Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
Sigh. Spain does not dispute the position on sovereignty. Its case is that Britain should decolonise. That is not a zero legal basis claim.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
No point covering up incompetence.
Surprised at the hypocrisy...for us to play games with EU citizens in the UK is utterly deplorable, but for the EU to do the same with those of Gibraltar is somehow not worth a single complaint.
Is Spain threatening to ethnically cleanse the area?
The citizens voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU after all so it can't be such a tragedy for the people if sovereignty is transferred. Those who don't like the idea but were keen on Brexit could even consider it 'taking one for the team' in order to help secure a good deal for the UK.
Ethnically cleanse? What are you bleating on about?
If you asked the Gibraltarians if they wanted to join Spain, I'm sure you'd get a result similar to the last referendum. The recent news will no doubt harden their resolve.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
Why should that matter to you? You don't believe countries should exist.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
These unequal treaties from a colonial period are not worth the paper it is written on. I suppose to you the Independence movement in North America was an insurrection ?
LOL. Unequal treaties?
As for the US... no, we signed a treaty recognising them.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
Sigh. Spain does not dispute the position on sovereignty. Its case is that Britain should decolonise. That is not a zero legal basis claim.
We could remove the inhabitants. Then what? It would still be British territory as per the treaty.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
Sigh. Spain does not dispute the position on sovereignty. Its case is that Britain should decolonise. That is not a zero legal basis claim.
The Gibraltarn people decided that their future lay with Britain in 2002. I am sure we could repeat that vote if necessary. Spain would be the colonising power, not Britain.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
These unequal treaties from a colonial period are not worth the paper it is written on. I suppose to you the Independence movement in North America was an insurrection ?
Spain was a great power in 1713. It's Empire was vastly greater than that of the UK at the time.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Gibraltar is British when it wants to be. It is nothing more than a low tax, no duties smugglers den. Who is the MP for Gibraltar in the HoC ?
Fair point, we should offer the people of Gibraltar the option of becoming part of the UK. Then we can tell the Spanish to fuck off forever.
They seem to be content with their current constitutional settlement. Not sure what difference having an MP would have.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Spain is now the good guy, so you wouldn't see thm mentioned by the usual suspects.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
These unequal treaties from a colonial period are not worth the paper it is written on.
Of course they are, otherwise Spain would dispute our legal sovereignty, and they don't. They still would like it back and will seek means to achieve that, but clearly the treaty has worth or they would claim it was worthless.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Do you think the Spanish should give up their places in North Africa?
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
What a surprise that Meeks is on the side of the EU on this. As usual they can do no wrong when it comes to relations with the UK.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Gibraltar is British when it wants to be. It is nothing more than a low tax, no duties smugglers den. Who is the MP for Gibraltar in the HoC ?
Fair point, we should offer the people of Gibraltar the option of becoming part of the UK. Then we can tell the Spanish to fuck off forever.
They seem to be content with their current constitutional settlement. Not sure what difference having an MP would have.
British when they need to be. Bloody leeches.
Again, any evidence for this? Or are you just talking bollocks?
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
No point covering up incompetence.
Surprised at the hypocrisy...for us to play games with EU citizens in the UK is utterly deplorable, but for the EU to do the same with those of Gibraltar is somehow not worth a single complaint.
Is Spain threatening to ethnically cleanse the area?
The citizens voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU after all so it can't be such a tragedy for the people if sovereignty is transferred. Those who don't like the idea but were keen on Brexit could even consider it 'taking one for the team' in order to help secure a good deal for the UK.
Ethnically cleanse? What are you bleating on about?
If you asked the Gibraltarians if they wanted to join Spain, I'm sure you'd get a result similar to the last referendum. The recent news will no doubt harden their resolve.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
Quite how much subjugation of the wider interest would be needed is surely a disputed matter. Given the overall option was not that which they would have preferred, it is only fair there be some level of compensation.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
These unequal treaties from a colonial period are not worth the paper it is written on. I suppose to you the Independence movement in North America was an insurrection ?
Spain was a great power in 1713. It's Empire was vastly greater than that of the UK at the time.
To call them unequal treaties is probably the most ridiculous thing I've read on PB this year.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Spain is now the good guy, so you wouldn't see thm mentioned by the usual suspects.
