BS: G.B. and N.I.?

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 11:04 AM

Steve, your earlier post to me was one of the nastiest I have seen here.
Why?
You only wanted me to justify a sentence I used. A perfectly reasonable request. No issues. You could have just asked nicely.

I had no trouble justifying the sentence, so now you both look very silly indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 11:12 AM

"He was sceptical UK could achieve an open border because the other side, Dublin and EU, would not allow it"

What he was sceptical of was Teresa May saying there should not be hard border, not that Dublin wanted a hard border.

"Prime Minister Theresa May has said there should not be a hard border after Brexit, but Dublin's Foreign Affairs Minister Charlie Flanagan has voiced scepticism over the reassurances."

He was sceptical of the reassurances proffered by Teresa May.

Can you not comprehend the English language, Dublin do not want a hard border.

Unless you can provide evidence to the contrary ..........

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 11:26 AM

A hard border would be very bad for the Republic, but they have no veto and will have to agree to whatever EU wants.
The EU seems to want it, and the Republic will have to go along with it.

I was careful to refer to "Dublin and the EU." They are a block. What EU wants Ireland gets.

It is pointless you demanding they be treated separately.
My statement was correct.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 11:29 AM

You haven't justified it one scrap. And the first time we ask you to justify a statement you've made, a request that has to be made far too frequently as a consequence of your dishonest approach to discussion, we always ask civilly. You were asked civilly to back up your Wheatcroft balls-up and you were asked civilly to back up this. In both cases you utterly failed to do so, instead deciding to hedge and ditch around in order to demonstrate that Keith speaketh ex cathedra at all times. Our civil requests generally trigger a tirade of evasions and dissembling from you. As in this case. You cannot remotely demonstrate that the EU and Dublin WANT hard borders. The best you can come up with is that one threatens it and the other has to tag along. In neither case, even if they are true (which they are not), does it have diddley squat to do with your declaration that it's what they WANT. The jury isn't even out on this. You made it up in order to bolster whatever case you were trying to make. Vulgar and fraudulent.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 11:33 AM

He's a bloody waste of bandwidth, Raggytash. And that's being kind. What an ego.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 02:16 PM

Steve, as you said, it was just a "throwaway remark" but you are so desperate to catch me out that you seized on it.
And failed!

I said, "
"UK does not want a hard border Jim, just Dublin and the EU."

I was right.
UK said it does not want a hard border.
Dublin "voiced scepticism" knowing EU would not allow it.
EU is determined to punish UK and deter others from following us out.
Ireland is part of EU.

I got it right.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 03:42 PM

"Dublin "voiced scepticism" knowing EU would not allow it.
EU is determined to punish UK and deter others from following us out.
Ireland is part of EU"

Dublin voiced scepticism about Teresa May assurances, nothing more, nothing less.

Have you any evidence to show that DUBLIN, which was your claim, wants a hard border.

No, you haven't nor will you find any.

But as ever you will make this thread about yourself and your pathetic existence, and I know you will now bleat about "personal abuse"

You really are a sad little cretin.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 04:29 PM

'sad little cretin'

i used to have a Latin teacher who called us names like that for not being able to remember lists of words that sort of stuff has resonances for me. we are all gentlemen of a certain age. do we really want stuff like that and the feelings it generates?

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 05:32 PM

Who's bloody side are you really on, Al? We have here this moronic and dishonest individual who even a saint would rail against, and you have got it into your head that we need a good bollocking for "calling him names." You even expressed sympathy for poor Teribus a couple of posts ago fer chrissake, accusing US of calling HIM vile names. May I suggest that you readjust your mindset by reading a decent selection of Teribus's posts in recent weeks?   Get a grip, Al.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Aug 17 - 08:44 PM

i'm not giving you a bollocking. i never would.

i just wonder why ake, Teribus and Keith keep coming back for more abuse.

occasionally things get to me. like the business of the world war one generals. that really upset me. loads of my family - both English and Irish - got slaughtered in that business. and every town had loads of casualties from it when i was a kid, families blighted.....

but the world is full of people who don't agree with me. i've had more than a few years to get used to the fact.

no tv station or even radio station plays the music i like. no political party agrees with me about anything much.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 02:25 AM

Britain does not want or need changes to the border.
If they are imposed, it will be from the other side.
The side of the EU and the Republic.

