How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

maestroamado wrote: »

What are you talking about?
I am not looking for arguement i say what i see.
If you think its all ok thats good for me...

I'll try and simplify again

1) You stated that NI politics are factional
we agree on this point

2) You stated that this is the reason they are unsuitable for Ministerial positions

3) I stated that the current UK Ministerial positions are filled with politicians from a highly factional party within a highly factional government system.

The question is if point 3 holds (the Tory government are from a highly factional party within a highly factional government system), that point 2 doesn't make logical sense, so why are parties from one location unsuitable due to their factional nature, yet parties from another location are perfectly suitable despite also having a factional nature. This implies to me that the factionalism isn't the problem.

How can the factional nature of NI politics be the reason they are not suitable for ministerial positions, when that government is made up of another highly factional party essentially.

Maybe someone else could step in and say if I'm being unclear here, because I genuinely can't make it any more easy to follow than this. It honestly feels like we're talking across a language barrier, hence my earlier question.

I see Michelle O’Neil is calling your people south of the border sectarian (or at least some of them).
Hopefully this will be enlightening for some

I can’t search back for posts, but several people on here including Francie (and I think jm08) argued I was wrong.
Was in the shop today and saw this so took a wee snap. Don’t all rush at once to apologise - you’ll crash the forum.

https://ibb.co/HqgGDX1

RobMc59

downcow wrote: »

I see Michelle O’Neil is calling your people south of the border sectarian (or at least some of them).
Hopefully this will be enlightening for some

It's strange how she's gone from the person in this link to doffing her cap and taking the Queens shilling as part of the British establishment.

"Michelle O’Neill's family's shocking IRA past" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4165570/amp/Michelle-O-Neill-s-family-s-shocking-IRA-past.html

RobMc59 wrote: »

It's strange how she's gone from the person in this link to doffing her cap and taking the Queens shilling as part of the British establishment.

"Michelle O’Neill's family's shocking IRA past" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4165570/amp/Michelle-O-Neill-s-family-s-shocking-IRA-past.html

You have to be actively trying to get under peoples' skin at this point, Rob. The Queen's Shilling.....is that from all of her taxable income? Odd time to drop that one given the news floating around about her own questionable dealings when it came to laws that would impact her own finances.

Gone from the person in that link to doffing the cap? At the point that article was written, Michelle O'Neill had been an MLA for almost a decade.

What happened to your claim in another thread that you don't use junk tabloids as sources anyway? Regardless of one's opinion on SF, that is absolute gutter journalism with a heap of patronising sexism hanging out of it. Exactly what I'd expect from your tabloid press of course.

downcow wrote: »

I can’t search back for posts, but several people on here including Francie (and I think jm08) argued I was wrong.
Was in the shop today and saw this so took a wee snap. Don’t all rush at once to apologise - you’ll crash the forum.

https://ibb.co/HqgGDX1

More lies...I never said you were wrong, I asked you to show the rule that said this must happen.
Now that it has been explained (what was so hard about you doing it???) I agree with the rule but I think 'easement or flexibility' can easily be found on that problem that has arisen.
But don't be thinking I believe a free for all should happen and I don't think the EU will agree either, correctly.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

More lies...I never said you were wrong, I asked you to show the rule that said this must happen.
Now that it has been explained (what was so hard about you doing it???) I agree with the rule but I think 'easement or flexibility' can easily be found on that problem that has arisen.
But don't be thinking I believe a free for all should happen and I don't think the EU will agree either, correctly.

Haha. You agree? How can we take you seriously if you agree that I can’t bring a Northern Irish (or southern Irish) bull into OWC but you think it is ok that I bring an English bull in. Catch a grip Francie!

downcow wrote: »

Haha. You agree? How can we take you seriously if you agree that I can’t bring a Northern Irish (or southern Irish) bull into OWC but you think it is ok that I bring an English bull in. Catch a grip Francie!

Catch a grip of what?

I agree with the overall rule. This anomaly where you can't bring back an animal can be sorted.
I agree that all animals arriving have to have the proper checks and paperwork as laid down by the EU. The UK is a third country.

downcow wrote: »

Haha. You agree? How can we take you seriously if you agree that I can’t bring a Northern Irish (or southern Irish) bull into OWC but you think it is ok that I bring an English bull in. Catch a grip Francie!

