Monday, April 1, 2019

The Irish Problem

In the comments of a recent post I made on the whole Brexit mess, one commentator bluntly asked how I would fix "the Irish problem". It's a good question and I am not dissuaded by the fact that it has bedevilled great minds for centuries. What armchair critic was ever put off by such piffling details, especially when he's on the other side of the planet?

The main argument is that Britain leaving the EU takes Northern Ireland with it, while the Republic of Ireland remains in the EU and that this must mean a so-called "hard border" between the two if Britain deviates from EU rules on goods, services and people, which of course would be a natural result of Parliament regaining control over regulations covering them.



There is much talk about how this could destroy the Good Friday Agreement, leading to the Troubles re-starting. It all sounds apocalyptic, and is intended to by the Remainers. The centerpiece seems to be this report on potential violence by the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. I've read the whole thing and what I see is the usual collection of bureaucratic if's, maybe's, and possibly's, with most of those based on surveys, focus groups and the occasional comment from a handful of politicians and bureaucrats, usually reported without the caveats. Moreover, from that report and its many links, it's clear that all of this talk of violence is because a hard border is created, not the border being created because of violence, so why would anybody do that, especially when everybody says they won't.

To me this is a classic Giordian knot problem, the knot is the traditional fear in Northern Ireland about joining the Republic of Ireland, and it's time to cut it. Let's look at the four players.

Northern Ireland (NI)
The traditional fears have been greatly reduced by six factors.

First, the border was effectively removed in 1993 with the end of customs posts due to EU agreements and this preceded the Good Friday Agreement. There is nothing to suggest that having a "soft" border made the Troubles worse in those five years, even as killings continued, nor would it now and people know this, which is a big reason why they're opposed to a hard border. The border has been basically invisible since 2005 and there is no reason why it should not remain so. For all their "patriotism" and opposition to it, even the DUP express little concern about the open border to their old Southern enemies. When you've got that, you've basically conceded that you're a province with some local controls.

Second the amount of time that has passed means an entire generation has grown up without the sectarian and religious bullshit that would make them fear the South. Despite the DUP's opposition at the time 70% of the people of NI voted for the Good Friday Agreement. It's hard to imagine that that figure has shrunk since then. The DUP looks increasingly disconnected from the NI population. The fears are still there in pockets, but increasingly losing ground given the evidence of everyday life, including crossing into Ireland and finding no devils. Even Ian Paisley's son is not the firebrand and political force his old man was.

Third, there has been an obvious and dramatic collapse in Roman Catholicism in the South:
While daily attendance was 13% in 2006, there was a reduction in weekly attendance from 81% in 1990 to 48% in 2006, although the decline was reported as stabilising. In 2011, it was reported that weekly Mass attendance in Dublin was just 18%, with it being even lower among younger generations.
With all the scandals that's not a surprise. It's rather hard to be scared of Popery when Irish Catholics themselves are turning their back on the man, including eliminating restrictions on abortion, homosexuality and gay marriage: further evidence of the waning power of the church.

Fourth, the world has opened up for these generations. They're going to be much less willing to fight for a nation that they often work away from, including working in a prosperous South that increasingly seems no different to "home".

Fifth, the NI government effectively collapsed several years ago, was basically dysfunctional before that and....? Nothing! In everyday life the economy and civil institutions continued to putter along quietly. Why it's almost as if the local government counted for nothing, so when the DUP squawks in the British Parliament about local control, how much notice do the locals take of it?

Sixth, the attachments to Britain have weakened greatly. As with other parts of the British Commonwealth, how much do ordinary folk care about the coming reign of Dumbo Prince Charlie, the Great Protector of the Church of England and his Tampon Queen? Given such hideous insults to history, the locals are likely increasingly more attached to the EU, again led by the younger generations.

Republic of Ireland
The locals here can see all the above in NI and they know it's a waiting game as the older generations die off in both countries. All they have to do is get another twenty years of peace, prosperity and declining religious observance, let alone fanaticism, in both nations, to allow their long desired merge into one nation, which will change virtually nothing on the ground.

For that, I'd wager they'll put up with any amount of nonsense regarding goods, services and people that breach EU rules that would otherwise require a hard border. For the same reason as NI locals, the Southern Irish know it would mean violence, so they would never implement it, even if told to by the EU.

