Gerry Adams to run for President ?

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

The Shankhill Butchers had nothing to do with the Provisionals- however if you watched the documentary that came out recently enough on them presented by a unionist you will see that Belfast RUC does have serious questions to answer on their response to them.

That is my point. We don't need to give credit to killers. Which include British Army soldiers who murdered innocent people.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

That is my point. We don't need to give credit to killers. Which include British Army soldiers who murdered innocent people.

Well dont.

But you are missing my main point-"Northern Ireland" has failed.

Now you might argue that it would have had a chance of working if it had been properly intergrated into the mainland UK in the 1920s, but the fact is that the mainland UK has its own concerns and its own dynamics which are increasingly pushing towards its possible break up at the most-increasing decentralization at the least. Now this is good for England, Scotland and Wales. However "Northern Ireland" is a completely different story.

The only possible solution to our problems is full intergration into the 26 counties. I cant see anything else.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

That is my point. We don't need to give credit to killers. Which include British Army soldiers who murdered innocent people.

Let God judge them.

The point is that circumstances of Northern Ireland gave birth to and fed the horrible violence that raged in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. We are not talking about a primarily moral problem like you would in the case of "serial killers" or whatever- though in the case of the Shankhill Butchers Im not so sure.

The fact that the overwhelming majority of the PIRA was prepared to put down its guns for so little should tell you something.

The continual Unionist MOPE about the Provos's campaign got tiresome a LONG time ago.

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

Well dont.

But you are missing my main point-"Northern Ireland" has failed.

Now you might argue that it would have had a chance of working if it had been properly intergrated into the mainland UK in the 1920s, but the fact is that the mainland UK has its own concerns and its own dynamics which are increasingly pushing towards its possible break up at the most-increasing decentralization at the least. Now this is good for England, Scotland and Wales. However "Northern Ireland" is a completely different story.

The only possible solution to our problems is full intergration into the 26 counties. I cant see anything else.

Northern Ireland hasn't failed because it is still a fully functioning state and because of the peace process, it is now in a new era to move forward. There could be a lot worse situations to be in like Greece.

And I don't think anyone will judge anyone, that is why people have a problem with them.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

Northern Ireland hasn't failed because it is still a fully functioning state and because of the peace process, it is now in a new era to move forward. There could be a lot worse situations to be in like Greece.

And I don't think anyone will judge anyone, that is why people have a problem with them.

In no way is Greece essentially in a worse situation- the state barely functions, and the fact you have to have mandatory coalition in order for it to function says it all really. The fleg movement has certainly brought Northern Ireland into new era- as has the reaction of the DUP too it. The continual economic decline and the complete failure to create a civic conciousness speaks of dire failure.

SoulandForm

Why have "Peace Walls" doubled since the GFA if the "Peace Process" is such a success and Northern Ireland is no longer a failed state?

You draw comfort from southern Partitionists who go on like Unionists about the Provies- but you forget or dont notice that they have no time for nordies full stop, and indeed probably in their heart of hearts dislike Unionists more than they dislike the Provies.

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

In no way is Greece essentially in a worse situation- the state barely functions, and the fact you have to have mandatory coalition in order for it to function says it all really. The fleg movement has certainly brought Northern Ireland into new era- as has the reaction of the DUP too it. The continual economic decline and the complete failure to create a civic conciousness speaks of dire failure.

Greece is bankrupt. Northern Ireland gets a block grant from Westminster. As a Republican, you obviously want Northern Ireland to form into big government from Dublin.

But the majority don't want that and currently support the peace process. The mandatory coalition will be on its way out soon enough and I hope for a parliamentary democracy set up to replace it and form a opposition.

That way the politicians would be forced to do things and not hide behind a mandatory coalition because ultimately they don't have to do anything as they know they will get voted back in anyway, regardless of the results they produce.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

But the majority don't want that and currently support the peace process. The mandatory coalition will be on its way out soon enough and I hope for a parliamentary democracy set up to replace it and form a opposition.

In all honesty think that the CNR population will tolerate DUP majority rule? The DUP appear on platforms with representives of the Belfast UVF even after they recently murdered a young Protestant girl and after the attempted pogrom they launched against the Short Strand. What the Golden Dawn are to Greece the DUP effectively are to Northern Ireland.

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

In all honesty think that the CNR population will tolerate DUP majority rule? The DUP appear on platforms with representives of the Belfast UVF even after they recently murdered a young Protestant girl and after the attempted pogrom they launched against the Short Strand. What the Golden Dawn are to Greece the DUP effectively are to Northern Ireland.

