Stormont power sharing talks

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 07:39AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

I answered that question clearly and comprehensively.

I also said before that I have little interest in debating which of the failed Northern Ireland parties is slightly less of a failure than the other. I consider the question you raised of which is the worse than the other answered - it depends on your timeframe of reference.

You obviously wish to pick a very short timeframe, others wouldn't be so generous. That means no disrespect to you, it just means the answer varies depending on your perspective.

How would a nationalist see the party that co-delivered the GFA as a 'failed party'? That is hilarious. You can be against them politically but 'failed'??
A nationalist who will not (despite been asked again and again) list how that party has failed to deliver the the various clauses of that agreement and agreements made as a follow on from the GFA.

As far as I know, there were more parties taking part in the whole shaping of the GFA and their clauses, SF was one of them and I wonder how one can determin which one of them all has given its major influence to it. In my view, the GFA is a compromise that delivered the basis for a peace process and brought about the ground on which power sharing was built up. All parts have been working together to achieve this and frankly, this wasn´t achieved by the pressure put by the UK govt in the first place as well as partly by the Irish govt (and partly with efforts by the USA) on both sides of the leading parties of the communities in NI.

What´s the merit of claiming that one party did more than the other to achieve the GFA? I see None cos the main issue is that it provided a peace process in which progressing period it deliverd peace after 30 years of conflict and thus allowing it a generation to grow up in peace.

That the power sharing has reached a deadlock is fully on the account of the DUP and it is evident by the proof this party has delivered herself since Mrs Foster took over from Mr Robinson. One can say that the relationship in power sharing between the DUP and SF wasn´t that good for years and this was also more due to the way the DUP conducted her own part in the light of social unrest eminating from the Unionist community and it was more due to the efforts taken by SF to calm the Republican and Nationalist community that it didn´t escalate further. The efforts of the DUP on the other hand were apparently led by their own reluctancy and it took some pressure on them to do anything at all.

I think that there is some need of a better balanced view on this matter. I´d also suggest to consider the fact that some people in the Republic of Ireland do have their reservations and some even some grievances towards SF that leads them to oppose that party for various reasons, in some cases even personal one when some relative has become the victim of PIRA terrorist attacks. This brings one back again on the issue SF has with her past which is that she can´t get rid of her own role as the political arm of the PIRA and this won´t be forgotten as it won´t be forgiven in some cases by those people who lost a beloved one due to the bombing campaings of the PIRA. Same goes for the bombings committed by Loyalists in the Republic of Ireland.

I do acknowledge the efforts which SF has taken and the progressive results she has been part in delivering them, but it is certainly wrong to depict them as if they had no responsibility to stand for regarding their past. They were no Saints and they still aren´t.

I think that you might know what the core problems below the surface for this deadlock on power sharing in NI is. It is the rule of power sharing itself which blocks any majority rule in NI like in any other democracy where either one party has gained a majority of seats to rule alone or where no single party has it and goes into coalition with others to form a government. But as this current ruling won´t be changed, it´s better for SF to wait and let the people see who is really unable to compromise and stand for the failures and thus make the voters see themselves how useless and regressive the DUP really is. There is another Unionist Party they could vote for instead. I recall that at the start of this power sharing rule, in the early days of the GFA, it was the UUP and the SDLP who were in the places SF and the DUP have since they took over.

Maybe, replacing them could be more progressive, the UUP and the SDLP are probably more moderate minded and could work together. I´m not quite so sure in case of the UUP (for they also have Orangemen within their ranks), but I´m sure in regards of the SDLP. The latter would be my preference in any election in NI anyway.

FrancieBrady · 03-08-2017 08:55AM

Thomas__ wrote: »

As far as I know, there were more parties taking part in the whole shaping of the GFA and their clauses, SF was one of them and I wonder how one can determin which one of them all has given its major influence to it. In my view, the GFA is a compromise that delivered the basis for a peace process and brought about the ground on which power sharing was built up. All parts have been working together to achieve this and frankly, this wasn´t achieved by the pressure put by the UK govt in the first place as well as partly by the Irish govt (and partly with efforts by the USA) on both sides of the leading parties of the communities in NI.

What´s the merit of claiming that one party did more than the other to achieve the GFA? I see None cos the main issue is that it provided a peace process in which progressing period it deliverd peace after 30 years of conflict and thus allowing it a generation to grow up in peace.