The European Union (EU)
The EU loves applying legal bullshit, especially at the finely-graded lower levels of life. But paradoxically when it comes to big things, they're as compromising and flexible as you would expect of such a "union". The best example being the Maastricht Treaty. Its rules around debt/GDP ratios and many other fiscal and economic matters, have been breached countless times over the last twenty years by many EU members. On each occasion noises have been made - and accommodations.

It will be the same with the Northern Irish border.

For example, claiming that their precious border will be penetrated by the likes of organised crime has to account for the massive penetrations already occurring in the South and East of the EU by much larger organised crime units than anything the British and Irish have. Or if the EU starts crapping themselves about cheap, hormone-fed Australian beef being smuggled across from Britain, or other similar phobias, then they will simply have to weigh those against the negatives of a hard border, as the Republic of Ireland will. And I've no doubt they'll reach the same conclusions, quietly shelve such talk and work on reuniting the two Ireland's over the next twenty years. They might even be quite good at that!

Great Britain (GB)
The ties to Northern Ireland have weakened enormously in the last twenty years. In a multi-ethnic Britain where the English increasingly would love to see fiscal soakholes like Scotland and Wales take a hike, the idea of fighting in any way to keep NI part of "Great" Britain has almost no appeal even at the political level, although all the right things have to be said to the DUP at present.

But basically the vast majority of the British people increasingly could not give a stuff about NI. If the call went out to send the British Army back there for "peacekeeping" duties, the negative public reaction would likely be greater than it was to involvement in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts.

Talk about uncontrolled immigration into GB and the resulting controls is similar scare talk, for the challenges of the route would make it much less of a problem than what is currently being dealt with in ports and train stations along both sides of the English Channel.

Theresa May has said that:
‘it would also be unacceptable to break up the United Kingdom’s own common market by creating a customs and regulatory border down the Irish Sea’
True. So don't create one! With Brexit, GB is basically entering a classic free trading example where the damage is actually to the protectionist partners. GB will be trading with the rest of the world so in that case the worries are actually on the EU side with all its tariffs and other nonsense, not Britain's side. So again, let the EU try to create such a border.

And as with the EU and the Republic of Ireland, if there are some negative consequences in goods, services and people crossing from NI into Britain - let them slide for the same reasons. Much better to buy time until Britain can finally, with great relief, watch NI sail off into the sunset and merge with their Republican neighbours.


To sum up. The "Irish Problem" - the "hard-border" issue - is basically another hobgoblin crafted by the EU as part and parcel of that whole French “rapport de force” negotiating strategy designed to make things as tough and painful as possible for GB, perhaps even to such an extent that she gives up and rejoins the EU.

The Conservative government and Theresa May should not fall for it. Sadly they have to date. But I'm sure that if Britain "crashes out" on April 12, while there will be difficulties, the demands of business will soon find ways around them and for most people, especially those in both Ireland's, life will continue on quite normally.

31 comments:

Kimbo said...

I hope you are right. The problem is similar sentiments were expressed back in the 1950s in Northern Ireland. Or in Yugoslavia right up until the mid 1980s for that matter. And just as a number of experts were prophesying before World War I that conflict between the major nations of Europe was impossible, human stupidity, fear and bad faith can quickly upset the most rational and measured calculations. Given the historical madness of Northern Irish sectarianism I’d hope for the best but be vigilant lest it turn shit bag real fast.

Snowflake said...

An awful lot of words and no real penny put down. Essentially you appear to argue for a de facto customs union between the EU and Britain via Northern Ireland until Northern Ireland somehow decouples from the UK and joins Ireland. Or something, perhaps you’re arguing the opposite - a hard border between Northern and Southern Ireland; you’re remarkably vague given how long-winded you are. Your faux self-deprecation at the beginning of the piece of verbiage was the only sensible thing in it.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Never in the field of human endevour has so much speculation, innuendo and spin been written into such a short piece.

The 28 member states have a border with Russia not to mention the other 39 external borders with non EU countries. Several of those have agreements with the EU and are in the customs union, Norway for example.

