Tension between Britain and Spain reaches new high

RobitTV

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

Headcounts of tiny populations are merely figleafs to justify a military base 1800 km from london.
Democracy and the right to self determination of this tiny population have nothing to do with the current british colony and bases there it is related to its strategic position and its military importance combined with british stubbornness and some misplaced imperial jingoism and their warlike nature.
The same attitude which led to the slaughter in the South Atlantic in 1982
over a population the size of a village.



I am all for the rationalization of human frontiers and the decolonization process to be completed. Whether it be the remnants of the british empire
The unification of Korea and Cyprus or the return of Guantanamo Naval base Bay to Cuba and scores of other examples.

Come off it, Netherlands has territories in the Caribbean which was their's since around the early/middle 1600's and have a population of just over 300,000. Are you going to tell me they have have those islands so they can build large military bases? :pac:

Even our American friends have 1 or 2 territories in the pacific that was captured from Japan, i don't see you condemning that!

And France which has numerous territories like Britain, i suppose they are perfect are they?

You are so deluded and just another anti-brit basher. The kind of people who put Ireland to shame.

I Hope you have learnt today that Britain isn't the only empire - France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Netherlands and even Germany for a short period and i'd add the USA aswell.

RobitTV

Jonny7 wrote: »

Does the decolonization include getting the Spanish out of South America?.. or where do we draw the line in this medieval whataboutery

Dear Guadeloupe, French Guiana, and Reunion you may now cast off your chains of French colonial oppression and be rightfully returned to whatever landmass is geographically closest. Oh Guiana, what's that, you democratically chose to stay linked to Paris? you leave the Spanish colonists no choice but to use force to claim what is rightfully theirs

Or even Argentina, The so called "claim" over the falklands.

I swear Spain and France for goodness sake even have more claim to the Islands then Argentina will ever have.

Since Britain, France and Spain have all owned the islands in it's history. Oh and not forgetting even America did own them for a brief period.

I say we let the islands go from the British and leave the French and spanish colonists to use force to claim what is rightfully theirs. :pac:

Or Spain should invade South america Yes great idea! Because............ Spain own's it anyway. :pac:

We MUST comply with the Self-Determination of the Native American's who want ALL of their land back because it is rightfully their's and i'm being serious

Cork boy 55

FTA69 wrote: »

It isn't though really is it? Ceuta and Melilla are remnants of an imperial age whereby European powers claimed dominion over north Africa and regarded it as either their own personal sphere of influence or else integral parts of their own country. Ceuta is no more an integral part of Spain than Algeria was an integral part of France. If you are using the "common sense" argument regarding Gibralter then it also applies to Ceuta and Melilla which are obviously part of Morocco.

Semantical nonsense. Either they have a claim to the place or they don't, population has nothing to do with it.

It's across the sea on a different continent and in the middle of territory belonging to a different country. It's hardly next door in real terms.

Again, wholly irrelevant. By your logic the Brits just have to hold Gibralter for another few years and their claim is then watertight?

Spanish posturing over Gibraltar is nonsense. This isn't a case of imperialist Britain attempting to bully some nation 'yearning to be free', rather a resurgence of an ugly jingoistic and ultra-nationalistic strain that runs through Spanish society. They themselves hold colonies in Morocco and have the brass balls to state they're part of Spain while at the same time throwing a hissy fit over Gibraltar. This is the same state that also bans newspapers, youth groups, mandated political parties and has sponsored death squads back in the 1980s all in pursuit of its chauvinistic ideal of a 'one, pure Spain'.

Is Gibraltar a cynical colony at this stage? Of course it is, but this is a row between countries up to their necks in imperialism and neither of them have any semblance of the moral high ground.

First of all you have abused the multi-quote function and shredded my constructed original post. leaving out key information. As I pointed out
Gib = colony as recognized by UN
Spain's African territory's are a Border dispute
I then went on to compare a hypothetical situation where Gib could be considered a border dispute and compared. The United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories do not consider those Spanish territories to be colonies, whereas it does declare Gibraltar as a non-decolonized territory.
The Spanish position states that both Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of the Spanish state, and have been since the 16th century, whereas Gibraltar, being a british Overseas Territory, is not and never has been part of the United Kingdom

Secondly
I never said Spains claims to Moroccan enclaves where watertight just that they where far better than britain's to gibs

Thirdly
The history of these enclaves and further European advances into North Africa in 19th century are two completely different phases of history
There where taken at a very different time in history The moors only left Spain in 1492.