Interesting election in Ecuador as leading centre-leftist Moreno - who got 39% rather than 40% needed to have won immediately - faces Guillermo Lasso int he second round. Lasso has been endorsed by the third place candidate, and the fourth place candidate (far left) refuses to endorse anyone.
Lasso has pledged to give Assange thirty days' notice!
Polls and BF slight favour Moreno who has been the VP under Correa.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
What a surprise that Meeks is on the side of the EU on this. As usual they can do no wrong when it comes to relations with the UK.
Well that's demonstrably not true either. I was very freely criticising the EU yesterday morning on its handling of its relations with the UK.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Spain is now the good guy, so you wouldn't see thm mentioned by the usual suspects.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Spain is now the good guy, so you wouldn't see thm mentioned by the usual suspects.
The principle is that my enemy's enemy is my friend. For some people, the British State is that enemy.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Good point. Why doesn't the UK government ? Because our little tax havens will also come under the periscope. Channel Islands, Isle of Man etc. They are there so that people with ill gotten money stash it there.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
What a surprise that Meeks is on the side of the EU on this. As usual they can do no wrong when it comes to relations with the UK.
Well that's demonstrably not true either. I was very freely criticising the EU yesterday morning on its handling of its relations with the UK.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Good point. Why doesn't the UK government ? Because our little tax havens will also come under the periscope. Channel Islands, Isle of Man etc. They are there so that people with ill gotten money stash it there.
Err... because they'd just respond with Gibraltar, isn't that obvious??
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
What a surprise that Meeks is on the side of the EU on this. As usual they can do no wrong when it comes to relations with the UK.
The whole thing is silly. The EU will support its member states as much as it can, but this issue is nothing to do with the wider EU, and they would not do more than encourage Spain. The EU is not so malevolent as to even indirectly attempt to force the UK to change its position on sovereignty and force it to give away its citizens against its will, and I cannot believe some seem to think so poorly of the EU that they would (and it has been suggested by some). No, giving some encouragement to Spain to raise surrounding matters, play silly buggers, that's reasonable from their point of view of supporting a member, but such a deeply personal matter between two states is beyond what the EU would involve itself in.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Do you think the Spanish should give up their places in North Africa?
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
Sigh. Spain does not dispute the position on sovereignty. Its case is that Britain should decolonise. That is not a zero legal basis claim.
Decolonialisation applies where the inhabitants of an area want to be independent. It seems you side with Spain in forcing a change on Gibraltar whether they want it or not.
It seems you like forcing people into situations they don't like. You want to force people to stay in the EU. You want to force the Gibraltese to give up the benefits of their links with the UK.
Why not give them the choice.
The Spanish option which is give up on the UK and stay in the EU or the British option which is stay with the UK but give up on the EU.
I would very happily bet on which way that particular vote would go.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
I think the Spanish riposte is that Ceuta and Melilla are both administered as if they are part of European Spain.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
What a surprise that Meeks is on the side of the EU on this. As usual they can do no wrong when it comes to relations with the UK.
Well that's demonstrably not true either. I was very freely criticising the EU yesterday morning on its handling of its relations with the UK.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
These unequal treaties from a colonial period are not worth the paper it is written on. I suppose to you the Independence movement in North America was an insurrection ?
Spain was a great power in 1713. It's Empire was vastly greater than that of the UK at the time.
To call them unequal treaties is probably the most ridiculous thing I've read on PB this year.
British North America was a backwater, compared to Spanish America, at the time.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Do you think the Spanish should give up their places in North Africa?
I have no strong view about either Gibraltar or Ceuta and Melilla. The cases are not identical. If the Spanish were to return Ceuta to its previous owners, they would be returning it to Portugal.
My point is simply that the EU is very properly not getting in the way of an EU member's dispute with what will be a non-EU member.
Some of the same people who think that putting Scotland's interests first would be the tail wagging the dog are quite happy to subjgate the British national interest to 30,000 people living in an enclave in the Med.
As a point of interest, why does no one ever raise the point about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both.
Pot... Kettle?
Good point. Why doesn't the UK government ? Because our little tax havens will also come under the periscope. Channel Islands, Isle of Man etc. They are there so that people with ill gotten money stash it there.
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Gibraltar is British when it wants to be. It is nothing more than a low tax, no duties smugglers den. Who is the MP for Gibraltar in the HoC ?
Fair point, we should offer the people of Gibraltar the option of becoming part of the UK. Then we can tell the Spanish to fuck off forever.