Golden Dawn are a far right neo Nazi party. They would not have black members in Golden Dawn. The DUP would welcome all races in the DUP. Its two completely different parties and ideologies.

DUP if they got majority rule would be held accountable and you would have the option of voting them out and Sinn Fein in as the majority party or UUP or SDLP or even Alliance if you want.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

Golden Dawn are a far right neo Nazi party. They would not have black members in Golden Dawn. The DUP would welcome all races in the DUP. Its two completely different parties and ideologies.

DUP if they got majority rule would be held accountable and you would have the option of voting them out and Sinn Fein in as the majority party or UUP or SDLP or even Alliance if you want.

Peter Robinson recently accused a fellow Unionist of selling land to Tea eggs as if it was terrible thing people should be ashamed. Ruth Patterson in the past complained about an attack on someone by asking why it was done seeing as the victim wasnt a Catholic or a member of an ethnic minority. The DUP also shared platforms with Billy Wright and attacked the UVF for trying to shut him up and stop his maddness at the time.

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

Peter Robinson recently accused a fellow Unionist of selling land to Tea eggs as if it was terrible thing people should be ashamed. Ruth Patterson in the past complained about an attack on someone by asking why it was done seeing as the victim wasnt a Catholic or a member of an ethnic minority. The DUP also shared platforms with Billy Wright and attacked the UVF for trying to shut him up and stop his maddness at the time.

Gerry Adams carried Thomas Begley coffin. Its a nonsense argument to use when discussing the political ideology of the DUP and the policies they believe in.

Its now 2013 and not the 1990s.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

Gerry Adams carried Thomas Begley coffin. Its a nonsense argument to use when discussing the political ideology of the DUP and the policies they believe in.

Its now 2013 and not the 1990s.

The thing about selling the land was THIS year.

They have been standing on platforms with the UVF in Belfast which has been acting up THIS year.

If anything they are not getting better they are getting worse.

The Provies dont have anything to do with the "Dissidents" and have condemned in the strongest possible terms.

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

The thing about selling the land was THIS year.

They have been standing on platforms with the UVF in Belfast which has been acting up THIS year.

If anything they are not getting better they are getting worse.

The Provies dont have anything to do with the "Dissidents" and have condemned in the strongest possible terms.

When did the DUP sit on stage with the "UVF" this year? If you are talking about the 90s, then just say so.

Go look up the policies of the DUP and what they believe. Anyway, I think this thread is running out of fuel now and I have discussed pretty much most things related to it.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

When did the DUP sit on stage with the "UVF" this year? If you are talking about the 90s, then just say so.

Go look up the policies of the DUP and what they believe. Anyway, I think this thread is running out of fuel now and I have discussed pretty much most things related to it.

Uh....Do you read the newspapers? What exactly was happening at Twaddle just recently or during the fleg protests?

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

Why have "Peace Walls" doubled since the GFA if the "Peace Process" is such a success and Northern Ireland is no longer a failed state?

May I ask how the "full intergration into the 26 counties" (?) of Northern Ireland would do anything to solve this problem?

Manassas61

SoulandForm wrote: »

Uh....Do you read the newspapers? What exactly was happening at Twaddle just recently or during the fleg protests?

The twaddle protesters are in the "UVF"? Sounds like myth spreading.

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

May I ask how the "full intergration into the 26 counties" (?) of Northern Ireland would do anything to solve this problem?

Because it greatly weaken the grounds for tribal politics by intergrating it a larger and saner unit and allow for a genuine civic conciousness to emerge.

SoulandForm

Manassas61 wrote: »

The twaddle protesters are in the "UVF"? Sounds like myth spreading.

Oh my who do you think Winkie Ervine is?

Iwasfrozen

SoulandForm wrote: »

Because it greatly weaken the grounds for tribal politics by intergrating it a larger and saner unit and allow for a genuine civic conciousness to emerge.

It was part of an even larger and saner unit during direct rule and look how that ended.

SoulandForm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It was part of an even larger and saner unit during direct rule and look how that ended.

London doesnt give a damn about Ulster- they are only interested in it in terms of the port in Derry. That is it. Plastic bullets are happily used to Northern Ireland but not used on the mainland even during very serious riots.

Also the UK is the process of if not breaking up than decentralizing.

The only option that Northern Ireland has is to dissolve itself and have direct Dublin rule.