That the power sharing has reached a deadlock is fully on the account of the DUP and it is evident by the proof this party has delivered herself since Mrs Foster took over from Mr Robinson. One can say that the relationship in power sharing between the DUP and SF wasn´t that good for years and this was also more due to the way the DUP conducted her own part in the light of social unrest eminating from the Unionist community and it was more due to the efforts taken by SF to calm the Republican and Nationalist community that it didn´t escalate further. The efforts of the DUP on the other hand were apparently led by their own reluctancy and it took some pressure on them to do anything at all.

I think that there is some need of a better balanced view on this matter. I´d also suggest to consider the fact that some people in the Republic of Ireland do have their reservations and some even some grievances towards SF that leads them to oppose that party for various reasons, in some cases even personal one when some relative has become the victim of PIRA terrorist attacks. This brings one back again on the issue SF has with her past which is that she can´t get rid of her own role as the political arm of the PIRA and this won´t be forgotten as it won´t be forgiven in some cases by those people who lost a beloved one due to the bombing campaings of the PIRA. Same goes for the bombings committed by Loyalists in the Republic of Ireland.

I do acknowledge the efforts which SF has taken and the progressive results she has been part in delivering them, but it is certainly wrong to depict them as if they had no responsibility to stand for regarding their past. They were no Saints and they still aren´t.

I think that you might know what the core problems below the surface for this deadlock on power sharing in NI is. It is the rule of power sharing itself which blocks any majority rule in NI like in any other democracy where either one party has gained a majority of seats to rule alone or where no single party has it and goes into coalition with others to form a government. But as this current ruling won´t be changed, it´s better for SF to wait and let the people see who is really unable to compromise and stand for the failures and thus make the voters see themselves how useless and regressive the DUP really is. There is another Unionist Party they could vote for instead. I recall that at the start of this power sharing rule, in the early days of the GFA, it was the UUP and the SDLP who were in the places SF and the DUP have since they took over.

Maybe, replacing them could be more progressive, the UUP and the SDLP are probably more moderate minded and could work together. I´m not quite so sure in case of the UUP (for they also have Orangemen within their ranks), but I´m sure in regards of the SDLP. The latter would be my preference in any election in NI anyway.

What is happening at the moment is the 'state' failing again. Not the 'parties'.

The DUP have not 'failed' they have succeeded in doing what they set out to do since the GFA was signed...wreck it and 'keep a taig from about the place'.

If Blanch would do the list I asked him to do and compare to the list of actions and blocks that the DUP have engaged in then that would be plainly evident.

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 10:06AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

As far as I know, there were more parties taking part in the whole shaping of the GFA and their clauses, SF was one of them and I wonder how one can determin which one of them all has given its major influence to it. In my view, the GFA is a compromise that delivered the basis for a peace process and brought about the ground on which power sharing was built up. All parts have been working together to achieve this and frankly, this wasn´t achieved by the pressure put by the UK govt in the first place as well as partly by the Irish govt (and partly with efforts by the USA) on both sides of the leading parties of the communities in NI.

What´s the merit of claiming that one party did more than the other to achieve the GFA? I see None cos the main issue is that it provided a peace process in which progressing period it deliverd peace after 30 years of conflict and thus allowing it a generation to grow up in peace.

That the power sharing has reached a deadlock is fully on the account of the DUP and it is evident by the proof this party has delivered herself since Mrs Foster took over from Mr Robinson. One can say that the relationship in power sharing between the DUP and SF wasn´t that good for years and this was also more due to the way the DUP conducted her own part in the light of social unrest eminating from the Unionist community and it was more due to the efforts taken by SF to calm the Republican and Nationalist community that it didn´t escalate further. The efforts of the DUP on the other hand were apparently led by their own reluctancy and it took some pressure on them to do anything at all.

I think that there is some need of a better balanced view on this matter. I´d also suggest to consider the fact that some people in the Republic of Ireland do have their reservations and some even some grievances towards SF that leads them to oppose that party for various reasons, in some cases even personal one when some relative has become the victim of PIRA terrorist attacks. This brings one back again on the issue SF has with her past which is that she can´t get rid of her own role as the political arm of the PIRA and this won´t be forgotten as it won´t be forgiven in some cases by those people who lost a beloved one due to the bombing campaings of the PIRA. Same goes for the bombings committed by Loyalists in the Republic of Ireland.