That is what I am saying.
That is all I have said, and it is correct.
Calling me names does not change that, it just reveals you for what you are.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 03:35 AM

well in truth Keith you have no reason to think you're privy to government thinking - as far as i know.

if Brexit ever happens, none of us really know how its going to work out. second guessing political situations is something we've all been wrong about. if we're honest. the unexpected is always on the cards.

who knows what's going to happen - perhaps the ulster unionist faction will demand having the border. perhaps Dublin will think - keep your stupid problems up there - it won't be the first time.

perhaps Corbyn will be elected and say it stops here. we are cutting NI free. Brexit won't work otherwise.

all kinds of things could happen. all kinds of extraordinary people could do and say extraordinary things.

the other side are too free with their insults. you are far too positive in your opinions, like you're some emissary from Planet Superior Knowledge.

theres an old Lancashire saying - when you get down to it, none of us know nowt! THink on la!

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 03:55 AM

"Britain does not want or need changes to the border.
If they are imposed, it will be from the other side.
The side of the EU and the Republic.
That is what I am saying.
That is all I have said, and it is correct"

But that is not all you have been saying, you said clearly:

"UK does not want a hard border Jim, just DUBLIN and the EU."

You have no evidence that DUBLIN wants a hard border.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 06:12 AM

We can only keep saying it, Raggytash. He is the king of denial, generally of the things he has plainly said in black and white himself. His last post is a typical example of his twisting and turning. There are bigots, nutjobs, obsessive, head-bangers and wearers of blinkers aplenty on this forum, as in the real world. But this guy is without peers when it comes to dishonesty. I don't think he can see it too clearly, because he's utterly dishonest with himself first and foremost. It's nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with him.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 06:28 AM

I know Steve, I watch Irish Television, I read Irish newspapers, I listen to Irish radio. Since Brexit was announced not one single member of the Dail has ever suggested that Dublin want a hard border.

Not a single one.

Simon Coveney the Irish Foreign Minister said "Any barrier or border on the island of Ireland in my view risks undermining a very hard-won peace process and all of the parties in Northern Ireland, whether they are unionist or nationalist, recognise that we want to keep the free movement of people and goods and services and livelihoods."

Leo Varadkar the Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach) said he and his government did not want to see any kind of economic border on the island of Ireland when the UK leaves the European Union.

Not a single person has spoken even vaguely suggesting the Dublin government want a hard border.

That SHOULD be easily understood.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 09:54 AM

I am not "privy to government thinking" Al.
The PM stated it publically and it was widely reported.
UK does not want or need any change to the border.

When she said that, Dublin's Foreign Affairs Minister Charlie Flanagan voiced scepticism over the reassurances. UK might not want or need changes but his side might.


Not a single person has spoken even vaguely suggesting the Dublin government want a hard border.

Dublin will have no say in it. Dublin gets what the EU wants.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 09:57 AM

you are far too positive in your opinions, like you're some emissary from Planet Superior Knowledge.

Just like Steve, Jim, and Rag then.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 10:10 AM

You can buy Mammoth tusk dirt cheap if you don't mind dark discolored ivory that still smells like cadaver.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 11:04 AM

"Charlie Flanagan voiced scepticism over the reassurances. UK might not want or need changes but his side might.

"Dublin will have no say in it. Dublin gets what the EU wants."

So his side might "want changes" but Dublin gets "no say." To Keith, this adds up to "Dublin wanting a hard border." We have now moved into high comedy.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 11:37 AM

Your twisting my words in comedic.

UK does not want a hard border according to the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. No such statement from EU leadership.

