The reporting of what sounds like an absolutely horrific attack in Croydon reminds me of when that Glasgow shopkeeper, Asad Shah, was murdered in a religiously motivated attack.
Meanwhile, closer to home.... "Civil servants acknowledged the atomic bomb plan could convert the tunnel into a mortar firing nuclear explosives into Kent and Calais, but reasoned it would be "100 per cent effective" at destroying our only physical link with France."
"The first reference found in the secret files to destruction using a nuclear bomb comes in November 1959 ..."
I may have to change my description of Brexit to 1959 Mk.II rather than 1957 Mk.II
Asked whether the building of the current Channel Tunnel involved plans for disabling it in the event of an invasion, a Eurotunnel spokesman said: “There has always been a military aspect to it, but I cannot give any further insight into what plans may or may not exist.”
Interesting...
Presumably a goods wagon full of HE would be sufficient.
Not sure. The tunnel is built well below the sea floor - about 150ft as I remember - so it would not necessarily be a simple job to collapse it. I assume that some security arrangements were put in place for this along the lines used on Swiss tunnels and mountain passes. Not that I advocating it of course. I am rather fond of the Channel Tunnel.
If you got a block of HE about the size of a crate, shaped it into a thick cone (open end upwards) and lined the inside of the cone with copper 1cm thick then you'd have just built yourself a gigantic armour penetrator. Think RPG x1,000. That would penetrate all the way up to the sea and flood the tunnel.
Off-topic, but I have just been listening to a talk by Michael Crick - bizarrely off the coast of Vietnam. It was mostly about interviewing politicians and included infamous snippets of the like of Godfrey Bloom, Paul Nuttal. and Lord Feldman. But he also told an anecdote about Boris of which I was not aware. Boris was canvassing in Islington during a London mayoral elections. He knocked on a door, which was opened by an attractive young lady. "Oh, Boris" she said " You are the father of one of my children." "Oh, cripes" said Boris. After some confusion the lady said " Yes, I teach him at the local primary school."
I'd love to hear how Brexit will solve any of this nonsense though
I am going to hand myself in for compulsory re education. I can no longer remember what the inherent contradictions of capitalism are, nor identify the bits of that utterly dreadful Enoch Powell speech which are actually, you know, wrong.
The reporting of what sounds like an absolutely horrific attack in Croydon reminds me of when that Glasgow shopkeeper, Asad Shah, was murdered in a religiously motivated attack.
Meanwhile, closer to home.... "Civil servants acknowledged the atomic bomb plan could convert the tunnel into a mortar firing nuclear explosives into Kent and Calais, but reasoned it would be "100 per cent effective" at destroying our only physical link with France."
"The first reference found in the secret files to destruction using a nuclear bomb comes in November 1959 ..."
I may have to change my description of Brexit to 1959 Mk.II rather than 1957 Mk.II
Asked whether the building of the current Channel Tunnel involved plans for disabling it in the event of an invasion, a Eurotunnel spokesman said: “There has always been a military aspect to it, but I cannot give any further insight into what plans may or may not exist.”
Interesting...
Presumably a goods wagon full of HE would be sufficient.
Not sure. The tunnel is built well below the sea floor - about 150ft as I remember - so it would not necessarily be a simple job to collapse it. I assume that some security arrangements were put in place for this along the lines used on Swiss tunnels and mountain passes. Not that I advocating it of course. I am rather fond of the Channel Tunnel.
If you got a block of HE about the size of a crate, shaped it into a thick cone (open end upwards) and lined the inside of the cone with copper 1cm thick then you'd have just built yourself a gigantic armour penetrator. Think RPG x1,000. That would penetrate all the way up to the sea and flood the tunnel.
Interesting comment from Tim Farron in the Indy I see. Not so much his broad point - as he sees it, we don't need a new centre party as we have one, the LDs, but of course he thinks that - but that in addition to making the sorts of noises of 'moderate mps on both sides tell me they have more in common with me than their leaders' (which even if true is irrelevant if they don't have the balls to follow through on that, like most of the 'wish we were UKIP' Tory crowd), but interesting in that he actually lists several by name he thinks (probably correctly) have more in common with him than their leaders, which is almost going as far as openly inviting them to.
Should the TV and radio talking heads have said nothing at all about the actually important angle of the case?
What - that a bunch of women and girls have had their lives ripped apart?
That women and underage girls across the country are having their lives ripped apart in organised and systemic attacks perpetrated by a constituent element of our society that refuses point blank to assimilate and occasionally feels the need to kill us.
Meanwhile, closer to home.... "Civil servants acknowledged the atomic bomb plan could convert the tunnel into a mortar firing nuclear explosives into Kent and Calais, but reasoned it would be "100 per cent effective" at destroying our only physical link with France."
"The first reference found in the secret files to destruction using a nuclear bomb comes in November 1959 ..."
I may have to change my description of Brexit to 1959 Mk.II rather than 1957 Mk.II
Asked whether the building of the current Channel Tunnel involved plans for disabling it in the event of an invasion, a Eurotunnel spokesman said: “There has always been a military aspect to it, but I cannot give any further insight into what plans may or may not exist.”