I do acknowledge the efforts which SF has taken and the progressive results she has been part in delivering them, but it is certainly wrong to depict them as if they had no responsibility to stand for regarding their past. They were no Saints and they still aren´t.

I think that you might know what the core problems below the surface for this deadlock on power sharing in NI is. It is the rule of power sharing itself which blocks any majority rule in NI like in any other democracy where either one party has gained a majority of seats to rule alone or where no single party has it and goes into coalition with others to form a government. But as this current ruling won´t be changed, it´s better for SF to wait and let the people see who is really unable to compromise and stand for the failures and thus make the voters see themselves how useless and regressive the DUP really is. There is another Unionist Party they could vote for instead. I recall that at the start of this power sharing rule, in the early days of the GFA, it was the UUP and the SDLP who were in the places SF and the DUP have since they took over.

Maybe, replacing them could be more progressive, the UUP and the SDLP are probably more moderate minded and could work together. I´m not quite so sure in case of the UUP (for they also have Orangemen within their ranks), but I´m sure in regards of the SDLP. The latter would be my preference in any election in NI anyway.

What is happening at the moment is the 'state' failing again. Not the 'parties'.

The DUP have not 'failed' they have succeeded in doing what they set out to do since the GFA was signed...wreck it and 'keep a taig from about the place'.

If Blanch would do the list I asked him to do and compare to the list of actions and blocks that the DUP have engaged in then that would be plainly evident.

Well, no state can be run without political parties, at least in a democracy, even if such democracy has the Instrument of power sharing imposed on it on the grounds that there can´t be a normal majority rule allowed for the sake of the still fragile peace process.

As for the issue you have with the other poster, it´s not necessary to compell him to list anything cos the evidence for what you like to have listed by him, is out there and well known to everybody who follows and has followed NI politics in the past couple of years. Or to say at least from that day onwards since the "Fleggers" took to the streets and rioted because of the UJ on the BCC.

I think that you´re just waisting your time and engery on your efforts to bring another poster to do what you demand. It´s useless cos either he sees and realises what you mean by himself, or he simply won´t and that´s that.

You see that the record of the DUP speaks for themselves and not in the most positive way. There are just some things which have been achieved by the power sharing with them in order to create jobs and improve the economy in NI. They managed to attract foreign Investment to NI to create jobs. But this was not the achievement of the DUP alone, it was done in the power sharing frame together with SF, namely Martin McGuinness as DFM, which was by many examples the better diplomat and "Ambassador" for NI. What I always recall when thinking of Mr Robinsin is the sour face of himself when appearing in public in his capacity as FM. It always left the Impression on my mind that this chap was doing his job with some great deal of reluctance and that because he had to do it in power sharing together with SF. Quite the opposite Impression one got from McGuinness, he appeared to like doing his job and very often reaching out to the other community. Well, we know how these approaches and attempts were honoured by the DUP followers.

I am absolutely not in any way disagreeing with you on your discription of the DUP, I 100% agree with you on that as I have witnessed some DUPers proving your point themselves by their very expressions on power sharing and a very blunt expressed attitude and more than that also wish for a return of direct rule in NI, only to get rid of the power sharing with SF.

Aside from all the propaganda on both sides of the communities, SF has a better record of their efforts to care for the whole society of NI. That of course by always bearing in mind their aim of a UI and that I find non-objectionable as a political aim. Whereas the Unionists were trying to invent some sort of a new "Northern Irish" identity only to keep the people away from considering the pros and cons of a UI. Some people in NI from both communities took a like in it and adopted that term for themselves, but they are just a few in compare to the whole population in NI.

One doesn´t has to agree with SF and be one of her followers, but one should at least acknowledge what they have done to keep the peace process going and bring some prosperity to NI from which both sides can have their merits and participate. I am no friend of SF, I am rather on the side of the SDLP, but credit where credit is due and SF has earned that by her own record. Whether I like it or not doesn´t matter, the Facts matter and that is what other people might do as well. In the end of the day, it Counts what has been achieved for all, not what silly propaganda tricks have worked to delude the own community and Keep the hate towards SF alive. That´s the real problem and more so on the Unionists side than on the Republicans.