If a hard border is imposed it will not be on the UK side.
EU will decide if there is one, but it will be Dublin uniforms behind the barriers.
A hard border will cause hardship on both sides of the border, but the other 26 governments only want to make sure that UK suffers so others do not follow.

UK on one side. Ireland/EU on the other.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 12:50 PM

Well Big Al, what can you say to that.

The professor has taken Charlie Flanaghans scepticisms over Teresa May comments regarding the border and decided with, no other evidence, that Dublin wants a hard border.

Please remember his EXACT quote was: "UK does not want a hard border Jim, just Dublin and the EU."

There is absolutely no evidence that DUBLIN wants a hard border. On Irish Television, Radio and press in the past 15 months not one politician has suggested any such thing.

I know you think that personal abuse should not come into the equation but as another poster once said what do you do with a "Thick c**t"

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 12:52 PM

I should add that he is clinging on to that one quote rather than lose face, he really is a sad little cretin.

Even his normal running mates are keeping out of this one.

No apologies for the abuse.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 01:24 PM

"No such statement from EU leadership."

Precisely. No statement that they WANT a hard border. No statement from Dublin that they WANT a hard border. No evidence that either WANTS a hard border. But YOU asserted, without qualification, that they BOTH want a hard border. I'm a very simple man, Keith. I haven't twisted anything. I'm simply saying that you made something up, hoping to get it past us, and you are going to the ends of the earth to deny it. You are insulting and abusing us by taking that stance. You are assuming that we are too stupid to see through you. Well we're not. Vulgar and fraudulent. That's you through and through.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 01:27 PM

Theresa said she didn't want Brexit.

Now she is in charge of a government implementing Brexit.

What she says is....liable to change Keith.

its not worth arguing about.

talks concerning NI are never what they seem. Remember all the time THatcher was saying she didn't negotiate with terrorists and all the time she was doing just that in secret.

we simply don't know and we can't trust anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 02:43 PM

Al, it was a statement of the position of the UK government and UK negotiators from the Prime Minister.
It sets out our position to the EU Brexit negotiators, the country and the world.

Steve, if no-one wants a hard border, there will not be one and there is no issue to discuss.

We know UK does not want one, but the indications are that EU does. They refuse to discuss it.
If they were content with the status quo why would they not say so as UK has?

Rag, I did not employ a team of lawyers to draft my post. As Steve said, it was a throwaway remark.
I did not expect you two to scrutinise every word for meanings I never intended.
I see where you misunderstanding crept in.

I said, "UK does not want a hard border Jim, just Dublin and the EU."

I withdraw and apologise for that statement.
Instead, insert, "UK does not want a hard border Jim, just Dublin/EU."

Dublin has no veto and is one out of 27.
Effectively it has no say.
What EU wants, Dublin gets.

There are only two sides on this. UK who do not want a hard border, and EU who are showing every indication that they do.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 02:58 PM

If you take Dublin out of the equation we JUST might be getting somewhere.

As I have already stated not one single person in the Dublin government has expressed one single remark to suggest that Dublin wants a hard border.

Not one single quote from any single person.

So if withdraw Dublin from your post we can draw a line under the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Aug 17 - 03:06 PM

Agree Rag.
Dublin will have no say in how its border will be operated.

EU dismiss the idea of no border posts.

The Independent
"It(UK) suggested there should be no border posts on Northern Ireland's border with the Republic of Ireland border, which has almost 300 crossing points, but that a mix of technology and physical checks should ensure big businesses were complying with customs rules. 
Labour at the time branded the idea a "fantasy frontier" and said the proposal lacked practical detail.
Speaking to reporters, the senior EU official also dismissed the idea.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-negotiations-talks-northern-ireland-border-magical-thinking-eu-david-davis-paper-theresa-may-a7913056.html

EU dismiss the idea of no border posts.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 02:27 AM

I know I am going to regret asking this but you said "It(UK) suggested there should be no border posts ... but that a mix of technology and physical checks..."

Where are those physical checks carried out? A temporary border post put in place for a day many have worked before the era of mobile phones, but as a means of ensuring smuggling is not going on it is fair to describe it as 'fantasy'.