They seem to be content with their current constitutional settlement. Not sure what difference having an MP would have.
British when they need to be. Bloody leeches.
Again, any evidence for this? Or are you just talking bollocks?
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
But does Spain have an otherwise mainstream political party that occasionally toys with the idea of handing those enclaves over? That might be the difference.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
Sigh. Spain does not dispute the position on sovereignty. Its case is that Britain should decolonise. That is not a zero legal basis claim.
Decolonialisation applies where the inhabitants of an area want to be independent. It seems you side with Spain in forcing a change on Gibraltar whether they want it or not.
It seems you like forcing people into situations they don't like. You want to force people to stay in the EU. You want to force the Gibraltese to give up the benefits of their links with the UK.
Why not give them the choice.
The Spanish option which is give up on the UK and stay in the EU or the British option which is stay with the UK but give up on the EU.
I would very happily bet on which way that particular vote would go.
The Spanish position is that the current Gibraltarians are the descendants of settlers and as such do not have the right to self-determination. The comparison, I guess, that they would make is to the Israeli West Bank settlers.
I have no particular interest in Gibraltar. I merely note that there is the fact of a dispute and the EU is deferring to the sole member state that post-Brexit will have a stake in that dispute.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Do you think the Spanish should give up their places in North Africa?
I have no strong view about either Gibraltar or Ceuta and Melilla. The cases are not identical. If the Spanish were to return Ceuta to its previous owners, they would be returning it to Portugal.
My point is simply that the EU is very properly not getting in the way of an EU member's dispute with what will be a non-EU member.
Gibraltar belonged to the Arabs for 750 years and then Spain for 250 years. Maybe we should insist it is returned to the Arabs again along with much of the rest of Spain.
Which of course is why such arguments are dumb. All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Colony or not, the treaty ceded the territory to Britain in perpetuity.
Sigh. Spain does not dispute the position on sovereignty. Its case is that Britain should decolonise. That is not a zero legal basis claim.
Decolonialisation applies where the inhabitants of an area want to be independent. It seems you side with Spain in forcing a change on Gibraltar whether they want it or not.
It seems you like forcing people into situations they don't like. You want to force people to stay in the EU. You want to force the Gibraltese to give up the benefits of their links with the UK.
Why not give them the choice.
The Spanish option which is give up on the UK and stay in the EU or the British option which is stay with the UK but give up on the EU.
I would very happily bet on which way that particular vote would go.
The Spanish position is that the current Gibraltarians are the descendants of settlers and as such do not have the right to self-determination. The comparison, I guess, that they would make is to the Israeli West Bank settlers.
I have no particular interest in Gibraltar. I merely note that there is the fact of a dispute and the EU is deferring to the sole member state that post-Brexit will have a stake in that dispute.
If they object to the current population but not British sovereignty derived from the treaty, why all the clamour for joint sovereignty?
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
But does Spain have an otherwise mainstream political party that occasionally toys with the idea of handing those enclaves over? That might be the difference.
Apparently the "rationale" (!) is that Spanish do not consider Melilla and Ceuta to be colonies but the UK does consider Gibraltar to be a colony.
Therefore the two situations are totally different. QED!
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Do you think the Spanish should give up their places in North Africa?
I have no strong view about either Gibraltar or Ceuta and Melilla. The cases are not identical. If the Spanish were to return Ceuta to its previous owners, they would be returning it to Portugal.
My point is simply that the EU is very properly not getting in the way of an EU member's dispute with what will be a non-EU member.
Gibraltar belonged to the Arabs for 750 years and then Spain for 250 years. Maybe we should insist it is returned to the Arabs again along with much of the rest of Spain.
Which of course is why such arguments are dumb. All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
Gibraltarians want British protection for free. Before the EU, Brits could not even work there without a work permit and I think British visitors needed visas. So much for being British.
Why can't they be independent ? After all, they exist for low tax and smuggling.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Having put the future security of both EU citizens and British citizens on the table, Britain is in no position to accuse the EU of stooping low.
The EU's position is in any case logical. After Brexit, the dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar will involve only one EU country. It would be quite wrong for the rest of the EU to start from a position of forcing its member to make concessions on such a dispute against its will. I thought Leavers liked the idea of bilateral negotiations?
Except Spain has zero legal basis for the claim. Or is that not an issue because they are now on the side of the EU?
