downcow wrote: » ......and it is very clear to all what your Prime Minister meant when he held up photos of bombed custom posts. I did say this was the inevitable outcome of two years of nationalist and republican politicians and the Republic of Ireland politicians using the threat of violence to get their way
FrancieBrady wrote: » Maybe they mean they 'cannot guarantee their peacefulness'? Which apparently isn't a threat either.
FrancieBrady wrote: » He was informing those that didn't know what our concerns were. He was not threatening anyone. He did not threaten to remove support for the GFA and he did not invent threats, meet with paramilitaries or daub graffitti either. STOP being ridiculous.
downcow wrote: » I think you guys want me to disagree with you because you are uncomfortable with what your government has instigated. I can read the subtext of the messages coming from Unionist politicians and loyalist parliamentary groups, and I do not deny them. But you cannot have it both ways. You guys are incomplete denial about what your politicians instigated and the lessons that they taught the unionist community. Something I find very interesting is that when Republicans worked with the RUC, they were agents. But when loyalists work with the RUC it was collusion. Now when the Republic of Ireland talks about potential violence, it is simply raising its concerns. When Unionists talk about potential violence, they are threatening it. I sincerely hope violence does not break out, and if it does, I sincerely hope that ordinary nationalists do not bear the brunt of the Republic of Ireland using our conflict, and walking all over the Belfast agreement, to look after their own interests. I really hope we are not sucked into another pointless sectarian tit-for-tat over something that was foisted upon us by an unreasonable European Union egged on by ROI
downcow wrote: » A nice shimmy there Francie, but I did not say he was threatening anyone, I said he was using the threat of violence from others to increase his bargaining stance. Exactly what a very small number of Unionist politicians seem to be embarking upon this morning. It's a pity you can only see the fault in others. You will note I see the fault both sides
Junkyard Tom wrote: » I feel it's like an alcoholic that has to hit rock-bottom before it can began to sort itself out.
Fionn1952 wrote: » So we're back to it being Republicans fault that the Loyalists are threatening violence again? When are Loyalists going to be responsible for their own actions?!
Junkyard Tom wrote: » It'll be interesting to see just how much economic harm the Tories are willing to inflict on Britain because of 'Irish' Unionism.
FrancieBrady wrote: » He's spinning around like one.
Junkyard Tom wrote: » I feel it's like an alcoholic that has to hit rock-bottom before it can begin to sort itself out.
downcow wrote: » So, are the Eu bluffing or could we be heading for a ‘no deal’ after all?
Fionn1952 wrote: » The UK have signed a deal, a deal so great that Boris was boasting about it, the Unionist parties were talking about how great it was and how it had taken Unification off the table for generations. While it is questionable why anyone would want to escape from an agreement they were boasting about a few weeks ago, should they wish to abdicate their responsibilities agreed in that deal, they will face penalties until they implement what they agreed to (and I emphasise that they WILL implement it eventually, along with damaging their reputation for integrity and trustworthiness on an international basis that goes beyond the EU). Ultimately, once more Britain will decide that bending NI Unionists over is preferable to suffering the alternative. A few Billy big balls moments for the local press and reality will set in. While backing out of the deal would certainly impact the EU (and particularly Ireland), it pales in comparison to how it would impact Britain. Given that they would also have proven themselves to be unreliable and untrustworthy with their word essentially counting for nothing, this would be even more damaging than leaving with no deal in the first place.
downcow wrote: » Was that rant a yes or a no ?
Fionn1952 wrote: » The UK have signed a deal, a deal so great that Boris was boasting about it,
Natterjack from Kerry wrote: » Nothing can be read into that. Boris will boast about anything and proclaim his greatness about anything. If he took a dump he could trumpet how it was a great dump for Britain, what a great journey it was off on in the sewers of the UK, and how superbly improved was the aroma of the No.10 lavatory.
FrancieBrady wrote: » These carrots have every right to identify as British if they wish.
downcow wrote: » When living in a greenhouse.........https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thejournal.ie/irish-brands-not-made-in-ireland-1785833-Nov2014/%3famp=1
RobMc59 wrote: » Don't mention Guinness being British owned.
Fionn1952 wrote: » You mean the company who's most famous drink is a London style porter, from the famed Protestant Guinness family, founded by staunch Unionist Arthur Guinness, now owned by Diageo? I don't think anyone is under any illusions there....aye, it still has more connection to Ireland (on account of actually being made here) than your Spanish carrots. I see one of the supermarkets have rebranded petit pois as British Fancy Peas and all. Laughable stuff, but whatever helps you sleep at night.
BonnieSituation wrote: » And what a stout it is. "Nailed it" isn't the word.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Ooooh fancy peas, that'll show the EU who is boss!
Junkyard Tom wrote: » Interesting watching Unionists helping the Tories cause great harm and reputational damage to Britain. In a way I'm glad that young people are getting a crash course in how full-of-hate and inflexible unionists are in the north. I dare say after the dust has settled on all this the number of people self-identifying as unionists in the north will fall below 30% out of sheer embarrassment at being associated with the DUP and their hangers-on.