And pointing out the proposed approach would not work is not to say I want a hard border: I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 02:29 AM

theres going to be a wall, and the Mexicans will pay for it

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 03:14 AM

The reality is that nobody has a clue as to the border being hard or soft after Brexit. The entire issue is still up for grabs. Personally I see a hard border being introduced more out of EU spite than common sense. A hard border will pose far more of a problem for Ireland than the UK.


http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/taoiseach-very-confident-no-border-controls-after-brexit-457836.html

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 04:02 AM

One of the strongest 'NO!!!' moments for me in the lead up to the Brexit vote was hearing Andrea Leadsom wave away discussion of the Irish border as a non-issue. Her case was that as we had a border pre-EU which worked (-ish), there would not be any difficulty doing that again. Brain not engaged, in my view at the time, and it is certainly turning out that way.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 04:28 AM

The reality is that nobody has a clue as to the border being hard or soft after Brexit.

The British side is clear that it does not want or need border posts.
Nobody has a clue what EU will agree to, but they do not want us to benefit from Brexit.

There has always been some smuggling across that border.
The paramilitaries raised millions by smuggling fuel at one time, and tobacco smuggling is still rife.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 05:01 AM

When I said "ensuring smuggling is not going on", I freely admit I chose the words carelessly. It is not a binary matter (it happens or not), but a quantitive one (how much does it happen).

So while Keith is right that 'some smuggling' has always gone on across that border, what matters is the amount, not whether it does.   And standard security analysis says if you want more control you have to harden the border, but if you are willing to accept a greater degree of cross border crime, you can soften it.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 05:11 AM

you keep saying that Keith - the British side is clear.

you've got a bloody funny idea of clarity. and the main ruling party has been running round like a headless chicken for decades on this very issue of Europe.

the idea that John Redwood and Theresa May would have similar views about anything regarding Europe is crazy. Both factions have some sort of claim to the middle ground.

how this translates into reality...god alone knows. and he's not letting on.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 05:19 AM

"A hard border will pose far more of a problem for Ireland than the UK."

I'm not sure about that statement Iains. The 2016 cross border trade from the Republic to the North amounted to 9.1 Billion.

The cross border trade from the North to the Republic was 13.6 Billion.

Together with all the other imponderables it is not clear who, if any, will benefit most and who, if any, will suffer most.

Border Control

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 05:23 AM

I hope Brexit does not reopen old wounds. The article below outlines the possible issues along with the history.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/23/northern-ireland-brexit-border-old-wounds-troubles

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 05:27 AM

One bit of the article which made me smile was:

"Critics pointed out that the absence of border checks would appear to contradict a key aspect of leave campaigners' pledge to "take back control"

A bit of a kick in the pants to some I would think, Farage, Gove, Johnson et al.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 05:46 AM

Unfortunately the British side is not clear as some would believe. As Iains link states:

"In the EU referendum, Northern Ireland voted Remain by a majority of 56% to 44%. THE DEMOCRATIC UNIONIST PARTY, WHICH VIEWS THE RETURN OF A HARD BORDER AS REINFORCEMENT OF BRITAIN'S LOYALTY TO NORTHERN IRELAND at a time of increasing uncertainty about the future of the United Kingdom, will place Brexit at the heart of its general election campaign" (my highlights)

Now that the government has to rely on the DUP for support who knows what may happen.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 06:06 AM

"Taking back control" was just one of the more brainless pro-brexit slogans. Now that the net immigration figures are plummeting, the phrase is redundant as far as controlling immigration is concerned. It never was an issue as far as taking back control of our laws, as all bar an infinitesimal number of EU laws were agreeable to us in any case. It seemed to me that every high-profile pro-brexiteer had been instructed to chant the slogan at least four times a minute. The tragedy now is that we have lost control over the outflow from the country of doctors, nurses, dentists, engineers and the other highly skilled people that we don't train ourselves. "Control of our borders" works one way only as far as people are concerned. Never mind. All those thousands of young people who are currently on "apprenticeships" (aka floor-sweeping and tea-making) on half the minimum wage will be able to step into the breach, I'm sure.