Interesting...
Presumably a goods wagon full of HE would be sufficient.
Not sure. The tunnel is built well below the sea floor - about 150ft as I remember - so it would not necessarily be a simple job to collapse it. I assume that some security arrangements were put in place for this along the lines used on Swiss tunnels and mountain passes. Not that I advocating it of course. I am rather fond of the Channel Tunnel.
Yes, the chunnel itself is well over-engineered, as one might expect, including massive vents between the three physical tunnels. Probably three simultaneous explosions required to do enough damage to collapse the tunnels, even if not enough to flood them out completely. Not that I'm advocating that of course, there's undoubtedly some bad people that have studied this already!
Meanwhile, closer to home.... "Civil servants acknowledged the atomic bomb plan could convert the tunnel into a mortar firing nuclear explosives into Kent and Calais, but reasoned it would be "100 per cent effective" at destroying our only physical link with France."
"The first reference found in the secret files to destruction using a nuclear bomb comes in November 1959 ..."
I may have to change my description of Brexit to 1959 Mk.II rather than 1957 Mk.II
Asked whether the building of the current Channel Tunnel involved plans for disabling it in the event of an invasion, a Eurotunnel spokesman said: “There has always been a military aspect to it, but I cannot give any further insight into what plans may or may not exist.”
Interesting...
Presumably a goods wagon full of HE would be sufficient.
Not sure. The tunnel is built well below the sea floor - about 150ft as I remember - so it would not necessarily be a simple job to collapse it. I assume that some security arrangements were put in place for this along the lines used on Swiss tunnels and mountain passes. Not that I advocating it of course. I am rather fond of the Channel Tunnel.
If you got a block of HE about the size of a crate, shaped it into a thick cone (open end upwards) and lined the inside of the cone with copper 1cm thick then you'd have just built yourself a gigantic armour penetrator. Think RPG x1,000. That would penetrate all the way up to the sea and flood the tunnel.
Cool. I used to be a shot firer in a quarry and mines back in the late 80s. We could indeed shift large sections of rock but it just seemed to me that 150ft was pushing it to penetrate right the way through.
Russian interference in France, Russian interference in the US. Makes you ask questions about the Brexit vote. Looking back, I can't think of any instance where it might have happened but then pre-Hillarygate, were we watching for it? It would certainly have been a vote Russia would have had an interest in targeting.
I expect it was zero in Vote Leave: Cummings had the whole shop sewn up very tight with Boris, Gove, and Elliot.
I could easily imagine a bit of flirting going on with Banks at Leave.EU, and possibly with the more naïve elements of GO.
More broadly, I am not sure how good the Russians are at penetrating the UK political scene. MI5 and GCHQ are pretty good at sussing them out.
Melenchon is worth keeping onside at 48/50 btw, he has been rising and could benefit if Hamon drops further.
Macron +++ Melenchon + Le Pen - Fillon ---
Is my assessment of the situation.
Melenchon is potentially a threat to Macron. It seems plausible that, so far, the absence of a challenger from the left with any prospects has prompted some on the left to declare for Macron in the first round on a pragmatic basis, to ensure that there is at least one non-right wing candidate in the second round.
That means though that there is some potential for things to unwind for Macron if a challenger from the left does emerge. It's quite plausible now to see Melenchon's surge continuing as people give up on Hamon. So support on the left consolidates around Melenchon, so that Hamon declines into single figures allowing Melenchon to consistently poll in the high teens. At that point, there is the prospect of Melenchon adding a couple of % more from Macron to get him into the bottom 20s, at Macron's expense. At that point we have effectively a three way contest for who is to join Le Pen in the second round - Macron, Fillon or Melenchon.
Meanwhile the Russian poll is bunkum and could quite easily help Macron by identifying Fillon as the Kremlin's candidate.
That is a very plausible scenario. The higher Melenchon rises in the polls, the more likely others will switch to him, because up until now, a lot will have seen a vote for Melenchon as a wasted vote.
And given that Melenchon's surge came on the back of the last tv debate and we are on the eve of another tv debate, Melenchon is certainly one to keep very much onside. If he can go level with or even overtake Fillon in just one (non Russian) poll, then the resultant media publicity will see his odds crash.
The poll putting Melenchon on 19.5% might be an outlier but it's certainly an amber warning light. My guess is that it is an outlier, simply because there's no obvious reason why his rating should jump five points right now. The trend upwards off the back of the debate: yes. A sudden surge? No.
However, he's now a serious runner and the 40/1 widely available (never mind the 80/1 with sportingbet quoted on oddschecker), is good value. i still don't like the 7/2 for Le Pen but for the first time you can see a realistic route for her opening up to the Elysee. I'd make her more like 8/1.
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
Well, yes. They must be very pleased. The reference is in their for no reason other than to piss us off at the behest of Spain, and it succeeded.