A third party country without a trade agreement MUST have a secure border if it wishes to trade under WTO rules...if it opens it's border to one country without tariffs or checks it must do the same to the rest of the world. That of course is reciprocal on the EU and if the UK were to crash out it would be a race to see who put up the first check point. Russia and Turkey would be the first to kick off if the UK was given special dispensation on a no deal Brexit.

"Taking back control" was the catch phrase of the leave campaign, well that does not include 300 hundred miles of unsecured border and if the UK were to leave the French and the Irish are under no obligation to intercept immigrants from sub Saharan Africa.....in fact the French would probably help them on the boats as they are totally fed up with British mismanagement of the immigration setup both with legal EU immigrants and non legal.

If the UK wants to stay in the customs union it must accept the four freedoms. It can't cherry pick and the insinuation that the French are calling the shots is totally wrong. All the negotiations are translated into 24 languages and every government votes on the results before it is ratified.

Introducing generational feelings on religion or local politics has absolutely no place in the argument.

I wont comment on the IRA/Sinn Fein but to think that a conflict that covered 10 generations would go away in madness, just look at the Balkans.

Read this and you will see the strength of feeling and perhaps the answer.
https://www.sinnfein.ie/

In short Chunter is doing a hit job on the EU again...........but why? Is because Putin and the troll factories think exactly the same. A divided Europe with turn on each other again leaving the door open for Russia to exploit.?

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Snowflake.....I wish I'd said that.

Kimbo said...

@ Eggie

“I wish I’d said that.”

To paraphrase James McNeill Whistler when Oscar Wilde said the same thing to him,

“You will, Eggie, you will”. 😀

Tom Hunter said...

@Kimbo
Yes, I worry about that too. I was taking a rather hopeful, Whiggish view of this particular history.

@Snowflake
You seem reasonably articulate. It may be that you're not entirely ignorant also. Pity you can't pull yourself past your loathing for this blog and its authors to actually produce - you know - arguments in response. Instead you use every article as an opportunity to attack each author in exactly the same way every time. That lack of variation is very dull and boring, but I'm hopeful you might produce something worth reading one day.

In the meantime I made it quite clear with multiple reasons: there will be no hard border in Ireland and this situation will slowly force the NI to join the Republic over time. If the EU is smart about it they'll play it slow.

Tom Hunter said...

@Eggbutt
I thought you said you weren't going to engage with me, such was your wounded pride and outraged, insulted honour?

But anyway, thumbs up for actually producing arguments.

That of course is reciprocal on the EU and if the UK were to crash out it would be a race to see who put up the first check point
All very legalistic. My argument is that the practical upshot of trying to erect a hard border in Ireland will be that it fails, no matter who tries to do it. The Irish simply won't accept one. The EU will compromise in this specific area as it has on other big issues like Maastricht breaches. The alternative will be to take responsibility for the fighting that starts from both sides against hard border infrastructures. I can't see the EU taking that risk.

if the UK were to leave the French and the Irish are under no obligation to intercept immigrants from sub Saharan Africa
Like I said, the Irish route is very roundabout and I doubt they would be keen on having hordes of such folk transiting their nation to get to Britain. Meanwhile the French aren't doing a very good job from their end right now and they have every interest in controlling such flows of immigrants for their own internal reasons. They're not going to screw that up just to spite the British.

... the insinuation that the French are calling the shots is totally wrong.
/eye roll/
So, using the French term for the general idea of the balance of power in any relationship translates in your brain to an insinuation that I'm saying the French are calling the shots? Alrighty then. Thank god I didn't use any Latin terms.

.... to think that a conflict that covered 10 generations would go away in madness
Sure, but they'll simply continue within a united Ireland in the EU, in the same way that other ancient tribal and ethnic conflicts continue within and across various EU nations.

... is because Putin and the troll factories...
Aaaannnnnddddd we're back to boring again. The EU's losing one nation: that alone is not going to divide them, but they need to start paying attention to voters more. Meanwhile Russia has too many fundamental weaknesses to take advantage anyway; they're a paper tiger getting splashed with water. And if by "take advantage" you mean trying to get the likes of Germany hooked on Russian gas? Well they're doing that already and seem fine with it.

And I do have issues wth the EU. My objections will probably make another article, but in short, I think they're too much in love with being governed by small groups of highly educated technocrats in a vast Administrative state and as a result, treat Euro voters with more contempt than even the average nation-state.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

You contradict ourself time and time again Chunter.

