nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Irish protocol.

downcow

The protocol will be challenged next week in the british high courts.
I am interested in what you guys believe is an appropriate way forward if it is declared illegal, as I have a haunch it will.
Is it appropriate to continue down an illegal road or will it be time for a rethink?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

Sure you guys are saying that if it’s close then we find some halfway house. Or is that different?

I didn't say anything the sort.
I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the unionist approach to democracy (to which you seem to adoringly subscribe). Apologies if that wasn't clear to you!

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

You are exactly right Francie. But we both know the republicans will be out wrecking the city as the bands are on their coaches back to the north

I'd expect you to blame everyone else. Same as Bryson is ready to do.

Will you be down yourself?

downcow

CaoimhinCong wrote: »

There was protests throughout the shankill with the whiterock parade on Saturday just gone. And I'd imagine it to be the same on this Saturday as it's Trevor king. 2 of biggest parades outside the 12th for them. It doesn't seem like loyalists are that shot over the protocol alot of talk by the same mouthpieces but when it comes to action it's null an void.

It just demonstrates the lack of understanding of our culture if you think those parades are two of the biggest outside the twelfth. I doubt they would even come in the top 200 numbers wise

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I think were the terrorists and criminals to travel "abroad" to Dublin looking for a fight, AGS will be ready for them. I would doubt that any streets their bus stops on would remain open to the public and the only ones in close proximity would be AGS and the media.
If the terrorists started any aggro with AGS then they would soon find out how efficient AGS can be when it wants to be.

I reckon every Friday afternoon would be better

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Any border poll would not be as poorly structured over the non-binding binary Brexit vote.
Whilst such a narrow margin is not ideal, it is written that 52% result would be deemed more than enough (as agreed by the people via the GFA)

Exactly my point. Brexit is brexit

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

I reckon every Friday afternoon would be better

So you're telling us that you are condoning violence.

Tell us, why would the unionists and LCC terrorists not bring the violence to London?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I reckon every Friday afternoon would be better

You can't get a decent protest going at home never mind every Friday in Dublin.

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

Exactly my point. Brexit is brexit

The two referenda would completely different. In one, the people would make an informed decision. In the other, the only description on the process is that "Brexit means Brexit" (we've never been told what else Brexit means) and the people were not allowed an informed decision.
I do not believe that a border poll will be anywhere near the closeness of 2016.

Fionn1952

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You can't get a decent protest going at home never mind every Friday in Dublin.

I remember well the huge crowds at the Twaddell Avenue camp over the return march and the City Hall protests over the flag. Attention span of a fish the most of them.....and sure the jam roll would hardly hold out to weekly trips down to Dublin unless they packed their own sandwiches and flasks of tea.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I remember well the huge crowds at the Twaddell Avenue camp over the return march and the City Hall protests over the flag. Attention span of a fish the most of them.....and sure the jam roll would hardly hold out to weekly trips down to Dublin unless they packed their own sandwiches and flasks of tea.

When was the last time a mass protest worked for them? Sunningdale?

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So you're telling us that you are condoning violence.

Tell us, why would the unionists and LCC terrorists not bring the violence to London?

I would be appalled if loyalists were violent in Dublin. I only support it as I expect a few loyalist bands to go down each trip. They are highly disciplined and will parade in Dublin (if allowed) and return home peacefully.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When was the last time a mass protest worked for them? Sunningdale?

I disagree with Bryson using the term mass. That would be madness and difficult to control. In his next sentence he says 300 which is much more sensible ie 4 or 5 bands

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I disagree with Bryson using the term mass. That would be madness and difficult to control. In his next sentence he says 300 which is much more sensible ie 4 or 5 bands

When's the last time street protest worked for Unionism? I can't think of anything after Sunningdale.

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

I would be appalled if loyalists were violent in Dublin. I only support it as I expect a few loyalist bands to go down each trip. They are highly disciplined and will parade in Dublin (if allowed) and return home peacefully.

So in loyalist tradition, they want to march somewhere they know the locals won't want them?
All for what? To prove that they really have no idea about what they are protesting against (because if they did they would be in London!)

Normal One

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When was the last time a mass protest worked for them? Sunningdale?

They protested against mass at Harryville church for a couple of years, and the Holy Cross School when children were targeted. They worked in exposing the utter stupidity and short-sightedness of loyalism. They still haven’t learned.

StupidLikeAFox

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So in loyalist tradition, they want to march somewhere they know the locals won't want them?
All for what? To prove that they really have no idea about what they are protesting against (because if they did they would be in London!)

Downcow is right - they will go to Dublin and be well behaved and a few idiots will attack them or need to be restrained. This will give the visitors enough ammunition to say "look what they think of us in the south" and whip up a bit hysteria among their followers. It's bog standard provocation, it'll probably work as well which is the worst part of it

briany

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Downcow is right - they will go to Dublin and be well behaved and a few idiots will attack them or need to be restrained. This will give the visitors enough ammunition to say "look what they think of us in the south" and whip up a bit hysteria among their followers. It's bog standard provocation, it'll probably work as well which is the worst part of it

But they're already hysterical. Besides, if they come to Dublin with placards saying 'NO TO NI PROTOCOL', they'll just be ignored. If they come to Dublin waving orange banners, it just paints their concern as sectarian rather than being borne out of what is best for NI.

