising freedom (why do you think that is). His speech writer had the problem to make a speech out of it.
A few years ago they all – Merkel included – would have talked about the shared values of the western world, Boris Johnson would have talked about Hongkong, Iran etc.
This year, he could not. Maybe he planned to, but after the Saudi oil fire the speech had to be rewritten.
So Boris Johnson invents “free” British state of the art technology. As a matter of fact Britain plans to have a center for “data ethics” – all Western countries have, it is the new craze.
They try to set it up as a differential from China who have the leading edge in artificial intelligence.
It all depends on consumers being takers. It is very easy to get off the grid if you intend to.
I am slightly cynical about placing the freedom to starve over the right to eat.
China has made huge progress fighting starvation while Britain is top of food insecurity in Europe.

MPs call for ‘minister for hunger’ while charities urge Government to end benefits freeze One-in-five children aged under 15 live with an adult who was ‘moderately or severely food insecure’ MPs are urging the Government to appoint a “minister for hunger” to address the issue of one in five children in the UK facing hunger and malnutrition.

Some human rights advocates conveniently forget that life is the most basic human right of all.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 25 2019 12:13 utc | 75

somebody @ 76
Bojo: “…To persevering in the vital task of achieving a two-state solution to the conflict in the Middle East.” – Admittedly Boris’ speech writer came up with some hand-slap idiocy there, but truth is always mixed in with falsehoods ‘smoke and mirrors’ tactics in the art of politics eh! What Boris says if you observe ‘patterns’ you cannot deny.
“…center for Data Ethics…” — a prominent joke? when governments have already handed over the ‘back-door’ to those companies that have created our supposed ‘free’ technology. I think Boris’ speech in the end crushed that delusion. Plus, Google going to Sicily for their secret Cult-Fest with elite attendees brings to light even more of the lack of transparency and immoral direction they are creating with vested interests and $$$ behind closed doors.
With regards to the Saudi oil ‘play’ — it maybe a bit off-topic, but I smiled when I read this little piece from Robert Fisk… Yep, some of us wonder why Israel and Saudi have a love of Black Cubes… Recently I’ve see Saudi Arabia in a whole different Light.
Robert Fisk: “…One option for Trump, now he knows Netanyahu’s fate, would be to turn on the Saudis, whose intelligence men chopped off poor Jamal Khashoggi’s head a year ago and did other unmentionable things to him before – let us speak frankly – disposing of him down a consulate drain, fountain or sink. Just what did the Saudi crown prince know about this abysmal, disgraceful affair? And let me add another question: was Khashoggi’s face turned towards Mecca when he was buried? Perhaps Mike Pompeo could actually ask Mohamed bin Salman, smiling broadly when he met him on Wednesday, what he knows about this gruesome killing of a very old friend of mine?
But that’s unkind. The Saudis are our allies – the Brits, remember, are still sponsoring them – and they tell us that the drone strikes by the Houthis/Iranians were “a test of global will”. And was our response to Khashoggi’s murder also a test of global will?…”
https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/09/24/as-netanyahus-power-in-the-middle-east-wanes-trump-has-to-find-his-own-way-to-deal-with-iran/
To shift and hopefully balance our collective consciousness to some kind of sane level of future humanity will require some changes and it won’t be cannabalism… I can assure you of that. Although, checking the integrity our food supply as well as our personal data security might be required.

Posted by: Jayne | Sep 25 2019 12:46 utc | 77

Nobody says it won’t be implemented, but as made clear from two documentaries linked by Noirette a while ago, the Brits did not prepare any deal. They prefer to let the city lawyers deal with real problems usually.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvKGWQXi3rM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT1FSmISCGw
Now, if the UK voters were asked, do they really want to end up a US colony (more than they are already)?
And why would the fate of the Scots and North-Irish be decided by Welsh and Brits?

Posted by: Mina | Sep 25 2019 13:33 utc | 79

Posted by: Jayne | Sep 25 2019 12:46 utc | 79
There seems to have been a European, Israeli, Trump alignment versus Iran.
What I see from Germany, they talk out of both sides of their mouth.
Maybe they are trying to help Trump to climb down, no sanctions versus an Iran deal and maybe the Nobel peace price.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 25 2019 13:51 utc | 81

The result of the ‘supreme GB’ court surprised me. The issue was a pol. matter, and not a judiciary one, imho, ergo, the court would render some kind of fudge. Motive and intent count in everyday life, and in criminal, plus civil/other rules/law (ex. manslaughter vs. homicide..) but for the performance of an official act, e.g. baptising a ship, marrying a sweet couple, declaring war, motive does not, or should not/cannot, count as the act is sufficient to itself!
The sentiment .. By golly gosh we can’t possibly countenance this something must bloody well be done.. is understandable – imagining a PM who prorogues Parliament for 4 months because his daughter is marrying a guitarist in Hawaii and he wants time off. Yet, going the judiciary route seems really askew to me, if Bojo is a scoundrel, a vote of no-confidence takes place, basta.
I wondered about these August Authorities, found that John W. at The Slog (pro-Brexit) gives a brief slanted acerbic portrait for each. (link)
Two weeks ago or so, Bojo was calling for a new general election but Labour refused, none other than Tony B-liar had publically advised not falling into that trap — but now Corbyn is agitating FOR a general election! Crikey. (> several other posters above who make a similar point ..)
All of the turmoil, hysteria, false news and declarations.. Moves (e.g. the Benn Act, link) which reportedly prevents a ‘no deal’ outcome (or at least goes a good ways..), are just deceptive fluff, as one cannot prevent ‘no deal’ by controlling, if that is even possible, one party to the deal. Sparkly floss so that MPs can wide-eyed stutter to their constituents they “voted to stop no-deal!”
A no-deal crash-out is baked in – i’m repeatin’ since a year or so…
Short extensions (of art. 50 end-date) change nothing in the pol. landscape in the UK – it is more than 3 years now and no compromise position can be found. Long extensions imho are no longer possible, not from the UK side or the EU, though the EU will bend over backwards, will grant extensions, etc. to mitigate as best as it can all the negative effects, and of course to escape blame for the debacle, to not ‘own’ it. But their patience is wearing thin, and a ‘long extension’ doesn’t serve them.
Remainers are crowing Victory as > prorog. parl. = ‘unlawful’ – which has no effect on the big picture, it is pathetic.
Britannia no longer rules the waves and soon won’t rule N. Ireland either. (Scotland more complicated.) The ultimate splintering, break-up, of a mighty empire. Its future is as a vassal to the US, as is already clear. Ex. Bojo blaming Iran for attack on KSA and sucking up to Trump. The last dregs, territorially v. small areas, will be extorted and manipulated by the US.
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2019/09/25/exclusive-why-this-supreme-court-was-never-going-to-find-bojos-proroguation-legal/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_(Withdrawal)_(No._2)_Act_2019

