RobMc59 wrote: » They can decide their own approach to coronavirus and might impose restrictions on the border now Ireland has a higher infection rate than the UK.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Which border...the land one or the one in the Irish sea imposed by Westminister against the wishes of the marjority unionist parties? Valiant Rob, valiant...but the truth is, when it comes down to it, the devolved regions tow the Westminster line if they are told to...a Westminster controlled by England.
Hamsterchops wrote: » Interment started & ended when. NI Troubles, early 70s? I think It was (wrongly used) as a blunt tool used at the time in the face of extreme terrorism on the streets of Northern Ireland. Car bombs going off every other day, firebombs, petrol bombs, people being shot as they opened their hall door, policemen being attacked in their homes, booby trap bombs, knee cappings galore, teenagers being tarred & feathered & shot.... The place had gone mad (in some areas), so internment was brought in as a blunt weapon against the mayhem I suspect? Not saying it was a good decision, just suggesting from their perspective why they brought it in.
RobMc59 wrote: » Classic 'look over there' tactics francie,you're obviously on the ropes.
jm08 wrote: » There were no car bombs going off in 1971 when it was decided to introduce internment without trial. The PIRA hardly existed.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Exactly...'internment' because it was a one sided 'solution' deepened the division and exacerbated and intensified the violence.
jh79 wrote: » So what's likely to happen with this 100 year celebration? Will MON have to be part of it as 1st Minister?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Quite a good opportunity to have a look at what we are supposed to be celebrating. As a nationalist what would you propose that they celebrate?
jh79 wrote: » No idea. Seems a bad idea but it's happening by the looks of it. Would MON be obliged to attend events as 1st minister?
RobMc59 wrote: » Probably as she's in the pay of the crown.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Who pays the 'crown'? 'Rob' might an operative word in your answer...wink wink nudge nudge.
Fionn1952 wrote: » Amazing how a family of generationally unemployed can manage to, 'pay' so many people....
FrancieBrady wrote: » Amazing that somebody thinks the money is magiced out od thin air and not taxes of the working man and woman. You gotta love the monarchists waiting for the benevolence of the superior one. Oh to be on your knees so long you don't realise it.
jh79 wrote: » I've made similar comments about SF. Where exactly is the money for a UI gonna come from?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Why is it up to SF to pay for a UI? We constitutionally aspire to a UI. If the opportunity presents itself it is up to all of us to find a way.
RobMc59 wrote: » I wonder if MON took the oath of allegiance?
jh79 wrote: » I was referring to SF seeming to think that money can be magicked up out of thin air.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » @ Bonniesituation I think you missed the hyphen / stroke in your rush to castigate me with your outrage. There is a reason Londonderry/Derry is called 'stroke city'. I supposed if I used that term you would find offence as well. A classic case of your prejudice/bias blinding you. And you getting outraged over nothing. Plus you ironically mention faux outrage! If you watched the Shane Paul Doherty video, you would understand why I used two names. :eek:
Yeah_Right wrote: » It does seem to be a standard technique of the belligerent republicans on here. If they don't like your point of view, you get told to butt out. Or you're anti-democratic. I told to shut up because I'm a foreigner so I clearly know nothing about Ireland and "real" Irish people :rolleyes:
Fionn1952 wrote: » A bit of basic research would clarify that for you, Rob. The Northern Ireland Assembly are not required to take an Oath of Allegiance....in fact, there isn't even a voluntary oath for them to take should they wish to. Ten seconds with Google could've put an end to your musings (if they were in any way genuine rather than an attempted jibe from a position of ignorance...)
RobMc59 wrote: » Thank you I was unaware of that.
jh79 wrote: » And free gaffs for all with no evictions. Increased social and PS pay. All the expensive populist stuff.
downcow wrote: » Wishful thinking I was listening to David Trimble interviewed after John Hume's death- you can pick it up on Nolan on the day of his death on BBC iPlayer. Nolan was affirming John Hume for bringing Sinn Fein along. Trimble said he disagreed and was incredibly clear of two things in response. 1) Sinn Fein had exploited John Hume 2) Sinn Fein and the IRA had reached a point of realising that they could not achieve their ends. He said they were so heavily infiltrated that the vast majority of their cells could not operate. Yes of course I know you will say they pulled off a spectacular in Manchester and maybe one or two others, but it was over, they were defeated, Manchester was the final kicks of a dying ruthless animal. Everyone, except a few old Republicans in dingy bars with several pints taken, realise that they were defeated. They used the John Hume initiative to try and save a little face. You can say as many times as you like that the Unionists lost, but we have got absolutely everything that we had 25 years ago, and you have got absolutely nothing that you and the IRA aspired towards. Yes you can continue to aspire, and try to lift your self esteem, by trying to convince yourselves that you were in control the process. John Hume was very intelligent and realised that you were defeated but that you needed some sort of face-saving exercise. He didn't get you very much but then he didn't need to because beggars cannot be choosers
outonawing wrote: » It's certainly a better place than it was in the 70's, 80's or 90's and is heading only in one direction......out of the EU.
jh79 wrote: » Is there a full transcript of the judgement floating around? Just find it hard to believe that SF or Unionists have not made a bigger deal out of this. Does it not completely undermine the GFA that one country has the ability to veto the will of the people without having to give any justification?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Where have they said this?
BonnieSituation wrote: » Here ya go... That's the summary.