only 2% of the UK is built on, the problem is it's very specific areas that are 'packed' - we need to listen to our best manager of the past 4.5 years and 'spread out', he was ahead of his time.
There's nothing natural or healthy about families living on top of each other. Air quality, refuse rates and cost of living all seem to escalate the more people you lump on top of each other. Building upwards works fine for offices and commercials premises but is having severe consequences for the health, wealth and happiness of those who live in such conditions.
I think I read somewhere that the 'slum' clearances of streets of two up two downers in places like Camberwell, to be replaced by high rise blocks did not improve the person per square foot thing. The housing conditions were poor, with back alleys, back yards, outside bogs and tin baths. However there was usually a sense of community and belonging. I sometimes wonder if creative architecture based on the old low rise model but with better building conditions would work. During the sixties and seventies when these tower blocks were slinging up everywhere, it made a lot of profit for big builders, and kick backs for some corrupt councillors, but didn't especially help the people per square foot footprint of the areas. Interestingly we have people now paying huge sums to choose to live in the 'undesirable' stacked way you describe. Look at the Ferrier, or the new stuff in Woolwich and Lewisham and all along the river in Surrey Docks. Maybe even high rise can work if done properly.
Far be it for me to praise a European model, but, what the UK needs is a Haussman figure or three, together with a Government prepared to plan properly for major urban areas...
Gove's disgraceful remark about Nazanin Ratcliffe have now quite rightly been picked up by the media. He, as well as Johnson should resign forthwith. They have blood on their grubby little hands.
After the murderer of the Czech citizen Zdenek Makar in Poplar was shamefully acquitted by a UK court, the Czech Foreign Minister went after the UK in a big way. First he summoned the British Ambassador, and when that predictably yielded sod all he sent a very strong note to the UK government, and finally publicly called on the CPS to reconsider the verdict. In doing this, he risked, as FO of a little country , making it unpopular with a Big Country; often seen as a no-no, especially by our own FCO for example when dealing with the USA China or Russia. He gained no discernible political advantage for doing so. He did it because he thought that was his job as Foreign Minister. My respect for him magnifies my contempt for Johnson, and especially now for Gove who is shamelessly using this poor woman as a pawn in his grand plan for power, which is all about Brexit.
We should put Gove and Johnson on the plane to Tehran and tell the Iranians that if they free Ratcliffe, they can keep both the tossers.
BTW you can sign the petition to free Nazanin Ratcliffe here. You'll be in the good company of more than a million people.
Blood on their hands? Are we over reacting just a tad? They are undoubtedly a couple of twats, but lets not get carried away.
PS Perhaps they could keep Tony too - a man with rivers of real blood on his hands.
No, absolutely not. You obviously have not read much about the conditions in which she is being kept. Even if she is released soon - which that couple of twats have made a lot less likely - the mental scars will be with her for life. They have put her in one of the toughest prisons, too. This is an ordinary British citizen, a mother separated from her 3 year old child, (who is also being held), a human being. Not a pawn in some political game of a couple of twats.
Actually, however much you've read, I've read slightly more -if you really want to play pompous silly childish cock waving games. How's that 'not playing the man' pledge you made earlier?
Do try and focus. You said 'blood on their hands' - I said overreaction, now can you try and justify the blood on hands statement because you and you like chums must have a different definition.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
Gove's disgraceful remark about Nazanin Ratcliffe have now quite rightly been picked up by the media. He, as well as Johnson should resign forthwith. They have blood on their grubby little hands.
After the murderer of the Czech citizen Zdenek Makar in Poplar was shamefully acquitted by a UK court, the Czech Foreign Minister went after the UK in a big way. First he summoned the British Ambassador, and when that predictably yielded sod all he sent a very strong note to the UK government, and finally publicly called on the CPS to reconsider the verdict. In doing this, he risked, as FO of a little country , making it unpopular with a Big Country; often seen as a no-no, especially by our own FCO for example when dealing with the USA China or Russia. He gained no discernible political advantage for doing so. He did it because he thought that was his job as Foreign Minister. My respect for him magnifies my contempt for Johnson, and especially now for Gove who is shamelessly using this poor woman as a pawn in his grand plan for power, which is all about Brexit.
We should put Gove and Johnson on the plane to Tehran and tell the Iranians that if they free Ratcliffe, they can keep both the tossers.
BTW you can sign the petition to free Nazanin Ratcliffe here. You'll be in the good company of more than a million people.
Blood on their hands? Are we over reacting just a tad? They are undoubtedly a couple of twats, but lets not get carried away.
PS Perhaps they could keep Tony too - a man with rivers of real blood on his hands.
In your opinion. How much more tax payer's money over how many more years do you think should be wasted trying to prove this fallacy?
You may think two weird ministers blundering their way through high office have spilt more blood than Blair, but that just makes you look very odd in the normal, non Charlton Life world.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
Whilst it is accepted that the dissidents would be doing this sort of thing anyway - from their perspective Brexit (as espoused by the UK Government) is the gift that will keep on giving, providing them both with additional targets and potential recruits.
