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

What happens when the courts decide the GFA hasn't been breached?

downcow wrote: »

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/loyalist-paramilitary-groups-withdraw-support-for-belfast-agreement-1.4500982?mode=amp

This was inevitable since Roi encouraged Eu to tear up the gfa.
I appreciate the LCCs desire for non violence but unfortunately the unionist community has watched Roi pm use the threat of republican violence work for them.

The one thing I agree 100% with them is that the unionist community should be clear that the gfa no longer has its support due to the breaches by Roi I say that as someone who took serious abuse from within my community for voting yes to it 20 years ago. I, like david Trimble, feel betrayed by Roi

#edit. I have reflected on this and what is interesting for me is that my anger is absolutely not against the ordinary nationalist people in NI, the EU or the UK, rather it is fair and square against the Roi. They are the ones manipulated the Eu etc with the threats of violence (and of course the Sf leadership)

Come off it.

You're doing so much twisting there that you're starting to resemble a torsade.

So can we take it, since you're intimating it here, that you're no longer supportive of the GFA?

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/loyalist-paramilitary-groups-withdraw-support-for-belfast-agreement-1.4500982?mode=amp

This was inevitable since Roi encouraged Eu to tear up the gfa.
I appreciate the LCCs desire for non violence but unfortunately the unionist community has watched Roi pm use the threat of republican violence work for them.

The one thing I agree 100% with them is that the unionist community should be clear that the gfa no longer has its support due to the breaches by Roi I say that as someone who took serious abuse from within my community for voting yes to it 20 years ago. I, like david Trimble, feel betrayed by Roi

#edit. I have reflected on this and what is interesting for me is that my anger is absolutely not against the ordinary nationalist people in NI, the EU or the UK, rather it is fair and square against the Roi. They are the ones manipulated the Eu etc with the threats of violence (and of course the Sf leadership)

Only through the most orange tinted of glasses could one have this sort of take. It is genuinely bizarre the mental gymnastics you'll do to avoid acknowledging that once more the British government have screwed you.

Funny how you were crowing about what a great opportunity it was, how NI was going to have such an advantage that Unification was a pipe dream, that there were a few teething problems that needed to be ironed out......now because Loyalist paramilitaries have said they're not happy they can't get their drugs, you're suddenly furious about it and feel, 'betrayed'.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What happens when the courts decide the GFA hasn't been breached?

We'll move onto to tomorrow's absurdity

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Only through the most orange tinted of glasses could one have this sort of take. It is genuinely bizarre the mental gymnastics you'll do to avoid acknowledging that once more the British government have screwed you.

Funny how you were crowing about what a great opportunity it was, how NI was going to have such an advantage that Unification was a pipe dream, that there were a few teething problems that needed to be ironed out......now because Loyalist paramilitaries have said they're not happy they can't get their drugs, you're suddenly furious about it and feel, 'betrayed'.

Don't forget Fionn that we have been told on numerous occasions by DC that the GFA was a capitulation and that it enforced the Union. It was such a great agreement for unionism. It obviously wasn't good enough for some.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

We'll move onto to tomorrow's absurdity

You can see the pathetic play here a mile off. Unionism will - or are attempting to hide their blushes behind 'the big bad EU did this to us', 'bad Ireland did this to us'....etc etc etc
All they have managed to do is further piss off the British and seriously anger the EU.

I think more needs to be made about the LCC withdrawal of support from the GFA.

Yet again belligerent loyalism showing their stone age thought processes.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I think more needs to be made about the LCC withdrawal of support from the GFA.

Yet again belligerent loyalism showing their stone age thought processes.

It's ironic that Jeffery Donaldson and Foster left the UUP because of the GFA and the premature release of paramilitaries, here they are meeting with them and discussing the 'way forward'. Is Unionism regressing?

[Deleted User]

Saw an article yesterday which said unionism is the biggest danger to the Union and I had to agree. All this drama over what are effectively minor customs checks. Sure, it's a little inconvenient, but only a little and likely to get less so.
There has been a terrible misreading of Brexit by unionism, not by all unionists, but at least by some prominent ones. The border between north and south is not going to be the factor it was, and Brexit couldn't restore it. It's very clear many unionists at a high level wanted a hard border, but that's no longer realistic. An east/west border is far more likely so unionists should have campaigned for a yes vote.
If unionism is serious about continuing the union it needs to behave a lot more like the alliance party, try and put the symbolism to the side and work for the economic and social success of NI. If it doesn't succeed in reversing some of the division the union will not last, the Protestant numbers just aren't there, it needs Catholic support. For that to happen they need to clear the leadership, Foster, Poots, Wilson etc are not going to be accepted by Catholics, whenever I talk to Catholics in Belfast about politics, its clear they despise the likes of those three. Younger ones see them as weird and mean spirited, while the more 'mature' ones of my vintage see them as a throwback to the dark times.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's ironic that Jeffery Donaldson and Foster left the UUP because of the GFA and the premature release of paramilitaries, here they are meeting with them and discussing the 'way forward'. Is Unionism regressing?

Of course it is.

It's a regressive ideology. All too aware what its against and not a clue what its for (bar some abusive blind loyalty to "Queen and Country").

When your whole raison d'etre is to 'other' Nationalists and Catholics, it should be no surprise that at some point that you run out of road.

The Unionist endgame is upon us.

maccored

Unionism is imploding - plus letting everyone see the mental gymnastics they do to justify their complaints. Its like a party of internet ‘Karens’

Vicxas

Unionism is a sad state. Cosying up to a country who would clean them off their boot if they could.

bocaman wrote: »

Now the UDA and other assorted loyalist terrorist have withdrawn their support for the GFA. I wonder who's using the threat of violence now?