FrancieBrady · 03-08-2017 11:00AM

Thomas__ wrote: »

As for the issue you have with the other poster, it´s not necessary to compell him to list anything cos the evidence for what you like to have listed by him, is out there and well known to everybody who follows and has followed NI politics in the past couple of years. Or to say at least from that day onwards since the "Fleggers" took to the streets and rioted because of the UJ on the BCC.

Correct.

I am just perplexed with the 'nationalist' self description.
I will leave people to judge that one themselves.

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 11:09AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

As for the issue you have with the other poster, it´s not necessary to compell him to list anything cos the evidence for what you like to have listed by him, is out there and well known to everybody who follows and has followed NI politics in the past couple of years. Or to say at least from that day onwards since the "Fleggers" took to the streets and rioted because of the UJ on the BCC.

Correct.

I am just perplexed with the 'nationalist' self description.
I will leave people to judge that one themselves.

Maybe you wouldn´t be that perplexed when you realise that there are different shades of nationalism. Someone you´d label as an partitionist can also be a Nationalist, just that he has no interest in a UI.
I am in support of the present Republic of Ireland but I would never call myself a nationalist by any means. The support of a UI isn´t based on nationalism either, as far as it concerns myself, it has more pragmatical reasons and of course the wish that this status quo in and by which a useless minority party like the DUP can hold a country in ransom for their selfish reasonings will be overcome.

end of the road · 03-08-2017 11:24AM

the undemocratic unionist party and their sectarian bigotry are the only problem party.
sf have modernised and while far from perfect, they are inclusive and want equality for all.
the undemocratic unionist party want to turn northern ireland back into a sectarian statelet and the tories would likely allow it as part of the coalition of chaos if it means the undemocratic unionist party prop them up.
apart from social media the british are rather quiet in terms of allowing this coalition of chaos to continue. they should be out on the streets protesting these sectarian bigots having a part in the running of their country.

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 11:34AM

end of the road wrote: »

the undemocratic unionist party and their sectarian bigotry are the only problem party.
sf have modernised and while far from perfect, they are inclusive and want equality for all.
the undemocratic unionist party want to turn northern ireland back into a sectarian statelet and the tories would likely allow it as part of the coalition of chaos if it means the undemocratic unionist party prop them up.
apart from social media the british are rather quiet in terms of allowing this coalition of chaos to continue. they should be out on the streets protesting these sectarian bigots having a part in the running of their country.

They probably don´t know them that good enough yet to protest against them. The resignation and compliance with Brexit by former remainers speaks for itself. So, no wonder that they don´t care much about the DUP as probably not less of them think that all is f*cked already anyway.

end of the road · 03-08-2017 12:35PM

Thomas__ wrote: »

They probably don´t know them that good enough yet to protest against them. The resignation and compliance with Brexit by former remainers speaks for itself. So, no wonder that they don´t care much about the DUP as probably not less of them think that all is f*cked already anyway.

fair point, but there are many doing what they can to educate people about this political "party" and it's views and history. they just need to keep trying to get the message through to enough people and we will get somewhere.

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 01:21PM

end of the road wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

They probably don´t know them that good enough yet to protest against them. The resignation and compliance with Brexit by former remainers speaks for itself. So, no wonder that they don´t care much about the DUP as probably not less of them think that all is f*cked already anyway.

fair point, but there are many doing what they can to educate people about this political "party" and it's views and history. they just need to keep trying to get the message through to enough people and we will get somewhere.

Maybe one could save oneself all the bother and watch the DUP exposing themselves as that what they really are for they are in the focus with this present UK govt anyway. From that point, their uselessness will be covered in due course of the going down of Mrs May as PM anyway. Whoever will replace her as PM, her successor will certainly make sure to keep any influence by the DUP on a low level. As I said before, they are in the focus of UK politics now and the British press is usually not too kind on the UK govt, no matter which party is ruling.

The downfall of Mrs May is already in the making, partly due her own doing and partly due to the plotters who can´t forgive her to lose the majority they had before Mrs May did her folly to call a snap GE. When it comes about power, the Tories know no friends among themselves and that is enough to be certain that the days of Mrs May as PM are counted, it´s just not yet announced how many of those days are left to count. I´m sure that the DUP is more like a thorn to the Tory Party "for power´s sake".

