Off with their heads.
Manny
mostly all viewed the official Spanuish stance as the right one and even had
the audacity to say that Gibraltarians should not be entitled to have a say
in their affairs. Gibraltarians were COLONIALS, the dirtiest of words and
colonials were the scum of the earth and to be regarded as not worthy of
being classified as humans.
Some of the Spaniards who posted here spoke of closing the frontier again
and practically removing us from the rest of the world, to be treated as the
lepers were in years gone by.
Where are those Spaniards now, do they now think differently because their
government on the face of it at least has turned U turn? Do they think as
they did but now dont dare speak for fear within?
We used to enjoy those very hispanic deliberations as they showed the rest
of they world how Spaniards thought and what as a colleague of mine once
described it as "Hispanic democracy" and what this really stood for. The
veiled threats of "off with their heads" and "throw them them to the sharks"
are with us no more. WHY?
To one and all, all the best for the festive season
Manny
Jim Watt
A very good point. It seems that the Spanish Government has
at last accepted that there are Gibraltarians and it is they who will
determine the future of Gibraltar.
Whether the PP really think that thats wrong, or they are just
playing politics is another thing, but its all a move in the right
direction.
I think our campaign of harassing Straw, lobbying MP's and
culminating in the referendum with its clear message has
worked, and is a good example to those seeking political
change that it can be effected by non-violent means can work.
It must be something indigestible for those who have tried
to marginalise us when the Chief Minister takes part in talks
AS AN EQUAL. The only thing now is to ensure that he
remains in touch with public opinion, but I know a bunch of
people who will ensure that their voice is heard over any
whispers from Soto.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com
Ken
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
news:a3sas05eu5bhjlo0m...@4ax.com...
It will be interesting to see also what comes of the Sp right wing party,
the Partido Popular, which I learn proposes to mount a challenge in the Sp
courts as to the validity of the agreement entered into by the SP govt in
recognising the existance of the Gibraltarians, and their ability and right
to speak for themselves.
If the PP action fails and the Sp govt's actions are endoresed in the Sp
courts as legal and proper, it deals the death blow to ANY shenanigans that
does not include the Gibraltarians - in effect, by agreeing that the present
formula is legal, it at least marks as currently less legal the previously
running Brussels process.
If OTOH the current framework is marked as not legal, then the Sp govt has
entered into an unlawful agreement and cannot continue. HOWEVER, while that
much may be binding on the Sp govt, it is in no way binding on the UK or Gib
govts which have already pledged their adherence to the new formula.
The outcomes then are - either the talks as now envisaged go ahead as
planned, Brussels is dead and there is no hope ever again of excluding the
Gibraltarians from determining their future OR the current framework is
paralysed AS WELL AS the Brussels process, given the the UK govt has moved
away from that as well.
The worst that can happen then is that nothing happens, and we stay for a
while exactly as we are now. There is in effect only one direction we can
move in, and that is in the direction of greater self-determination, whether
now or in the future. I can certainly live with that.
K
Jim Watt
wrote:
>It will be interesting to see also what comes of the Sp right wing party,
>the Partido Popular, which I learn proposes to mount a challenge in the Sp
>courts as to the validity of the agreement entered into by the SP govt in
>recognising the existance of the Gibraltarians, and their ability and right
>to speak for themselves.
>
>If the PP action fails and the Sp govt's actions are endoresed in the Sp
>courts as legal and proper, it deals the death blow to ANY shenanigans that
>does not include the Gibraltarians - in effect, by agreeing that the present
>formula is legal, it at least marks as currently less legal the previously
>running Brussels process.
>
>If OTOH the current framework is marked as not legal, then the Sp govt has
>entered into an unlawful agreement and cannot continue. HOWEVER, while that
>much may be binding on the Sp govt, it is in no way binding on the UK or Gib
>govts which have already pledged their adherence to the new formula.
>
>The outcomes then are - either the talks as now envisaged go ahead as
>planned, Brussels is dead and there is no hope ever again of excluding the
>Gibraltarians from determining their future OR the current framework is
>paralysed AS WELL AS the Brussels process, given the the UK govt has moved
>away from that as well.
>
>The worst that can happen then is that nothing happens, and we stay for a
>while exactly as we are now. There is in effect only one direction we can
>move in, and that is in the direction of greater self-determination, whether
>now or in the future. I can certainly live with that.
I really don't see how the Spanish Government can enter into an
llegal agreement, as they make the laws ... they are not that foolish
and without having had the pleasure of reading the Spanish
Constitution doubt it proscribes talking to Gibraltar.