It's the reason why, where they have support the pro-Brexit vote was higher than was expected, because they encouraged their followers to vote that way.
They're definitely dickheads, but there is, sadly, a logic to their thinking.
P.S. Today's pipe bomb was viable and, as I understand it, the town centre was closed for several hours while four controlled explosions were carried out. All things being equal, it's one of many "traditional" activities I'd happily see ended (including, even though we get an additional bank holiday, the Twelfth and any Easter commemorations).
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
Except they haven't really been "bombing each other" for the last two decades have they (certainly not to the same extent in any event)?
And what is "So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday..." supposed to mean btw? It was a bomb placed today not, yesterday or a month ago. I'd have made the same point, that there are people out there very happy to continue/ramp up the violence where they can regardless of the date.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
Whilst it is accepted that the dissidents would be doing this sort of thing anyway - from their perspective Brexit (as espoused by the UK Government) is the gift that will keep on giving, providing them both with additional targets and potential recruits.
It's the reason why, where they have support the pro-Brexit vote was higher than was expected, because they encouraged their followers to vote that way.
They're definitely dickheads, but there is, sadly, a logic to their thinking.
P.S. Today's pipe bomb was viable and, as I understand it, the town centre was closed for several hours while four controlled explosions were carried out. All things being equal, it's one of many "traditional" activities I'd happily see ended (including, even though we get an additional bank holiday, the Twelfth and any Easter commemorations).
Hi NI I'm interested what these additional targets would be.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It might be a better move towards understanding, and even empathy if you rephrased:
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It might be a better move towards understanding, and even empathy if you rephrased:
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
Good points, Seth. Can I ask why the (massive) decommissioning of weapons, greatly increased intelligence and shared initiatives, the much more positive cross party/and seemingly sectarian (which IMO having considerable experience there,will never be fully resolved, hence the continued threat of violence underpinning much of life and organised crime) co-operation, the wonderful efforts towards positive action powered by the will of the people will be, as you say, at risk? How will they be at risk? Is this real or imagined?
In between the genuine republican and unionist advocates there is an army of small time crooks and thugs that have used “the troubles” for decades as cover to become gangsters and make a lot of money under the pretext of politics.
If you can’t see that the return to a hard border isn’t a complete gift to these people, a wonderful business opportunity then I’m not sure that you have a grasp of the ROI / NI border at all.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
Whilst it is accepted that the dissidents would be doing this sort of thing anyway - from their perspective Brexit (as espoused by the UK Government) is the gift that will keep on giving, providing them both with additional targets and potential recruits.
It's the reason why, where they have support the pro-Brexit vote was higher than was expected, because they encouraged their followers to vote that way.
They're definitely dickheads, but there is, sadly, a logic to their thinking.
P.S. Today's pipe bomb was viable and, as I understand it, the town centre was closed for several hours while four controlled explosions were carried out. All things being equal, it's one of many "traditional" activities I'd happily see ended (including, even though we get an additional bank holiday, the Twelfth and any Easter commemorations).
Hi NI I'm interested what these additional targets would be.
Well, unless the UK negotiators are to agree to either the UK or Northern Ireland (unlikely given the Parliamentary arithmetic) in some way remaining within the Customs Union, there will have to be some form of Customs infrastructure.
Even if the intention is to use cameras on the border with random vehicle checks at a number of locations inside Northern Ireland, the physical equipment and those operating the Customs regime (and, with the terrorists historical view of "legitimate targets", this will include workmen in the building/repair phase and maintenance engineers for the cameras). Mobile Customs patrols will also be vulnerable, and it will only take a couple of near misses for them to require escort.
The PSNI have made clear that they would expect to be asked to provide protection for fixed installations and personnel, which would, in itself, provide additional targets.
This would lead to a reintroduction of the sort of protected buildings that were common in the Troubles. Most of these have been sold off.
If there is a need for border posts, either because the technological solution will not be available in time or following a bombing campaign, we could very easily see a return to sangers and military support to the Police.
The PSNI have neither the physical nor human resources available to address the upsurge in attacks that they expect.
The problem is that there are people willing to kill or main in an effort to achieve their aims. They will take advantage of any opportunities that come their way. And, at the same time, border controls will piss off a significant proportion of the population.
Gove's disgraceful remark about Nazanin Ratcliffe have now quite rightly been picked up by the media. He, as well as Johnson should resign forthwith. They have blood on their grubby little hands.
After the murderer of the Czech citizen Zdenek Makar in Poplar was shamefully acquitted by a UK court, the Czech Foreign Minister went after the UK in a big way. First he summoned the British Ambassador, and when that predictably yielded sod all he sent a very strong note to the UK government, and finally publicly called on the CPS to reconsider the verdict. In doing this, he risked, as FO of a little country , making it unpopular with a Big Country; often seen as a no-no, especially by our own FCO for example when dealing with the USA China or Russia. He gained no discernible political advantage for doing so. He did it because he thought that was his job as Foreign Minister. My respect for him magnifies my contempt for Johnson, and especially now for Gove who is shamelessly using this poor woman as a pawn in his grand plan for power, which is all about Brexit.
