Corby at Glastonbury

[big_cod]

Look at the bright side cods corbyn may sell us down the river ,May just may sell the rights to it lol

 

We must consult those at glasto for how to party our way down it

You see Chesters the express we are going get our waters back AND the people are being led down a garden path the big boys in Fishing industry own all the quota laid million and millions for it they ain't gonna give it up the small man will still lose out Manchester Utd are the biggist single owner of cod quota are they going to give up NO it's all a delusion just for you .

[chesters1]

Why do you think i am deluded big business rules the roost worldwide and why should i care who owns the cod all the time i can get some of it ,i may scowl if i cannot but you dont need anything you want things so if i skip a bit of cod every fortnight or so who gives a crap i dont ,you may ,i dont

I bide my time for things to drop in price then buy a lot like anyone with a right mind would when you can CHOOSE to buy things only an idiot wouldnt know buying something makes the price rise if you want prices to drop refuse to buy it and buy something similar

We dont get the best fish anyway its flogged abroad to foreigners so blame them s well for doing so

Ps does football related fish taste different you intrigue me

Edited June 25, 2017 by chesters1

[Ken L]

Yeah and you sound like you relish the idea.

Far from it, one of the reasons that I'll be more than happy to see a hard boarder is it gives us a chance to prevent the wildfire from spreading here when the continent burns - although of course, we have a lot of work to do here to make the UK les of a powder keg first - applying the law in the same way for everyone would be a good start.

 

How exactly did you arrive at the conclusion that I'd "relish the idea"? Or was that just a little fallacious thinking?

[corydoras]

Far from it, one of the reasons that I'll be more than happy to see a hard boarder is it gives us a chance to prevent the wildfire from spreading here when the continent burns - although of course, we have a lot of work to do here to make the UK les of a powder keg first - applying the law in the same way for everyone would be a good start.

 

How exactly did you arrive at the conclusion that I'd "relish the idea"? Or was that just a little fallacious thinking?

It's just how you sound by your posts.

 

There will be no "hard border" If Saint Theresa and her Darling Duds of May try that stunt she might find herself well and truly DUPed. She really need the Creationist vote and I'm not so sure that she can count on her eleven new MPs from north of the border.

 

There will be no hard border between the UK and the EU because there will be no hard border between NI and the Republic.

 

I don't understand you at all sometimes Ken. You rail against creationism in one thread but are willing to bend over and receive a healthy portion of Belfast bacon up the back passage because Brexit. If that's not cognitive dissonance or just plain old phony I don't know what it is.

[Ken L]

The provisions of the GFA will need to be respected in some form but hat does not mean that we have to have an open door to the whole of Europe or right of abode for any Tom, Dick or Abdul with an EU passport at our ports or airports.

As for the DUP, they, along with the Irish Government and no doubt Sinn Fein's 4 MPs will all be party to working out how the border with the republic will work.

If the EU is incapable of allowing the Republic a different border arrangement, ten the worst case scenario is that we leave that boarder open and impose checks on everyone travelling to and from the North.

[chesters1]

The provisions of the GFA will need to be respected in some form but hat does not mean that we have to have an open door to the whole of Europe or right of abode for any Tom, Dick or Abdul with an EU passport at our ports or airports.

As for the DUP, they, along with the Irish Government and no doubt Sinn Fein's 4 MPs will all be party to working out how the border with the republic will work.

If the EU is incapable of allowing the Republic a different border arrangement, ten the worst case scenario is that we leave that boarder open and impose checks on everyone travelling to and from the North.

Going by tv the border is pretty tight anyway with customs and excise looking for red diesel .

I dont mind an offer to the brit lovers coming here (swop one set of immigrants for another) and letting northern ireland go they get a great deal of taxpayers money and produce little we need nowadays you then get a hard border it wont help May and no government has the balls to admit thousands of deaths were wasted keeping something for no other reason they can

It may also stop some troublesome elements leaving their fine house's and putting our fine caravan dwellers out of business selling pegs and heather

Edited June 25, 2017 by chesters1

[corydoras]

The provisions of the GFA will need to be respected in some form but hat does not mean that we have to have an open door to the whole of Europe or right of abode for any Tom, Dick or Abdul with an EU passport at our ports or airports.

