Watching Ian on RTE1 at the moment.

Hobbes

and hes not the full shilling tbh.

Clearly condoning violence on the unionists side. Also not interested in power sharing at all.

MrJoeSoap

Was watching as well. Miriam couldn't get an inch on him. So stubborn and rigid. There's no hope for him changing.

Ah well, once he dies... Oh wait? There's a son? ...

democrates

Agreed, having said that it's unacceptable to enter power-sharing with people who have a gun under the table, or are involved in criminality, he says it is impossible for anyone or any evidence to prove that that is not the case. He's right in scientific terms, and he's happily milking the opportunity presented by those who may insist those goals have been achieved, to point out they can't prove it, and every interview is another chance to express the usual rhetoric and stoke division and mistrust.

But he recognises that the impossible is not a reasonable condition to expect and can't evade that question with bluster, so now he's saying there would have to be repentance for their past sins, but of course no matter what SF were to ever to say, he'd simply say that their words cannot prove their true beliefs, another impossible condition. In the end, his last excuse can only be "I don't trust them". Hardly a useful person to bring peace to a divided community.

As for the loyalist community fearing that SF have a deal with the two governments they're right, it's called the Good Friday Agreement, and they've signed up too.

A Dub in Glasgo

democrates wrote:

Agreed, having said that it's unacceptable to enter power-sharing with people who have a gun under the table, or are involved in criminality, he says it is impossible for anyone or any evidence to prove that that is not the case. He's right in scientific terms, and he's happily milking the opportunity presented by those who may insist those goals have been achieved, to point out they can't prove it, and every interview is another chance to express the usual rhetoric and stoke division and mistrust.

In the same vain, in scientific terms, it is correct to say that the DUP cannot prove that they themselves do not have a gun under the table or are not involved in criminal behaviour.

biko

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Paisley is a extremely dangerous man. A lot of grief would not have happened but for his fear mongering and his fanning the flames of sectarianism. I take it you've heard of his stunt with Ahern, asking for boiled eggs so Ahern couldn't poison him?

In June 1959, at the corner of Percy Street and the lower Shankill, he said: 'You people of the Shankill Road, what's wrong with you? Number 425 Shankill Road - do you know who lives there? Pope's men, that's who! 'Fortes ice-cream shop, Italian Papists on the Shankill Road! How about 56 Aden Street? For 97 years a Protestant lived in that house and now there's a Papisher in it. Crimea Street, number 38! Twenty five years that house has been up, 24 years a Protestant lived there but there's a Papisher there now.'

Several founding members and early leaders of the Ulster Defense Association were close confidants and workers for Paisley. Between 1971 and 1976 alone, the UDA [Ulster Defense Association] and its cover organizations murdered 600 Catholics. Freddie Parkinson, a leader of the UDA, stated in 1984, that Paisley was "a tarantula who spreads the venom of further conflict and has been a major contributor to our prolonged tragedy."

Paisley's Deputy, Peter Robinson, armed with a firearm, led an 'invasion party' with 500 Loyalists into the village of Clontibret, Co Monaghan in 1986 and assaulted two Gardas.

Bonus joke: God visits President George Bush, Mikhail Gorbachev, and Ian Paisley to announce the impending end of the world. They report the news to their colleagues.

George Bush announces to his cabinet: "Friends, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that I have definite proof that God exists, because He has spoken with me, and the bad news is that the world's going to end tomorrow."

Mikhail Gorbachev announces to the Presidium: "Comrades, I have bad news and worse news. The bad news is that the God, who we have been denying for the last 70 years, exists, for He has spoken with me, and the worse news is that the world's going to end tomorrow."

Ian Paisley announces to the party leadership: "Friends, I have good news and better news. The good news is that I have proof that the Lord our God exists, because I have spoken with Him, and the better news is that He has told me that there will NEVER be a united Ireland!".

Zombrex

Can't stand the man ... his agenda is to simply not share power at all. Never has been. It is simply to say No to everything and hold on to what they have for as long as possible. The DUP really needs another leader, but it is much harder to remove a figure head who is constantly saying "No!" and taking no risks than it is to remove a leader who says "we'll give it a go" and does take risks that then might back fire.

But sure hopefully he will die soon ...

MrJoeSoap

Wicknight wrote:

But sure hopefully he will die soon ...

Introducing the new and "improved" model!

Here's the link to the Prime-Time show. Paisley starts approx. 13 minutes in.

Prime-Time

bonkey

democrates wrote:

having said that it's unacceptable to enter power-sharing with people who have a gun under the table, or are involved in criminality, he says it is impossible for anyone or any evidence to prove that that is not the case. He's right in scientific terms, and

should be immediately asked how he can prove that he doesn't have a gun under the table and that he isn't involved in criminality.

Of course, it would take a brave, brave person to ask him that to his face.