What a balls-up. Cheers, call-me-Dave. What a git.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 06:49 AM

"Now that the net immigration figures are plummeting" ...

We need to be a bit careful here. We have the number of immigrants, the immigration rate (1st differential) and the change in the immigration rate (2nd differential). As I read the figures it is the second differential which is unusually high, but it is the number of immigrants that those who do object tend to object to.

I remember Mrs T once heralding an achievement because of a change in the third differential of whatever it was.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 07:08 AM

" The tragedy now is that we have lost control over the outflow from the country of doctors, nurses, dentists, engineers and the other highly skilled people that we don't train ourselves."

Unmitigated rubbish! People came and went long before The EU was even dreamed of. Please give a link to the legislation where the UK prevented free travel of foreign nationals pre EU days.
And the idea that we do not train highly skilled people is a joke.
Perhaps a little rephrasing is in order?
and perhaps better research instead of quoting tired old ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 07:21 AM

Now that the government has to rely on the DUP for support who knows what may happen.

May made her statement under the current circumstances.

you've got a bloody funny idea of clarity. and the main ruling party has been running round like a headless chicken for decades on this very issue of Europe.

May spoke to clarify. All parties have their dissidents, but May is still the leader.
She said,
"Today, we publish a position paper which sets out how we want to approach these and other issues in the negotiations."

"I hope people in Northern Ireland and Ireland will see the UK Government is determined to protect the unique arrangements between Northern Ireland and Ireland, and the wider relationship between the UK and Ireland. Protecting your citizenship rights, and protecting the Belfast Agreement, are at the heart of our approach.
On the citizenship rights guaranteed by the Belfast Agreement, our position is clear. Northern Ireland remains an integral part of the United Kingdom, but it is also the permanent birthright of the people of Northern Ireland to hold both British and Irish citizenship.
This will remain the case, and people of Northern Ireland who are Irish citizens will remain EU citizens. The UK wants this guarantee confirmed alongside the other aspects of the Belfast Agreement as part of our withdrawal agreement with the EU.
We also want the EU funding that has helped victims of the Troubles and cross-community groups to continue at least until the current programme finishes.
We then want to go further, and explore a potential future programme of peace funding after we leave the EU.
This will need to be agreed between the EU, along with the UK and Irish Governments, but I have always said that as part of the deep and special partnership I want to negotiate between the UK and the EU, there may be specific and valuable EU programmes for which we want to agree the continuation of funding. Peace funding in Northern Ireland is one of them.
For those concerned about freedom of movement across Northern Ireland and Ireland, our proposal is clear: we want to maintain the reciprocal arrangements for the Common Travel Area and all the rights for our citizens that have existed in some form since 1922.
It allows British and Irish people to move freely across our islands, and is at the core of the deep social, cultural and economic ties that link us together.
It goes beyond just the ability to move between our islands without passport controls, and also means guaranteeing continuing rights for UK and Irish nationals to work and access public services.
We believe it is inconceivable that it could change, and we believe that can be agreed early in the talks.
Of course making sure the border remains as seamless as possible isn't just about free movement of people. We need to ensure there is no hard border enforced on the movement of goods.
While the UK will no longer be a member of the EU customs union, we have set out plans in this week's paper on customs to seek a deal that allows for the most seamless possible movement of goods between the UK and EU.
This is especially important for the movement of goods, not least in relation to agriculture. As Michel Barnier has said, we will need an unprecedented approach for the border here, and this will mean careful work and imaginative approaches but today we set out our key principles.
The first of those principles is stark: there should be no physical border infrastructure of any kind on either side of the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. I want people to be absolutely clear: the UK does not want to see border posts for any purpose.
There are other vital issues we want to address: preserving North-South and East-West cooperation, and making sure the all-Ireland energy market is protected. All of this work only underlines the importance of getting the Northern Ireland Executive back up and running. That is an urgent goal for me and Secretary of State James Brokenshire. And it is one the Irish Government shares.
Today I want to reassure everyone in Northern Ireland, that the UK leaving the EU will not jeopardise things you value profoundly.
Your citizenship rights are permanent and inviolable; you will be able to work and live in Northern Ireland and Ireland exactly as now on a reciprocal basis; and we do not want any border posts between Ireland and the UK.
In addition, there can be no question of imposing a new customs border between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. That would be totally unacceptable to the UK Government.
I am determined to deliver a good Brexit deal for the whole UK, and my first priority is protecting the unique and special relationship between the UK and Ireland."