Fourthly
You don't seem to understand how territorial disputes are attributed by the UN and countries Of course these factors( and others) are important

Cork boy 55

RobitTV wrote: »

Come off it, Netherlands has territories in the Caribbean which was their's since around the early/middle 1600's and have a population of just over 300,000. Are you going to tell me they have have those islands so they can build large military bases? :pac:

Even our American friends have 1 or 2 territories in the pacific that was captured from Japan, i don't see you condemning that!

And France which has numerous territories like Britain, i suppose they are perfect are they?

You are so deluded and just another anti-brit basher. The kind of people who put Ireland to shame.

I Hope you have learnt today that Britain isn't the only empire - France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Netherlands and even Germany for a short period and i'd add the USA aswell.

So..
no counter claim that britian retains gib for military strategic purposes
to project power at a key strategic location due its jingoistic and warlike nature and that gib is a colony and recognized intentionally as such

so engage in more whataboutery and name calling and personnel abuse

Sand

The other key problem for the Spanish is that they entirely ceded Gibraltar to the British in the Treaty of Utrecht. By challenging the terms of that treaty, they are giving permission to everyone else to re-examine and arbitrarily revise treaties that they may have signed with Spain. Undermining respect for sovereign treaties is a dangerous game.

Long term, bad Spanish-British relations are a worse problem for the Spanish. If British tourists are even dully aware of some aggro, they may go to Portugal or France or Cyprus or wherever instead to spend their money with knock on effects for the Spanish tourist industry/economy. I don't think you'll see a boycott (though who knows with The Sun) but why Spain would want to discourage any tourists (even the British...) is inexplicable. On the other hand, will the British even notice a blockade of Gibraltar?

pablomakaveli

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

First of all you have abused the multi-quote function and shredded my constructed original post. leaving out key information. As I pointed out
Gib = colony as recognized by UN
Spain's African territory's are a Border dispute
I then went on to compare a hypothetical situation where Gib could be considered a border dispute and compared. The United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories do not consider those Spanish territories to be colonies, whereas it does declare Gibraltar as a non-decolonized territory.
The Spanish position states that both Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of the Spanish state, and have been since the 16th century, whereas Gibraltar, being a british Overseas Territory, is not and never has been part of the United Kingdom

Secondly
I never said Spains claims to Moroccan enclaves where watertight just that they where far better than britain's to gibs

Thirdly
The history of these enclaves and further European advances into North Africa in 19th century are two completely different phases of history
There where taken at a very different time in history The moors only left Spain in 1492.

Fourthly
You don't seem to understand how territorial disputes are attributed by the UN and countries Of course these factors( and others) are important

Given it was under Portuguese control before that should the Spanish return Ceuta to Portuguese control as well? Or is it only countries you don't like who need to hand over territory despite the wishes of the populace?

RobitTV

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

So..
no counter claim that britian retains gib for military strategic purposes
to project power at a key strategic location due its jingoistic and warlike nature and that gib is a colony and recognized intentionally as such

so engage in more whataboutery and name calling and personnel abuse

Where in Gibraltar is there a significant military base with tanks, Artillery, Fighter jets? Please tell us!

They couldn't even fit one for goodness sake. Project power? you talk like Britain is the only nation to do this.

China is currently expanding its power by trying to claim islands in the pacific and south china sea. I think china is acting warlike!

You have no evidence to support your claim that Britain has some sort of Military base with the power to strike anywhere in the Med and North Africa. I'm sorry but it's just complete rubbish!

What do you mean a key strategic location? It's a small piece of land in Southern Europe! I Don't think North Korea or Argentina will be threatened much by it's incredible strategic location! :pac:

You are basically saying the French keep its territory in South america so they can have a significant military presence in a region that is influenced highly by the USA.

Do you think the USA or it's South American partners would be happy if the French started placing Long Range missiles and several thousand troops and warships on the territory? No.

Spain will go crazy if Britain did it. So that's why there isn't a significant military presence in Gibraltar.

The Falkland islands have much more protection then Gibraltar i'd say Gibraltar is probably the least defended.

