|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 9:33:54 GMT
The Irish will use psychological warfare tactics. They will bombard the UK with repeats of Mrs. Brown's Boys trained to NATO standards if the UK doesn't meet their demands. This will never get to court. Sunak is busy extending an olive branch to the EU at this very moment. And the incoming Labour Government certainly won't be interested in rocking the boat. The only clout the Irish have is if they threaten to cut off the supply of Guinness.. ...and adorable, cheeky boy bands. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 19, 2022 10:05:16 GMT
The Irish will use psychological warfare tactics. They will bombard the UK with repeats of Mrs. Brown's Boys trained to NATO standards if the UK doesn't meet their demands. This will never get to court. Sunak is busy extending an olive branch to the EU at this very moment. And the incoming Labour Government certainly won't be interested in rocking the boat. The only clout the Irish have is if they threaten to cut off the supply of Guinness.. They have friends in high places, Doc. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 19, 2022 10:12:57 GMT
Your earlier post seemed to suggest that Cameron's 'promise' should be given a status it doesn't deserve. It doesn't matter what Cameron promised. He is just one member of Parliament. The majority in Parliament is sovereign, not one member, even if he is the Prime Minister. Cameron had no more authority to speak on behalf of Parliament than you or I have. It doesn't matter if the Tories don't win a majority - and Cameron never thought he would win a majority. But when they did he had no alternative but to keep his word. The backlash against the Tories at the next election would have been massive. UKIP would have come back with a vengeance. You can't stage the biggest democratic vote in our history, promising to honour the result, and then renege on it. Nope, Cameron wasn't sovereign, parliament was. Cameron had no right to speak on Parliament's behalf. That's fundamental to the Constitution. That's why none of you was able to take it before the courts. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 10:14:56 GMT
It's the sovereignty Brexiteers refuse to discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 19, 2022 10:16:48 GMT
The only clout the Irish have is if they threaten to cut off the supply of Guinness.. ...and adorable, cheeky boy bands. I think they feel a bit guilty about that now. Westlife was taking revenge on the UK too far, famine or no famine. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 19, 2022 10:22:58 GMT
...and adorable, cheeky boy bands. I think they feel a bit guilty about that now. Westlife was taking revenge on the UK too far, famine or no famine. In a perfect world the spud faced charmers would have been restricted to the traditional Irish vocations of tarmacing drives and bare knuckle fighting in pub car parks. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 19, 2022 12:39:00 GMT
It's the sovereignty Brexiteers refuse to discuss. What does this mean? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 19, 2022 18:11:41 GMT
I think they feel a bit guilty about that now. Westlife was taking revenge on the UK too far, famine or no famine. In a perfect world the spud faced charmers would have been restricted to the traditional Irish vocations of tarmacing drives and bare knuckle fighting in pub car parks. they were quite good at digging ditches as well....  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 19:00:40 GMT
We've had a lot of howling and whinging from Europhiles over recent years proclaiming that if the Protocol isn't implemented in full it will jeopardise the Good Friday Agreement. There seems to be a 180 degree U-turn now from the same kind of folk on this stance because what we're witnessing now is that the partial implementation of the Protocol is adversely affecting the political stability of the GFA as well as diverting trade, but that's okay because it doesn't adversely effect 'my team' - the EU and Irish nationalists. "Without prejudice" as you rightly said cannot be to the detriment of the GFA. Yet, the facts and reality of the matter are that the partial implementation of the Protocol is detrimental to the GFA. This cannot be argued. It is a fact. The U-turn I keep hearing about now is that the UK government will now start building a closer relationship with the EU. It's the DUP adversely affecting the stability of the GFA not the implementation of the Protocol. Nothing, but nothing, in the Protocol itself and its implementation is detrimental to the GFA. Article 1 of the Protocol is very explicit in its reaffirmation of Northern Ireland's position in the UK yet these politicians choose to believe and argue that the Protocol undermines that position. Again, it's the DUP's self-serving interpretation and their fake fears that NI would be cut off from the United Kingdom that is creating the problem. Not the Protocol itself or its implementation. But sadly, what you seem to want is to surrender the entire United Kingdom to the ridiculous demands of these bullying, blackmailing, deplorable DUP politicians. The DUP never even agreed with, let alone, supported the GFA in the first place!  Please. The issue is not of permanence, is it? It is a question of whether the agreement is legally binding or not. And before you start, there is a difference between permanent and binding. If you put your neutral hat on, you would realise that it is the UK that negotiated or could have negotiated the agreement in bad faith. Our negotiators understood or must have understood the many issues that could lead to the UK reneging on the treaty -- like the DUP's position and intransigence or the status of the future trade balance between GB and NI. Yet, they still went ahead and negotiated it, agreed it, signed it and sold the bloody thing to the Parliament for ratification. Paraphrasing Dominic Cummings: "Sign now, scrap later." Now, that is the definition of negotiating in bad faith. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 19, 2022 22:37:28 GMT