We should put Gove and Johnson on the plane to Tehran and tell the Iranians that if they free Ratcliffe, they can keep both the tossers.
BTW you can sign the petition to free Nazanin Ratcliffe here. You'll be in the good company of more than a million people.
Blood on their hands? Are we over reacting just a tad? They are undoubtedly a couple of twats, but lets not get carried away.
PS Perhaps they could keep Tony too - a man with rivers of real blood on his hands.
No, absolutely not. You obviously have not read much about the conditions in which she is being kept. Even if she is released soon - which that couple of twats have made a lot less likely - the mental scars will be with her for life. They have put her in one of the toughest prisons, too. This is an ordinary British citizen, a mother separated from her 3 year old child, (who is also being held), a human being. Not a pawn in some political game of a couple of twats.
Actually, however much you've read, I've read slightly more -if you really want to play pompous silly childish cock waving games. How's that 'not playing the man' pledge you made earlier?
Do try and focus. You said 'blood on their hands' - I said overreaction, now can you try and justify the blood on hands statement because you and you like chums must have a different definition.
OK, if you insist, I will rephrase it.
I cannot imagine how anyone who has read or listened to the detail of her incarceration, including the testimony of Iranians in the UK who have been in the same prison on similar trumped up charges, could not believe that she has been physically as well as mentally harmed. Every day she is there increases the likelihood and frequency of this harm. Johnson is directly responsible as Foreign Secretary for her welfare, and he has made it worse for her, not better. Gove is complicit as of today. I trust that satisfies your demand for "focus".
It is not just that Johnson and Gove are a couple of twats. This woman is in the most appalling situation. It would be nice to think that all of us on here care about her and insist the UK Govt. pull its finger out. That is why I supplied details of the petition. Maybe we could all focus on that.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It might be a better move towards understanding, and even empathy if you rephrased:
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
Good points, Seth. Can I ask why the (massive) decommissioning of weapons, greatly increased intelligence and shared initiatives, the much more positive cross party/and seemingly sectarian (which IMO having considerable experience there,will never be fully resolved, hence the continued threat of violence underpinning much of life and organised crime) co-operation, the wonderful efforts towards positive action powered by the will of the people will be, as you say, at risk? How will they be at risk? Is this real or imagined?
The risk will be the establishment of a hard border because of brexit.
I have commented before that there are as far as I can see it only two choices, no border as there is now beyond a few quaint road signs and markings, and a border with any kind of control which would be a hard border.
Right now I can travel to and fro from Lee to Greenwich, or Greenwich to Central London, or London to Bristol, or Bristol to Cardiff, or Cardiff to Lancaster, or Lancaster to Glasgow, or Glasgow to Belfast, or Belfast to Dublin without a heed. If I were taking my garden grown potatoes with me to sell in any of those places I can do it without a hindrance.
If I had to have checks, and costs, and rules and regulations and paperwork as I take myself and my spuds through Blackheath to Greenwich it would become (quote W1A) a bummer.
For many reasons such restrictions on the island of Ireland would be a bummer to the power of 10, and enough to stir up trouble by the usual suspects especially because of the historic reasons being brought back to create enmity. Have you seen the pictures of the walls in Belfast, they are bummer enough?
Perhaps it might be even worth looking at this brexit border thing another way and asking a different question, would a hard border help the peace process?
Gove's disgraceful remark about Nazanin Ratcliffe have now quite rightly been picked up by the media. He, as well as Johnson should resign forthwith. They have blood on their grubby little hands.
After the murderer of the Czech citizen Zdenek Makar in Poplar was shamefully acquitted by a UK court, the Czech Foreign Minister went after the UK in a big way. First he summoned the British Ambassador, and when that predictably yielded sod all he sent a very strong note to the UK government, and finally publicly called on the CPS to reconsider the verdict. In doing this, he risked, as FO of a little country , making it unpopular with a Big Country; often seen as a no-no, especially by our own FCO for example when dealing with the USA China or Russia. He gained no discernible political advantage for doing so. He did it because he thought that was his job as Foreign Minister. My respect for him magnifies my contempt for Johnson, and especially now for Gove who is shamelessly using this poor woman as a pawn in his grand plan for power, which is all about Brexit.
We should put Gove and Johnson on the plane to Tehran and tell the Iranians that if they free Ratcliffe, they can keep both the tossers.
BTW you can sign the petition to free Nazanin Ratcliffe here. You'll be in the good company of more than a million people.
Blood on their hands? Are we over reacting just a tad? They are undoubtedly a couple of twats, but lets not get carried away.
PS Perhaps they could keep Tony too - a man with rivers of real blood on his hands.
No, absolutely not. You obviously have not read much about the conditions in which she is being kept. Even if she is released soon - which that couple of twats have made a lot less likely - the mental scars will be with her for life. They have put her in one of the toughest prisons, too. This is an ordinary British citizen, a mother separated from her 3 year old child, (who is also being held), a human being. Not a pawn in some political game of a couple of twats.