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 07:31 AM

1. Teresa May spoke earlier this year and said there would be no General Election.

What May says and what May does are not necessarily the same thing, that truth applies to most politics and politicians.

2. "The first of those principles is stark: there should be no physical border infrastructure of any kind on either side of the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. I want people to be absolutely clear: the UK does not want to see border posts for any purpose"

How on earth is she going to equate 2. with the DUP's stance of:

"The Democratic Unionist Party, which views the return of a hard border as reinforcement of Britain loyalty to Northern Ireland"

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 09:51 AM

Steve Shaw - 26 Aug 17 - 05:32 PM

"Who's bloody side are you really on, Big Al?"

Thanks for asking that rather childish and idiotic question "Biologist" Steve. Reveals and speaks volumes about you.

By the way WE WILL see exactly what happens with regard to the border in Ireland - but it will be decided by Brussels and London - Dublin no matter what they want will be told what to do by Brussels - it's one of the main reasons the electorate of the UK decided to leave - It should be up to sovereign independent countries to decide what type of borders and border controls they have - not some remote, unelected "commission" sitting elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 10:02 AM

There you have it.

A reasoned, well thought out, eloquent and intelligent resume of the picture.

Absolute Bollocks of course, but our resident oracle knows all.

Please feel free to put fuck into that last sentence.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 11:29 AM

May is the leader. But only because Gove stabbed Boris in the back. She doesn't believe in Brexit - doesn't understand the faction of her party that does.

her hold is very fragile. if she had won the election convincingly, you could say with some confidence that she was in charge, as it is who knows how long she will keep this wonky wagon on the road.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 11:40 AM

It is not just May herself speaking personally Al.
This is the UK policy for the negotiations.

"Today, we publish a position paper which sets out how we want to approach these and other issues in the negotiations."

Not the "Royal We."
That is the stated position of the UK government, agreed by the UK government.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 12:18 PM

That may be the stated position but how do they get the DUP to go along with it.

As the DUP effectively hold the balance of power any "stated position" could have the same chance as a snowball in hell.

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 12:37 PM

You haven't a clue as to why the people voted to leave, Teribus, because they were asked only if they wanted to leave or not, not why. As for this Dublin thang, Keith said, without qualification, that the EU and Dublin WANT a hard border. We want to know what evidence he has for that. We know now that the answer to that is that he hasn't got any evidence. Nothing to do with what the EU might force Dublin to do. He clearly stated that Dublin WANTS a hard border. Why don't you read the thread properly before doing your feet-first Johnny-come-lately stunts?

Subject: RE: BS: G.B. and N.I.?
From: Iains
Date: 28 Aug 17 - 01:48 PM

"You haven't a clue as to why the people voted to leave, Teribus, because they were asked only if they wanted to leave or not, not why."

Oh Dear, wrong again!

Sovereignty

On the day of the referendum Lord Ashcroft's polling team questioned 12,369 people who had completed voting. This poll produced data that showed that 'Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the European Union was "the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK".

Immediately prior to the vote, Ipsos MORI data showed that Europe was the third most highly ranked problem by Britons who were asked to name the most important issues facing the country, with 32% of respondents naming it as an issue.
Immigration

Lord Ashcroft's election day poll of 12,369 voters also discovered that 'One third (33%) [of leave voters] said the main reason was that leaving "offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders."'