....Jesus Downcow, you're just trying to be belligerent.

Francie has clearly stated there that he thinks a solution could be found to this (without creating a free for all).

How could you possibly read his post and come back with this?!

It is clearly one of those cases where a niche situation falls through the cracks, and by the letter of the law is prohibited. I would agree that it wouldn't be within the, 'spirit' of the law as intended and would expect and hope this scenario receives attention and is resolved.

Why do I get the feeling yourself and Rob will be in crowing about the EU backing down when that happens though?

RobMc59 wrote: »

It's strange how she's gone from the person in this link to doffing her cap and taking the Queens shilling as part of the British establishment.

"Michelle O’Neill's family's shocking IRA past" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4165570/amp/Michelle-O-Neill-s-family-s-shocking-IRA-past.html

Thanks for that. It explains a lot.

Happydays2020

Be realistic. The DUP will agree to a United Ireland well ahead of Cork.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

....Jesus Downcow, you're just trying to be belligerent.

Francie has clearly stated there that he thinks a solution could be found to this (without creating a free for all).

How could you possibly read his post and come back with this?!

It is clearly one of those cases where a niche situation falls through the cracks, and by the letter of the law is prohibited. I would agree that it wouldn't be within the, 'spirit' of the law as intended and would expect and hope this scenario receives attention and is resolved.

Why do I get the feeling yourself and Rob will be in crowing about the EU backing down when that happens though?

This is the kind of 'easement or flexibility' not being used by a lazy UK government that the EU have thrown back at Gove. They'd rather have a strop than do their job.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

....Jesus Downcow, you're just trying to be belligerent.

Francie has clearly stated there that he thinks a solution could be found to this (without creating a free for all).

How could you possibly read his post and come back with this?!

It is clearly one of those cases where a niche situation falls through the cracks, and by the letter of the law is prohibited. I would agree that it wouldn't be within the, 'spirit' of the law as intended and would expect and hope this scenario receives attention and is resolved.

Why do I get the feeling yourself and Rob will be in crowing about the EU backing down when that happens though?

......Jesus Fionn how can you not understand that he is saying that he agrees with the rule??. Here is what he said
“ I agree with the rule but I think 'easement or flexibility' can easily be found on that problem that has arisen.”

downcow wrote: »

......Jesus Fionn how can you not understand that he is saying that he agrees with the rule??. Here is what he said
“ I agree with the rule but I think 'easement or flexibility' can easily be found on that problem that has arisen.”

Yes downcow, I agree with the rule that states an animal must have a certificate and be resident for 6 months.

I think ease/flexibilty can be found for the anomaly that you and others fell victim to travelling to sales and shows and needing to take an unsold animal home.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes downcow, I agree with the rule that states an animal must have a certificate and be resident for 6 months.

I think ease/flexibilty can be found for the anomaly that you and others fell victim to travelling to sales and shows and needing to take an unsold animal home.

Haha. Help me. Do you agree with the rule that says animal must be resident for six months, but you think the rule that an animal must be resident for six months should not apply. Is that really what you are saying?
I am not being funny, I am just amazed at the contortions you would pull to avoid saying the ni protocol is a nonsense.

Lol. And Fionn has your back!

downcow wrote: »

Haha. Help me. Do you agree with the rule that says animal must be resident for six months, but you think the rule that an animal must be resident for six months should not apply. Is that really what you are saying?
I am not being funny, I am just amazed at the contortions you would pull to avoid saying the ni protocol is a nonsense.

Lol. And Fionn has your back!

I'll simplify it as you seem to be having difficulty. There is a problem taking animals to a sale and them not being sold. There should be a simple fix to allow somebody take an animal like that back.

But the general rule of cert and residency should apply to all other animals as intended.

RobMc59

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You have to be actively trying to get under peoples' skin at this point, Rob. The Queen's Shilling.....is that from all of her taxable income? Odd time to drop that one given the news floating around about her own questionable dealings when it came to laws that would impact her own finances.

Gone from the person in that link to doffing the cap? At the point that article was written, Michelle O'Neill had been an MLA for almost a decade.