Red_Wake · 03-08-2017 02:09PM

Thomas__ wrote: »

end of the road wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

They probably don´t know them that good enough yet to protest against them. The resignation and compliance with Brexit by former remainers speaks for itself. So, no wonder that they don´t care much about the DUP as probably not less of them think that all is f*cked already anyway.

fair point, but there are many doing what they can to educate people about this political "party" and it's views and history. they just need to keep trying to get the message through to enough people and we will get somewhere.

Maybe one could save oneself all the bother and watch the DUP exposing themselves as that what they really are for they are in the focus with this present UK govt anyway. From that point, their uselessness will be covered in due course of the going down of Mrs May as PM anyway. Whoever will replace her as PM, her successor will certainly make sure to keep any influence by the DUP on a low level. As I said before, they are in the focus of UK politics now and the British press is usually not too kind on the UK govt, no matter which party is ruling.

The downfall of Mrs May is already in the making, partly due her own doing and partly due to the plotters who can´t forgive her to lose the majority they had before Mrs May did her folly to call a snap GE. When it comes about power, the Tories know no friends among themselves and that is enough to be certain that the days of Mrs May as PM are counted, it´s just not yet announced how many of those days are left to count. I´m sure that the DUP is more like a thorn to the Tory Party "for power´s sake".

Apart from their initial sales of their support for cash, have any of their policies or beliefs come under scrutiny on the mainland?

Unless their policies start manifesting via the HoC[which would probably require direct rule to happen in the first place], I don't think they'll get much attention from the British media again. As is, I think they're coming across as a generic coalition partner[albeit one which was remunerated generously for its support].

I am open to anyone posting any links to any recent articles in the UK press detailing the policies of the DUP, to prove me wrong.

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 02:29PM

Red_Wake wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

end of the road wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

They probably don´t know them that good enough yet to protest against them. The resignation and compliance with Brexit by former remainers speaks for itself. So, no wonder that they don´t care much about the DUP as probably not less of them think that all is f*cked already anyway.

fair point, but there are many doing what they can to educate people about this political "party" and it's views and history. they just need to keep trying to get the message through to enough people and we will get somewhere.

Maybe one could save oneself all the bother and watch the DUP exposing themselves as that what they really are for they are in the focus with this present UK govt anyway. From that point, their uselessness will be covered in due course of the going down of Mrs May as PM anyway. Whoever will replace her as PM, her successor will certainly make sure to keep any influence by the DUP on a low level. As I said before, they are in the focus of UK politics now and the British press is usually not too kind on the UK govt, no matter which party is ruling.

The downfall of Mrs May is already in the making, partly due her own doing and partly due to the plotters who can´t forgive her to lose the majority they had before Mrs May did her folly to call a snap GE. When it comes about power, the Tories know no friends among themselves and that is enough to be certain that the days of Mrs May as PM are counted, it´s just not yet announced how many of those days are left to count. I´m sure that the DUP is more like a thorn to the Tory Party "for power´s sake".

Apart from their initial sales of their support for cash, have any of their policies or beliefs come under scrutiny on the mainland?

Unless their policies start manifesting via the HoC[which would probably require direct rule to happen in the first place], I don't think they'll get much attention from the British media again. As is, I think they're coming across as a generic coalition partner[albeit one which was remunerated generously for its support].

I am open to anyone posting any links to any recent articles in the UK press detailing the policies of the DUP, to prove me wrong.

The HoC is currently in recess and will return on 5th September. So until then, there´s little to be expected to happen.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

The average Brit in GB doesn´t has any interest in the DUP´s policies and beliefs. Same goes for any much interest in NI as well. For them, it´s just a part of Ireland.

Before the HoC recess, there were various articles to read on the website of the Guardian. They have some Focus on the DUP as long as they are the helpers of the Tory Party to have their majority in the Commons. Once that has ended, nobody is interested in the DUP anymore and I dare say, that what is going on in NI is of Little interest as well, just worthy a side note. But from the comments on articles on the Guardian Website, although it´s rather hard to tell whether the comments were written by readers from NI or from GB, the reputation the DUP has among them is a bad one.

The Golden Miller · 03-08-2017 02:31PM

Thomas__ wrote: »

Maybe you wouldn´t be that perplexed when you realise that there are different shades of nationalism. Someone you´d label as an partitionist can also be a Nationalist, just that he has no interest in a UI.