The U-turn I keep hearing about now is that the UK government will now start building a closer relationship with the EU. It's the DUP adversely affecting the stability of the GFA not the implementation of the Protocol. Nothing, but nothing, in the Protocol itself and its implementation is detrimental to the GFA. Article 1 of the Protocol is very explicit in its reaffirmation of Northern Ireland's position in the UK yet these politicians choose to believe and argue that the Protocol undermines that position. Again, it's the DUP's self-serving interpretation and their fake fears that NI would be cut off from the United Kingdom that is creating the problem. Not the Protocol itself or its implementation.. putting a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK by definition changes it's status - to argue otherwise is rather daft. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 23:36:24 GMT
The U-turn I keep hearing about now is that the UK government will now start building a closer relationship with the EU. It's the DUP adversely affecting the stability of the GFA not the implementation of the Protocol. Nothing, but nothing, in the Protocol itself and its implementation is detrimental to the GFA. Article 1 of the Protocol is very explicit in its reaffirmation of Northern Ireland's position in the UK yet these politicians choose to believe and argue that the Protocol undermines that position. Again, it's the DUP's self-serving interpretation and their fake fears that NI would be cut off from the United Kingdom that is creating the problem. Not the Protocol itself or its implementation.. putting a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK by definition changes it's status - to argue otherwise is rather daft. By what and by whose definition are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 20, 2022 1:47:35 GMT
In a perfect world the spud faced charmers would have been restricted to the traditional Irish vocations of tarmacing drives and bare knuckle fighting in pub car parks. Sounds like a healthy work/life balance to me.  |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Nov 20, 2022 1:53:46 GMT
In a perfect world the spud faced charmers would have been restricted to the traditional Irish vocations of tarmacing drives and bare knuckle fighting in pub car parks. they were quite good at digging ditches as well.... ... until the UK started haemorrhaging financial institutions to the rest of the EU after 2016, and all the ditch diggers were called back to Ireland to take up positions as bank managers. Did you see that Paris has deposed London as Europe's leading stock exchange, Doc? |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 20, 2022 3:12:00 GMT
That should make you happy then if there is any substance to what you're hearing. Lol. The Protocol is adversely affecting the stability of the GFA if one of the fundamental communities of it are unhappy with its implementation. The Protocol is incoherent and contradictory and from the viewpoint of Unionists and small businesses from Great Britain exporting to N.Ireland trashes Strand 3 of the GFA - east/west relationship, by erecting trade barriers. No, I believe Unionists have legitimate concerns over the Protocol and GFA and they certainly aren't bullying anyone. You believe the EU right, everyone else wrong. Our negotiators as well as EU negotiators foresaw issues with the incoherent and contradictory Protocol clearly by adding Art.16 into it. Both then clearly understood there could be legitimate issues with the practical working of the Protocol. It just so happens it's the UK side that are having those practical issues, and you want to ignore it. As for Dominic Cummings he has no relevance to the present. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Nov 20, 2022 3:15:21 GMT
The U-turn I keep hearing about now is that the UK government will now start building a closer relationship with the EU. It's the DUP adversely affecting the stability of the GFA not the implementation of the Protocol. Nothing, but nothing, in the Protocol itself and its implementation is detrimental to the GFA. Article 1 of the Protocol is very explicit in its reaffirmation of Northern Ireland's position in the UK yet these politicians choose to believe and argue that the Protocol undermines that position. Again, it's the DUP's self-serving interpretation and their fake fears that NI would be cut off from the United Kingdom that is creating the problem. Not the Protocol itself or its implementation.. putting a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK by definition changes it's status - to argue otherwise is rather daft. Succinctly put. |
|