Well that's simply untrue. Spain maintains that Gibraltar is a colony, a view with some international support (and the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht contemplates that Britain might one day give up sovereignty points in that direction). It maintains the Gibraltarians, as descendants of settlers, do not have the right of self-determination.
Britain clearly has current sovereignty. But to say that Spain has zero legal basis for its position is wildly overstating the case.
Do you think the Spanish should give up their places in North Africa?
I have no strong view about either Gibraltar or Ceuta and Melilla. The cases are not identical. If the Spanish were to return Ceuta to its previous owners, they would be returning it to Portugal.
My point is simply that the EU is very properly not getting in the way of an EU member's dispute with what will be a non-EU member.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
The Spanish Costas are full of Brits whose Britishness is not threatened one bit by living in sovereign Spain.
There are good reasons for holding onto Gibraltar, but this isn't one of the best.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
But does Spain have an otherwise mainstream political party that occasionally toys with the idea of handing those enclaves over? That might be the difference.
Apparently the "rationale" (!) is that Spanish do not consider Melilla and Ceuta to be colonies but the UK does consider Gibraltar to be a colony.
Therefore the two situations are totally different. QED!
I would have thought that since Spain does not actually question the British sovereignty , why does not Britain assimilate the Rock. So the MP for Isle of Wight will also represent Gibraltar.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
It would be very interesting to see what the result of a free and fair election would be. Part of me suspects it would still be a majority in favour of joining Russia.
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
But does Spain have an otherwise mainstream political party that occasionally toys with the idea of handing those enclaves over? That might be the difference.
Apparently the "rationale" (!) is that Spanish do not consider Melilla and Ceuta to be colonies but the UK does consider Gibraltar to be a colony.
Therefore the two situations are totally different. QED!
I would have thought that since Spain does not actually question the British sovereignty , why does not Britain assimilate the Rock. So the MP for Isle of Wight will also represent Gibraltar.
Just imagine the rows that would ensue over election expenses once trips to Iberia became a fixture of the campaigns...
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
But does Spain have an otherwise mainstream political party that occasionally toys with the idea of handing those enclaves over? That might be the difference.
Apparently the "rationale" (!) is that Spanish do not consider Melilla and Ceuta to be colonies but the UK does consider Gibraltar to be a colony.
Therefore the two situations are totally different. QED!
I would have thought that since Spain does not actually question the British sovereignty , why does not Britain assimilate the Rock. So the MP for Isle of Wight will also represent Gibraltar.
Just imagine the rows that would ensue over election expenses once trips to Iberia became a fixture of the campaigns...
An ex-officio office (in the Lords perhaps) may be easier.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
Noticeably, you are not denying that they were the forgotten people! Theresa May did not forget to mention the land border in Ireland but totally forgot the one between Spain and our free loading colony.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
If she'd used all her diplomatic capital on getting accepted as an EFTA member there wouldn't need to be a deal on the future relationship and it wouldn't be an issue.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
Noticeably, you are not denying that they were the forgotten people! Theresa May did not forget to mention the land border in Ireland but totally forgot the one between Spain and our free loading colony.
We've gone over this before, she probably thought they wouldn't mention it in their opening letter! As for the Irish border, I think we can all agree that is far more sensitive.
I would think that the Isle of Man is fairly safe and I doubt there is much dispute with France about the Channel Islands, but I find it odd that Spain criticises the UK for exactly the same behaviour is does twice over in Africa. I find it even odder than no one points out the obvious to the Spanish.
But does Spain have an otherwise mainstream political party that occasionally toys with the idea of handing those enclaves over? That might be the difference.
Apparently the "rationale" (!) is that Spanish do not consider Melilla and Ceuta to be colonies but the UK does consider Gibraltar to be a colony.
Therefore the two situations are totally different. QED!
I would have thought that since Spain does not actually question the British sovereignty , why does not Britain assimilate the Rock. So the MP for Isle of Wight will also represent Gibraltar.
Just imagine the rows that would ensue over election expenses once trips to Iberia became a fixture of the campaigns...
The French manage it with horrible constituencies like Tahiti....
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
If she'd used all her diplomatic capital on getting accepted as an EFTA member there wouldn't need to be a deal on the future relationship and it wouldn't be an issue.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
It would be very interesting to see what the result of a free and fair election would be. Part of me suspects it would still be a majority in favour of joining Russia.