And also to make clear that Gibraltar is an issue for after we've left the EU - so no Spanish silly buggers beforehand.....and then, it's a purely bilateral matter between the UK and Spain - another statement of the bleedin obvious.....
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
However, he's now a serious runner and the 40/1 widely available (never mind the 80/1 with sportingbet quoted on oddschecker), is good value. i still don't like the 7/2 for Le Pen but for the first time you can see a realistic route for her opening up to the Elysee. I'd make her more like 8/1.
SportingBet allowed me £18.75 @ 80s, which is more than fair.
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Russian interference in France, Russian interference in the US. Makes you ask questions about the Brexit vote. Looking back, I can't think of any instance where it might have happened but then pre-Hillarygate, were we watching for it? It would certainly have been a vote Russia would have had an interest in targeting.
I expect it was zero in Vote Leave: Cummings had the whole shop sewn up very tight with Boris, Gove, and Elliot.
I could easily imagine a bit of flirting going on with Banks at Leave.EU, and possibly with the more naïve elements of GO.
More broadly, I am not sure how good the Russians are at penetrating the UK political scene. MI5 and GCHQ are pretty good at sussing them out.
Zero direct interference, but a big role in creating the mood music that allowed it to happen. RT is very popular among a certain kind of Brexiteer.
Only if you think that someone is likely to try and acquire them now, for example Apple might have another shot.
The basic problem Imagination have is that their GPU architecture is no longer significantly better than the competition, so companies are either happy enough with Qualcomm and Mediatek, or if they want to customise Mali is the easier option. Apple was really Imagination's only major customer and already customising the GPUs they use, without Apple paying the bills it's hard to see Imagination being able to keep up with the competition.
The IP will be worth something though, as the GPU business is a patent minefield.
Russian interference in France, Russian interference in the US. Makes you ask questions about the Brexit vote. Looking back, I can't think of any instance where it might have happened but then pre-Hillarygate, were we watching for it? It would certainly have been a vote Russia would have had an interest in targeting.
I expect it was zero in Vote Leave: Cummings had the whole shop sewn up very tight with Boris, Gove, and Elliot.
I could easily imagine a bit of flirting going on with Banks at Leave.EU, and possibly with the more naïve elements of GO.
More broadly, I am not sure how good the Russians are at penetrating the UK political scene. MI5 and GCHQ are pretty good at sussing them out.
The current problems are around online disinformation, which I guess is why the French version of the BPC have gone in really hard on what's blantantly Russian misrepresentation of French polling.
Opens up good betting opportunities for the rest of us though
Melenchon is worth keeping onside at 48/50 btw, he has been rising and could benefit if Hamon drops further.
Macron +++ Melenchon + Le Pen - Fillon ---
Is my assessment of the situation.
Melenchon is potentially a threat to Macron. It seems plausible that, so far, the absence of a challenger from the left with any prospects has prompted some on the left to declare for Macron in the first round on a pragmatic basis, to ensure that there is at least one non-right wing candidate in the second round.
That means though that there is some potential for things to unwind for Macron if a challenger from the left does emerge. It's quite plausible now to see Melenchon's surge continuing as people give up on Hamon. So support on the left consolidates around Melenchon, so that Hamon declines into single figures allowing Melenchon to consistently poll in the high teens. At that point, there is the prospect of Melenchon adding a couple of % more from Macron to get him into the bottom 20s, at Macron's expense. At that point we have effectively a three way contest for who is to join Le Pen in the second round - Macron, Fillon or Melenchon.
Meanwhile the Russian poll is bunkum and could quite easily help Macron by identifying Fillon as the Kremlin's candidate.
That is a very plausible scenario. The higher Melenchon rises in the polls, the more likely others will switch to him, because up until now, a lot will have seen a vote for Melenchon as a wasted vote.
And given that Melenchon's surge came on the back of the last tv debate and we are on the eve of another tv debate, Melenchon is certainly one to keep very much onside. If he can go level with or even overtake Fillon in just one (non Russian) poll, then the resultant media publicity will see his odds crash.
The poll putting Melenchon on 19.5% might be an outlier but it's certainly an amber warning light. My guess is that it is an outlier, simply because there's no obvious reason why his rating should jump five points right now. The trend upwards off the back of the debate: yes. A sudden surge? No.
However, he's now a serious runner and the 40/1 widely available (never mind the 80/1 with sportingbet quoted on oddschecker), is good value. i still don't like the 7/2 for Le Pen but for the first time you can see a realistic route for her opening up to the Elysee. I'd make her more like 8/1.
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Sturgeon has made it clear that the SNP's policy on seeking EU membership hasn't changed. However an independent Scotland would be a democracy, not a one-party state.
As for the precise process of managing the transition, that's something that would be negotiated to achieve the most frictionless process possible, and with goodwill from the EU side, the options are numerous.
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Sturgeon has made it clear that the SNP's policy on seeking EU membership hasn't changed.
Should the TV and radio talking heads have said nothing at all about the actually important angle of the case?
What - that a bunch of women and girls have had their lives ripped apart?