The People want to remain BRITISH! The Territory is legal under UN and International law! Self-determination is Legal and The People decide their own future. It's a recognized territory under legal international Law!

There isn't much more that can be said. Just because you are anti-british does not mean you have to Ignore the true facts!

Fratton Fred

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

First of all you have abused the multi-quote function and shredded my constructed original post. leaving out key information. As I pointed out
Gib = colony as recognized by UN
Spain's African territory's are a Border dispute
I then went on to compare a hypothetical situation where Gib could be considered a border dispute and compared. The United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories do not consider those Spanish territories to be colonies, whereas it does declare Gibraltar as a non-decolonized territory.
The Spanish position states that both Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of the Spanish state, and have been since the 16th century, whereas Gibraltar, being a british Overseas Territory, is not and never has been part of the United Kingdom

Secondly
I never said Spains claims to Moroccan enclaves where watertight just that they where far better than britain's to gibs

Thirdly
The history of these enclaves and further European advances into North Africa in 19th century are two completely different phases of history
There where taken at a very different time in history The moors only left Spain in 1492.

Fourthly
You don't seem to understand how territorial disputes are attributed by the UN and countries Of course these factors( and others) are important

So in other words, if the UK dissolved the Gibraltar government and made it part of the UK, it wouldn't be a colony, but because they are self governing, they are?

You ignored my question by the way, why should the Falklands belong to Argentina?

Manach

The European convention of Human Rights is the main rights based treaty that Spain and the UK both signed and implemented. Explicit in that is a emphasis on the democratic values a modern state must embrace - "a fundamental feature of European public order" according to the Court. Hence it does not matter what the UN recognised status is, the democratic wishes of that political unit of Gibraltar (which is included in the convention )are clear - being part of the UK polity. Only if that changes,then Spain might have a case.

WakeUp

The British will not hand back control of Gibraltar anytime soon to the Spanish. It isnt just them who view its location as strategically important so do the Americans and NATO. The most important aspect of the military base for the British is its ability to support their nuclear submarine fleet. It also gives them direct access to the eastern Atlantic. In theory controling the straight of Gibraltar gives the British the ability to exercise control of everything that enters and leaves the Mediterranen. The US/NATO view the straight of Gibraltar as one of five choke points, somewhere that a numerically defending inferior force can prevent a much larger force bringing their superior numbers to bear. The base and Gibraltar maybe small but it remains extremely important to the British and the US and I cant see it being returned to the Spanish anytime soon. Spain will not want to start a war the tensions will receed eventually and the status quo will remain the same I would think.

alastair

WakeUp wrote: »

The British will not hand back control of Gibraltar anytime soon to the Spanish. It isnt just them who view its location as strategically important so do the Americans and NATO. The most important aspect of the military base for the British is its ability to support their nuclear submarine fleet. It also gives them direct access to the eastern Atlantic. In theory controling the straight of Gibraltar gives the British the ability to exercise control of everything that enters and leaves the Mediterranen. The US/NATO view the straight of Gibraltar as one of five choke points, somewhere that a numerically defending inferior force can prevent a much larger force bringing their superior numbers to bear. The base and Gibraltar maybe small but it remains extremely important to the British and the US and I cant see it being returned to the Spanish anytime soon. Spain will not want to start a war the tensions will receed eventually and the status quo will remain the same I would think.

You're aware that Spain are a NATO member, and that the US have military bases there (Spain) already? So what's the strategic benefit in a different NATO member claiming the place?

WakeUp

alastair wrote: »

You're aware that Spain are a NATO member, and that the US have military bases there (Spain) already? So what's the strategic benefit in a different NATO member claiming the place?

It isnt a case of what Spain stands to gain as a NATO member but more a case of what Britain stands to lose and to some extent the US aswell. The Spanish have always had designs about direct control of the straight. When Spain was negotiating to join the integrated military structure of NATO they put forward as part of their application this line of thought ( direct control ) which was rejected outright and not included in the NATO command located in Spain.

Spain affirmed conditional membership of NATO passed by referendum in 1986. As per the terms affirmed among others was that a) no nuclear weapons would be stationed on Spanish territory and b) efforts would be made to reduce the role of the US military on Spanish soil. Britains nuclear submarine fleet is not only important to NATO but also a crucial part of their national defence/ deterrent policy which makes Gibraltar strategically important to them. The docking of nuclear submarines containing nuclear weapons particularly irks the Spanish. Which is why the British will not hand control over to them anytime soon.