They might well have before Russia's actions. However the vote has to be "free and fair"; as an example, if there have been major forced and/or unforced population movements beforehand then votes should be null and void.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
TBH, it's hard to argue that the Crimea should not be part of Russia. It was, until 1957, and most inhabitants favour Russia.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
After the triggering of Article 50 "our Brexiters" looks even more petulant than it would have done this time last week. It was our (your) Prime Minister who signed and sent that letter: you are now a Brexiter. If you don't like it the only ways of ceasing to be one are 1. build a time machine and teleport back to a year ago with some fellow remainers, and this time try not to miss the most wide open goal in the history of democracy, or 2. emigrate.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
It would be very interesting to see what the result of a free and fair election would be. Part of me suspects it would still be a majority in favour of joining Russia.
They might well have before Russia's actions. However the vote has to be "free and fair"; as an example, if there have been major forced and/or unforced population movements beforehand then votes should be null and void.
Agreed, you can influence the vote before the vote itself. Don't think we'll see it happen in our lifetimes though!
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
If she'd used all her diplomatic capital on getting accepted as an EFTA member there wouldn't need to be a deal on the future relationship and it wouldn't be an issue.
She wouldn't do that because of free movement.
She chose to make that a priority. If she'd taken everything into account she might have calculated that it was worth taking a 5-10% hit in the polls and getting on with it.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
Apart from the Tatars, everyone would vote to be part of Russia because........they are Russians ! Crimea was given to Ukraine only in 1954 by Khruschev only to artificially increase the Russian population there.
Would you support the people of the Donbass region to join Russia ? You probably would not give even the Scots the same right of self determination.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
If she'd used all her diplomatic capital on getting accepted as an EFTA member there wouldn't need to be a deal on the future relationship and it wouldn't be an issue.
She wouldn't do that because of free movement.
She chose to make that a priority. If she'd taken everything into account she might have calculated that it was worth taking a 5-10% hit in the polls and getting on with it.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
After the triggering of Article 50 "our Brexiters" looks even more petulant than it would have done this time last week. It was our (your) Prime Minister who signed and sent that letter: you are now a Brexiter. If you don't like it the only ways of ceasing to be one are 1. build a time machine and teleport back to a year ago with some fellow remainers, and this time try not to miss the most wide open goal in the history of democracy, or 2. emigrate.
I will not be a Brexiter in a hundred years because I will never be a racist.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
After the triggering of Article 50 "our Brexiters" looks even more petulant than it would have done this time last week. It was our (your) Prime Minister who signed and sent that letter: you are now a Brexiter. If you don't like it the only ways of ceasing to be one are 1. build a time machine and teleport back to a year ago with some fellow remainers, and this time try not to miss the most wide open goal in the history of democracy, or 2. emigrate.
I will not be a Brexiter in a hundred years because I will never be a racist.
Well as we simply let the Gibraltarians decide what they want, then naturally they will remain in the EU.
I doubt that will be an option, unfortunately for them!
The irony is that after Britain leaves the EU, Spain could legally close the border. What was that expression ? Taking "control" of one's borders. Then the bloody alcohol and cigarette smugglers will have to use boats etc.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
After the triggering of Article 50 "our Brexiters" looks even more petulant than it would have done this time last week. It was our (your) Prime Minister who signed and sent that letter: you are now a Brexiter. If you don't like it the only ways of ceasing to be one are 1. build a time machine and teleport back to a year ago with some fellow remainers, and this time try not to miss the most wide open goal in the history of democracy, or 2. emigrate.
I will not be a Brexiter in a hundred years because I will never be a racist.
You'll be like a Jacobite in 1780. You'll be toasting Jean Claude Juncker as The King over the Water.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
After the triggering of Article 50 "our Brexiters" looks even more petulant than it would have done this time last week. It was our (your) Prime Minister who signed and sent that letter: you are now a Brexiter. If you don't like it the only ways of ceasing to be one are 1. build a time machine and teleport back to a year ago with some fellow remainers, and this time try not to miss the most wide open goal in the history of democracy, or 2. emigrate.
I will not be a Brexiter in a hundred years because I will never be a racist.
How can you bear to continue to live in a country where 51. odd of the voting population are morally deformed racist scum? Go on, emigrate.
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
Noticeably, you are not denying that they were the forgotten people! Theresa May did not forget to mention the land border in Ireland but totally forgot the one between Spain and our free loading colony.