That women and underage girls across the country are having their lives ripped apart in organised and systemic attacks perpetrated by a constituent element of our society that refuses point blank to assimilate and occasionally feels the need to kill us.
Most women are attacked by their husbands/partners
The majority of rapists know their victims too... "Only around 10% of rapes are committed by 'strangers'. Around 90% of rapes are committed by known men, and often by someone who the survivor has previously trusted or even loved."
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Sturgeon has made it clear that the SNP's policy on seeking EU membership hasn't changed.
The Spanish position hasn't changed since mid-March:
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
Meanwhile, closer to home.... "Civil servants acknowledged the atomic bomb plan could convert the tunnel into a mortar firing nuclear explosives into Kent and Calais, but reasoned it would be "100 per cent effective" at destroying our only physical link with France."
"The first reference found in the secret files to destruction using a nuclear bomb comes in November 1959 ..."
I may have to change my description of Brexit to 1959 Mk.II rather than 1957 Mk.II
Asked whether the building of the current Channel Tunnel involved plans for disabling it in the event of an invasion, a Eurotunnel spokesman said: “There has always been a military aspect to it, but I cannot give any further insight into what plans may or may not exist.”
Interesting...
Presumably a goods wagon full of HE would be sufficient.
Not sure. The tunnel is built well below the sea floor - about 150ft as I remember - so it would not necessarily be a simple job to collapse it. I assume that some security arrangements were put in place for this along the lines used on Swiss tunnels and mountain passes. Not that I advocating it of course. I am rather fond of the Channel Tunnel.
If you got a block of HE about the size of a crate, shaped it into a thick cone (open end upwards) and lined the inside of the cone with copper 1cm thick then you'd have just built yourself a gigantic armour penetrator. Think RPG x1,000. That would penetrate all the way up to the sea and flood the tunnel.
Cool. I used to be a shot firer in a quarry and mines back in the late 80s. We could indeed shift large sections of rock but it just seemed to me that 150ft was pushing it to penetrate right the way through.
It's not rock though. I remember a good documentary years back about the tunnelling process. The sea bed is soft (ish) clay/loam/sand. Very little structural integrity and porous/wet. (That's why it's a bastard to tunnel through - the cutting of the tuneel is dead easy, it's the keeping it watertight that's very very hard). A penetrator on the scale I mooted would sail right through like a knife through butter and would destroy the watertightconcrete liner.
The Spanish position hasn't changed since mid-March:
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
Only if you think that someone is likely to try and acquire them now, for example Apple might have another shot.
The basic problem Imagination have is that their GPU architecture is no longer significantly better than the competition, so companies are either happy enough with Qualcomm and Mediatek, or if they want to customise Mali is the easier option. Apple was really Imagination's only major customer and already customising the GPUs they use, without Apple paying the bills it's hard to see Imagination being able to keep up with the competition.
The IP will be worth something though, as the GPU business is a patent minefield.
Why did the Apple deal fall through last year out of interest?
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Sturgeon has made it clear that the SNP's policy on seeking EU membership hasn't changed.
The Spanish position hasn't changed since mid-March:
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
Should the TV and radio talking heads have said nothing at all about the actually important angle of the case?
What - that a bunch of women and girls have had their lives ripped apart?
That women and underage girls across the country are having their lives ripped apart in organised and systemic attacks perpetrated by a constituent element of our society that refuses point blank to assimilate and occasionally feels the need to kill us.
Most women are attacked by their husbands/partners
The majority of rapists know their victims too... "Only around 10% of rapes are committed by 'strangers'. Around 90% of rapes are committed by known men, and often by someone who the survivor has previously trusted or even loved."
There is not an epidemic of immigrants raping and killing UK women.
Dare I say that those statistics are very carefully presented such as to downplay cases of 'grooming' of the sort that occurred in Rotherham, Bradford and other cities, where there was a definite racial and religious element to the abuse and where the perpetrators were often British-born and known to their victims?
There's now overwhelming evidence of large numbers sexual offences that are being played down by authorities and media for social reasons across Britain and Europe, which is doing little but fostering distrust of those authorities and media.
The Spanish position hasn't changed since mid-March:
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
They're black. We await Diane Abbott's pronunciamento.
You may also note the weekend news that 7 men have been arrested in Oxford on counts of rape and sexual assault on girls as young as 12 over a period of years. No mention of their race however. I wonder why.
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Sturgeon has made it clear that the SNP's policy on seeking EU membership hasn't changed.
That's one link each requested, but only one provided.
Thanks.
Couple of non-sequiteurs:
Independent Scotland would use the £
An independent Scotland would be part of the EU
Scotland can't apply to join the EU using a currency it doesn't control and without a Central Bank.
ECB to Bank of England: 'Are you Scotland's Lender of Last Resort?' Bank of England to ECB: 'No'.
It's all a theory question for Scotland though. Nicola has to win the referendum first, and I'd have "Remain" as slight favourite in that at the moment. If she wins then I'm sure there'll be plenty of Brussels fudge, particularly with Spain if London annoys Madrid with Gibraltar - which is an error it seems to be making.
