Mortelaro wrote: » He certainly didn't surrender, he got 90% of the Republic's population to amend articles 2 and 3 of its constitution removing the claim to jurisdiction over northern Ireland
blanch152 wrote: » I am pointing out the ridiculous nature of Francie's definition of politicians lying. If he is correct, the IRA and Sinn Fein are the biggest liars of the lot. The IRA should have signed up to peace 40 years before they did eventually cop on.
Bonniedog wrote: » No harm to you but you clearly do not understand what the "veto" is. It is not some esoteric ritual, it is simply that a united Ireland would require the consent of a majority in 6 counties. That is in Sunningdale, Hillsborough AND the GFA. Only difference is that SF now accept the "veto"/consent clause. Not only that, but they are happy to sit in Stormont running the place on behalf of London. Now, if you think that is remotely near republicans having achieved their objective then good luck to you. Seems that current pipe dream is based on winning the sectarian riding stakes at some stage in the future. Which ironically is much less likely given the shinners' support for abortion!
John Hume wrote: The fundamental change that has taken place as a result of the Anglo-Irish Agreement is a change that is deeply and fully understood by every Unionist. What it means is that their exclusive hold on power has gone and is not coming back. The power of veto on British policy which they have always had, and which goes to the heart of our problem here, has gone and is not coming back. The loss is uncomfortable for their leaders, for while they held that privileged position they never had to be politicians or exercise the art of politics, which is the art of representing one’s own view while treating others with fairness. For traditional Unionism in Northern Ireland, other points of view have never actually existed. To this day, as they boast about the proposals which they have placed before the British Government about the future of Northern Ireland – the future of us all – the insult which their behaviour represents doesn’t seem to have occurred to them. Not only have they not presented these proposals to those of us who represent other views – views which must be accommodated if we are to have a future: they haven’t even published them for the information of their own followers. They are still oligarchs. The faithful will line up when the drums beat. The other points of view, to which lip-service is publicly paid, don’t really count.
Bowie wrote: » Well you need edit you comment. It reads as if you are ridiculing the people on both sides who signed up to peace. The IRA signed up when it was right for the IRA I'd imagine.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Your lack of education on this point is your responsibility, not mine.
Bishop of hope wrote: » It is í suppose, the #not my Taoiseach should be dead and buried at this stage though don't you think? It's childish and undemocratic at best. Taoiseach means chief says Marylou, I'm his chief. Jesus.
landofthetree wrote: » The scum breaking the C19 rules as per usual.https://www.rte.ie/amp/1150536/
25% or 1 in 4 Irish adults score at or below level 1 for numeracy. At this level a person may have problems doing simple math calculations. 42% of Irish adults score at or below level 1 on using technology to solve problems and accomplish tasks.
maccored wrote: » says more about yourself that post than anything
landofthetree wrote: » A large group breaking the rules. What else are they but scum? Tens of thousands of people haven't got to go to funerals because of restrictions. Yet SF just ignore the rules.
FrancieBrady wrote: » We all know at this stage that partitionists probably preferred the pre conflict/war arrangements in northern Ireland. They seem to have the view that nationalists should have lain down and accepted their lot until the British got around to being democrats.
JohnnyFlash wrote: » A lot of the SF ‘top brass’ in that photo. Some of them mightn’t be household names though....
Bonniedog wrote: » SF are partitionists. They accepted partition in 1998 and now they administer it. The unionist veto is about blocking Irish unity.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » I don't think SF has just vanished. I think SF as being varnished while vanished.
maccored wrote: » I think it was pointed out why back in this threads infancy that SF hadn't vanished at all
blanch152 wrote: » Some people believe that the rules don't apply to them.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » I find the body language interesting in the photo the way Mary Lou is in submissive mode to Gerry Adams smiling up at him. He on the other hand is looking every bit the commander arms folded. Would make a good caption competition. Very clear who is boss, even if you did not know them from Adam(s).
FrancieBrady wrote: » Good lord, even when it is spelt out in black and white you still won't accept you are wrong. The Unionists DO NOT have a veto on a UI if a majority vote for it. READ the GFA.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Don't smaller people generally have to 'look up' to taller people...not much point looking at his chest. Stretching things a bit there GDG
gormdubhgorm wrote: » It is not just that, pay close attention to the body language, and facial expressions. Gerry is still 'The Mon' it screams.