We've gone over this before, she probably thought they wouldn't mention it in their opening letter! As for the Irish border, I think we can all agree that is far more sensitive.
More sensitive ? Therefore, you do agree the Gibraltarians are less important.
"she probably thought they wouldn't mention it in their opening letter!" - so they were smarter !
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
You really think Spain would have kept quiet had she mentioned it? It was clearly going to be an issue in the negotiations.
Noticeably, you are not denying that they were the forgotten people! Theresa May did not forget to mention the land border in Ireland but totally forgot the one between Spain and our free loading colony.
We've gone over this before, she probably thought they wouldn't mention it in their opening letter! As for the Irish border, I think we can all agree that is far more sensitive.
More sensitive ? Therefore, you do agree the Gibraltarians are less important.
"she probably thought they wouldn't mention it in their opening letter!" - so they were smarter !
Yes, I do agree on that point. Not everything is of the same importance. That doesn't mean it isn't important.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Who do you think is responsible for making the Irish border and the Gibraltar-Spain border into two external EU borders? Britain or EU27? By filing Article 50, May is only doing what the British Sun readership population wants. Britain has no right to insist that the same rules apply to both borders.
The situation would be Gibraltar outside the EU, Spain inside it. If the population of Britain wanted to keep a lovely open border between Spain and Gibraltar, they should have voted Remain. The population of Gibraltar understood this very well, and they did vote Remain. It's the Leavers who didn't give much of a toss about the population of Gibraltar. Did they think the benefits of Leave came without costs?
Indeed EU26 would have no right to demand that Spain didn't shut the Gibraltar-Spain border. If Brexit were to go ahead and the border with Spain to remain open, one could easily imagine Gibraltar becoming a landing place of choice for boat people. There's a lot of barbed wire along the external EU borders around Ceuta and Melilla.
Find a quote from me, at the time, when I talked about "Muslim conspiracy" "after the initial detentions". Go on, find it.
Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Apart from using the words Muslim conspiracy you wrote everything about it. Even during the Norwegian massacre you were hoping that it was done by Islamist terrorists before news came out about the extreme right madman.
So the Remoaners want Spain to seize Gibraltar, to punish the Leavers for voting for Brexit.
Well it's view I suppose.
It's more accurate to state that the Leavers have interpreted a clause saying "the EU-UK agreement has nothing to do with Gibraltar" as "the EU-UK agreement has everything to do with Gibraltar" and used it as an excuse for yet another gob on, part 997 and counting
When people of one political persuasion criticise their enemies for doing something which would be worse if they did the exact opposite (eg Democratic criticism of the Trump travel ban as being poorly drafted - they wanted it to be better drafted?), something has gone wrong. If the EU had said "the EU-UK agreement covers Gibraltar" it would lay the whole thing open to Spanish interference and foot-dragging.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
Apart from the Tatars, everyone would vote to be part of Russia because........they are Russians ! Crimea was given to Ukraine only in 1954 by Khruschev only to artificially increase the Russian population there.
Would you support the people of the Donbass region to join Russia ? You probably would not give even the Scots the same right of self determination.
You evidently have not read any of my posts on Scotland, as your assumption is the opposite of what I've said.
As for the Donbass: if a vote had been freely and fairly held, then yes, I would have supported it. However Russia chose a different route, and a free and fair vote is now an impossibility.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
Apart from the Tatars, everyone would vote to be part of Russia because........they are Russians ! Crimea was given to Ukraine only in 1954 by Khruschev only to artificially increase the Russian population there.
Would you support the people of the Donbass region to join Russia ? You probably would not give even the Scots the same right of self determination.
You evidently have not read any of my posts on Scotland, as your assumption is the opposite of what I've said.
As for the Donbass: if a vote had been freely and fairly held, then yes, I would have supported it. However Russia chose a different route, and a free and fair vote is now an impossibility.
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Who do you think is responsible for making the Irish border and the Gibraltar-Spain border into two external EU borders? Britain or EU27? By filing Article 50, May is only doing what the British Sun readership population wants. Britain has no right to insist that the same rules apply to both borders.
Indeed EU26 would have no right to demand that Spain didn't shut the Gibraltar-Spain border. If Brexit goes ahead, one could easily imagine Gibraltar becoming a landing place of choice for boat people if the border with Spain remains open. There's a lot of barbed wire along the external EU borders around Ceuta and Melilla.
If it isn't a landing place now, why would it become one after, especially if tighter border controls come after we leave?