But is it the public comment about not vetoing Scotland, or the EU clause about Gibraltar that's the real cause of the panic?
No - as was explained to you yesterday - that's no change. Sindy will have to apply to join as a new member once its independent....
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
You seem to have invented a new mythical veto in the space of two paragraphs. Please cite a source which shows the Spanish government expressing a view against a fast accession.
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
You mention 'fast accession' - the SNP's argument in Sindyref1 was that it wouldn't have to leave the EU - but perhaps you could clarify what the SNP's current EU plans are?
Sturgeon has made it clear that the SNP's policy on seeking EU membership hasn't changed.
That's one link each requested, but only one provided.
Thanks.
Couple of non-sequiteurs:
Independent Scotland would use the £
An independent Scotland would be part of the EU
Scotland can't apply to join the EU using a currency it doesn't control and without a Central Bank.
ECB to Bank of England: 'Are you Scotland's Lender of Last Resort?' Bank of England to ECB: 'No'.
It could apply but it'd have trouble being accepted.
That said, a newly independent country applying would be sui generis in terms of EU accessions and there's no guarantee that past policies would continue: each accession requires its own treaty which could make more wide-ranging changes to EU practices than just tinkering for the sake of the new member's representation and the like.
In practice, an independent Scotland without its own currency would probably be obliged to join the Euro within a short period - two years, say - with transition mechanisms well in place before membership began.
If it is Melenchon vs Le Pen, I'll probably cut out for a moderate loss in all honesty. I am
1690 @ 1.97 Melenchon in that scenario.
I am the same. It would be very close.
Melenchon-Macron is the dream. Le Pen-Fillon the nightmare
There is next to zero chance of Melenchon v Macron, almost as little chance of Fillon v Macron a small chance of Fillon v Le Pen or Melenchon v Le Pen but a very high chance of Macron v Le Pen
The Spanish position hasn't changed since mid-March:
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
No talk of a 'veto' there - just newspaper 'back of queue' spin....
Then there a clear change - from 'negotiations would take place', to 'we would not veto'.
Where's the mention of 'veto' in mid-March?
Precisely. The change is that now a veto has been ruled out publicly. The spectre has been removed.
The spectre only applied to the SNP's 'magic door' (which didn't exist, like, for example, their legal advice) that would allow them to slip frictionlessly from membership of the UK to membership of the EU......now that's dead and buried they can address themselves to difficult questions like currency, deficit and so on.
In theory Scottish accession to the EU should be straightforward - in practice there are difficulties the SNP would prefer to ignore....
"A dad-of-five has been branded a racist and banned from attending football matches for three years after calling a Scottish steward a "teuchter"."
Teuchter? I'm not familiar with that one, I must say.
Charges presumably brought by some Keystone Kops, with the approval of the CPS (?)
Does that mean "sassenach" is now banned as a racist epithet? What about "bampot"? Can we get the feminists for "mansplainer" as a gendered pejorative?
Or perhaps a policemen and a couple of magistrates, or a law, need to be retired, and some growing up is required.
If it is Melenchon vs Le Pen, I'll probably cut out for a moderate loss in all honesty. I am
1690 @ 1.97 Melenchon in that scenario.
I am the same. It would be very close.
Melenchon-Macron is the dream. Le Pen-Fillon the nightmare
There is next to zero chance of Melenchon v Macron, almost as little chance of Fillon v Macron a small chance of Fillon v Le Pen or Melenchon v Le Pen but a very high chance of Macron v Le Pen
Macron-Le Pen is what I'm realistically looking at, and hoping for in r2.
Why did the Apple deal fall through last year out of interest?
I don't know, but one obvious problem for Apple is that if they buy Imagination it presumably would come with a whole bunch of obligations to license technology to other companies, which is not the sort of thing Apple is likely to want.
The Spanish position hasn't changed since mid-March:
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
No talk of a 'veto' there - just newspaper 'back of queue' spin....
Then there a clear change - from 'negotiations would take place', to 'we would not veto'.
The Spanish position has not changed. They have always said they would not block an independent Scotland's application to join the EU. What Spain has always opposed - and still does - is automatic or fast-tracked entry. That said, what was interesting about the original interview in Spanish was the minister's comments about Scotland and Catalonia being very different - this is not something that gets said by Madrid very often and may imply some wriggle room should Yes win a referendum. That said, EEA membership is surely Scotland's best option anyway.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
A little context on the 'miracle of the Spanish veto':
Spanish prime minister Mariano Rajoy had been quick to warn he would oppose any attempts to hold talks with Scotland over its EU membership in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote as Nicola Sturgeon sought to forge a separate Scottish deal.
Mr Rajoy said that “if the UK goes, Scotland goes too”.
Why did the Apple deal fall through last year out of interest?
I don't know, but one obvious problem for Apple is that if they buy Imagination it presumably would come with a whole bunch of obligations to license technology to other companies, which is not the sort of thing Apple is likely to want.