StupidLikeAFox

briany wrote: »

But they're already hysterical. Besides, if they come to Dublin with placards saying 'NO TO NI PROTOCOL', they'll just be ignored. If they come to Dublin waving orange banners, it just paints their concern as sectarian rather than being borne out of what is best for NI.

Seems reasonable but the last time they came down under an innocuous banner of "love ulster" and caused a riot without getting off the bus. Theyd love a repeat of that, perfect propaganda fodder

fash

downcow wrote: »

Unionist brexiteeers did not influence the vote. The margin was much greater.

Had both sides of Northern Ireland divide explained the problems it would mean for NI, the issues with Northern Ireland would have cut through during the referendum debates. The fact that unionists repeatedly stated that there would be no issue for peace in NI, no issues regarding the break up of the Union, no issues regarding a border (and of course funneled illegal advertising money into England) provided cover for Brexiters arguing this point during the run up to the referendum. Furthermore then continuously pushed for the hardest of possible Brexits during the negotiations means that the DUP (and their electorate who supported and continue to support them) had a particularly decisive influence on the brexit outcome.
Given that, is it not appropriate that unionists reap what they sowed?

fash

downcow wrote: »

Would you apply the same thinking to a 52:48 UI vote. Just sayin’

To make a better analogy,, imagine a 52-48 vote for UI where following the vote, the entire population of unionist children were taken for forced indoctrination as Jesuits and all unionist property and businesses expropriated & given to been nationalists and remaining unionists given the opportunity to jump into the sea or go to the rump UK as anything less wouldn't be a "real" Ireland.
I'm sure you would agree that that would be a drastic outcome- especially if in the run up to the referendum people repeatedly promised "nobody is talking about undermining unionists' place in society".

fash

downcow wrote: »

Exactly my point. Brexit is brexit

I agree brexit means brexit- it inevitably meant borders and that border inevitably had to go into the Irish sea- so what is your problem? This is exactly what you voted for.

[Deleted User]

The only reason unionists would protest in Dublin would be to turn Ireland against the idea of reunification. Which is a fair enough reason when your mother hates you but you despise your father so you go wreck his gaff so he won't take you in.

downcow

fash wrote: »

I agree brexit means brexit- it inevitably meant borders and that border inevitably had to go into the Irish sea- so what is your problem? This is exactly what you voted for.

It did not need to mean that pets need rabies vaccines if travelling from Scotland to ni for a holiday.

fash

downcow wrote: »

It did not need to mean that pets need rabies vaccines if travelling from Scotland to ni for a holiday.

Of course it did - there is a border - and at borders they check for rabies vaccines. And don't forget brexit meant brexit- so the border was always necessary. Not having to check for rabies vaccines wouldn't be a *true* brexit.

VinLieger

downcow wrote: »

It did not need to mean that pets need rabies vaccines if travelling from Scotland to ni for a holiday.

Are you saying the realities of Brexit were not adequately planned for or explained to you prior to the vote? I suppose that's Dublin and the EUs fault too somehow?

Peregrinus

downcow wrote: »

It did not need to mean that pets need rabies vaccines if travelling from Scotland to ni for a holiday.

Once the UK government decided that Brexit had to mean hard Brexit, then it meant a rabies border somewhere. And the UK government decided that it should be between GB and NI, rather than between NI and IRL. And, in so far as the people of the UK were permitted to exercise a judgement about that decision, they resoundingly endorsed it, given the Tories a substantial majority on a manifesto to ratify and implement the WA which provided for it.

So, yeah, by all means come and protest in Dublin about that. You'll be protesting against a party that didn't want a rabies border anywhere, but was unable to persuade the UK government, parliament and people of the merits of that view. A pig-headed refusal to hold the true authors of NI's misfortune to account and instead try to deflect blame elsewhere is bound to succeed. :rolleyes:

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

It did not need to mean that pets need rabies vaccines if travelling from Scotland to ni for a holiday.

It still doesn't need to, and the EU keep saying that and explaining how. But your Prime Minister and the unelected bureaucrat he's appointed to handle things have insisted on branding the island of GB a risk to human and animal health in the name of The One True Brexit.

As you may have heard, there's a significant proportion of Scots who think that their best interests lie in an exit from the UK and a reunification with Ireland and the EU26. Perhaps that could work for NI too? :pac:

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

It did not need to mean that pets need rabies vaccines if travelling from Scotland to ni for a holiday.

So yet again were going around in circles where you make a claim and others here point out the realities of the situation, again.
You were given information about the rabies checks that your daughter's dog will face when she returns from Scotland.
Have you got alzheimer's because you seem to quickly forget facts shortly after being given them?

downcow

fash wrote: »

Of course it did - there is a border - and at borders they check for rabies vaccines. And don't forget brexit meant brexit- so the border was always necessary. Not having to check for rabies vaccines wouldn't be a *true* brexit.

Very enlightening response. Thanks for that!

downcow

VinLieger wrote: »

Are you saying the realities of Brexit were not adequately planned for or explained to you prior to the vote? I suppose that's Dublin and the EUs fault too somehow?

Watch this space. I think it’s you that hasn’t had everything explained to you. There will be changes and these will be more than the flexibilities that Francie talks about.