"In the meantime I made it quite clear with multiple reasons: there will be no hard border in Ireland and this situation will slowly force the NI to join the Republic over time. If the EU is smart about it they'll play it slow."

In a blog of sometimes ridiculous statements that one is right up there. If there is no customs and immigration checks on the 300 mile border it will mean that Brexit has been canned or Westminster has relinquished it's hold on NI and moved the border to Wales Scotland and England........the EU does not have play anything at anytime, in fact the whole thing can be done without EU involvement or comment as the UK is a sovereign nation in charge of it's own laws.

Of course you could, like Niggle Fromage, always try to convince the Rep. of Ireland to leave the EU which would solve the problem but the Irish Prime Minister said "I know you think the the Irish are mad but were are not that mad"

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Aagh...just spotted your clever little trick. Insinuating that the EU is secretly running the Irish govt and urging them to incorporate Northern Ireland into the great new soviet sphere......what a crock.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Chunter...crossed posts. You do not argue, you speculate so there is no point in speculating back.

Is there something about world trade organisation rules that you don't understand??

You take on non legal immigrants is interesting as it means you nothing about the subject or France.

Eyes roll...you have said in previous posts that the French are influencing the talks
They are in as much they can have their say like the rest of the 28 before the result is put to the ballot.

Please please don't do another article, I think we are all articled out at the moment

Andrei said...

It all goes to show the formerly Great Britain is a defeated Nation and the Victors are intent on Balkanising it

Love this
"English increasingly would love to see fiscal soakholes like Scotland and Wales take a hike, the idea of fighting in any way to keep NI part of "Great" Britain has almost no appeal even at the political level, although all the right things have to be said to the DUP at present."

Of course these were the regions of the formerly Great Britain that drove the industrial revolution. The Great ships were built on the Clyde and in Belfast and powered by Welsh Coal when Britannia ruled the waves

And the oil and Gas is Scottish not English when it comes down to it

I doubt that NI would ever be allowed to reunite with the South - if the past shows anything NI would be transformed into a statelet within the EU in true divide and conquer fashion. It would or will become the Republic of Northern Ireland, capital Belfast, ruled from Brussels

What our masters want is to transform humanity into a grey army of worker ants with no culture and heritage and history forgotten - it's Marxism.

As you say in the Republic of Ireland the Godless Empire has successfully marginalized the Roman Catholic Church in a manner reminiscent of the Soviet Union while Irish independance has been subsumed to the gnomes of Brussels who act for the Trans-Atlantic elites

Andrei said...

38-year-old Farah Swaleh Noor arrived in Ireland in 1996. He claimed he was from Somalia and that his family had been killed. A later investigation showed that this was a lie and that he was actually from Kenya, and his family were very much alive. Additionally, he had a plethora of convictions. In 1997, he raped a mentally disabled teenager who later gave birth to a son. Two other women also claimed he raped them and he had faced eight charges of both assault and disorder. The Gardaí described him as being particularly violent towards women and he was a suspect in the murder of Raonald Murray, a 17-year-old girl that was stabbed to death in 1999.

Noor moved in with Kathleen Mulhall, who had twin daughters - Linda Mulhall and Charlotte Mulhall. On the day of 20 March, 2005, the four of them spent the day getting drunk in Dublin and the twins and their mother took ecstasy tablets before they made their way back to the flat where Kathleen crushed an ecstasy tablet and slipped it in Noor’s drink.

While they were all sitting on the sofa, Noor began to touch Linda in an inappropriate way which caused an altercation between Kathleen and Noor, ending with her shouting “just kill him for me” - to which the twins complied. Charlotte stabbed Noor in the neck with a stanley knife and he fell to the ground. Linda then hit him across the head with a hammer numerous times. They took turns in stabbing him - he was stabbed at least 27 times. Kathleen watched on. The twins then dragged his corpse to the bathroom where they dismembered it and dispatched of it.

