Matt Barrett wrote: » You've a very bizarre take on this. One is a leader of a party whose main goal is ushering in a United Ireland and having any form of English/British authority removed. Marching on St. Patrick's Day, behind a flag saying as much. I don't see the political shock and awe value others do obviously. Furthermore your comparison is absolutely flawed. Since when is seeking a united Ireland the same as looking to kick out a religious minority? What of the Jews? What of the Protestants in the south? You're not making much of an argument but more of a massive leap. It's not credible and gymnastics of Olympic proportions. Coveney was way out of order using the killings to score a point on SF IMO. It was gutter politics. 'Clumsy' is a cop out on your behalf TBF.
blanch152 wrote: » To be honest, I know very little about McGregor, from what I do, I wouldn't want to be associated with him, but I don't think that marching in the same parade as him (and far away from him from what I understand) sends any kind of political or other message. From a quick google, he has some convictions for speeding and another one for damaging a bus which some see as a publicity stunt. Whatever your view of his "sport" and I detest it, that isn't enough to see him as embarrassing.
jm08 wrote: » Seriously, you don't know a lot about McGregor? His tuggish behaviour (which has seen him arrested twice now) in the US is what is embarrassing (not to mention his lack of respect for the Irish courts). I note you failed to respond to the rest of my post. Unionists are not English. If it was 'Brits out' unionists might have some reason for being annoyed.
blanch152 wrote: » The banner didn't say "Let's work for a united Ireland" which I would have no problem with her marching behind. It said "English out of Ireland" which is a very different slogan and the type of thing we should have left behind decades ago.
blanch152 wrote: » I have some English friends living here, how do I explain your post to them?
Johnny Dogs wrote: » No it didn't, English in that context would have been referring to people, nationality - English. The banner had England out of Ireland, which has a completely different meaning, and would be completely inline with SF policies, the main one being the aspiration of a United Ireland, ie an end to British government involvement in the island. Straws being clutched at, and men being constructed with the straw I think.
blanch152 wrote: » Within your own post you are contradicting yourself. England is not the British government. Even "No more British rule" would have been better than what she marched upon, but I am just going to leave it there rather than continue a ding-dong on this.
blanch152 wrote: » Within your own post you are contradicting yourself. England is not the British government.
Even "No more British rule" would have been better than what she marched upon, but I am just going to leave it there rather than continue a ding-dong on this.
blanch152 wrote: » To be honest, I know very little about McGregor, from what I do, I wouldn't want to be associated with him, but I don't think that marching in the same parade as him (and far away from him from what I understand)
Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: » Unionists aren't British either.
Junkyard Tom wrote: » A lot of them consider themselves British as is their right.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Just my own experience of course.
Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: » it's a lazy generalisation to say Unionists = British.
Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: » Are you suggesting that Unionists are English? That seems to be the only logical take from what you're suggesting.
Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: » A lot of them might consider themselves British, but I think it's a lazy generalisation to say Unionists = British. There are probably plenty of people who believe for various reasons that membership of the Union is beneficial to Northern Ireland but they may not consider themselves "British".
Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: » You think incorrectly then. As an aside, isn't "British rule" a direct result of NI's own failures to self-govern?
Matt Barrett wrote: » So we've gone from us not needing the cost or headache to them being better off without us? We have many ongoing generational problems, as does NI, but family is family.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Exactly the opposite point is being made Matt
jm08 wrote: » There has been much talk about the perks of being part of the UK (such as NHS). This article throws a new light on how good things are in NI. At least in the ROI, you won't have to wait 3 weeks to get an appointment with a GP and 4 to 5 year wait for outpatient appointment. Big problems with the schools as well, with parents providing toilet rolls and other supplies.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/19/dup-bung-schools-hospitals-northern-ireland
RobMc59 wrote: » The NHS is creaking at the seams but is still a brilliant service-years of tory austerity haven't helped either.The current gripes about the NHS have only really surfaced since they got into power.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Not so according to some.https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/how-labour-broke-nhs-and-why-labour-must-fix-it
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Speaking as an Ulster Unionist myself, I strongly consider myself Irish first and foremost. I wouldn't remotely consider myself British. Most Unionists I've known, including those most fervent feel the same way. Just my own experience of course.
RobMc59 wrote: » Does this mean you maybe from one of the counties not part of NI but part of Ulster?I ask as I thought you had expressed concern about your status in Britain which wouldn't be the case if you where from NI?