Let's face it. We are talking about this rock because our Brexiters simply forgot they even existed.
After the triggering of Article 50 "our Brexiters" looks even more petulant than it would have done this time last week. It was our (your) Prime Minister who signed and sent that letter: you are now a Brexiter. If you don't like it the only ways of ceasing to be one are 1. build a time machine and teleport back to a year ago with some fellow remainers, and this time try not to miss the most wide open goal in the history of democracy, or 2. emigrate.
I will not be a Brexiter in a hundred years because I will never be a racist.
How can you bear to continue to live in a country where 51. odd of the voting population are morally deformed racist scum? Go on, emigrate.
Hungary's nice...
Yeah, but it's only 25% of the actual population and 38% of the electorate, so fuck 'em.
All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
I agree, but we do tend to espouse that selectively - Falklands and Gibraltar yes, Crimea no. And what about border areas that might like to switch, e.g. Nationalist counties in Northern Ireland?
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
The views of the current population, freely and fairly given. One thing you cannot say about the Crimea vote ...
Apart from the Tatars, everyone would vote to be part of Russia because........they are Russians ! Crimea was given to Ukraine only in 1954 by Khruschev only to artificially increase the Russian population there.
Would you support the people of the Donbass region to join Russia ? You probably would not give even the Scots the same right of self determination.
You evidently have not read any of my posts on Scotland, as your assumption is the opposite of what I've said.
As for the Donbass: if a vote had been freely and fairly held, then yes, I would have supported it. However Russia chose a different route, and a free and fair vote is now an impossibility.
Excuses, excuses !
Nope. Unless you're in favour of elections/votes that are not free and fair?
Mind you, that's the only way Labour're likely to get back into power for the next few years ...
Somebody has to do it since May was found sleeping. She completely forgot Gibraltar.
She probably thought the EU wouldn't stoop so low as to play games with the citizens of Gibraltar.
Who do you think is responsible for making the Irish border and the Gibraltar-Spain border into two external EU borders? Britain or EU27? By filing Article 50, May is only doing what the British Sun readership population wants. Britain has no right to insist that the same rules apply to both borders.
Indeed EU26 would have no right to demand that Spain didn't shut the Gibraltar-Spain border. If Brexit goes ahead, one could easily imagine Gibraltar becoming a landing place of choice for boat people if the border with Spain remains open. There's a lot of barbed wire along the external EU borders around Ceuta and Melilla.
If it isn't a landing place now, why would it become one after, especially if tighter border controls come after we leave?
I meant if there were no controls or only light controls.
Find a quote from me, at the time, when I talked about "Muslim conspiracy" "after the initial detentions". Go on, find it.
Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Apart from using the words Muslim conspiracy you wrote everything about it. Even during the Norwegian massacre you were hoping that it was done by Islamist terrorists before news came out about the extreme right madman.
...about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both...
[pedant mode on]
I think it's Spanish exclaves - parts of Spain outside Spain. They're enclaves in Morroco, but Spanish exclaves.
I'm not sure about this bit, so please feel free to correct if wrong
Find a quote from me, at the time, when I talked about "Muslim conspiracy" "after the initial detentions". Go on, find it.
Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Apart from using the words Muslim conspiracy you wrote everything about it. Even during the Norwegian massacre you were hoping that it was done by Islamist terrorists before news came out about the extreme right madman.
You must be so disappointed that the Westminster terrorist wasn't a Brexiteer!
...about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both...
[pedant mode on]
I think it's Spanish exclaves - parts of Spain outside Spain. They're enclaves in Morroco, but Spanish exclaves.
I'm not sure about this bit, so please feel free to correct if wrong
[pedant mode off]
So they are both enclaves and exclaves, and they are Spanish...
If memory serves, the UK founded EFTA, and did so to compete with the then-EC. Are you getting it mixed up with EEA
Entirely possible. Am I wrong in thinking that you still have to sign up to the four freedoms, and supremacy of the ECJ?
I don't think you necessarily have to but what I meant was join EFTA so as to be able to stay in the EEA and therefore you would remain signed up to the four freedoms (and have much less to negotiate).
...about the two Spanish enclaves on the North African coast? Morroco would like Ceuta and Melilla back but for some reason the Spanish insist that they own both...
[pedant mode on]
I think it's Spanish exclaves - parts of Spain outside Spain. They're enclaves in Morroco, but Spanish exclaves.
