Everyone, except me, is getting very excited over Mrs. May's speech in Florence today. I can't think why because it will change nothing. Despite her (in)famous words that "Brexit means Brexit" her main concern is to keep her cabinet together because if they split then that will lead to another election which the Communist Labour party will probably win. That prospect alone should be enough to concentrate even the simple minds of all her ministers be they 'Brexiteers' or 'Remoaners'. My guess is that her speech today will be an emollient one designed to show that we Brits, in our frightfully decent, 'fair play', 'anyone for cricket?' way are genuinely seeking a compromise.
Of course, it will not work because, as I have said before, the Euro-fanatics in the Berlin-Brussels apparat are determined that Britain must be severely punished, nay, humiliated, for our dastardly crime in turning up our noses at the stinking pile of corrupt and undemocratic offal on which the likes of 'Junck the Drunk' live so grandly. The European dislike, verging on hatred, for the British is partly based on our perpetual 'odd man out' behaviour over the past 40+ years as they stitched together their nefarious deals but also, and I suspect more strongly, on our history over the past few centuries. Also, of course, they intend to publicly flay us alive pour encourager les autres, lest any of those uppity East or Med Europeans begin to get ideas above their station which is, obviously, that they remain mere vassal provinces in 'Mutti' Merkel's Reich!
Bring it on, I say, because the more vicious and uncompromising they are the more eager we Brits will be to get out.
Stand by for "incoming SoD". Size of shell as yet uncertain but arrive it will.
Posted by: AussieD | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 09:01
My covering aircrews Aussie D, are confident the incoming loads appear to be more chaff.
Still Gentlemen, while preferring not sounding general battle stations, ensure the covers are off the guns. Looks to be a long stand-off.
Posted by: JK | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 09:31
JK, you are a very naughty boy, it's way past your bedtime and I hope you have not been out with that Barney Magroo!!!
Posted by: David Duff | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 09:54
I'm feeling nervous for her already.
See, just coz I call out Blighty for what it is, doesn't mean I'm not fond of the place. Seeing it seemingly endlessly humiliated, on the ropes, pummelled to buggery, hurts me too.
That's exactly why I preferred Blighty being in the EU, blocking, stopping, where required, and steering the juggernaut in our Anglo-Saxon Libertarian direction. The single market was the golden haired Thatcher's idea, for example. And although not everything would go our way, we still carved out the best deal of the 28 states - even before Dave layered on some more for the country-bumpkins benefit last year.
I think from what the leaks say she's effectively asking to stay in the EU for an extra two years as a paying member with no vote. The benefit to the Euros being they won't have to fill the budget gap for an extra two years after the official Brexit date. The benefit to Blighty being we might have time to know what we're doing and make a plan by then.
Be interesting to see how the Euros respond.
If they say no, then it shows they really want to force hard or unruly Brexit. Get ready for WTO rules and regs, and the Tory party will have to swing behind BoJo and a Singapore-style, low tax, unfettered Anglo-Saxon Liberalism, confrontational stance against Europe. Cue eruption from Corbyn, the unions, and the Sweaties, Paddies et al. Cue likely communist government and reversal of Brexit.
If they say yes, then the ball goes into the long grass for a while, and who knows.
Let's see what she's made of then.
SoD
.
Posted by: Loz | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 12:18
No attempt to predict the future, only to highlight possibilities: As the economic consequences of the Brexit vote continue to take hold the public could be drawn further toward populist and nationalist sentiments. BoJo seems to be positioning himself to take advantage by developing a "sell" language of aggrievement and simple answers that could overwhelm Corbyn's less than cohesive stance. It might be over-learning a lesson, but that would be similar to how Trump won over here.
There are interesting ironies. It appears Brits, who produced George Orwell and Winston Churchill, are every bit as clueless about political language as Americans. Also, no matter which way you go the British government will end up being larger and more pervasive, since it will replace EU bureaucrats with its own.
Posted by: Bob | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 13:41
She's rocked up to the venue in a Maserati - flash bee-atch!
Enjoy while you can darlin' - you'll be lucky to get there without a call to the AA when you're chugging around in a British Leyland mark II courtesy Jezza Corbyn in 10 years time!
SoD
Posted by: Loz | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 14:30
Nuthin' to concern yoursef much David, just had a little 400 mile roundtrip I had to make today. With two women incidentally - ought to've heard the caterwauling when, just the once, I hit 137 miles per hour.
Surprised the hell outta the guy in the Camero.
S-10's (well, "somewhat" modified) rock!
Posted by: JK | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 23:08
Impressive speed, JK! How were the women?
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Friday, 22 September 2017 at 23:58
Aside from needing some of that stuff women put on they face to put color in they's cheeks - fair to middlin' - in my opinion.
Catch y'all sometime after the big yeller ball rises again 'cause now I'm plumb sore out. Toodles.
Posted by: JK | Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 01:01
Reading JK's adventure my mind just boggled!
Posted by: David Duff | Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 08:11
Holy crap, Batman!
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=s-10&prmd=ivns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjl5c6porzWAhUiKsAKHStrC9AQ_AUIBigB
One of those can do 137mph? No mechanical engineer would ever persuade me that's possible - but because JK said so, I'm a believer!
By George, JK, you've steered some way out stuff! Spitfires, S-10's at 137mph, what else?
What is the most off the wall of the lot, ever?
SoD
Posted by: Loz | Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 22:45
Well SoD,
You may've seen me post elsetimes wherein I'd described my peculiar and very particular S-10?
