Jayop wrote: » https://twitter.com/SJAMcBride/status/844183989095223296
steddyeddy wrote: » Nail on head. Without him there would be no peace in the North. Can you imagine Arlene reaching out the hand of friendship to nationalists? She is of yet undecided as to whether she will go to Martin's funeral. A hate filled group.
Bambi wrote: » Derry doesn't vote as one constituency for Westminister elections. It's split into Foyle and East Londonderry. Durkan is heavily reliant on unionist votes to get him past the post. The SDLP knows it, the unionists know it and Sinn Fein know it. You don't somehow. You don't seem to be very clued in on this
Snickers Man wrote: » I have made it quite clear I was talking about Westminster elections where Derry (Foyle) votes as one constituency. Jayop certainly got that point, hence his/her wondering why they would bother standing for a seat they would abstain from filling anyway. Only Westminster continues to be so shunned by successful SF candidates today. You are probably talking about the Assembly or local elections in which Derry is a multiseat constituency (six then/five now) with people elected by PR. When there is only one choice to make, they wouldn't have made it McGuinness. He knew that. They didn't make it McLoughlin, Anderson or O'Hara either.
Lucy8080 wrote: » Clinton and Blair are going to attend the funeral,it seems.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Ramping up the pressure on the DUP.
Lucy8080 wrote: » I heard Arlene Foster's address to the assembly at lunchtime.I would say she is going to the funeral too, Judging by it's tone.
PhuckHugh wrote: » When is the funeral, tomorrow?
Alf Stewart. wrote: » It would be political suicide not to imo.
bigbrotherfan wrote: » The longer this goes on and the more high profile figures involved, the more difficult the position for Arlene Foster.
timthumbni wrote: » The mail in the U.K. Has a 6 page spread on mcguinness today. Rightly highlights a lot of the shameful antics he was involved in directly and supported. As I said earlier no one should have to be thanked just because they decided that bombing and shooting people wasn't going anywhere.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I posted last night wondering why they couldn't have avoided damage by saying straight away that she would attend. They seem incapable of not damaging themselves in the wider public eye or they don't care. This is just ramping up the longer it goes on and it will look like she capitulated to pressure now if she does go.
FrancieBrady wrote: » timthumbni wrote: » The mail in the U.K. Has a 6 page spread on mcguinness today. Rightly highlights a lot of the shameful antics he was involved in directly and supported. As I said earlier no one should have to be thanked just because they decided that bombing and shooting people wasn't going anywhere. I think your 'there was only one side engaged in the conflict' nonsense has an audience of one believer - yourself. Do yourself a favour and read what the GFA sorted out and you will get an idea of the extent of the problems that led to the conflict/war.
bigbrotherfan wrote: » Clinton & Blair are hugely significant attendees.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I think your 'there was only one side engaged in the conflict' nonsense has an audience of one believer - yourself. Do yourself a favour and read what the GFA sorted out and you will get an idea of the extent of the problems that led to the conflict/war.
timthumbni wrote: » Well as I said this was in the mail , one of the most read newspapers and news websites in the U.K.
Jelle1880 wrote: » Where exactly does he say so ? Or do you think that when people mention the atrocities he is responsible for it's only because they think the British weren't the bad guys ? It seems to be the standard response, so I'm just wondering. Or is it more the fact you think his past actions should be glossed over just because he later decided to use peaceful means ?
FrancieBrady wrote: » I don't think any part of his life should be 'glossed' over nor should his life be split into two halves. Peaceful people have gone to war for the greater good many many times in history. Judge for yourself if what we have in the north now is a 'greater good' than when McGuinness first involved himself. I am a long time reader of Tim's posts. I know very well what his shtick is.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » Looking at the front pages of the daily mail in the UK and Ireland tells you all you need to know about that tabloid Ireland UK
lawred2 wrote: » how original
Lucy8080 wrote: » It could be that she was always going. I'm speculating, but I reckon it was probably wise to say nothing . In the last twenty -four hours the media has been filled with praise and damnation as people were asked for their views. If Foster announced yesterday that she was attending, I would say a lot of vitriol would have come her way. If she announces tonight, or in the morning that she is attending, it will be easier for some in the unionist community to accept it, in the light of knowing who else is attending. It will look more like an honouring of the peace process ,with all sides represented . The new dispensation ,rather than the old.It's understandable,I think, that the D.U.P. would handle this carefully in regards to the sensitivities to their own community.