I'm not sure about this bit, so please feel free to correct if wrong
[pedant mode off]
So they are both enclaves and exclaves, and they are Spanish...
If memory serves, the UK founded EFTA, and did so to compete with the then-EC. Are you getting it mixed up with EEA
Entirely possible. Am I wrong in thinking that you still have to sign up to the four freedoms, and supremacy of the ECJ?
I don't think you necessarily have to but what I meant was join EFTA so as to be able to stay in the EEA and therefore you would remain signed up to the four freedoms (and have much less to negotiate).
I think accepting the four freedoms would have been political suicide for May, and like it or not a significant part of the campaign was down to immigration.
Find a quote from me, at the time, when I talked about "Muslim conspiracy" "after the initial detentions". Go on, find it.
Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Apart from using the words Muslim conspiracy you wrote everything about it. Even during the Norwegian massacre you were hoping that it was done by Islamist terrorists before news came out about the extreme right madman.
You must be so disappointed that the Westminster terrorist wasn't a Brexiteer!
Comments
As for the US... no, we signed a treaty recognising them.
Pot... Kettle?
Evening everyone BTW.
Lasso has pledged to give Assange thirty days' notice!
Polls and BF slight favour Moreno who has been the VP under Correa.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/01/all-12-people-arrested-over-westminster-attack-released-without-charge
It seems you like forcing people into situations they don't like. You want to force people to stay in the EU. You want to force the Gibraltese to give up the benefits of their links with the UK.
Why not give them the choice.
The Spanish option which is give up on the UK and stay in the EU or the British option which is stay with the UK but give up on the EU.
I would very happily bet on which way that particular vote would go.
My point is simply that the EU is very properly not getting in the way of an EU member's dispute with what will be a non-EU member.
I have no particular interest in Gibraltar. I merely note that there is the fact of a dispute and the EU is deferring to the sole member state that post-Brexit will have a stake in that dispute.
Which of course is why such arguments are dumb. All that matters in these cases is the wishes of the current population. Let them decide. Of course Spain won't like that one little bit.
Therefore the two situations are totally different. QED!
Why can't they be independent ? After all, they exist for low tax and smuggling.
There are good reasons for holding onto Gibraltar, but this isn't one of the best.
But the fact that we're a bit inconsistent doesn't make it wrong. Of course we can't hand over Gibraltar against their wishes.
So the Remoaners want Spain to seize Gibraltar, to punish the Leavers for voting for Brexit.
Well it's view I suppose.
Would you support the people of the Donbass region to join Russia ? You probably would not give even the Scots the same right of self determination.
People like him used to call people who wanted to leave "headbangers"
Who are the headbangers now? lol
Hungary's nice...
"she probably thought they wouldn't mention it in their opening letter!" - so they were smarter !
The situation would be Gibraltar outside the EU, Spain inside it. If the population of Britain wanted to keep a lovely open border between Spain and Gibraltar, they should have voted Remain. The population of Gibraltar understood this very well, and they did vote Remain. It's the Leavers who didn't give much of a toss about the population of Gibraltar. Did they think the benefits of Leave came without costs?
Indeed EU26 would have no right to demand that Spain didn't shut the Gibraltar-Spain border. If Brexit were to go ahead and the border with Spain to remain open, one could easily imagine Gibraltar becoming a landing place of choice for boat people. There's a lot of barbed wire along the external EU borders around Ceuta and Melilla.
When people of one political persuasion criticise their enemies for doing something which would be worse if they did the exact opposite (eg Democratic criticism of the Trump travel ban as being poorly drafted - they wanted it to be better drafted?), something has gone wrong. If the EU had said "the EU-UK agreement covers Gibraltar" it would lay the whole thing open to Spanish interference and foot-dragging.
As for the Donbass: if a vote had been freely and fairly held, then yes, I would have supported it. However Russia chose a different route, and a free and fair vote is now an impossibility.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/world/europe/brexit-scotland-independence-vote.html
Mind you, that's the only way Labour're likely to get back into power for the next few years ...
So what point is being made here?
And absence of evidence is by no means evidence of absence.
I think it's Spanish exclaves - parts of Spain outside Spain. They're enclaves in Morroco, but Spanish exclaves.
I'm not sure about this bit, so please feel free to correct if wrong
[pedant mode off]
Shouldn't credible evidence move the threat level to critical?