Linda and Charlotte were charged with murder and Charlotte was given a life sentence while Linda was sentenced to 15 years. Their mother, Kathleen, was sentenced to five years for assisting with the disposal of the body. Noor’s head and penis were never discovered. The twins were dubbed the “scissor sisters” by the media. After the twins were sentenced, their father hanged himself.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Are you allowed out without a minder Andrie....do you just cut paste any shit that takes your fancy, actually that last of yours is worthy of our boylover in Thailand

"As you say in the Republic of Ireland the Godless Empire has successfully marginalized the Roman Catholic Church in a manner reminiscent of the Soviet Union while Irish independance has been subsumed to the gnomes of Brussels who act for the Trans-Atlantic elites".....lovely

Tom Hunter said...

@Eggbutt

You just don't even read anything before you write, do you? "Thinking" for you means your knee hitting your jaw to spark a few neurons.

you have said in previous posts that the French are influencing the talks
In my previous post, Borders and Backstops, I quoted an in-depth article which discussed, among other things, the concept of the balance of force and used the French term for it.

I did not take from that article that they were saying that France was in charge of the negotiations: no reasonable, coherent, sober reader would have. In fact the article went into some detail to discuss the EU-wide efforts, voting and support that applied - exactly as you demand is the case.

That's it. That's all. The rest is entirely your fevered interpretation of what you think I said based on skim reading. You seem to have conversations and arguments with an imaginary opponent in your head before writing anything, which is ok except that you then constantly complain about his ignorance, stupidity and insulting bad manners.

Tom Hunter said...

Insinuating that the EU is secretly running the Irish govt and urging them to incorporate Northern Ireland into the great new soviet sphere......what a crock.

Oh Gaaawwwdddd.

What I said was that the EU will work with the Republic of Ireland to incorporate Northern Ireland slowly over time, given that it's right in line with the grand EU project of having a happy, unified Europe.

You're confusing me with Andrei. Not surprising given your mania about Russian trolls.

Andrei is a Russian Super Patriot and he really does believe all that stuff about the giant EU Godless conspiracy stuff, extending a vast Godless empire across Europe.

By contrast I just think the EU is simply a bunch of stuffed shirt technocrats who have contempt for the voters in EU nations. Their idea of "democracy" extends no further than having the leaders and technocrats of those nations vote on issues. The plebs can just suck those decisions up.

Oh - and as yet another example of your strangely wired brain, I see some strange references from you about my New Zealandish and my beat cop Dad? The only time I have written the words "beat cop" was in my piece on Chicago, and that was a direct reference to Sean Connery's character in the movie, The Untouchables.

This, plus your earlier complete spinout about Hillary Clinton, where you claimed I'd said something about her that I demonstrated I had not, leads me to think that you're just not much of a coherent thinker.

I note that on that last one you did at least blame your mistake on your pills. I'll keep that in mind.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Three times you referred to beatcop/detective in different posts...beat cop is not a term that was ever used in NZ. It is peculiar to eastern seaboard cities in the US. I really do think you try too hard.

Tom Hunter said...

That's because I lived in Chicago for a decade. I use the term "diaper" instead of "nappy" also. :)

Tom Hunter said...

Oh - and a quick DuckDuckGo check reveals only that one use of "beat cop" on this blog, by me or anyone else.

Take your pills. :)

andrei said...

Hey Tom if Sottish independance succeeds do you think they will allow the Jaobite heir to succeed as nominal head of State?

We could soon see Queen Sophie I of Scotland on the Scottish throne but it will never happen.

Tom Hunter said...

@Andrei
Ha!

Scotland's far too socialist for that sort of royalty nonsense! They're also far too socialist to go for independence from Great Britain unless they can be sure of having the EU as a replacement sugar daddy. They've been sucking on tits for so long they're frightened of true independence, as the last vote showed. I've wanted them to go independent for years, but the results have been a bloody embarrassed to my heritage.

In the words of Danny Boyle in Trainspotting:
It's shite being Scottish!
We're the lowest of the low!
The scum of the fucking Earth!
The most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash, that was shat into civilisation!
Some people hate the English, I don't! They're just wankers!
We, on the other hand, are colonised by wankers!
Can't even find a decent culture to be colonised by!
We're ruled by effete assholes!


Having said that, Brexit may well force the issue again. Given how much it would screw Labour in Britain, the Conservatives should drop their attachments to Empire and encourage the Scots to as many votes as they want until they leave.

Tom Hunter said...

See also this superb article on Milan Kundra in Quillette.