Posted by: Noirette | Sep 25 2019 15:26 utc | 83

Mina #32
“in addition to developing tools such as linguee
Is the Linguee site a project of the EU?
I use it all the time. It is really excellent!
I just assumed it was another free translation site.

Posted by: Really?? | Sep 25 2019 16:23 utc | 85

@86 kc… nice comments @54… regarding ot stuff – many here do read the open thread that is still running… go check it out and see for yourself… open threads only happen when b doesn’t have anything, otherwise they seem to happen once a week..
@a user – i had to look up your use of ‘brenda’ for the queen… you bring a lot of humour to moa!
i agree with galloway here –From now on, many, maybe most things, will be ultimately decided not in parliament by elected MPs but in courts by unelected judges..

Posted by: james | Sep 25 2019 16:29 utc | 87

88
If you notice, it is mainly a collection of EU texts; I doubt the person who had access to all the data simply woke up with a good idea.
here you go
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguee
https://www.gruenderszene.de/allgemein/linguee-gereon-frahling-startup-helden?interstitial_click
here presented as neutral, independent,
and here it seems more like home-cooked
https://www.eu-startups.com/2011/01/new-round-of-financing-at-the-dictionary-service-linguee/
I wonder if Leonard Fink is a real name.. I find not much about him in relation to such a project/field.

Posted by: Mina | Sep 25 2019 17:28 utc | 89

re Victor | Sep 25 2019 13:34 utc | 82
Most of the three years was taken up with May’s unworkable red lines. She stuck to those lines all 12 of ’em are listed here through all negotiations in england with other parties and with the EU in Brussels.
Leavers believed they were too soft and remainers found ’em too strict on things like freedom of movement, so she could never get sufficient support in parliament, even after that camel of a deal she eventually reached with the EU.
IOW for 33 of the 36 months that Brexit was meant to be planned, nothing useful happened.
Historians may well see May who was largely a ventriloquist doll for her ‘city’ finance hubby, as being a remainer deliberately blocking brexit and the fault for that lies entirely with the tories as they should have dumped her long before.
Substantial and irrevocable movement on worker’s rights and organisation would have got the Labour Party onside, but May wouldn’t offer anything more than flimsy easily revocable tosh. Boris & co making a big deal outta the Irish backstop is pretty much the same. If england wants brexit more than anything else, they are going to have to accept a single state Ireland, if they don’t, they will not get brexit, no matter how hard Germany & France are pressured. The reason is simple, like any union, such a public failure to defend a member against an outsider destroys the purpose of the union.

Posted by: A User | Sep 25 2019 18:32 utc | 91

Is Trump being impeached now to clear the way for Pence, who is already on board to start the War on IRAN, a war Trump has refused to launch?
Why now, and why on such a weak case, unless both sides, Dems and Reps, are ready to frame Trump and drown out the narrative? Is Bolton behind this?

Posted by: EtTuBrute | Sep 26 2019 19:30 utc | 93

Taking a break from impeachment matters, I see there’s plenty similar lawbreaking going on in the UK Supreme Court as thanks to James, is expressed by Galloway thusly:
“…It is true that the prime minister set out to frustrate the ability of the parliament to “stymie” him. But it is also true that the parliament itself has set out to frustrate the decision of the British people to leave the EU. And not for a week but for three long years…”
Now, we the general public don’t like this state of affairs – either one! I don’t consider myself a rabble rouser, but as far as I can see in both cases laws or nonlaws are being stretched into ‘it is what I say it is’ and that can’t be right!
I guess I am no longer a British subject in some eyes, but native born antipodally I was such, and to me you don’t upstage the Queen, so I’m guessing no one of my heritage is very happy with what their Court has done. Especially, as b states in his headline, because if they didn’t get it sorted in three years, how can doing a further stretch of weeks or days help. I think the Brits want a resolution, and Johnson had provided a simple path forward, with the Queen’s accord as is proper. So people could go back to their fish’n chips, or tea and crumpets, and welcome visitors and set up probably returns to trade with the Commonwealth as in earlier times – maybe even get the trains doing what they are supposed to do, as British trains.
I remember being very upset with the US Supreme Court when they upturned US citizens rights to have their votes counted and recounted if necessary and made the decision themselves. That was our Rubicon; now the Brits have theirs.
And I thought I was coming here for a bit of straight talk about hearts of oak. Back to impeachment I go.

Posted by: juliania | Sep 29 2019 0:29 utc | 95