How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

https://twitter.com/TadhgHickey/status/1364864367121022977

I see Ben, who we discussed the other day, funnily enough, has gotten himself in some hot water with an outrageous tweet. The editor of the Newsletter has resigned it is being rumoured online...anyone hear anything?

Who is Pastor Jimberoo?

Fionn1952 wrote: »

A parody Twitter account, who apparently went to the same school as young Ben (not too many Provos attended that particular school...)

I certainly didn't think it was serious enough to lead to Ben's resignation, though as far as journalists go, while surprised I won't shed too many tears if it turns out to be true. He's brass necked out a lot worse than this though, so I would be VERY surprised.

EDIT: I do see he hasn't Tweeted in two days, which is unusual for him

I saw this...but may be spoofing. I think the Pastor's crime in Ben's eyes was challenging Stephen Nolan's bias.

https://twitter.com/BorderSeaIrish/status/1364928087662723076

Fionn1952 wrote: »

That is what it spawned from alright, but it led to certain challenges regarding his right to anonymity and then escalated to the Provo Jimberoo nonsense, which as a fellow alumnus of the same secondary, he would be well aware isn't the case.

I'd be incredibly surprised if it was serious enough to lead to a resignation unless Jimberoo is much better connected that I suspected: there aren't very many people regularly reading The Newsletter who'd be too upset at calling anyone who could be perceived as attacking Loyalism a Provo.

No word today...Ben still silent on Twitter. Lying low I'd say, letting it blow over.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The pastor has relaunched his account anyhow:

https://twitter.com/PastorJimberoo3

And apparently it was confirmed on the Nolan Show this morning that Lowry has not resigned. That's also heard second hand though as I would watch paint dry before putting Nolan on.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nobody has asked the strategic geniuses in Unionism what happens if they win. Anyone prepared to tell us in the Unionist camp?

I actually don’t know. I had the same question. Can boris just ignore it. Quite possibly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nobody has asked the strategic geniuses in Unionism what happens if they win. Anyone prepared to tell us in the Unionist camp?

In the unlikely event they won all the judges can do is ask the government to find a "remedy". They can't get rid of the protocol even if they won. That's not how it works.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

In the unlikely event they won all the judges can do is ask the government to find a "remedy". They can't get rid of the protocol even if they won. That's not how it works.

That's what I would have thought, they'll succeed in plunging the 'motherland' into even more crisis.

Be gas if they precipitated a referendum here over it. Could see Boris doing it too.

downcow wrote: »

Hahaha. I can’t be bothered scrolling back, but I even specifically told you that I was being clear in the post that I was writing in such a way so as you couldn’t say later that I had claimed it was big stuff that was going to change the world. And haha you just done it.

I said big news Downcow, nothing about changing the world.

Your tone clearly implied that should it pass, it would be an interesting development, though you did caveat it with the, 'it might go nowhere', which is fair enough. I'd call interesting developments big news, but realistically it isn't a particularly significant part of my question. You also said it COULD be a gamechanger, so to me calling it big news seems reasonable.

To save your scrolling, your post was

downcow wrote: »

Watch this space. There will be an interesting development around the protocol in the coming days.
....and it won’t be a guy with a paintbrush this time

And here is where you said it could be a gamechanger;

downcow wrote: »

The developments I refer to coming up may also achieve nothing or it could be a gamechanger. As people on here say about a referendum, we only need to get lucky once.

I am not being more explicit as I think those involved should announce it, but it will be fronted by cross party MPs on that big island where you say no one cares.

And let me emphasise again so as you don’t misinterpret it, it my achieve nothing. It may end up another lost battle, but what is key is who wins the war.

So I'll ask the question again, and to avoid deflection into semantics about the significance of the term, 'big news', I'll rephrase: was this indeed the development you were discussing a few days ago, and is the cross party support from Britain you referenced essentially just Kate Hoey and a member of the Brexit Party?

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

You can't amend an international agreement with internal legislation. They'd have to back to the EU in an even weaker position than before they left.

And that would take them back to 'no deal' territory. The British are gonna love those who want to maintain the Union with them, for that.

The Old Lady going back to her roots:

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/a-unionist-history-of-northern-ireland-1.4488587?mode=amp

I reckon we'll be seeing quite an uptick in articles and discussion about how benign and misunderstood Unionism was.

Pass me the bucket.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Is this not an illegal act?

Decided on during the meeting with illegal organisations.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

DUP have gone rogue...this should be fun.

More popcorn Francie

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This calls for something stronger...candy popcorn.

I've opened a bottle of football special!