Much of it is actually a rebuke to some of what I believe about our world and the way it is moving - including my take on the Irish problem. But I'm not about to dismiss the thinking of a man who experienced and wrote so well about Communism. This quote in particular seemed appropriate:

The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long that nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was. The world around it will forget even faster.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Can't count Chunter?...........three references to beat cop/deetctive in the firearm posts including one where "he" looked at your renewal "in" NZ.

Suddenly he's your dad and whats a New Zealandish?

I put your age at about 25 possibly younger with very good computer skills. This is not a case of "oh look how clever I am" and I'm doing this for fun. You and your sock puppets are intent on destabilisation.

Your responses to criticism are sometimes childlike and at odds with your posts.

Perhaps one day we may meet in a street or in a bar in which case I will shout first.

Tom Hunter said...

I put your age at about 25 possibly younger

God I wish.

Tom Hunter said...

three references to beat cop/deetctive in the firearm posts ..
Arggggsgs - ya got me. Fucking DuckDuckGo missed that one.

And yes I did refer to my dad, who was a beat cop and then a detective in the Force just prior to WWII, hence the reference to the abandonment of gun registration in 1983, which he disagreed with.

However you were still wrong about the gun licencing procedure in NZ, as Adolf demonstrated and I'm sure your old mate, The Veteran, could also attest. And you were wrong about this too...
beat cop is not a term that was ever used in NZ. It is peculiar to eastern seaboard cities in the US.

"https://duckduckgo.com/?q=new+zealand+%22beat+cop%22&t=h_&ia=web".

Quite common in NZ actually but perhaps it's a modern infiltration of another Americanism?

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Maybe common now through TV but certainly not in the 70's and 80's. Beat cop was a job description in the 20's through to the 60's in the US cities. The same cop would patrol the same neighbourhood for years knowing the name of every kid on every block.
In NZ probationary constables with a senior constable would patrol on foot usually at night, it was called a beat (from UK) but they never referred to themselves as beat cops. Many of our veterans went into the police force and from what I have heard the foot patrols were replaced by Motor patrols in the 70's and once again they say that they never referred to them selves as beat cops.

Now lets look at the other.....to make detective in the NZ police you would have to have 5 years in uniform which would make your dad about 25-28 before the war. if he had you prior to the war that makes you about 80.

If you were a baby boomer after the war you are in your 70's...if he waited until 1959 he would be 45-49 you would be 60 +.

I just think you make stuff up as you go along. Bit disappointed that our gun nut Paranormal did not pick up on your rambling post about your .22 being the workshop.

Tom Hunter said...

Ha!

Dad joined in January '37 (same wing as Gid Tait). Did two years in Auckland on the beat(and they certainly used that expression at the time), made it into the D-office in late '38. None of this five year nonsense. He resigned in early 1940 for some business in the North African desert.

And I was a very late baby in the lives of my parents. Technically I'm a boomer but basically Gen-X.

I just think you're having great laugh at all this. No normal person - and you seem so from other viewpoints - could be as obssessed and as wrong as you so frequently are.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Nice try but no cigar......A newly joined constable was probationary for two years. The idea that he would be made a detective constable so soon is quite wrong, it would take at least a year of study and exams. but that aside you must be in your sixties minimum unless your father married a child bride. Do the sums......and you called me aged

Give it up Chunter you are a paid troll flying a faux drapeau..

Tom Hunter said...

Give it up Chunter you are a paid troll flying a faux drapeau..

AHahahahaha..

Having chatted a bit with the The Veteran about you it seems you're not an unhinged stalker after all, so I shall amuse myself by indulging your Russian troll obsession.

And make up your mind. A few comments back you pegged me as being 25 or less. Now you've gone from five years as a beat cop (yes - my Americanisms again), to probationary for two years.

And don't forget your pills.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

So end it here.....how old are you? Entertain us.

Tom Hunter said...

I'm in the comments to entertain myself, not you.

Besides, given that you don't believe that this is my real name or that I live in NZ, or anything at all, what would be the point of telling you exactly how old I am?

Much more fun to continue on with this and watch you become more and more spun up about it.

Do svidaniya! :)

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Quite right Chunter......we don't believe anything about you at all...when you get caught out lying in order to boost the credibility of your story or your legend you are finished.