Actually, however much you've read, I've read slightly more -if you really want to play pompous silly childish cock waving games. How's that 'not playing the man' pledge you made earlier?
Do try and focus. You said 'blood on their hands' - I said overreaction, now can you try and justify the blood on hands statement because you and you like chums must have a different definition.
OK, if you insist, I will rephrase it.
I cannot imagine how anyone who has read or listened to the detail of her incarceration, including the testimony of Iranians in the UK who have been in the same prison on similar trumped up charges, could not believe that she has been physically as well as mentally harmed. Every day she is there increases the likelihood and frequency of this harm. Johnson is directly responsible as Foreign Secretary for her welfare, and he has made it worse for her, not better. Gove is complicit as of today. I trust that satisfies your demand for "focus".
It is not just that Johnson and Gove are a couple of twats. This woman is in the most appalling situation. It would be nice to think that all of us on here care about her and insist the UK Govt. pull its finger out. That is why I supplied details of the petition. Maybe we could all focus on that.
Nope, you've still not concentrated quite hard enough. And your focus was very badly aimed.. I'll synthesise.
Here we go.
Blood on hands - over reaction - yes or no?
And I cant believe I'm bothering to respond to your peripheral blathering, but, 1. No I don't insist you do anything. It would be nice if you could just answer the question. 2. Yes Iranian prisons are bad. (FYI I was once accosted and taken to a Zahedan police station for a day) 3. Yes people who end up there will have a bad time. 4. Johnson was a twat and risks lengthening a jail sentence by 5 years (though I imagine foreign Office cogs will turn (despite Boris) and this probably will not happen - we can revisit this in the future.
Phew, all understood so far, nothing too taxing for little old me there.
PS Why do you not show the merest murmur of criticism of the regime that put the mother in jail in the first place. Please don't answer that - it's too obvious.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It might be a better move towards understanding, and even empathy if you rephrased:
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
Good points, Seth. Can I ask why the (massive) decommissioning of weapons, greatly increased intelligence and shared initiatives, the much more positive cross party/and seemingly sectarian (which IMO having considerable experience there,will never be fully resolved, hence the continued threat of violence underpinning much of life and organised crime) co-operation, the wonderful efforts towards positive action powered by the will of the people will be, as you say, at risk? How will they be at risk? Is this real or imagined?
The risk will be the establishment of a hard border because of brexit.
I have commented before that there are as far as I can see it only two choices, no border as there is now beyond a few quaint road signs and markings, and a border with any kind of control which would be a hard border.
Right now I can travel to and fro from Lee to Greenwich, or Greenwich to Central London, or London to Bristol, or Bristol to Cardiff, or Cardiff to Lancaster, or Lancaster to Glasgow, or Glasgow to Belfast, or Belfast to Dublin without a heed. If I were taking my garden grown potatoes with me to sell in any of those places I can do it without a hindrance.
If I had to have checks, and costs, and rules and regulations and paperwork as I take myself and my spuds through Blackheath to Greenwich it would become (quote W1A) a bummer.
For many reasons such restrictions on the island of Ireland would be a bummer to the power of 10, and enough to stir up trouble by the usual suspects especially because of the historic reasons being brought back to create enmity. Have you seen the pictures of the walls in Belfast, they are bummer enough?
Perhaps it might be even worth looking at this brexit border thing another way and asking a different question, would a hard border help the peace process?
FWIW, I don't think any kind of border has to be seen as a hard border. Just because you can only see two options doesn't mean that compromises cant be struck.
I also really don't think a hard border will materialise, and so I am not predicting the death and mayhem the few on here seem to enjoy predicting. Maybe I'm naive, maybe not. Time will tell.
(FYI I have spent a considerable time in and around the Divis Road flats before the demolition process, so yes I have seen plenty of pictures, and recently went back to gaze in awe at the tourist industry capitalising on them.)
To the main point. Perhaps we should cross bridges when we come to them, because a lot of the doom predictions are very much hypothetical, yet 6 posters on CL seem obsessed with what might be, and are full of hyperbolic outrage at every possible future disaster.
So let me get this right. If I threaten to start pipe-bombing random folk under the I Must Have Brexit banner, then Brexit will deffo go through ?
Tthere are suggestions on here that the risk of renewed violence should stop Brexit. i.e threaten violence and you will get your way.
That may be a suggestion. All the brexiters have to do is suggest a solution to the border issue and we can get started. If the threat of violence would stop brexit, then all the brexiters have to do is stop the threat of violence. It might be possible, I doubt it would come cheap, or be a 100% success, but I urge the brexiters to go for it, find a solution to the threat of violence and the hard border issues. Brexiters voted for it, presumably they know the solutions. I am waiting with baited breath as it were.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It might be a better move towards understanding, and even empathy if you rephrased:
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
Good points, Seth. Can I ask why the (massive) decommissioning of weapons, greatly increased intelligence and shared initiatives, the much more positive cross party/and seemingly sectarian (which IMO having considerable experience there,will never be fully resolved, hence the continued threat of violence underpinning much of life and organised crime) co-operation, the wonderful efforts towards positive action powered by the will of the people will be, as you say, at risk? How will they be at risk? Is this real or imagined?