Fratton Fred

WakeUp wrote: »

It isnt a case of what Spain stands to gain as a NATO member but more a case of what Britain stands to lose and to some extent the US aswell. The Spanish have always had designs about direct control of the straight. When Spain was negotiating to join the integrated military structure of NATO they put forward as part of their application this line of thought ( direct control ) which was rejected outright and not included in the NATO command located in Spain.

Spain affirmed conditional membership of NATO passed by referendum in 1986. As per the terms affirmed among others was that a) no nuclear weapons would be stationed on Spanish territory and b) efforts would be made to reduce the role of the US military on Spanish soil. Britains nuclear submarine fleet is not only important to NATO but also a crucial part of their national defence/ deterrent policy which makes Gibraltar strategically important to them. The docking of nuclear submarines containing nuclear weapons particularly irks the Spanish. Which is why the British will not hand control over to them anytime soon.

I'd be very surprised if a nuclear armed (Vanguard class) submarine docked in Gibraltar. Nuclear powered yes, but not armed.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Is that why the UK stops and searches every car heading up the M1 and charges €50 to get off the ferry in holyhead?

No need to be either misleading or childish Fred.
Firstly the UK and Ireland have already an agreement in place known as the "Common Travel Area".
Secondly Spain is not charging anyone anything at the mo.
Spain has a duty to protect its economy against smuggling, it is fully entitled to stop vehicles and persons from the non-schengen area to ensure that they are entitled to enter Spain and that they are not smuggling.

Fratton Fred

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

No need to be either misleading or childish Fred.
Firstly the UK and Ireland have already an agreement in place known as the "Common Travel Area".
Secondly Spain is not charging anyone anything at the mo.
Spain has a duty to protect its economy against smuggling, it is fully entitled to stop vehicles and persons from the non-schengen area to ensure that they are entitled to enter Spain and that they are not smuggling.

EU citizens crossing from non schengen to schengen countries should be subject to a minimum check. What is currently going on is ridiculous. It is affecting the residents of Gibraltar's right to free movement.

pablomakaveli

Fratton Fred wrote: »

EU citizens crossing from non schengen to schengen countries should be subject to a minimum check. What is currently going on is ridiculous. It is affecting the residents of Gibraltar's right to free movement.

I've experienced the crossing from Gibraltar to Spain first hand and can say from that experience that it is just more about being an inconvenience than searching cars. We had no problem going into Gibraltar which we had to drive over the airport runway to get in. But on the way back out we faced about an hour wait in the car because they had only one border guard to check the dozens of vehicles that were waiting to pass.

This was over 10 years ago so can't say if its still the same but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.

Jonny7

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Firstly the UK and Ireland have already an agreement in place known as the "Common Travel Area".
Secondly Spain is not charging anyone anything at the mo.
Spain has a duty to protect its economy against smuggling, it is fully entitled to stop vehicles and persons from the non-schengen area to ensure that they are entitled to enter Spain and that they are not smuggling.

That's not the issue. It's the deliberate political intervention to increase to searches to a ridiculous level as a punitive measure.

alastair

WakeUp wrote: »

It isnt a case of what Spain stands to gain as a NATO member but more a case of what Britain stands to lose and to some extent the US aswell. The Spanish have always had designs about direct control of the straight. When Spain was negotiating to join the integrated military structure of NATO they put forward as part of their application this line of thought ( direct control ) which was rejected outright and not included in the NATO command located in Spain.

Spain affirmed conditional membership of NATO passed by referendum in 1986. As per the terms affirmed among others was that a) no nuclear weapons would be stationed on Spanish territory and b) efforts would be made to reduce the role of the US military on Spanish soil. Britains nuclear submarine fleet is not only important to NATO but also a crucial part of their national defence/ deterrent policy which makes Gibraltar strategically important to them. The docking of nuclear submarines containing nuclear weapons particularly irks the Spanish. Which is why the British will not hand control over to them anytime soon.

During the Libyan conflict, Spain actively lobbied for the US to base their (nuclear powered) submarines and carrier in the Spanish/US base at Rota, rather than Gibraltar - arguing that the base at Rota was better suited and more secure than Gibraltar. So maybe they're not that irked at government level?