If one has no interest in a united Ireland, then by definition they are not an Irish nationalist. It is the core tenet of Irish nationalism.

FrancieBrady · 03-08-2017 02:41PM

Red_Wake wrote: »

I am open to anyone posting any links to any recent articles in the UK press detailing the policies of the DUP, to prove me wrong.

Give it time, it is summer. Not much ordinary governing being done.

Thomas__ · 03-08-2017 03:23PM

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

Maybe you wouldn´t be that perplexed when you realise that there are different shades of nationalism. Someone you´d label as an partitionist can also be a Nationalist, just that he has no interest in a UI.

If one has no interest in a united Ireland, then by definition they are not an Irish nationalist. It is the core tenet of Irish nationalism.

Well, it is by nature of the very meaning. Nevertheless, one can support a UI without subscribing to the nationalism that carries that aim with it. Nationalism has a bad taste for me, that´s why I don´t subscribe to it.

Junkyard Tom · 03-08-2017 03:24PM

This hate-filled hibernophobic bigot is in the news again:

irishnews.com

Red_Wake · 03-08-2017 04:39PM

Thomas__ wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

end of the road wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

They probably don´t know them that good enough yet to protest against them. The resignation and compliance with Brexit by former remainers speaks for itself. So, no wonder that they don´t care much about the DUP as probably not less of them think that all is f*cked already anyway.

fair point, but there are many doing what they can to educate people about this political "party" and it's views and history. they just need to keep trying to get the message through to enough people and we will get somewhere.

Maybe one could save oneself all the bother and watch the DUP exposing themselves as that what they really are for they are in the focus with this present UK govt anyway. From that point, their uselessness will be covered in due course of the going down of Mrs May as PM anyway. Whoever will replace her as PM, her successor will certainly make sure to keep any influence by the DUP on a low level. As I said before, they are in the focus of UK politics now and the British press is usually not too kind on the UK govt, no matter which party is ruling.

The downfall of Mrs May is already in the making, partly due her own doing and partly due to the plotters who can´t forgive her to lose the majority they had before Mrs May did her folly to call a snap GE. When it comes about power, the Tories know no friends among themselves and that is enough to be certain that the days of Mrs May as PM are counted, it´s just not yet announced how many of those days are left to count. I´m sure that the DUP is more like a thorn to the Tory Party "for power´s sake".

Apart from their initial sales of their support for cash, have any of their policies or beliefs come under scrutiny on the mainland?

Unless their policies start manifesting via the HoC[which would probably require direct rule to happen in the first place], I don't think they'll get much attention from the British media again. As is, I think they're coming across as a generic coalition partner[albeit one which was remunerated generously for its support].

I am open to anyone posting any links to any recent articles in the UK press detailing the policies of the DUP, to prove me wrong.

The HoC is currently in recess and will return on 5th September. So until then, there´s little to be expected to happen.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

The average Brit in GB doesn´t has any interest in the DUP´s policies and beliefs. Same goes for any much interest in NI as well. For them, it´s just a part of Ireland.

Before the HoC recess, there were various articles to read on the website of the Guardian. They have some Focus on the DUP as long as they are the helpers of the Tory Party to have their majority in the Commons. Once that has ended, nobody is interested in the DUP anymore and I dare say, that what is going on in NI is of Little interest as well, just worthy a side note. But from the comments on articles on the Guardian Website, although it´s rather hard to tell whether the comments were written by readers from NI or from GB, the reputation the DUP has among them is a bad one.

That's a fair point, it will take time to see if the DUP to make an impression on the votes of mainland UK.

FrancieBrady · 03-08-2017 04:42PM

Red_Wake wrote: »

That's a fair point, it will take time to see if the DUP to make an impression on the votes of mainland UK.

It's looking like the partitioning of this island will once again be designed to placate a few bigoted, sectarian unionists, at the expense of ordinary decent unionists and everybody else.
They had better hope and pray that Brexit is a resounding success from the get-go.

Junkyard Tom · 03-08-2017 05:52PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

bigoted, sectarian unionists

That's why the whole seeking unionist approval for a UI by 'nationalist moderates' is a red herring. It's a poor disguise for 'stick your GFA and stick your pro-UI referendum where the Sun don't shine'.