As for the DUP, they, along with the Irish Government and no doubt Sinn Fein's 4 MPs will all be party to working out how the border with the republic will work.

If the EU is incapable of allowing the Republic a different border arrangement, ten the worst case scenario is that we leave that boarder open and impose checks on everyone travelling to and from the North.

No you won't.

 

!) The DUP won't stand for it, so that's 10 votes for Sait Theresa down the pan.

2) I'm pretty sure that at least some the new cohort of her Tory MPs in Scotland won't be able to face their constituents. Religion still matters north of the border. Scotland is a sectarian country. (much to my chagrin)

3) Thousands of people cross that border each and every day to get to work

4) It's totally Impractical. That border is more than three hundred miles long and is criss crossed by hundreds of little roads and country lanes.

 

 

This is the kind of thing that should have been talked about and worked out BEFORE Clever Clogs Cameron called his stupid referendum.

 

Last but not least talk like that REALLY puts the peace process in jeopardy. Westminster is supposed to be neutral and not show any NI party any favour, let alone be beholden to one.

[corydoras]

Going by tv the border is pretty tight anyway with customs and excise looking for red diesel .

I dont mind an offer to the brit lovers coming here (swop one set of immigrants for another) and letting northern ireland go they get a great deal of taxpayers money and produce little we need nowadays you then get a hard border it wont help May and no government has the balls to admit thousands of deaths were wasted keeping something for no other reason they can

It may also stop some troublesome elements leaving their fine house's and putting our fine caravan dwellers out of business selling pegs and heather

Dangerous, dangerous talk that. "Letting Northern Ireland go" would mean and end to the Peace Process.

Edited June 25, 2017 by corydoras

[chesters1]

Dangerous, dangerous talk that. "Letting Northern Ireland go" would mean and end to the Peace Process.

There never was a process just that admitting the terrorists won couldnt be acknowledged .

I had conceeded those that want to come can the rest can have their religious war to themselves

[Huge_Vitae]

......David Cameron with Libya all In all doesn't make good reading .

And where has all these wars got us in deep **** cost us billions and many lost precious lives and Corbyn voted against them all makes you wonder like him or loath him he has been proved to be right.

Sorry to burst your bubble again BC but twittering on about matters when you clearly do not know wtf you are talking about is always going to attract my attention.

 

Do I like 'Dodgy Dave?' Certainly not, did he order the Libyan intervention? NO, you listen and read too much propaganda, the Libyan intervention was at the bequest of the United Nations to enforce a no fly zone as the treatment of civilians by Bliars friend was escalating into acts of criminality against humanity, as such NATO, That's NATO not the UK intervened, UK forces were deployed along with many other NATO member forces also deployed, at the time of deployment they are no longer UK, French, Netherlands, Canadian, US or any other Countries troops, they are NATO Troops.

 

Thereafter, the UN recognised, legitimate Govt. in Libya requested UK troops assistance and such assistance was granted. So as a starter get some historical facts correct.

 

Yes, Jeremy Corbyn voted against each and every involvement in any Country for whatever reason, but that does not make him right on every occasion, there is room for a pacifist voice in every Country but never should the use of Armed Forces deployment in another Country to protect civilians from genocide and mass murder be ruled out from the start.

 

Parliment were asked to vote on the deployment to Iraq, as a result of the information given by Bliar they decided to support the War, that vote was not the fault of the Members who voted for it, it is squarely in the lap of the person who authorised the bullocks that was told to Parliment, and yes, Corbyn was, quite probably, correct to object as a handful did, but as I said he votes 'NO' on each and every occasion which means he has no thought but to vote against!