Given what their share price just did on Apple's announcement this morning, if Apple were to even try and bid for IMG at anything lower than yesterday's price they'll be pulled up in a big way by the US and UK competition authorities. About as clear-cut an offence of stock price manipulation as you'll see.
If it is Melenchon vs Le Pen, I'll probably cut out for a moderate loss in all honesty. I am
1690 @ 1.97 Melenchon in that scenario.
I am the same. It would be very close.
Melenchon-Macron is the dream. Le Pen-Fillon the nightmare
There is next to zero chance of Melenchon v Macron, almost as little chance of Fillon v Macron a small chance of Fillon v Le Pen or Melenchon v Le Pen but a very high chance of Macron v Le Pen
Macron-Le Pen is what I'm realistically looking at, and hoping for in r2.
Indeed, Macron should win but Le Pen now has a roughly 40% runoff base to work from
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
The Scots, English, Welsh and Northern Irish have agreed, to date, to subordinate many issues to the wider British interest and decision making. By being a part of the UK the Scots are agreed to be bound by UK wide, not just Scotland wide decisions.
It may well be that they feel the need to reassess that relationship in the light of this particular UK wide decision. But that is not the same as ignoring their will to remain in the EU - if they had wanted only their will to resolve that issue, they would have left the UK already, and could choose to exit the UK so that sort of thing does not happen again. We're respecting their will to be a part of the UK, and the UK as a whole decided about the EU, we shall now see if they regret the former as a result of the latter.
It's not a directly comparable situation, nor helpful or that funny to pretend the two are the same. There are enough problems with idiot leavers and remainers with no sense of humour or perspective as it is.
"A dad-of-five has been branded a racist and banned from attending football matches for three years after calling a Scottish steward a "teuchter"."
Teuchter? I'm not familiar with that one, I must say.
Charges presumably brought by some Keystone Kops, with the approval of the CPS (?)
Does that mean "sassenach" is now banned as a racist epithet? What about "bampot"? Can we get the feminists for "mansplainer" as a gendered pejorative?
Or perhaps a policemen and a couple of magistrates, or a law, need to be retired, and some growing up is required.
In light of Outlander I imagine sassenach, depending on circumstances, would be regarded as flirtatious teasing.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Gibraltar isn't part of the UK.......
It is a UK territory with its defence and foreign policy run from Westminster but full control of tax and domestic policy, basically what Scotland may eventually look like
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
The Scots, English, Welsh and Northern Irish have agreed, to date, to subordinate many issues to the wider British interest and decision making. By being a part of the UK the Scots are agreed to be bound by UK wide, not just Scotland wide decisions.
It may well be that they feel the need to reassess that relationship in the light of this particular UK wide decision. But that is not the same as ignoring their will to remain in the EU - if they had wanted only their will to resolve that issue, they would have left the UK already, and could choose to exit the UK so that sort of thing does not happen again. We're respecting their will to be a part of the UK, and the UK as a whole decided about the EU, we shall now see if they regret the former as a result of the latter.
It's not a directly comparable situation.
When Gibraltar held a wildcat referendum to undermine the British government they forfeited any right to loyalty in return.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Hysterical, much?
Santander, fishing and 17 million visitors say Spain will not want to play silly buggers.....
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Clues today that Lord Howard was set up by Downing Street PR to ratchet up the warrior rhetoric. Planned, not a loose cannon, and presumably with the aim of boosting Mrs May's Falklands-style tough operator image with the more jingoistic press.
Comparisons with Galtieri are more apt than those with Thatcher, I would say.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
The Scots, English, Welsh and Northern Irish have agreed, to date, to subordinate many issues to the wider British interest and decision making. By being a part of the UK the Scots are agreed to be bound by UK wide, not just Scotland wide decisions.
It may well be that they feel the need to reassess that relationship in the light of this particular UK wide decision. But that is not the same as ignoring their will to remain in the EU - if they had wanted only their will to resolve that issue, they would have left the UK already, and could choose to exit the UK so that sort of thing does not happen again. We're respecting their will to be a part of the UK, and the UK as a whole decided about the EU, we shall now see if they regret the former as a result of the latter.
It's not a directly comparable situation.
When Gibraltar held a wildcat referendum to undermine the British government they forfeited any right to loyalty in return.
Aren't they at liberty to hold a referendum on anything they want at any time?
Why did the Apple deal fall through last year out of interest?
I don't know, but one obvious problem for Apple is that if they buy Imagination it presumably would come with a whole bunch of obligations to license technology to other companies, which is not the sort of thing Apple is likely to want.
Given what their share price just did on Apple's announcement this morning, if Apple were to even try and bid for IMG at anything lower than yesterday's price they'll be pulled up in a big way by the US and UK competition authorities. About as clear-cut an offence of stock price manipulation as you'll see.