Fratton Fred

As usual, the daily mash has the full story http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/cameron-offers-military-aid-to-spain-2013081478625

Jonny7

Fratton Fred wrote: »

As usual, the daily mash has the full story http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/cameron-offers-military-aid-to-spain-2013081478625

"An aircraft carrier full of TV journalists in flak jackets has been put on standby, with emergency supplies of Union Jack bunting being flown in from China.

Office worker Donna Sheridan said: “Say what you like about Mrs T, the Falklands were great for national pride and gritty post-watershed TV drama."

lol

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Fratton Fred wrote: »

EU citizens crossing from non schengen to schengen countries should be subject to a minimum check. What is currently going on is ridiculous. It is affecting the residents of Gibraltar's right to free movement.

Tell that to the UK Border Force!
They put the Spaniards in the H'penny place.
At least the Spaniards are not demanding the right to set up border controls inside Gibralter, like the UK does in France.

Fratton Fred

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Tell that to the UK Border Force!
They put the Spaniards in the H'penny place.
At least the Spaniards are not demanding the right to set up border controls inside Gibralter, like the UK does in France.

The bastards, I bet they'd never let the French set up border controls in the UK.

Well, other than those agreed under the Sangatte Protocol

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juxtaposed_controls

murphaph

Gibraltar hasn't been of any military significance since WWII. Air power reigns supreme these days, not naval might. Britain (IMO) has no strategic interest in the Rock any more. They have strategic interest in Cyprus, where they really could be accused of having overstayed their welcome by a few decades (no local population wants them on the island) but Gibraltar is different. They (the UK government) would probably be happier shot of the place, but the residents are British and that changes everything.

How many of those contributing here have been to Gibraltar and the Spanish territory nearby? I have and it helps to understand why most Gibraltarians feel no real connection to Spain and do not wish under any circumstances to be part of Spain.

alastair

murphaph wrote: »

How many of those contributing here have been to Gibraltar and the Spanish territory nearby? I have and it helps to understand why most Gibraltarians feel no real connection to Spain and do not wish under any circumstances to be part of Spain.

La Linea might be a kip, but Gib isn't a whole lot better tbh, and it's a nonsense to claim that Gibraltarians feel no connection to Spain - they've far greater connections to Spain than the UK. The rejection of shared sovereignty has nothing to do with a lack of connection with all things Spanish, and rather more to do with the risk of killing the particular set of economic/financial circumstances that apply in Gib.

LordSutch

murphaph wrote: »

How many of those contributing here have been to Gibraltar and the Spanish territory nearby? I have and it helps to understand why most Gibraltarians feel no real connection to Spain and do not wish under any circumstances to be part of Spain.

As a matter of interest, what did you make of Gibraltar as a holiday destination?
I have always wondered about facilities, beaches, pubs, shops, historic buildings, etc . . .

alastair

LordSutch wrote: »

As a matter of interest, what did you make of Gibraltar as a holiday destination?
I have always wondered about facilities, beaches, pubs, shops, historic buildings, etc . . .

It's not the best, if you're looking for a holiday destination - better options in 'proper' Spain. It is an interesting place to visit short-term all the same - but no more so than say, Ceuta - which has less to offer than Tetouan.

murphaph

alastair wrote: »

La Linea might be a kip, but Gib isn't a whole lot better tbh, and it's a nonsense to claim that Gibraltarians feel no connection to Spain - they've far greater connections to Spain than the UK. The rejection of shared sovereignty has nothing to do with a lack of connection with all things Spanish, and rather more to do with the risk of killing the particular set of economic/financial circumstances that apply in Gib.

Indeed, Gibraltar is not some swanky English speaking version of Monaco. It is run down in parts (but La Linea is much worse-Gibraltar is faded glory, La Linea is just a dump).

Why should the Gibraltarians agree to anything that might harm them economically (and make Gibraltar into another La Linea)? Ireland fiercely defends its tax rates etc. and I feel Gibraltar has every right to do the best it can for itself in a similar vein.

murphaph

alastair wrote: »

It's not the best, if you're looking for a holiday destination - better options in 'proper' Spain. It is an interesting place to visit short-term all the same - but no more so than say, Ceuta - which has less to offer than Tetouan.

