How long before Irish reunification?

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

It would be ridiculous and absurd (not to mention unreasonable) for a SoS to conclude that a referendum would pass at a time when the share of the vote held by nationalist parties is in a minority and declining election by election.

Despite thersea may and the british attorney general being of the opioion that it would pass??



Your keep falling into your exho chamber trap of assuming its only sinn fein voters who want a utd ireland despite numourous times it being told to yous

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

My opposition to a referendum is based on the international agreement known as the GFA and the requirement to adhere to the terms of that agreement. It would be ridiculous and absurd (not to mention unreasonable) for a SoS to conclude that a referendum would pass at a time when the share of the vote held by nationalist parties is in a minority and declining election by election.

You have the right to take the SOS to task if you feel that way. It isn't the basis for opposing a poll as decided by previous Judicial Reviews. The SOS cannot have their hands tied in what elements they take into account incalling a Border poll.

Good luck with that one.

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

No problem with inclusivity. As a start, I would propose that we make the 12th July a public holiday in Ireland to show our good wishes to our neighbours in the north.

Tbf giving people extra bank holidays is going to be a turn off to voters :pac:

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Despite thersea may and the british attorney general being of the opioion that it would pass??



Your keep falling into your exho chamber trap of assuming its only sinn fein voters who want a utd ireland despite numourous times it being told to yous

Where did I say SF? Read my post again.

James Brown

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

..

Now, if you said that you believe that Northern Ireland was morally wrong in how it was created, your opinion might be classified as dubious, rather than just pure wrong when you state that it is illegal.

As recognised and legal as East Germany.

blanch152 wrote: »

No problem with inclusivity. As a start, I would propose that we make the 12th July a public holiday in Ireland to show our good wishes to our neighbours in the north.

But you don't give weight to nationalism, so why the flip flop?

I'm all for recognising and facilitating the 12th, but a national holiday, it wouldn't warrant due to the minute size of the community that celebrates it. I'd suggest November 11th, Polish Independence day.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You have the right to take the SOS to task if you feel that way. It isn't the basis for opposing a poll as decided by previous Judicial Reviews. The SOS cannot have their hands tied in what elements they take into account incalling a Border poll.

Good luck with that one.

Francie, that nonsense of yours about previous Judicial Reviews has been shown to be nonsense several times. You cannot judicially review a decision before the decision has been made, only after.

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Where did I say SF? Read my post again.

Was under opioin yous were alluding to sf vote...but fair enough if you class the uup and dup.collaspe as nationlist decline



None of which explains why the SOS should ignore the view of british attprmey general or present prime minister in forming their decision???

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Francie, that nonsense of yours about previous Judicial Reviews has been shown to be nonsense several times. You cannot judicially review a decision before the decision has been made, only after.

You saying it is nonsense (you would be expected by most here to say that) doesn't 'show' anything blanch but your inability to accept that there is no onus on a SOS to provide evidence for thinking a Yes vote 'likely' just as there is no onus on him/her to provide evidence for why there has not been one. Here is what the judge said again:

The precise circumstances and the political context of a decision are variable and highly political.
Decision-making in this area requires a political assessment on the part of the Secretary of State and in this context political flexibility and judgment are called for.

In such a context I am wholly unpersuaded by the argument that the Secretary of State is bound to be bound by a policy detailing the way in which that flexible and politically sensitive power is bound to be exercised.”

In essence it must be for the Secretary of State to decide what matters should be taken into account on the political question of the appropriateness of a poll.

Good luck to anyone taking a JR when a Border Poll is called...a fool and their money etc etc.

bobbysands81

facehugger99 wrote: »

There is no indication on the B&A poll that respondents were told any headline figures on cost - they were simply asked if they'd be willing to pay extra tax - any extra tax - towards a UI.

Only 37% affirmed they would.

You are quite correct that the % willing to pay for it will change if the true cost were ever known - just not in the way you think.:D

There is a huge difference in polls which include the question of cost and those that don't, because the issue of cost is fundamental. There's no getting away from it.

Yourself and others on here are consistently ignoring facts put to you and instead are relying on your own opinion as if it’s some scientific truism.