What happened to your claim in another thread that you don't use junk tabloids as sources anyway? Regardless of one's opinion on SF, that is absolute gutter journalism with a heap of patronising sexism hanging out of it. Exactly what I'd expect from your tabloid press of course.

I'd agree with you about the patronising sensationalism but the rest is true isn't it?She has close ties to terrorism.
She does seem very comfortable in her role and has become far less critical and outspoken compared to her earlier years though.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'll simplify it as you seem to be having difficulty. There is a problem taking animals to a sale and them not being sold. There should be a simple fix to allow somebody take an animal like that back.

But the general rule of cert and residency should apply to all other animals as intended.

I’ll simplify for you as you seem to be struggling.
Let’s set aside the unsold bull.
If I go over to Carlisle to buy a bull for my herd, do you think it makes sense that I can buy an English bull and bring it home but I can’t buy one of the many Northern Irish (or southern Irish) bulls at the sale ??

Francie try saying “I was wrong and the protocol is a nonsense”, it will do your heart good

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'd agree with you about the patronising sensationalism but the rest is true isn't it?She has close ties to terrorism.
She does seem very comfortable in her role and has become far less critical and outspoken compared to her earlier years though.

She grew up in a world you'll fortunately never have to experience, Rob.

Are we convicting based on the sins of the father now?

We have all become more comfortable, Rob....that's the beauty of 20 years without the British Army and Loyalist paramilitaries murdering my community and without the IRA murdering the other. What's the big surprise here? That was the point of the GFA.

downcow wrote: »

I’ll simplify for you as you seem to be struggling.
Let’s set aside the unsold bull.
If I go over to Carlisle to buy a bull for my herd, do you think it makes sense that I can buy an English bull and bring it home but I can’t buy one of the many Northern Irish (or southern Irish) bulls at the sale ??

Francie try saying “I was wrong and the protocol is a nonsense”, it will do your heart good

I think if I wanted to buy a bull from the island of Ireland for my herd, I probably wouldn't travel to the UK, Australia, Turkey or any other country that isn't in the EU customs area.

That being said, I fully accept that if you, as an NI citizen travel to Carlisle to sell a bull, you should be able to return home with it (in a reasonable timeframe) should it be unsold. I would be happy to see this changed as I think it is a case of the letter vs the spirit of the law, and one I'm confident that the EU will be willing to come to an arrangement on.

The thing is, if I was an NI citizen, I'd be questioning why why UK agreed to this arrangement rather than blaming the EU for it.....the EU's primary responsibility is to its member states, it is down to the UK to negotiate the best arrangement it can for itself.....Carson's, 'I was only a puppet' comes to mind once more.

downcow wrote: »

I’ll simplify for you as you seem to be struggling.
Let’s set aside the unsold bull.
If I go over to Carlisle to buy a bull for my herd, do you think it makes sense that I can buy an English bull and bring it home but I can’t buy one of the many Northern Irish (or southern Irish) bulls at the sale ??

Francie try saying “I was wrong and the protocol is a nonsense”, it will do your heart good

Is the animal you are buying compliant? #How do you know or rather, how does the customs know how long the animal was there?

Sorry you are inconvenienced, but you cannot say you were not warned often enough, the rules are the rules, you wanted to Brexit, there will be many paying a price. Consider yourself lucky you have a halfway house thanks to those who stood up for the island.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

She grew up in a world you'll fortunately never have to experience, Rob.

Are we convicting based on the sins of the father now?

We have all become more comfortable, Rob....that's the beauty of 20 years without the British Army and Loyalist paramilitaries murdering my community and without the IRA murdering the other. What's the big surprise here? That was the point of the GFA.

She is supposed to be a deputy first minister, yet she accused the Psni of sectarianism when they intervenened in a crowd breaking covid regulations in Belfast this weekend - and not a word about the broken regulations.

downcow wrote: »

She is supposed to be a deputy first minister, yet she accused the Psni of sectarianism when they intervenened in a crowd breaking covid regulations in Belfast this weekend - and not a word about the broken regulations.

The PSNI apologised for their behaviour and suspended an officer.