Yeah, I only made a day trip to Gib from Spain. I wouldn't go to Gibraltar for 2 weeks. The Rock is very interesting inside and the town is nice to stroll around for a few hours, then you've had your fill and can go back to Spain.

RobitTV

Breaking Via Sky News

Cameron has attempted to de-escalate the situation and has held another phone conversation with Rajoy. Amongst the PMs call for de-escalation is the plan to organise ad-hoc conversations involving the Gibraltar Government. Rajoy has refused and has stated border controls will be maintained.

In view of Rajoy's response the UK is now "actively considering" legal action and confirms it is gathering evidence for a legal case against Spain. And also the possibility of sanctions.

Spain is currently threatening Gibraltar with environmental fines and clamp down on Gibraltar's refuelling industry and a Border tax of 50 euro.

Tention's between Britain and Spain have reached boiling point today with both sides not backing down and Spain is looking to Argentina as a close ally in the dispute.

RobitTV

Latest:

“We are confident that in the end that we will have Gibraltar as part of Spain,” the Spanish diplomat said. -

His comments drew a sharp response from Tory MP John Baron, who sits on the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee.

“I think this is wishful thinking,” Mr Baron said. “This smacks of a country desperate to divert attention away from its domestic political and economic woes.”

“The people of Gibraltar have spoken in a referendum and our position is absolutely clear that Gibraltar will remain British.”

---

UK likely to win at EU court the Gibraltar border ‘excessive checks’ case

Britain is likely to win a case against Spain over the imposition of excessive border queues and could get an interim order to ease the controls from the European Court of Justice said Professor Damian Chalmers an expert in EU law at LSE and who is a Jean Monnet Chair and was editor of the European Law Review and EU Jurist.

http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/15/uk-likely-to-win-at-eu-court-the-gibraltar-border-excessive-checks-case

---

Falklands/Gibraltar in Garcia Margallo’s agenda when he visits Argentina and meets Timerman

Spain’s Foreign affairs ministry Director General Ignacio Ibañez confirmed that Spain’s Foreign Minister José Manuel García-Margallo, would raise Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands with his Argentine counterpart, Hector Timerman, during a visit to Buenos Aires in early September.

http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/15/malvinas-gibraltar-in-garcia-margallo-s-agenda-when-he-visits-argentina-and-meets-timerman

RobitTV

Breaking also tonight -

Britain has urged the EU to send a team to investigate border checks "Urgently"

Britain has asked the EU to “urgently” send a team to Gibraltar “to gather evidence” on extra border checks at the centre of a growing row with Spain. PM David Cameron spoke to EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso to raise “serious concerns” that Spain's actions are “politically motivated”.

http://en.mercopress.com/2013/08/16/uk-asks-eu-to-urgently-send-a-team-to-gather-evidence-on-gibraltar-spain-borders-row

LordSutch

Has to be the case that this will all pass over in the coming weeks, and by this time next year time this will all be forgotten (hopefully) . . .

It can't really escallate, unless of course Cameron does something silly like expelling the Spanish ambassador, or putting extra tax on Spanish wine?

Storm in a tea cup me thinks.

SpaceTime

The whole thing is about deflecting political heat from the PP in Spain and it's not working.

The Spanish are seeing right through it and mostly seem to think it's a bit ridiculous.

If the PP thinks it can deflect media and public criticism of various corruption scandals and the economic mess they've plonked the country in by pretending to be all super nationalistic they've another thing coming!

Spanish media outlets and most Spanish people aren't suckers for a bit of crude spin and are being quite cynical about this stuff.

They want urgent action on the economy not starting a ridiculous fight with the UK.

Reading the Spanish media and talking Spanish people they just mostly think it's absolute nonsense.

Jonny7

The pantomime continues..

(apologies for use of daily rag link)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2396584/A-modern-day-Spanish-Armada-Flotilla-fishermen-stand-Royal-Navy-police-boats-Gibraltar.html

losthorizon

Just arrived back from Holiday and saw this story. Spent the last three days (well four) in Gibraltar. There are no queues or checks as far as I could see. The only time I was asked for a passport was actually going in By Gibraltar police).


Its a very friendly place though.

SpaceTime

This story doesn't even seem to be making the Spanish news very much.

From what I could see on TVE and Canal 24 Horas it was sort of an "and finally .. "

Live Spanish news channel Canal 24H : http://www.rtve.es/noticias/directo/canal-24h/