Looking at the most recent poll on Irish unity this is what it says:

Exit polls from Irish local and euro elections.



When broken down further support for a United Ireland is positive across all backgrounds and social groups, both rural and urban... yet you think the vote in unity is never goi g to happen. The vote is inevitable.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

Blanch has three times refused to answer my estion about her stupid point that people in favour ‘dont even pay income tax.’


The poll.

Was taken.

Outside polling stations.

People who vote. Very much care and are informed. And turn up to vote.
And pay taxes.


Doesn’t fit the blinkered myopic head in the sand view of Blanch and Hugger tho

FrancieBrady

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Blanch has three times refused to answer my estion about her stupid point that people in favour ‘dont even pay income tax.’


The poll.

Was taken.

Outside polling stations.

People who vote. Very much care and are informed. And turn up to vote.
And pay taxes.


Doesn’t fit the blinkered myopic head in the sand view of Blanch and Hugger tho

You will get that 'those who don't pay tax' line trotted out when somebody doesn't fall in line with what the poster wants.

FG are past masters of the insinuation too funnily enough. 'Those who get up early' etc etc.

James Brown

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You will get that 'those who don't pay tax' line trotted out when somebody doesn't fall in line with what the poster wants.

FG are past masters of the insinuation too funnily enough. 'Those who get up early' etc etc.

Also FG are 'those who don't like to pay tax for 9 years'. Staunch nationalists in support of a united Ireand no doubt

facehugger99

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Looking at the most recent poll on Irish unity this is what it says:
]

The silly TG4 poll that doesn’t include costs?

Widely rubbished already.

Ties in perfectly with the B&A poll, other that the pan-nationalists in RTÉ didn’t dare include a question on paying for it.

Methinks our State broadcaster wouldn’t like the answers that poll would give them.

You’ve actually ended up proving my point perfectly. It’s all about the costs.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

The silly TG4 poll that doesn’t include costs?

Widely rubbished already.

Ties in perfectly with the B&A poll, other that the pan-nationalists in RTÉ didn’t dare include a question on paying for it.

Methinks our State broadcaster wouldn’t like the answers that poll would give them.

You’ve actually ended up proving my point perfectly. It’s all about the costs.

'Widely rubbished'? Where was that then?

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Widely rubbished'? Where was that then?

Think we might be waiting on huggers answer to that.

Other than ‘I rubbished it’ I doubt anyone else did

bobbysands81

facehugger99 wrote: »

The silly TG4 poll that doesn’t include costs?

Widely rubbished already.

Where?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You have the right to take the SOS to task if you feel that way. It isn't the basis for opposing a poll as decided by previous Judicial Reviews. The SOS cannot have their hands tied in what elements they take into account in advance of calling a Border poll but can still be subject to judicial review after the decision.

Good luck with that one.

The easiest way to correct your misunderstanding once again is to correct your post.

The previous judicial review sought to tie his hands in advance of a decision, that cannot be done anywhere.

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Was under opioin yous were alluding to sf vote...but fair enough if you class the uup and dup.collaspe as nationlist decline



None of which explains why the SOS should ignore the view of british attprmey general or present prime minister in forming their decision???

Have you actually looked at what has happened the combined SDLP/SF vote over the last three elections?

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Have you actually looked at what has happened the combined SDLP/SF vote over the last three elections?

Have you been somehow aware of the unionist vote being wiped out by the moderates?

You have a very selective view of the facts and a bizarre twisted regurgitation of them Blanch

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The easiest way to correct your misunderstanding once again is to correct your post.

The previous judicial review sought to tie his hands in advance of a decision, that cannot be done anywhere.

As I have said any fool can be parted from their money. What the judge said as part of this JD was:

In essence it must be for the Secretary of State to decide what matters should be taken into account on the political question of the appropriateness of a poll.

Basically, they will say the same again. I.E. we note your concerns, but tough.

blanch152

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Have you been somehow aware of the unionist vote being wiped out by the moderates?