The risk will be the establishment of a hard border because of brexit.
I have commented before that there are as far as I can see it only two choices, no border as there is now beyond a few quaint road signs and markings, and a border with any kind of control which would be a hard border.
Right now I can travel to and fro from Lee to Greenwich, or Greenwich to Central London, or London to Bristol, or Bristol to Cardiff, or Cardiff to Lancaster, or Lancaster to Glasgow, or Glasgow to Belfast, or Belfast to Dublin without a heed. If I were taking my garden grown potatoes with me to sell in any of those places I can do it without a hindrance.
If I had to have checks, and costs, and rules and regulations and paperwork as I take myself and my spuds through Blackheath to Greenwich it would become (quote W1A) a bummer.
For many reasons such restrictions on the island of Ireland would be a bummer to the power of 10, and enough to stir up trouble by the usual suspects especially because of the historic reasons being brought back to create enmity. Have you seen the pictures of the walls in Belfast, they are bummer enough?
Perhaps it might be even worth looking at this brexit border thing another way and asking a different question, would a hard border help the peace process?
FWIW, I don't think any kind of border has to be seen as a hard border. Just because you can only see two options doesn't mean that compromises cant be struck.
I also really don't think a hard border will materialise, and so I am not predicting the death and mayhem the few on here seem to enjoy predicting. Maybe I'm naive, maybe not. Time will tell.
(FYI I have spent a considerable time in and around the Divis Road flats before the demolition process, so yes I have seen plenty of pictures, and recently went back to gaze in awe at the tourist industry capitalising on them.)
To the main point. Perhaps we should cross bridges when we come to them, because a lot of the doom predictions are very much hypothetical, yet 6 posters on CL seem obsessed with what might be, and are full of hyperbolic outrage at every possible future disaster.
Well OK. Would you like to suggest any compromises? The reason I ask is because that is a bridge that will have to be faced/crossed sometime isn't it? I can handle hypothetical if you can suggest a solution, no worries. If brexit means control of the borders and such like. Is it wise to wait for the last minute and then contemplate the border issue once brexit has happened? if you are unable to imagine a compromise, as I admit I am, then a hard border it is isn't it? I would love for you to enlighten me on this issue.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
So people who have bombed each other for decades are bombing each other today.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It might be a better move towards understanding, and even empathy if you rephrased:
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
Good points, Seth. Can I ask why the (massive) decommissioning of weapons, greatly increased intelligence and shared initiatives, the much more positive cross party/and seemingly sectarian (which IMO having considerable experience there,will never be fully resolved, hence the continued threat of violence underpinning much of life and organised crime) co-operation, the wonderful efforts towards positive action powered by the will of the people will be, as you say, at risk? How will they be at risk? Is this real or imagined?
The risk will be the establishment of a hard border because of brexit.
I have commented before that there are as far as I can see it only two choices, no border as there is now beyond a few quaint road signs and markings, and a border with any kind of control which would be a hard border.
Right now I can travel to and fro from Lee to Greenwich, or Greenwich to Central London, or London to Bristol, or Bristol to Cardiff, or Cardiff to Lancaster, or Lancaster to Glasgow, or Glasgow to Belfast, or Belfast to Dublin without a heed. If I were taking my garden grown potatoes with me to sell in any of those places I can do it without a hindrance.
If I had to have checks, and costs, and rules and regulations and paperwork as I take myself and my spuds through Blackheath to Greenwich it would become (quote W1A) a bummer.
For many reasons such restrictions on the island of Ireland would be a bummer to the power of 10, and enough to stir up trouble by the usual suspects especially because of the historic reasons being brought back to create enmity. Have you seen the pictures of the walls in Belfast, they are bummer enough?
Perhaps it might be even worth looking at this brexit border thing another way and asking a different question, would a hard border help the peace process?
FWIW, I don't think any kind of border has to be seen as a hard border. Just because you can only see two options doesn't mean that compromises cant be struck.
I also really don't think a hard border will materialise, and so I am not predicting the death and mayhem the few on here seem to enjoy predicting. Maybe I'm naive, maybe not. Time will tell.
(FYI I have spent a considerable time in and around the Divis Road flats before the demolition process, so yes I have seen plenty of pictures, and recently went back to gaze in awe at the tourist industry capitalising on them.)
To the main point. Perhaps we should cross bridges when we come to them, because a lot of the doom predictions are very much hypothetical, yet 6 posters on CL seem obsessed with what might be, and are full of hyperbolic outrage at every possible future disaster.
Why do you have to be so abrasive around this?
I've already said a few days ago that I wasn't predicting an immediate return to sectarian violence, despite what you've made out, but that there were groups out there prepared to use whatever circumstances they can to further division, like a reintroduced border, and it would be naive to think there are not.
A few days later we have a pipe bomb at a memorial service somewhat underlining my point...albeit apparently its only being mentioned today for "dramatic effect" and not because it actually happened today or anything relevant like that...