Sam Russell

downcow wrote: »

Haha. Help me. Do you agree with the rule that says animal must be resident for six months, but you think the rule that an animal must be resident for six months should not apply. Is that really what you are saying?
I am not being funny, I am just amazed at the contortions you would pull to avoid saying the ni protocol is a nonsense.

Lol. And Fionn has your back!

What were the rules prior to Brexit? Were animals required to have VET certs and be inspected in Larne?

I remember a report saying that Barnier thought that the current 10% inspection rate would have to go to 100% after the transition period. So what has changed with SPS import inspections at Larne?

downcow wrote: »

She is supposed to be a deputy first minister, yet she accused the Psni of sectarianism when they intervenened in a crowd breaking covid regulations in Belfast this weekend - and not a word about the broken regulations.

That would be the one that was so outrageous even Jamie feckin Bryson came out on the side of the Republicans on, aye?

That would be her pointing out the difference between the PSNI actions at the memorial service compared with how they reacted to a Loyalist paramilitary show of strength?

The one that the PSNI chief constable has acknowledged they got completely wrong?

Pick a better hill to die on, Downcow. Seriously, it isn't like SF are a difficult target. There's lower hanging fruit out there.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I think if I wanted to buy a bull from the island of Ireland for my herd, I probably wouldn't travel to the UK, Australia, Turkey or any other country that isn't in the EU customs area.

That being said, I fully accept that if you, as an NI citizen travel to Carlisle to sell a bull, you should be able to return home with it (in a reasonable timeframe) should it be unsold. I would be happy to see this changed as I think it is a case of the letter vs the spirit of the law, and one I'm confident that the EU will be willing to come to an arrangement on.

The thing is, if I was an NI citizen, I'd be questioning why why UK agreed to this arrangement rather than blaming the EU for it.....the EU's primary responsibility is to its member states, it is down to the UK to negotiate the best arrangement it can for itself.....Carson's, 'I was only a puppet' comes to mind once more.

Fionn. Why don’t you answer the question. I naively expected more of you. The top sales by far for bulls on these islands are Carlisle and Stirling. Many southerners go over to get quality. The one bull I sold in 2019 at Stirling was bought by a Roi breeder. He now couldn’t buy my bull because of the ni protocol.

You have not answered the question. Is the protocol a nonsense because no Irish buyer can buy an Irish bull at the sales but they can buy any gb bull.

Same advice I’ll give to you as I did to Francie. Try saying. I was wrong and the protocol is a nonsense

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The PSNI apologised for their behaviour and suspended an officer.

I am usually proved right on here.
I have from good authority that the officer who intervened was a catholic from ROI and the officer who made the arrest was a catholic from ROI.
There were only two officers involved who were fresh out of training college and at least one of them was catholic
Will Michelle have the bulls to apologise and admit she was wrong. Not a chance. She’s fit in well on this thread.

I amn staking any reputation I have here on the fact that the officer who is being accused by Michele of being sectarian is a catholic. Watch this space. And the chief con is a total coward

downcow wrote: »

Fionn. Why don’t you answer the question. I naively expected more of you. The top sales by far for bulls on these islands are Carlisle and Stirling. Many southerners go over to get quality. The one bull I sold in 2019 at Stirling was bought by a Roi breeder. He now couldn’t buy my bull because of the ni protocol.

You have not answered the question. Is the protocol a nonsense because no Irish buyer can buy an Irish bull at the sales but they can buy any gb bull.

Same advice I’ll give to you as I did to Francie. Try saying. I was wrong and the protocol is a nonsense

The 'protocol isn't a nonsense' There are minor issues with the protocol.

Manufacturing NI have a survey out tonight where they say emphatically that they want the Protocol to work.

Brexit is going to inconvenience you downcow, you need to accept that.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

That would be the one that was so outrageous even Jamie feckin Bryson came out on the side of the Republicans on, aye?

That would be her pointing out the difference between the PSNI actions at the memorial service compared with how they reacted to a Loyalist paramilitary show of strength?

The one that the PSNI chief constable has acknowledged they got completely wrong?

Pick a better hill to die on, Downcow. Seriously, it isn't like SF are a difficult target. There's lower hanging fruit out there.

Fionn. Do you know that the offending officer is one of your own?