It was Imagination Technologies announcement, unless Apple has said something as well. It does look like the two companies have fallen out. Apple is by far Imagination's largest customer, Apple were already customising the GPU designs, Apple has hired quite a number of engineers from Imagination, and it looks like someone at Apple has concluded that as they were in effect paying for the GPU R&D they might as well own it too.
I would guess that Apple has a view about the value of the GPU engineering and IP, and wants as little to do with IP licensing, or the CPU and consumer parts of Imagination as is possible. Imagination is in trouble because without Apple they would probably go out of business.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
We won't get a good Brexit deal because of Gibraltar only due to concessions on EU budget contributions and EU immigration and if we do it is not worth having
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Hysterical, much?
Santander, fishing and 17 million visitors say Spain will not want to play silly buggers.....
The only hysterical people are Leavers like Lord Howard who wish to send 16 Air Assault Brigade and our Trident subs to The Rock.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Hysterical, much?
Santander, fishing and 17 million visitors say Spain will not want to play silly buggers.....
The only hysterical people are Leavers like Lord Howard who wish to send 16 Air Assault Brigade and our Trident subs to The Rock.
You're the one suggesting transfer of sovereignty.....
Oh those Russians. Instead of waging war on Spain we should wage war on Russia.
Let's practice war on Spain first before taking on Russia.
We could call on our Portugese allies, with whom we have never been at war.
I think technically the Spanish are in breach of the peace treaty signed at the end of the Peninsular War (they haven't returned some towns to Portugal). Britain has a reputation for upholding Treaties...
Clues today that Lord Howard was set up by Downing Street PR to ratchet up the warrior rhetoric. Planned, not a loose cannon, and presumably with the aim of boosting Mrs May's Falklands-style tough operator image with the more jingoistic press.
Comparisons with Galtieri are more apt than those with Thatcher, I would say.
The fact he wasn't stopped appearing throughout the day suggests tacit approval by No 10.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
The Scots, English, Welsh and Northern Irish have agreed, to date, to subordinate many issues to the wider British interest and decision making. By being a part of the UK the Scots are agreed to be bound by UK wide, not just Scotland wide decisions.
It may well be that they feel the need to reassess that relationship in the light of this particular UK wide decision. But that is not the same as ignoring their will to remain in the EU - if they had wanted only their will to resolve that issue, they would have left the UK already, and could choose to exit the UK so that sort of thing does not happen again. We're respecting their will to be a part of the UK, and the UK as a whole decided about the EU, we shall now see if they regret the former as a result of the latter.
It's not a directly comparable situation.
When Gibraltar held a wildcat referendum to undermine the British government they forfeited any right to loyalty in return.
A somewhat extreme approach isn't it? A territory acts against the government of the day and they forfeit 'all' rights of loyalty? What our obligations are or ought to be is Im sure up for debate, but come on.
Besides which, it is in our interest to maintain the place as well as the Gibraltarians, so it isn't purely an issue of loyalty to them. The border is disrupted there already, and presumably will get worse, to what extent we try to make up for that is interesting, but there's not much else going on there, we're not going to change our stance on the locals deciding things, so the ball is in their court.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Another referendum for Gibraltar
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is. 2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Given we haven't a clue about the Irish border, the people of Gibraltar should be bracing themselves to be given to Spain to get a good Brexit deal for the rest of the UK. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Hysterical, much?
Santander, fishing and 17 million visitors say Spain will not want to play silly buggers.....
The only hysterical people are Leavers like Lord Howard who wish to send 16 Air Assault Brigade and our Trident subs to The Rock.
You're the one suggesting transfer of sovereignty.....
Which was something foretold by intelligent Remainers like William Hague and myself before the Brexit vote.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39476898
The migrants that go down south can get very sensitive, as we see on here.
About as offensive as "country bumpkin"
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-theresa-may-tim-farron-brexit-centre-ground-liberal-democrats-a7662861.html
Although i suppose it depends on tone.
Spanish foreign minister Alfonso Dastis has said his government had been "surprised by the tone of comments coming out of Britain" about Gibraltar.
He told a Madrid conference: "It seems someone is losing their cool."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39475127
I could easily imagine a bit of flirting going on with Banks at Leave.EU, and possibly with the more naïve elements of GO.
More broadly, I am not sure how good the Russians are at penetrating the UK political scene. MI5 and GCHQ are pretty good at sussing them out.
However, he's now a serious runner and the 40/1 widely available (never mind the 80/1 with sportingbet quoted on oddschecker), is good value. i still don't like the 7/2 for Le Pen but for the first time you can see a realistic route for her opening up to the Elysee. I'd make her more like 8/1.
What was the issue in IndyRef1 was the SNP arguing that somehow there was a 'magic door' through which they could slip out of the UK, straight into the EU (which was garbage, but there you go) - that's what Spain would veto - not that it would arise....
The fact is that there is no veto threat and never has been. What has changed is that now they are willing to say so publicly, which undermines a whole plank of 'better together' propaganda.
The basic problem Imagination have is that their GPU architecture is no longer significantly better than the competition, so companies are either happy enough with Qualcomm and Mediatek, or if they want to customise Mali is the easier option. Apple was really Imagination's only major customer and already customising the GPUs they use, without Apple paying the bills it's hard to see Imagination being able to keep up with the competition.