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

Because it greatly weaken the grounds for tribal politics by intergrating it a larger and saner unit and allow for a genuine civic conciousness to emerge.

But what do you mean my integration? Will you be demanding that the tribes come down South so that us partitionists can teach them how to be be sane?

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

But what do you mean my integration? Will you be demanding that the tribes come down South so that us partitionists can teach them how to be be sane?

By full intergration I mean no "regional assembly" or special opt outs.

SoulandForm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It was part of an even larger and saner unit during direct rule and look how that ended.

Northern Ireland during the period of direct rule was not fully intergrated into the mainland UK. Things went on than that just wouldnt have been acceptable at all on the UK mainland. That was a point I was trying to make to Fred.

Iwasfrozen

SoulandForm wrote: »

London doesnt give a damn about Ulster- they are only interested in it in terms of the port in Derry. That is it. Plastic bullets are happily used to Northern Ireland but not used on the mainland even during very serious riots.

You couldn't be more wrong. The UK is very much interested in Northern Ireland. They need it to help keep the ideal of Unionism alive within Britain. The elites in Britain have a lot of interest vested in Northern Ireland and they won't let it go easily.

Also the UK is the process of if not breaking up than decentralizing.

The union is on the verge of a landmark democratic boost once the Scottish independence referendum is defeated by a landslide.

The only option that Northern Ireland has is to dissolve itself and have direct Dublin rule.

Not true. They have loads of other options.

SoulandForm wrote: »

Northern Ireland during the period of direct rule was not fully intergrated into the mainland UK. Things went on than that just wouldnt have been acceptable at all on the UK mainland. That was a point I was trying to make to Fred.

It's special policing needs were taken into account but it's not fair to alienate NI from the rest of the UK because of it. If you do that the terrorists have won.

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

By full intergration I mean no "regional assembly" or special opt outs.

Yes, but how does that do anything to solve the problems that gave rise to the need for peace lines?

SoulandForm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's special policing needs were taken into account but it's not fair to alienate NI from the rest of the UK because of it. If you do that the terrorists have won.

Im not talking about just policing mate (and if sorry Plastic Bullets kill and torture is utterly immoral as well as often ineffective in its aims)- the anti-discrimination measures that protected British blacks and Asians on the mainland UK were not brought in to protect Northern Irish Catholics because they didnt want to annoy Loyalist bigots.

Iwasfrozen

SoulandForm wrote: »

Im not talking about just policing mate (and if sorry Plastic Bullets kill and torture is utterly immoral as well as often ineffective in its aims)- the anti-discrimination measures that protected British blacks and Asians on the mainland UK were not brought in to protect Northern Irish Catholics because they didnt want to annoy Loyalist bigots.

You also have to remember that Asians and Blacks were not seen as a threat to the state. I'm sorry if this offends you but that's how it went down.

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

Yes, but how does that do anything to solve the problems that gave rise to the need for peace lines?

Because it would allow for the emergence of a genuine civic conciousness and so dissolve the tribalism on which the Peace Lines are built on. A tribalism shameless encouraged by Tories such as Randolph Churchill and Edward Carson who were not even from Ulster to ensure their objectives. A tribalism also shamelessly used to destroy any union of working class people to improve their mutual standards of living.

SoulandForm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You also have to remember that Asians and Blacks were not seen as a threat to the state. I'm sorry if this offends you but that's how it went down.

The state was a threat to itself- if the British government had not let Northern Ireland be utterly piosoned by the first Stormount regime there would not have been the troubles.

SoulandForm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You couldn't be more wrong. The UK is very much interested in Northern Ireland. They need it to help keep the ideal of Unionism alive within Britain. The elites in Britain have a lot of interest vested in Northern Ireland and they won't let it go easily.

I fear you are correct here- but my point still stands that they dont care about the actual people of Northern Ireland, or if they do they care about them much less than they do the people of the UK mainland.

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

Because it would allow for the emergence of a genuine civic conciousness and so dissolve the tribalism on which the Peace Lines are built on.

So you have said. Twice! I am asking you how will this happen? What are the mechanics of it likely to be?

I can certainly understand that you might hope this would happen, but can you give any kind of logical reason why you think it would?

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

So you have said. Twice! I am asking you how will this happen? What are the mechanics of it likely to be?

I can certainly understand that you might hope this would happen, but can you give any kind of logical reason why you think it would?

Because people would be forced to partake of politics that transcend their own nonsense.