If it is acceptable grounds to suggest that Sinn Fein shouldn't be dealt with because they can't prove they don't have guns / are involved with criminals, then no party - including his own - should be deal with by any other party because they too cannot prove any such thing.

In short, his use of a Universal Negative is a desperate ploy to make a silk argument out of a sow'\s stonewalling.

jc

bonkey

bonkey wrote:

In short, his use of a Universal Negative is a desperate ploy to make a silk argument out of a sow'\s stonewalling.
jc

I was going to post something similar last night.He struck me when I watched the interview to be on the ropes.Anyone not connected ie neutral would probably be of that opinion.

Theres one thing I'm thinking though.The hatrid and fear out of 30 years of the troubles is very real and immediate.

It took 70 years in the 26 counties for the Blue shirts versus the Develara supporters-one always voting FG and the other always voting FF to start to dilute... theres less and less of the blind support for one or the other now a days but it still exists and has its roots in generational brainwashing.
And that was linked to the civil war here.
I've posted this before here but I still remember only a year or two ago a staunch FF supporter shout down the phone at an FG councilor on a local radio station " Where was your grandfather during the war of independence?? I'll tell you where he was... he was under the bed...he was under the bed!!"


It's a variation of that mentalitity I think we are dealing with here except with the added salt that, the deaths of the last 30 years are very real and fresh in peoples mind.
Some can move on straight away and others will take a lot more time.
It might take another 70 years for the current bitterness to fade up North.

horseflesh

Earthman wrote:

It might take another 70 years for the current bitterness to fade up North.

I think it could take considerably longer than that.

I'd never normally say something so callous, but the sooner Paisley dies the better, for everyone, "his own" people included.

Maskhadov

did you hear the 17th century evangelical christian hard line stance he was taking ?? I used to be annoyed with that kind of stuff but I was laughing at him last night. It was something picked out of a book made 4 centuries ago. Bush and him sounds like best of buds.

Whats everyone going to say about the awl fella when he does kick the bucket in the next few years ? I dont think many people will shed any tears. The fella is a freak

bonkey

horseflesh wrote:

I'd never normally say something so callous, but the sooner Paisley dies the better, for everyone, "his own" people included.

People keep saying this, and I can't figure it out.

If the problem was just Paisley, he wouldn't have any followers.

Anyone who believes his death will solve, resolve, or change anything significantly is kidding themselves. The only difference is that you'll have someone else to wish were dead.

Hardly a good approach to a political solution. Might hold some water when discussing the leader of a regime (e.g. North Korea), where there can be hope that his successor may be different as neither are dependant on the people's support....but a democratically elected leader?

jc

Ruu_Old

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Introducing the new and "improved" model!

Here's the link to the Prime-Time show. Paisley starts approx. 13 minutes in.

Prime-Time

Just had a look at that, gah i dont think he knows what he wants anymore just to continue to block any kind of progress like he always has done :rolleyes:

murphaph

Wicknight wrote:

Can't stand the man ... his agenda is to simply not share power at all. Never has been. It is simply to say No to everything and hold on to what they have for as long as possible. The DUP really needs another leader, but it is much harder to remove a figure head who is constantly saying "No!" and taking no risks than it is to remove a leader who says "we'll give it a go" and does take risks that then might back fire.

There's a former MP for Upper Bann at a loose end at the moment IIRC! Maybe he'd be interested

Paisley just doesn't know where to go next so he sticks with what he knows-the 'do nothing' secenario. We all look from afar and wonder what benefit that will derive, but his party will win the next election in another landslide IMO. That's part of the reason why NI is fcuked.

The OP is right though, there's more and more demensia creeping in there every year.

hill16

Paisley should be asked where the rest of the guns are that his Ulster Resistance movement imported in for MI5/UDA/UVF.

stevenmu

bonkey wrote:

People keep saying this, and I can't figure it out.

If the problem was just Paisley, he wouldn't have any followers.

Anyone who believes his death will solve, resolve, or change anything significantly is kidding themselves. The only difference is that you'll have someone else to wish were dead.

Hardly a good approach to a political solution. Might hold some water when discussing the leader of a regime (e.g. North Korea), where there can be hope that his successor may be different as neither are dependant on the people's support....but a democratically elected leader?

jc

He gets his support by practically telling people that if they don't vote for him, the provos will come and eat their children. In reality most of us realise that the further the peace process moves along, the less support there would be for the IRA to return to violent means. There's very little at the moment and there be even less if devolution and power sharing were implemented. Intead of realising this though, Paisley stonewalls the peace process and uses scaremongering to hold his position. If the IRA dissapeared over night, there no longer be a reason for anyone to vote for him, similarly if Paisley dissapeared over night the conditions would be there for the IRA to fully disband, it's a self-perpetuating circle. This IMO is why the IRA decided to unilateraly disarm, they're heaping all the pressure now on Paisly to either move forward or f**k off and let the rest of them get on with it.