My view's not difficult to grasp. I just asked myself two questions; are we more or less likely to have a hard border post-Brexit and is the GFA more or less likely to break down as a result of any hard border. I think more in both situations, you think differently and that's completely fair enough. It's just a shame you feel the need to throw labels around rather than set your point out clearly without the personals.
So let me get this right. If I threaten to start pipe-bombing random folk under the I Must Have Brexit banner, then Brexit will deffo go through ?
Tthere are suggestions on here that the risk of renewed violence should stop Brexit. i.e threaten violence and you will get your way.
Sadly, with regard to Northern Ireland (including the separation of the six north eastern counties from the rest of the Home Rule settlement being prepared in advance of the First World War) that is clearly the case. If it didn't work, there would not be a Northern Ireland today.
For what it's worth, I'm not saying the threat of anything, other than an outbreak of sanity, should stop Brexit. I would like there not to be a Brexit, because I think it is foolish, but that's a different thing.
What I am saying is that the particular variety of Brexit that appears to be being pursued will be seriously economically damaging in Ireland (much more here than south of the border down Baileborough way...), but it will also, according to the PSNI, lead to an increased security threat from dissident Republican terrorists.
Brexit is also a potential danger to the Good Friday Agreement, because shared EU membership allowed for common cause to be developed between both sides (and parts of the GFA seem to be predicated on EU membership).
While I do not necessarily believe that the Assembly here has fallen because of Brexit, I believe the divisions it has caused, or even just highlighted again, will make getting a return to devolved government very difficult.
All of the difficulties that Brexit creates over here could be much reduced by the UK agreeing a settlement leaving it within the Customs Union and/or Single Market. But this appears unlikely.
Which means every Guinness or milk tanker, every load of meat or cheddar heading across the border in Ireland or Irish Sea would be subject to stringent sanitary and phyto-sanitary checks.
The particular difficulty for Northern Ireland will be that every time the UK agrees a Free Trade Agreement with someone like the USA, the further will our regulatory systems be from the EUs (which will gave a significant impact).
I'm a remainer but taking or avoiding a certain course of action, with particular regard to the Irish border, because a small number of nut cases will use it as an excuse to commit acts of terror seems like a slippery slope. Our decisions should not be dictated by terrorists.
I'm a remainer but taking or avoiding a certain course of action, with particular regard to the Irish border, because a small number of nut cases will use it as an excuse to commit acts of terror seems like a slippery slope. Our decisions should not be dictated by terrorists.
You're absolutely right, but that does not mean that a responsible Government should not consider all possible risks and benefits, and make a practical case for their preferred border relationship. Even if we just consider the fact that the EU is a Single Market and acknowledge generic WTO rules, the UK suggestion for the border between the EU and UK is both unfeasible and profoundly dim.
In my view, bad things will happen post-Brexit in Northern Ireland, but the economic impact is more obviously and immediately a problem. There will be security implications, according to the experts, because our one abundant natural resource is numpties.
To make a decision on the proposed border settlement without taking expert security/intelligence opinion into account is akin to implementing environmental and industrial policies without reference to what risks have been identified by climate change experts.
Obviously, it's only opinion, they dont know; it's not like the security services would ever collude with, or even be involved in targeting by, terrorist groups.
I should make clear that I am definitely opposed to Brexit in any event. Given that it is happening, I believe that the most sensible option is seeking to be in the EEA as an EFTA member. Unfortunately, the Government policy appears to have been decided as a tribute to Jacques Tati's films.
My comments concerning the security implications are largely based on a very strong belief that I would have an allergic reaction to being blown up (there's a definite potential to bring me out in lumps).
One death caused or facilitated by the outworkings of Brexit is, IMHO, far too many - though, for most of us, more likely to happen because of the impact on NHS services than anything else.
We have a few on here who seem to think that anyone concerned about the impact of Brexit on the (fragile) peace in NI are only worthy of taking the piss. I think this serves as a reminder to us all that not everyone is happy with the status quo and will be looking to maximise on any division it results in.
Who's took the piss? I've given ideas for solutions about 6 times now (which was basically leaving the physical border as it is), and I also shared a piece later on that said the government is considering doing just that. Although it was largely ignored on here
I should make clear that I am definitely opposed to Brexit in any event. Given that it is happening, I believe that the most sensible option is seeking to be in the EEA as an EFTA member. Unfortunately, the Government policy appears to have been decided as a tribute to Jacques Tati's films.
My comments concerning the security implications are largely based on a very strong belief that I would have an allergic reaction to being blown up (there's a definite potential to bring me out in lumps).
One death caused or facilitated by the outworkings of Brexit is, IMHO, far too many - though, for mist of us, more likely to happen because of the impact on NHS services than anything else.
What about "one death caused or facilitated by the outworkings of" remaining?
This is all getting a bit too sinister now if you ask me...
Comments
Do try and focus.
You said 'blood on their hands' - I said overreaction, now can you try and justify the blood on hands statement because you and you like chums must have a different definition.