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

Because people would be forced to partake of politics that transcend their own nonsense.

I feel an infinite regress coming on! How will they be forced to partake of nonsense-free politics?

If they don't even have a local assembly anymore, surely they are more likely to become more apolitical to national politics and focus all the more on their local squabbles?

Happyman42

SoulandForm wrote: »

Because people would be forced to partake of politics that transcend their own nonsense.

And some would have to ask themselves 'what is the point, and more importantly, the cost, of agitating for generations to come'. Pragmatism would be the order of the day once it is obvious there is no threat to peaceful inclusive diverse cultural traditions.

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

I feel an infinite regress coming on! How will they be forced to partake of nonsense-free politics?

If they don't even have a local assembly anymore, surely they are more likely to become more apolitical to national politics and focus all the more on their local squabbles?

No because the national politics of this small nation would obviously effect everyone in the six counties and local government has very little power in the Free State/Republic of Ireland/26 counties (which in general I think is to be deplored however in the case of the 6 counties...).

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

No because the national politics of this small nation would obviously effect everyone in the six counties and local government has very little power in the Free State/Republic of Ireland/26 counties (which in general I think is to be deplored however in the case of the 6 counties...).

I have no idea what this means but it doesn't answer my question.

The peace lines were / are necessary because some individuals in the two communities have an irrational distrust / loathing for those in the other community. How does your proposed political solution, or any political solution for that matter, change this kind of mindset?

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

I have no idea what this means but it doesn't answer my question.

The peace lines were / are necessary because some individuals in the two communities have an irrational distrust / loathing for those in the other community. How does your proposed political solution, or any political solution for that matter, change this kind of mindset?

Okay because it would replace a tribal based politics with a civic based politics.

The distrust/loathing is not as irrational as it seems at first- the fleg riots were as much about feeling that more of the limited resources were going to "themuns" as about the flag itself.

The six counties also needs a strong bill of rights to secure civil liberties as well as full employment (a moral duty for every state to insure with the price of hellfire in the next life if they dont at least make a serious effort in that direction).

Painted Pony

SoulandForm wrote: »

Okay because it would replace a tribal based politics with a civic based politics.

The distrust/loathing is not as irrational as it seems at first- the fleg riots were as much about feeling that more of the limited resources were going to "themuns" as about the flag itself.

The six counties also needs a strong bill of rights to secure civil liberties as well as full employment (a moral duty for every state to insure with the price of hellfire in the next life if they dont at least make a serious effort in that direction).

Hmmm. I fear some of you might be in for a smidgen of disappointment if and when a united Ireland ever comes to pass.

SoulandForm

Painted Pony wrote: »

Hmmm. I fear some of you might be in for a smidgen of disappointment if and when a united Ireland ever comes to pass.

Oh Im well aware of the disdain that Leinster House holds the idea of civil liberties-I know all about the Special Criminal Courts and the Offenses Against the State Act. I also know that it is effectively an oligarchy. That said even under present conditions Northern Ireland dissolving itself into would be a very big step forward on the road to getting the six counties healed.

Majority rule by the DUP would see the slaughter back in no time.

Happyman42

Painted Pony wrote: »

Hmmm. I fear some of you might be in for a smidgen of disappointment if and when a united Ireland ever comes to pass.

Could it be anymore 'disappointing' than the failure that is N.I.?

Painted Pony

Happyman42 wrote: »

Could it be anymore 'disappointing' than the failure that is N.I.?

Short answer, yes it could. The compromise in Northern Ireland at present, imperfect though it may be, is about the best that can be realistically hoped for. And substantial change could, and probably would, make things much, much worse.

Happyman42

Painted Pony wrote: »

Short answer, yes it could. The compromise in Northern Ireland at present, imperfect though it may be, is about the best that can be realistically hoped for. And substantial change could, and probably would, make things much, much worse.

Look at it realistically for once, will they ever truly work together without the oversight of outsiders?
Instead of owing to the past, what if they thought about what they owe the future for once.
The unfortunate ordinary people of N.I. are faced with this kind of nonsense into the distant future. It's not a compromise, it's round pegs into square holes as they cling onto something that is clearly long gone. The British will not fight for them anymore, have said via the GFA that they will walk away once the time is right. The question is always there for Unionists, the question they will pretend doesn't exist...'what is our future now that it is clear we are not full Britons and our so called 'Britishness' will not be defended?' It's a tough question but it is very clearly there to be answered.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Look at it realistically for once, will they ever truly work together without the oversight of outsiders?
Instead of owing to the past, what if they thought about what they owe the future for once.
The unfortunate ordinary people of N.I. are faced with this kind of nonsense into the distant future. It's not a compromise, it's round pegs into square holes as they cling onto something that is clearly long gone. The British will not fight for them anymore, have said via the GFA that they will walk away once the time is right. The question is always there for Unionists, the question they will pretend doesn't exist...'what is our future now that it is clear we are not full Britons and our so called 'Britishness' will not be defended?' It's a tough question but it is very clearly there to be answered.