The IP will be worth something though, as the GPU business is a patent minefield.
Opens up good betting opportunities for the rest of us though
As for the precise process of managing the transition, that's something that would be negotiated to achieve the most frictionless process possible, and with goodwill from the EU side, the options are numerous.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/07/men-killed-900-women-six-years-england-wales-figures-show
The majority of rapists know their victims too... "Only around 10% of rapes are committed by 'strangers'. Around 90% of rapes are committed by known men, and often by someone who the survivor has previously trusted or even loved."
https://rapecrisis.org.uk/mythsvsrealities.php
There is not an epidemic of immigrants raping and killing UK women.
That's one link each requested, but only one provided.
1690 @ 1.97 Melenchon in that scenario.
He [Alfonso Dastis] said: "Spain supports the integrity of the United Kingdom and does not encourage secessions or divisions in any of the member states. We prefer things to stay as they are."
He said Scotland "would have to queue, meet the requirements for entry, hold negotiations and the result would be that these negotiations would take place."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/scotland-independence-referendum-spain-foreign-minister-alfonso-dastis-eu-brexit-nicola-sturgeon-a7629776.html
No talk of a 'veto' there - just newspaper 'back of queue' spin....
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/848855236164952064
Couple of non-sequiteurs:
Independent Scotland would use the £
An independent Scotland would be part of the EU
Scotland can't apply to join the EU using a currency it doesn't control and without a Central Bank.
ECB to Bank of England: 'Are you Scotland's Lender of Last Resort?'
Bank of England to ECB: 'No'.
There's now overwhelming evidence of large numbers sexual offences that are being played down by authorities and media for social reasons across Britain and Europe, which is doing little but fostering distrust of those authorities and media.
If she wins then I'm sure there'll be plenty of Brussels fudge, particularly with Spain if London annoys Madrid with Gibraltar - which is an error it seems to be making.
That said, a newly independent country applying would be sui generis in terms of EU accessions and there's no guarantee that past policies would continue: each accession requires its own treaty which could make more wide-ranging changes to EU practices than just tinkering for the sake of the new member's representation and the like.
In practice, an independent Scotland without its own currency would probably be obliged to join the Euro within a short period - two years, say - with transition mechanisms well in place before membership began.
In theory Scottish accession to the EU should be straightforward - in practice there are difficulties the SNP would prefer to ignore....
Does that mean "sassenach" is now banned as a racist epithet? What about "bampot"? Can we get the feminists for "mansplainer" as a gendered pejorative?
Or perhaps a policemen and a couple of magistrates, or a law, need to be retired, and some growing up is required.
1) We should respect the will of Gibraltarans to remain part of the Uk
2) But ignore the will of Scots to remain in the EU
Options
1) In EU, Joint British & Spanish sovereignty, border remains as is.
2) No spanish sovereignty, WALLhard border with Spain. Navy blue Passports, guineas and groats.
Spanish prime minister Mariano Rajoy had been quick to warn he would oppose any attempts to hold talks with Scotland over its EU membership in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote as Nicola Sturgeon sought to forge a separate Scottish deal.
Mr Rajoy said that “if the UK goes, Scotland goes too”.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/spain-would-not-block-independent-scotland-eu-application-1-4409892
It was all about Mrs McTurnip trying to do an end-run round BREXIT.....
Scotland didn't hold a referendum on leaving the EU.
The UK did.
Scotland previously held a referendum on leaving the UK - and decided against.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/848446692999540736
For that they deserve more respect and loyalty than the Nat mafia running their operation squirrel in Holyrood.
It may well be that they feel the need to reassess that relationship in the light of this particular UK wide decision. But that is not the same as ignoring their will to remain in the EU - if they had wanted only their will to resolve that issue, they would have left the UK already, and could choose to exit the UK so that sort of thing does not happen again. We're respecting their will to be a part of the UK, and the UK as a whole decided about the EU, we shall now see if they regret the former as a result of the latter.
It's not a directly comparable situation, nor helpful or that funny to pretend the two are the same. There are enough problems with idiot leavers and remainers with no sense of humour or perspective as it is.
Santander, fishing and 17 million visitors say Spain will not want to play silly buggers.....
Comparisons with Galtieri are more apt than those with Thatcher, I would say.
I would guess that Apple has a view about the value of the GPU engineering and IP, and wants as little to do with IP licensing, or the CPU and consumer parts of Imagination as is possible. Imagination is in trouble because without Apple they would probably go out of business.
"France's Fillon says would launch probe into Hollande if elected"
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-election-idUSKBN17513F
Besides which, it is in our interest to maintain the place as well as the Gibraltarians, so it isn't purely an issue of loyalty to them. The border is disrupted there already, and presumably will get worse, to what extent we try to make up for that is interesting, but there's not much else going on there, we're not going to change our stance on the locals deciding things, so the ball is in their court.