So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday, we can extend today's event into the future when they might - for some (as yet unspecified) reason related to a Brexit which hasnt happened yet - keep bombing each other more.
And there again they might have kept bombing each other regardless of Brexit.
But lets make a drama out of it just in case the sky falls in sometime in the future.....
It's the reason why, where they have support the pro-Brexit vote was higher than was expected, because they encouraged their followers to vote that way.
They're definitely dickheads, but there is, sadly, a logic to their thinking.
P.S. Today's pipe bomb was viable and, as I understand it, the town centre was closed for several hours while four controlled explosions were carried out. All things being equal, it's one of many "traditional" activities I'd happily see ended (including, even though we get an additional bank holiday, the Twelfth and any Easter commemorations).
And what is "So for the sake of dramatic effect on Remembrance Sunday..." supposed to mean btw? It was a bomb placed today not, yesterday or a month ago. I'd have made the same point, that there are people out there very happy to continue/ramp up the violence where they can regardless of the date.
I'm interested what these additional targets would be.
'So people who have bombed each other for decades' and changed it to 'So people who have bombed each other for reasons'.
The reasons are the key factor. In the face of other terror threats there is a concept of 'de-radicalisation' which is an attempt to engage with the reasons why people do terrible things. Given the significance of the Good Friday Agreement some of the reasons for conflict, like the border, were softened.
if there is a notion that 'these people have been at it for decades so what's new?', then that notion ignores that there has been relatively new initiatives in the peace process which have helped, and are now at risk.
The Good Friday agreement has diluted the notion that people have been bombing each-other for decades and will therefore continue, and the terror has been reduced massively. I disagree with you if you mean that being worried about an increase in terror make you a drama queen, because it has been demonstrated that with effort terror can be decreased.
Can I ask why the (massive) decommissioning of weapons, greatly increased intelligence and shared initiatives, the much more positive cross party/and seemingly sectarian (which IMO having considerable experience there,will never be fully resolved, hence the continued threat of violence underpinning much of life and organised crime) co-operation, the wonderful efforts towards positive action powered by the will of the people will be, as you say, at risk?
How will they be at risk?
Is this real or imagined?
If you can’t see that the return to a hard border isn’t a complete gift to these people, a wonderful business opportunity then I’m not sure that you have a grasp of the ROI / NI border at all.
Even if the intention is to use cameras on the border with random vehicle checks at a number of locations inside Northern Ireland, the physical equipment and those operating the Customs regime (and, with the terrorists historical view of "legitimate targets", this will include workmen in the building/repair phase and maintenance engineers for the cameras). Mobile Customs patrols will also be vulnerable, and it will only take a couple of near misses for them to require escort.
The PSNI have made clear that they would expect to be asked to provide protection for fixed installations and personnel, which would, in itself, provide additional targets.
This would lead to a reintroduction of the sort of protected buildings that were common in the Troubles. Most of these have been sold off.
If there is a need for border posts, either because the technological solution will not be available in time or following a bombing campaign, we could very easily see a return to sangers and military support to the Police.
The PSNI have neither the physical nor human resources available to address the upsurge in attacks that they expect.
The problem is that there are people willing to kill or main in an effort to achieve their aims. They will take advantage of any opportunities that come their way. And, at the same time, border controls will piss off a significant proportion of the population.
I cannot imagine how anyone who has read or listened to the detail of her incarceration, including the testimony of Iranians in the UK who have been in the same prison on similar trumped up charges, could not believe that she has been physically as well as mentally harmed. Every day she is there increases the likelihood and frequency of this harm. Johnson is directly responsible as Foreign Secretary for her welfare, and he has made it worse for her, not better. Gove is complicit as of today. I trust that satisfies your demand for "focus".
It is not just that Johnson and Gove are a couple of twats. This woman is in the most appalling situation. It would be nice to think that all of us on here care about her and insist the UK Govt. pull its finger out. That is why I supplied details of the petition. Maybe we could all focus on that.
I have commented before that there are as far as I can see it only two choices, no border as there is now beyond a few quaint road signs and markings, and a border with any kind of control which would be a hard border.
Right now I can travel to and fro from Lee to Greenwich, or Greenwich to Central London, or London to Bristol, or Bristol to Cardiff, or Cardiff to Lancaster, or Lancaster to Glasgow, or Glasgow to Belfast, or Belfast to Dublin without a heed. If I were taking my garden grown potatoes with me to sell in any of those places I can do it without a hindrance.
If I had to have checks, and costs, and rules and regulations and paperwork as I take myself and my spuds through Blackheath to Greenwich it would become (quote W1A) a bummer.
For many reasons such restrictions on the island of Ireland would be a bummer to the power of 10, and enough to stir up trouble by the usual suspects especially because of the historic reasons being brought back to create enmity. Have you seen the pictures of the walls in Belfast, they are bummer enough?
Perhaps it might be even worth looking at this brexit border thing another way and asking a different question, would a hard border help the peace process?
If I threaten to start pipe-bombing random folk under the I Must Have Brexit banner, then Brexit will deffo go through ?