You have a very selective view of the facts and a bizarre twisted regurgitation of them Blanch

I have indeed noted the move away from the DUP in the last election, and I particularly welcome the rise in support for the Greens and the Alliance. I have previously referred to the growing sense of a Northern Ireland identity separate and distinct from both an Irish and an English identity but comfortable with the existing constitutional status quo.

Delighted to see it, and delighted it is happening on both sides of the divide.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As I have said any fool can be parted from their money. What the judge said as part of this JD was:



Basically, they will say the same again. I.E. we note your concerns, but tough.

Yes, the SoS must decide the factors to be taken into account, and cannot be pre-judged on it. In essence, the judge was repeating the commonly understood precept of common law that you cannot judicially review in advance.

The purpose of a judicial review is to examine a decision made and ascertain whether it was legal and reasonable. If no decision has been taken, you cannot review it.

It is amazing that you remain incapable of understanding the difference, no matter how many times it has been explained to you and no matter how many different ways. It suggests a blind spot.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, the SoS must decide the factors to be taken into account, and cannot be pre-judged on it. In essence, the judge was repeating the commonly understood precept of common law that you cannot judicially review in advance.

The purpose of a judicial review is to examine a decision made and ascertain whether it was legal and reasonable. If no decision has been taken, you cannot review it.

It is amazing that you remain incapable of understanding the difference, no matter how many times it has been explained to you and no matter how many different ways. It suggests a blind spot.

Your explanation is totally slanted and inadequate.

If the SOS and ONLY the SOS is to decide what is appropriate how can anyone win a case saying his/her call was inappropriate or unreasonable.

You need to start making some sense here.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Every nation has it's nationalists. Every government is nationalist in nature. It's about who you are as a nation, which is of course subject to change. N.I. is an artificial illegal anomaly IMO.

So illegal that its internationally recognised as part of the UK, which we the Irish nation voted for in the GFA.

Everyone can have an opinion, but an opinion does not trump Facts.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I'm all for recognising and facilitating the 12th, but a national holiday, it wouldn't warrant due to the minute size of the community that celebrates it. I'd suggest November 11th, Polish Independence day.

A very telling and sectarian comment in fairness.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

There’s A very simple work around and just make it international day where we celebrate all different ethnicities in the country. As if elements of those up north would even like us making it a national holiday just for them. They really wouldn’t.

janfebmar

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

There’s A very simple work around and just make it international day where we celebrate all different ethnicities in the country. As if elements of those up north would even like us making it a national holiday just for them. They really wouldn’t.

Let's face it, some elements in Ireland could not even tolerate a victims parade (victims and families of IRA victims) in Dublin without rioting, but instead a parade of IRA dissidents was tolerated and went ahead. Says it all.

The thread titled with the word "reunited" is loaded anyway. The only time Ireland was United was when we were with the British.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

janfebmar wrote: »

Let's face it, some elements in Ireland could not even tolerate a victims parade (victims and families of IRA victims) in Dublin without rioting, but instead a parade of IRA dissidents was tolerated and went ahead. Says it all.

The thread titled with the word "reunited" is loaded anyway. The only time Ireland was United was when we were with the British.

Ehhh that ‘victims’ parade never happened.
And as up north any crowd is entitled to hold a march if it’s applied for and held peacefully. No matter how stupid the parade is or how stupid the people are taking part in it.
You truly do live in an alternative universe don’t you?
I’m not explaining reunification to you. You’d want to let every media outlet possible know they’re using the wrong term

Jaysis

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Widely rubbished'? Where was that then?

The was a whole thread dedicated to that joke of a poll Francie lad - I'm surprised you don't remember it. You had your arse handed to you numerous times over the course of discussion.

Have you blanked out the trauma of it all?;)

facehugger99

janfebmar wrote: »

Let's face it, some elements in Ireland could not even tolerate a victims parade (victims and families of IRA victims) in Dublin without rioting, but instead a parade of IRA dissidents was tolerated and went ahead. Says it all.

I think if you scratch beneath the mealy-mouthed words of some of the most hardened proponents of a UI, you would be appalled at the sectarian hatred on which their beliefs are built.

Occasionally the mask slips of course.