NJS

But, but they could have forced a pv at any time surely?

Ignoring the greens that's two hard brexit leave parties gaining and one ultra remain and one sort of depending who's speaking remain losing. Doesn't bode well for a second ref.

I have to say the Windrush thing convinced me that there's a lot of truth in this - picking on a very accepted community for very little return was very vindictive.

I know she's a robot and would probably just reply brexit means brexit but has anyone actually asked her why she's so determined to keep her red lines? She must realise she can't make it hard enough so the nut jobs will vote for it so I don't understand why she won't consider a softer option - especially knowing that's what businesses want. I suppose its a fear of losing "betrayed" tory voters but still.

So what were the subtleties in the last vote that meant May wanted it to fail? From her pov she doesn't need no deal fear any more as she'll be putting the turd up next week for another vote as the only way out. Even in her shitness I just don't get it.

Mueller has got Manhattan to charge him with more stuff in case the fuckwit pardons him straight away.

In fact she's clarified it will be an anti-no deal vote, Soz.

No, her motion is to leave with no deal, for or against. I assume it will fail.

I'm surprised at the margin - despite the lack of changes I thought a lot more tories and quite a few Labour MPs would switch. Surely no deal can't pass, can it?

We're a relatively small bank and not that asset based but we've spent a fortune moving stuff to Dublin - fuck knows what the big boys have spent. As you say, even if we now remain why would anyone trust the UK when the next leader could be Rees-Mogg or Johnson and the shit starts all over again?

There were a couple of disturbing remarks on Goals on Sunday and on the main Sky show sort of hankering after fences coming back - not good.

It's the question of citizenship I find interesting - I'd have sympathy with the view she gave up hers when she joined up as it were - I know that's not exactly international law though. It's also callous to say that none of the childrens lives in those camps matter as has been proven previously by the response to Syrian refugees in general but this one is somehow upgraded because of its mother.

Presumably the leaver cunts who've died since would have their votes counted again.

So Mason will say he thought pickford attempted to reach the ball and the whole world will point and laugh. Anf that'll be the end of it. Cunts.

That tackle on Almiron in the first half deserves another lok as well - looked two footed.

I'd love to see the entire team take turns doing a Keown on Van Nistleroy to the ref and/or the Mackem cunt. Everybody else won outside the doomed two though - shit day for Palace.

The argument is not missing what you never really had but nobody can deny the nerve ending loss. A mate of mine had it done at 17 due to phimosis and said wanking wasn't as good without but I dont think he'd had enough sex pre-op to really know if it made that much of a difference.

Germany had a go at talking about bannig male circumcision about five years ago I think and the argument never got as far as mutilation, consent or health - it was just deemed anti-semitic/islamaphobic straight away. Probably not the right country to try like....

Same applies to halal/kosher - legal exemption for traditional barbarism.

I think it was just medically fashionable for decades. They used to argue it prevented penile cancer but that's so rare its not a justification. There was another study a few years ago which suggested it reduced aids infection but it was debunked I think. I'm with Fist - if I started a religion and said I wanted to lop off something a lot less useful like ear lobes I'd be jailed ten seconds after the first op - say its 6000 years old and it's somehow okay.

My first reaction was the judge has been promised a supreme court seat. Judge next week is expected to be harsher - we'll see.

Why? I think if the intention is to give them a say then it may be tokenistic - I think to give them a stake in success its not a bad idea. They've started giving us shares (I also got some when I first joined) but I think its in anticipation of shit bonuses this year - most people including me are selling them as soon as we can to offset said shitness.

He's been very good recently.

I think McDonnell, Watson, Starmer and possibly more are starting to distance themselves from him on a few things - there may be trouble ahead. To be clear I'd welcome the trouble that produces a better leader - as long as the policy platform isn't watered down.

Krul in the same sentence as the other three - what a fucking knacker you are man.