Sounds like hot air, rather like the 'impeach Blair' campaign
which seems somewhat quiet at present.
The media was playing down the paramedics who attended Dr
Kelly and who said 'blood? there is usually lots of it when people
slash their wrists, but we didn't see any'
Nobody apart from the conspiracy theorists wants to know.
Ken
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
I dont know how it works in Sp, but in the UK at least an independent
judiciary can and does from time to time find against the govt when an
interested and motivated citizen or group takes action against their govt in
the high courts. In the UK, as in Sp, the govt makes the laws. Occasionally
the govt's actions are shown to be aginst the laws of the land. I imagine it
is possible in Sp also? If not, it brings into question the nature of what
passes for democracy there, for the judiciary would not be independent.
K
DCC
UK. They've had some very high profile cases in the years since France died.
I recall some in relation to the Basque Country. Democracy DOES work in
Spain. It may not work in relation to Gib, but otherwise they do a fine job
of it.
"Ken" <k...@k1at.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cq4lhu$m63$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
Ken
"DCC" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:cq4uar$sl9$1...@mawar.singnet.com.sg...
> Spain has the 'Audencia Nacional' which does what the Privy Council does
in
> UK. They've had some very high profile cases in the years since France
died.
> I recall some in relation to the Basque Country. Democracy DOES work in
> Spain. It may not work in relation to Gib, but otherwise they do a fine
job
> of it.
How it works (or not) internally is their business. What concerns me is how
it works as regards us. It appears you are of the opinion (as I am) that it
doesn't.
K
Jim Watt
>
>Spain has the 'Audencia Nacional' which does what the Privy Council does in
>UK. They've had some very high profile cases in the years since France died.
>I recall some in relation to the Basque Country. Democracy DOES work in
>Spain. It may not work in relation to Gib, but otherwise they do a fine job
>of it.
My legal advisors tell me the justice system is third world
compared to the British one, whatever its failures.
DCC
You want 3rd World judicial systems, come to my back yard. they set the
standards in these environs.
What about what Blunket guy did for his mistress. Out with the
'fairplay'...in with 'what's in it for me' That's 3rd world....not my words
but a quote from a BBC commentator sometime last week.
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
news:9f6ds0du4lpdn0vvr...@4ax.com...
Ken
> You are probably ill advised.
> You want 3rd World judicial systems, come to my back yard. they set the
> standards in these environs.
> What about what Blunket guy did for his mistress. Out with the
> 'fairplay'...in with 'what's in it for me' That's 3rd world....not my
words
> but a quote from a BBC commentator sometime last week.
What this goes to show is, as has oft been quoted, that power corrupts and
absolute power corrupts absolutely. It seesm to matter not whay your name is
be it Blunkett or Mugabwe IMHO. The transgression is the same, the nature of
what might be done with the usurped power varies IMHO.
K
Jim Watt
>You are probably ill advised.
That was the opinion of three lawyers;
Ken
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:51:00 +0800, "DCC" <m...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >You are probably ill advised.
>
> That was the opinion of three lawyers;
Whether the standards of justice in any particular country are high or low,
it is common experience that half of all legal advice in virtually every
country turns out to be incorrect.
K
Jim Watt
wrote:
There was no dissenting opinion :)
However, let me say I believe Spain has a first rate
health service, and a very wide choice of radio and
television.
They also have good books and newspapers and
a domestic electronics industry that built a satellite
thats whizzing around at present.
However, look at the state of the law on the ownership
of property and its exceedingly backward.
DCC
Spain, I'll say that it was very different and very 'Continental'. But it
was not backward, just not same as what we are used in in UK/Gib and here in
Singapore. I am just at this moment in the process of selling and buying a
place here, and the mambo jumbo one gets from the lawyers and the likes,
makes you think if they are from the same planet as the rest of us! They're
all the same everywhere. Just have different colour skin and/or talk/write
in a manner that is designed to confuse us lesser folk.
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
news:9qces0pb4a7272v7u...@4ax.com...
Jim Watt
>Having had the experience of purchasing and later selling a property in
>Spain, I'll say that it was very different and very 'Continental'. But it
>was not backward, just not same as what we are used in in UK/Gib and here in
>Singapore.
My understanding is that there is no clear title to property,
that is a terrible failing IMHO.
Incidentally, someone mentioned to me that the Nigerian 419
advance fee fraud which is currently rife on email, originated
there and was known as 'The Spanish Prisoner' fraud.
Look it up on google. its an older one than we thought !