Tthere are suggestions on here that the risk of renewed violence should stop Brexit.
i.e threaten violence and you will get your way.
Nope, you've still not concentrated quite hard enough. And your focus was very badly aimed.. I'll synthesise.
Here we go.
Blood on hands - over reaction - yes or no?
And I cant believe I'm bothering to respond to your peripheral blathering, but,
1. No I don't insist you do anything. It would be nice if you could just answer the question.
2. Yes Iranian prisons are bad. (FYI I was once accosted and taken to a Zahedan police station for a day)
3. Yes people who end up there will have a bad time.
4. Johnson was a twat and risks lengthening a jail sentence by 5 years (though I imagine foreign Office cogs will turn (despite Boris) and this probably will not happen - we can revisit this in the future.
Phew, all understood so far, nothing too taxing for little old me there.
PS Why do you not show the merest murmur of criticism of the regime that put the mother in jail in the first place. Please don't answer that - it's too obvious.
I also really don't think a hard border will materialise, and so I am not predicting the death and mayhem the few on here seem to enjoy predicting. Maybe I'm naive, maybe not. Time will tell.
(FYI I have spent a considerable time in and around the Divis Road flats before the demolition process, so yes I have seen plenty of pictures, and recently went back to gaze in awe at the tourist industry capitalising on them.)
To the main point.
Perhaps we should cross bridges when we come to them, because a lot of the doom predictions are very much hypothetical, yet 6 posters on CL seem obsessed with what might be, and are full of hyperbolic outrage at every possible future disaster.
Brexiters voted for it, presumably they know the solutions. I am waiting with baited breath as it were.
Would you like to suggest any compromises? The reason I ask is because that is a bridge that will have to be faced/crossed sometime isn't it? I can handle hypothetical if you can suggest a solution, no worries.
If brexit means control of the borders and such like. Is it wise to wait for the last minute and then contemplate the border issue once brexit has happened?
if you are unable to imagine a compromise, as I admit I am, then a hard border it is isn't it?
I would love for you to enlighten me on this issue.
I've already said a few days ago that I wasn't predicting an immediate return to sectarian violence, despite what you've made out, but that there were groups out there prepared to use whatever circumstances they can to further division, like a reintroduced border, and it would be naive to think there are not.
A few days later we have a pipe bomb at a memorial service somewhat underlining my point...albeit apparently its only being mentioned today for "dramatic effect" and not because it actually happened today or anything relevant like that...
My view's not difficult to grasp. I just asked myself two questions; are we more or less likely to have a hard border post-Brexit and is the GFA more or less likely to break down as a result of any hard border. I think more in both situations, you think differently and that's completely fair enough. It's just a shame you feel the need to throw labels around rather than set your point out clearly without the personals.
Happy to be proved wrong though. Over to you.
For what it's worth, I'm not saying the threat of anything, other than an outbreak of sanity, should stop Brexit. I would like there not to be a Brexit, because I think it is foolish, but that's a different thing.
What I am saying is that the particular variety of Brexit that appears to be being pursued will be seriously economically damaging in Ireland (much more here than south of the border down Baileborough way...), but it will also, according to the PSNI, lead to an increased security threat from dissident Republican terrorists.
Brexit is also a potential danger to the Good Friday Agreement, because shared EU membership allowed for common cause to be developed between both sides (and parts of the GFA seem to be predicated on EU membership).
While I do not necessarily believe that the Assembly here has fallen because of Brexit, I believe the divisions it has caused, or even just highlighted again, will make getting a return to devolved government very difficult.
All of the difficulties that Brexit creates over here could be much reduced by the UK agreeing a settlement leaving it within the Customs Union and/or Single Market. But this appears unlikely.
Which means every Guinness or milk tanker, every load of meat or cheddar heading across the border in Ireland or Irish Sea would be subject to stringent sanitary and phyto-sanitary checks.
The particular difficulty for Northern Ireland will be that every time the UK agrees a Free Trade Agreement with someone like the USA, the further will our regulatory systems be from the EUs (which will gave a significant impact).
In my view, bad things will happen post-Brexit in Northern Ireland, but the economic impact is more obviously and immediately a problem. There will be security implications, according to the experts, because our one abundant natural resource is numpties.
To make a decision on the proposed border settlement without taking expert security/intelligence opinion into account is akin to implementing environmental and industrial policies without reference to what risks have been identified by climate change experts.
Obviously, it's only opinion, they dont know; it's not like the security services would ever collude with, or even be involved in targeting by, terrorist groups.
My comments concerning the security implications are largely based on a very strong belief that I would have an allergic reaction to being blown up (there's a definite potential to bring me out in lumps).
One death caused or facilitated by the outworkings of Brexit is, IMHO, far too many - though, for most of us, more likely to happen because of the impact on NHS services than anything else.
Who's took the piss? I've given ideas for solutions about 6 times now (which was basically leaving the physical border as it is), and I also shared a piece later on that said the government is considering doing just that. Although it was largely ignored on here
This is all getting a bit too sinister now if you ask me...