Weston Super Saint

Presumably she's his ex-wife because they no longer want to be together, so does it really matter what she thinks? Maybe his kids are excited that they will be getting a new brother or sister?

Sometimes people can be 'defiantly wrong' rather than 'definitely wrong', rare but special

Well, whatever it is, it clearly doesn't apply to badger who quoted another headline from the same paper...

Jackett out!

Apparently a 'mild illness' in four out of five people according to the BBC.

And yet one sneeze and all this pointless precautions go out of the window!!! https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/how-far-do-coughs-and-sneezes-travel/

They must be mustn't they? Surely no one would weaponise a virus and make it almost identical to one that has a cure!

Not exactly a 'potent' weapon then! Back to the drawing board methinks!!

By who? Who would want a weapon that gives the overwhelmingly majority of people a sore throat and a bit of a temperature, not exactly a game changer!

Why do you take your son to work?

He's having a 'mare! You're all over the place, pal. It's a pretty basic assumption that the '27' countries comprise the EU without the UK and that the UK was the 28th member. Yet, we were talking about an agreement to the terms by which the UK would leave. No-one in their right mind would group the UK with the other 27 countries in that context, excepet you when it suits your agenda to throw more petty insults. So tell us, oh magnificient one, what is this deal that is 'diammetrically opposed' to a 'no deal' that you mentioned - surely you can let us know the details, unless of course you made it up to try and be all superior, that wouldn't be like you at all.....

No, that is not what I said. I said there were too many fingers in too many pies to agree a deal. I also included the UK in that analogy as the owner of some of those fingers and that, therefore, the UK would not agree to demands, not just the EU. However, I'm glad that you recognise that Shurlock has said pretty much the same thing as me, despite his claim that the two opinions are 'diammetrically opposed'. It just took him a year longer to reach the conclusion

So, just so I've got this clear - you know, what with me being a thickie and all. My post said there would be 'no deal' - despite you pretending not to know what that meant earlier, I suspect you know exactly what I was referring to. Your post is apparently completely different to mine - "diammetrically opposed" in fact - which must mean you believe there will be a deal. The opposite of 'no deal' being 'deal'. Enlighten us, oh great one, what will this deal look like? (If you can use one or two paragraphs rather than your usual diatribe which covers every point ever made but doesn't answer the question, that would be much obliged).

Jesus wept! It seems to be a mission of yours to prove to everyone that you are indeed thicker than a whale omelette. Let me spell it out for you using simple words! In 2017 I stated there would be no deal. In 2018 you stated the same thing - well at least it looks like you did, you used way more words than were necessary to provide your conclusion, but that fits your narcissistic M.O. Hence why imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Simple really. Are you now saying that you have never concluded that there will be 'no deal'? - for clarity as it seems to have confused you earlier, by 'no deal' it is commonly believed that there will be NO agreement between the EU and UK and therefore the UK will conclude the transition period for leaving the EU on WTO trading terms.

Ah, bless, you keep telling yourself that pal. The facts speak for themselves, it took you a year longer to reach the same conclusion. I'll lend you a spade if you want to keep on digging! If you'd bothered to look, my response was a reply to your kipper nonsense post. Odd that it would take you over 2 years to try and claim they aren't related - you're coming off desperate now. Hint for you, click the little blue arrows in the post and the magic of the internet will whisk you back in time to the posts!

Are you incapable of understanding I have never said I am unwilling to pay the licence fee - in fact, I have done, dilligently for many, many years! - it is just your (and aintforever's) assumptions that I object to it! I am, however, capable of understanding other people's point of view and can appreciate why some do not want to pay the fee, especially given the plethora of subscription TV packages currently available. I'm not really a fan od Attenborough's style, but appreciate that the programs are very well made and informative. I haven't bought a copy of the Sun for about 20 years - it was 10p when I last bought it and the internet wasn't as widely availabe - or as fast! - as it is now.

Do you not think he has a point about different rules operating within the single market?

England and Ireland?

Are you incapable of discerning the difference between a 'health' service and an 'entertainment' service or are they equal in your eyes?

This makes absolutely no sense!

No. HTH.

Nice one, well done. You came to the same conclusion as I did, it just took you a year longer to do so! Luckily, I don't have to pretend I'm more clever than you when you provide the proof for me

It's odd really, that given the open goal of finding a couple of quotes and the most intelligent person in the world can't be bothered! Not sure what your reading and comprehension level is like - hopefully it's better than our resident narcisist's - but this is EXACTLY what I was saying in 2017! I suppose imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

And yet, the cleverest person in the whole wide world told all us dummies about it and can point to numerous posts on this thread highlighting just that, as he's claimed..... Unless you're avoiding digging out said posts as you don't want us to look even more stupid, which wouldn't be like you at all.

You don't HAVE to, you choose to. That is not the case with the TV licence - which is what people are objecting to!