I absolutely agree with you bovaman I am not so disingenuous not to admit loyalists are playing the same dangerous game with threat of violence that Roi played for two years Some Unionist politicians are also referring to it now in an unhelpful way. This legitimises violence when it kicks off - which is what your pm etc was doing throughout negotiations which would have legitimised republican violence

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Come off it.

You're doing so much twisting there that you're starting to resemble a torsade.

So can we take it, since you're intimating it here, that you're no longer supportive of the GFA?

I thought that was clear. Until it is upheld in a way that protects identities equally it won’t have my support. I believe Stormont is on borrowed time.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Only through the most orange tinted of glasses could one have this sort of take. It is genuinely bizarre the mental gymnastics you'll do to avoid acknowledging that once more the British government have screwed you.

Funny how you were crowing about what a great opportunity it was, how NI was going to have such an advantage that Unification was a pipe dream, that there were a few teething problems that needed to be ironed out......now because Loyalist paramilitaries have said they're not happy they can't get their drugs, you're suddenly furious about it and feel, 'betrayed'.

All the points in your post are compatible. I still believe it is economically excellent for OWC. I but the gfa has been betrayed on the matter of identity. It’s that simple and just needs sorted

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Don't forget Fionn that we have been told on numerous occasions by DC that the GFA was a capitulation and that it enforced the Union. It was such a great agreement for unionism. It obviously wasn't good enough for some.

Again. I stand by all of that. It just needs respected and adhered to

downcow wrote: »

I absolutely agree with you bovaman I am not so disingenuous not to admit loyalists are playing the same dangerous game with threat of violence that Roi played for two years Some Unionist politicians are also referring to it now in an unhelpful way. This legitimises violence when it kicks off - which is what your pm etc was doing throughout negotiations which would have legitimised republican violence

This is just more outrageous nonsense.
Loyalist paramilitaries threatening violence is the same as the PSNI, The EU, the Dublin government having 'concerns' about paramilitaries returning to violence.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

All the points in your post are compatible. I still believe it is economically excellent for OWC. I but the gfa has been betrayed on the matter of identity. It’s that simple and just needs sorted

Ah so it's back to having your cake and eating it then? Unfortunately it won't happen.

downcow wrote: »

All the points in your post are compatible. I still believe it is economically excellent for OWC. I but the gfa has been betrayed on the matter of identity. It’s that simple and just needs sorted

The identity clauses were betrayed when some fools decided Brexiting would be a good idea.

Everything follows from there.

downcow wrote: »

I thought that was clear. Until it is upheld in a way that protects identities equally it won’t have my support. I believe Stormont is on borrowed time.

Oh right, so you feel that nationalists are not being treated equally. I would have to agree.

On borrowed time is right, border poll will see to the end of it alright.

According to Jeffrey, the withdrawal of support for the GFA does not signal a return to violence by Loyalists.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm... I need some salt to grab a pinch of.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dup-says-loyalist-move-on-belfast-agreement-does-not-signal-violence-1.4500982

The DUP are clearly fomenting this and they ned to be roundly condemned.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is just more outrageous nonsense.
Loyalist paramilitaries threatening violence is the same as the PSNI, The EU, the Dublin government having 'concerns' about paramilitaries returning to violence.

twisting again Francie.
I said unionist leaders expressing concerns about paramilitaries returning to violence is exactly what ROI have been doing for 2 years.

I am not aware of any paramilitaries threatening violence - please enlighten us?

I see the Shinners have nothing better to waste there time at
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/unnamed-sinn-fein-in-court-challenge-to-dup-ministers-decision-to-halt-work-on-border-control-posts-3153645

Junkyard Tom

It'll be interesting to see just how much economic harm the Tories are willing to inflict on Britain because of 'Irish' Unionism.

lurleen lumpkin

downcow wrote: »

I am not aware of any paramilitaries threatening violence - please enlighten us?

'The LCC leadership is determined that unionist opposition to the Protocol should be peaceful and democratic. However, please do not underestimate the strength of feeling on this issue right across the unionist family.'

I interpret that as threatening violence.

downcow wrote: »

twisting again Francie.
I said unionist leaders expressing concerns about paramilitaries returning to violence is exactly what ROI have been doing for 2 years.

I am not aware of any paramilitaries threatening violence - please enlighten us?

You have done the stock Unionist thing...claimed that Dublin 'threatened violence'...stop trying to pretend you didn't.

If Loyalist paramilitary organisations are withdrawing support for the GFA they are reverting to what they were before that agreement. Don't add disingenuousness to the lying about what you said about 'threats'.\

It is very clear to all what Loyalists mean by that move.

lurleen lumpkin wrote: »

'The LCC leadership is determined that unionist opposition to the Protocol should be peaceful and democratic. However, please do not underestimate the strength of feeling on this issue right across the unionist family.'

I interpret that as threatening violence.

.....and i interpret your PM holding up photos of bombed customs posts at EU meetings, as him using the threat of violence. So I am not really surprised that a paramilitary group reckon its ok for them to highlight their concerns that violence could break out

lurleen lumpkin wrote: »

'The LCC leadership is determined that unionist opposition to the Protocol should be peaceful and democratic. However, please do not underestimate the strength of feeling on this issue right across the unionist family.'

I interpret that as threatening violence.

Maybe they mean they 'cannot guarantee their peacefulness'? Which apparently isn't a threat either.