As I recall your Dad an' I were expounding on some of the finer points of the requirements for the equipment that's de rigueur far as Formula One goes? And that I'd gone into some detail that I'd PAID one of my fellow hillbilly pals to "do some work" on my S-10's suspension system? Because of the nature of the roads (we call 'em "hog trails" locally - paved or not) to go fast when some of the "younger hillbillys" - whose Daddies (an' some Moms) have access to extraordinary funds to purchase "off-the-shelf" hot cars and my personal preference toward "travelling in disguise"?
There's a "little something" I didn't get much into at the time on this here public blog and that'd be perhaps euphemistically explained by , aside from being disguised I also, personally speaking prefer, surprise.
I'd suggest SoD, you employ your Search somewhat further - as I'm certain your somewhat limited previous Search "probably" informed you S-10's do not ordinarily feature rear seating?
Anyway, at one time in ol' JK's life he'd enjoyed the acquaintance of the Dad of this fellow:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDZw5Pj8Xw4
(It doesn't hurt that there's a Corvette engine under the hood.)
Posted by: JK | Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 23:29
Back in the day, we called them souped-up jalopies, like the one below:
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 23:56
"What is the most off the wall of the lot, ever?"
Had to give that 'un some thought SoD ... probably not gonna surprise you much to hear me relate that it'd come down to a tie?
Two events. Neither of which I actually had any control over. In no particular order:
I was backseated for a cat-shot (F-14) and the front-seat guy, recognizing almost superhumanly that "something was wrong" with the steam-receivers that'd loaded the catapult we happened to be on - clicked the ABs on and somehow we avoided having to hold our breath as we passed beneath the length (and the props) of the CV we "launched" from.
Hearing (what I presume to've been Arabic) expletives/prayers when his AK failed to fire.
At any rate - either of the two (both) remain vividly remembered.
***
I will admit this - when the water looked ... - I shit myself.
Posted by: JK | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 00:11
JK,
What does "when the water looked" mean? Is that Navy jargon?
If "ABs" are afterburners, how on earth did you pass "beneath the length (and the props) of the CV" while inside an F-14?
I can't quite picture what you're describing, but it sure sounds awe-inspiring (and shit inducing)!
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 01:01
Henry,
You ever seen any of that old WWII film footage where, whatever aircraft dropped out of sight of the flightdeck and the guys filming (usually quarterdeck) ... The Doolittle Raid most conspicuously ... (when audio was available) and the guys on the deck were "saying" stuff hopeful-like?
The guy up front (aircraft) had the helm for the cat-shot - no way I could "help" with that. Yes. Afterburners.
You give me shit over how I say (express) shit I would submit Henry, you know nothing about. May I leave that at that?
Very apparently We did not encounter the underneath and that's all I've got to say about that.
I talk to my f'ward guy's widow fairly regularly - he "bought it" finally flying something like you'd know as a Piper Cub. I drink a full drink of Glenfiddich honoring him who saved me from that. I invite you to share with me that "Thanks" come 11 November.
"When the water looked" had (has, in my lessening - probably more frequent dreams but what can you do now I'm reminded) no official mention in any Blue-Jacket's Manual I ever saw - the Lieutenant's immediate response was to kick the ABs in and very hard right. The right wingtip (appeared to me) immersed which, I'm given to understand is impossible to recover.
Nevertheless.
We got out of the way ... He, I should say got Us out of the way - I don't know the point I shit myself just, when we'd caught the third wire and the Corpsmen were laddering us down, somebody mentioned, "Commander, how is it your uniform's soiled and your subordinate's is not?"
I promised I'd have him Courts-Martialed and flogged.
Somewhere I forgot about that. Impertinent little shit.
As you are Henry. Impertinent.
I dream this again tonight Henry - I'll have you flogged.
Posted by: JK | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 03:30
JK,
WTF?!!! Have you lost your fcking mind? I am your fcking friend! My questions were innocent requests for an explanation of something that was confusing to me! And you go off on me about it with a fury that is entirely uncalled for?WTF, JK?
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 04:25
Gentlemen, Gentlemen, pur-lease! This is, after all, the Corporals' Mess where we do have some standards, er, well, we do when I can find them.
Henry, it's no use trying to understand all of JK's 'literary' output, it is a cross between Arkie, Navy and Barney Magroo's Finest! Soon it will be a subject of study at the more rarefied Literary Departments at posh universities where they also try to work out what the hell James Joyce was wittering on about!
Posted by: David Duff | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 08:20
By George and all the Saints.
If Mr Spielberg gets hold of any of that, you'll be adding another life changing experience to the list.
I'll raise a glass 11/11.
The guy with the AK? Just tell me to fuck off. Or simply don't answer. Whichever takes your fancy.
On a lighter note ...
"S-10's do not ordinarily feature rear seating?"
... I had assumed the rear seating for the ladies was as shown, what with being country folks 'n' all that! :-) :-) :-)
SoD
Posted by: Loz | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 09:23
David,
I appreciate your words of wisdom. Truly I do.
JK and I have been online friends for years. He knows that I have a hard time understanding what he says. But this is the first time he has responded to me in anger when I simply asked for clarification. It just threw me for a loop that he would do that to me.
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 15:42
I offer my humble and sincere apologies Henry.
Posted by: JK | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 19:53
Thank you, JK.
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 20:50
Oh no - does that mean the gunfight at the 'OK corral' is cancelled?
Posted by: David Duff | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 21:17
It wouldn't have been a gunfight, David. JK would have brought a slingshot. I would have brought my withering look. And a small nuke.
Posted by: TheBigHenry | Sunday, 24 September 2017 at 23:13