Northern Ireland 2125?

I know a lad in Boston who learnt Irish in school too, in America. He was never in Ireland in his life. A few people in school were from Ireland and sometimes called him Amadain, and he learnt that word, so he says he learnt Irish in school in Boston.

I've already pointed out that Ulster Gaeilge was the more widely spoken dialect in my home county long before the claims that Blanch threw in here and Francis is attempting to parrot without actually understanding. It isn't meant as actual historical discussion, it is meant to gloat and demean.

Their assertion is that because the dialect originating in Donegal spread into the western counties of NI pre-partition that when the last speaker of (in my own example) Fermanagh-originating Gaeilge was replaced by Ulster Gaeilge speaking, that it means the language was, 'imported'.

Still no explanation from any of them on how a bloke was speaking a native language the day before partition but it suddenly became imported a day later.

I think that for 2-3 decades post partition, primary schools continued as they always had pre-partition i.e. as per those in the rest of Ireland. Maybe in more recent decades, as the curriculum became more prescribed, they became more like the rest of the UK.

The fact that a former editor for the Newsletter is talking about Unification really doesn't make for the win you think this is. I don't think you'd have to go back too long for anyone who has had any involvement whatsoever with the Newsletter to be dismissing a conversation about Unification outright with derision rather than discussing it. Listening to the hardline end of Unionism discussing their acceptable, 'terms of surrender' on the union rather than the old faithful shouting, 'never, never, never' is pretty significant progress. If that's what it would take to satisfy the Newsletter crowd on Unification, it really gets one thinking what it might take to convince the much less entrenched middle ground.

I'd agree with your take that SF and their usual b*llocks do a better job of promoting the union than they do pulling much of the middle ground towards Unification, but you manage to ignore the equal but opposite irony; that Unionist parties and their refusal to get behind anything Irish do more for pushing the Unification argument than keeping the union among that same middle ground.

Conversely Unionism had 100 years to consolidate the Union and are now in decline and increasingly insecure and being tacitly led by a bigot from social media. And are losing every single strategic battle they take on.

Bryson has lost nearly every lawfare case taken. I feel sorry for him not hate.

It is cringe watching or reading him trying to turn them into wins.

And what will Unionism seeking to get their veto back (basically what 'culture war' 'lawfare' means) achieve?

Nothing.

You slunk away after posting his triumphalism (false as it turned out, inevitably) over the Palestinian flag. His lawfare attempting to get a judge to direct it's removal FAILED.
This is more vainglorious 'I was right' tweeting. Pol Deeds never claimed he had 'unilateral powers'.

You had him on here laughing that it would never fly….it did and the court denied the bid to get it taken down.

He loses any significant case he takes and his ‘lawfare’ is only showing the middle ground that what belligerent Unionism wants is their veto back, which is never happening- UI or no UI.

The judge refused to direct it be taken down.

Why did they do it at midnight? Because they could?
Bit of advice, the courts seem to be getting mighty pissed off being used like this and even more pissed off by unelected tweeters sitting in the body of the court directing affairs.

I did answer - because they could.

Nothing divisive about it unless you think the city belongs to you and you can veto even a majority decision.

I did answer.
You not liking the answer is your issue tbh.

The fact is the courts allowed it stay.

Bryson’s suprematist gloating firmly rebuffed. Again.

Wasn’t just republicans.

Those who wanted to show support for the victims of a genocide put the flag up because a majority decided they wanted to.

And you ‘can do these things’’ when you have enough support like any normal democracy.

@downcow, Jamie etc will be telling us that a government/executive/council can only show support for the folk they support. 'It's our inalienable right not to have our support for colonial and genocidal regimes challenged, it's 'our wee country' after all'
Yeh won't be getting a UI unless you promise not to upset/offend us.'