There will always be a section of PUL's who'd be against a UI even if it meant widescale subsistence farming was their only way of maintaining the so-called 'union'.

Thomas__ · 04-08-2017 09:06AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

That's a fair point, it will take time to see if the DUP to make an impression on the votes of mainland UK.

It's looking like the partitioning of this island will once again be designed to placate a few bigoted, sectarian unionists, at the expense of ordinary decent unionists and everybody else.
They had better hope and pray that Brexit is a resounding success from the get-go.

Where have you seen or even noticed any protest coming from them during all those years since the "Flegger" riots? I have had some exchange of opinions with them on message boards but that´s it and there is hardly any attempt by them to either distance themselves from the sectarians within their community nor is there much condemnation, except by some Unionist politicians and this comes only when some public pressure has been lied down on their door step. The moderate ones among the Unionist are of course expressing their disagreement with the actions taken by the Loyalists, which is represents the core of the diehard sectarians along with staunch Orangemen of various ages and it is often the case that a Loyalist is also a member of the Orange Order which makes no difference between them in many cases, but you don´t see them to carry their protest in public areas. You don´t see them saying "not in my Name" and demonstrate against the sectarians. But, one doesn´t see much of the like on the Republican side either, except towards the Dissos on which both sides, Republican and Unionist politicians were joining together in condemning them, which is of course the right way to do.

It´s just that neither Republicans nor Nationalists have given much reason for protest on their side in the past years. On the contrary, they often remained restrained and calm when the Unionist thugs along with other Loyalists were rioting on the streets.

How many incidents have been counted in the past years in which Loyalist thugs had a go at foreigners in NI, besmearing houses in which foreign nationals live with racist and insulting slogans? Such incidents of damage with intend to intimidate them and in worse cases even beating them up, happened and the response by Unionist politicians was in the usual way, lip-service to condemn such deeds and then leave it at that. But no action taken against the perpetrators which are imo not to hard to be find out by members of the community and bring them to justice. This is why they can do as they please and get away with it, if not caught at sight by the PSNI.

To use another but matching term from the USA, I´d say that judged by such incidents and the very mindset of the diehard sectarians within Unionism and Loyalism, they are the "Rednecks" of NI. They are as much xenophobic, misogynistic, anti-Catholic, anti-Republican and anti-Irish as their counterparts in the South of the USA and some of them are even unashamed racists. In my view, they really represent the bottom of their community and those who are supposed to show up with some leadership are either reluctant to do so, or even worse, give it their tacit approval.

What all the Unionist, whether moderate or sectarian, fear most is that the UK would abandon them for good and give way to a UI whether they like it or not and that is what lies at the core of the many of their actions, their so called maintenance of traditions and their eagerness to show a kind of "Loyalty" towards the Crown which appears to the average Briton in GB as a bunch of people who like to represent themselves more British than the Brits in GB. This is also the reason for why the average Briton in GB finds them and their behaviour strange, except the nutters from the far-right spectrum of BNP, Britain First, EDL, NF and not to forget UKIP.

Frankly, when it comes to talk about on whomse expense this all goes, I really have to say that those who don´t like to have it should get their guts and act against it. But there´s nothing to anticipate from them and therefore, it´s the way as it is and will remain so as long as they don´t change their attitude towards those who discredit their community and stand up against them.

FrancieBrady · 04-08-2017 09:28AM

I didn't say that ordinary unionists have protested about extreme unionist behaviour.

They don't because the likes of the DUP have cultivated a false 'siege mentality'.
Normality is an 'erosion of their rights' etc etc. We hear it all the time.

It will I think be very interesting when they are genuinely affected by the siege that will be Brexit and the realisation that Westminster will not be making up the difference in their fragile economy.

Thomas__ · 04-08-2017 11:02AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't say that ordinary unionists have protested about extreme unionist behaviour.

They don't because the likes of the DUP have cultivated a false 'siege mentality'.
Normality is an 'erosion of their rights' etc etc. We hear it all the time.

It will I think be very interesting when they are genuinely affected by the siege that will be Brexit and the realisation that Westminster will not be making up the difference in their fragile economy.

Aye, and the others will have to suffer with them because of them Brextieers of which the DUP is herself part of.

Stormont power sharing talks

Comments