But the GFA also says that the South will only take them if both North and South want it to happen.

I cannot see a referendum passing on both sides of the border this side of 2040.

What the GFA forces the people of Northern Ireland to do is firstly get along with one another. Even if the nationalist majority makes itself heard in a vote in the next 15 years, do you think that the South will want to take on a bitterly divided Northern Ireland where the new future nationalist majority does not give respect to the traditions of the unionist minority?

If you think the Unionists have a crisis over their Britishness, how will the nationalists feel when the South rejects them?

Crooked Jack

Godge wrote: »

But the GFA also says that the South will only take them if both North and South want it to happen.

Ugh, this type of language is so cringeworthy. Nobody will be "taking" anyone. Ireland is Ireland, it will be the reunification of the country and a new start north,south, east and west.

Godge wrote: »

What the GFA forces the people of Northern Ireland to do is firstly get along with one another. Even if the nationalist majority makes itself heard in a vote in the next 15 years, do you think that the South will want to take on a bitterly divided Northern Ireland where the new future nationalist majority does not give respect to the traditions of the unionist minority?

If you think the Unionists have a crisis over their Britishness, how will the nationalists feel when the South rejects them?

Do not confuse your and Iwasfrozens's opinions with those of the general population.

Godge

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Ugh, this type of language is so cringeworthy. Nobody will be "taking" anyone. Ireland is Ireland, it will be the reunification of the country and a new start north,south, east and west.



Do not confuse your and Iwasfrozens's opinions with those of the general population.

Ironically I have been told on these threads I know nothing about the North because my profile says Dublin 15 but now it seems I know nothing about the South either.

Northern nationalists continually overestimate the willingness of the South to take on the burden of reunification. You will get 90% in an opinion poll to say that they would love a United Ireland but you won't get 51% to say yes in a referendum if the North is still a bitterly divided State with a substantial dissident Unionist minority and there is a significant bill for security and welfare attached to reunification not to mention a serious domestic terrorism issue.

The only way it can be achieved is if the two communities up North reach an accommodation among themselves that demonstrably delivers peace and mutual respect. The Nationalist bellyaching over 12th of July commemorations is one example of issues that don't help.

Crooked Jack

Godge wrote: »

Ironically I have been told on these threads I know nothing about the North because my profile says Dublin 15 but now it seems I know nothing about the South either.

Northern nationalists continually overestimate the willingness of the South to take on the burden of reunification. You will get 90% in an opinion poll to say that they would love a United Ireland but you won't get 51% to say yes in a referendum if the North is still a bitterly divided State with a substantial dissident Unionist minority and there is a significant bill for security and welfare attached to reunification not to mention a serious domestic terrorism issue.

Care to provide something to back this up, because all the evidence indicates otherwise.

Godge wrote: »

The only way it can be achieved is if the two communities up North reach an accommodation among themselves that demonstrably delivers peace and mutual respect. The Nationalist bellyaching over 12th of July commemorations is one example of issues that don't help.

Those bloody nationalists, bellyaching about their rights. I mean, they got the vote, what more do they want.

Godge

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Care to provide something to back this up, because all the evidence indicates otherwise.



.

Common sense.

Who in their right mind would want to add on an extra jurisdiction with two communities that don't get on with each other and are making no effort to get on and will leave you with a taxation headache, an expensive policing bill and a risk that violence would spread South?

It is not rocket science to conclude that once a serious debate takes place about the North that support in the South will wither away. Of course, in another 20 years you will have learned to get on and the Orange Order will be able to have their parades, marching bands, flags and bunting while the SF/IRA apologists will be able to have their bomber commemorations in peace. Then we might look at reunification.

golfball37

Every Political Party in the South supports re-unification as long as thats what the majority in the North want.

Its a non runner that the South would reject it unless the main parties are even bigger hypocrites than we thought.

Godge

golfball37 wrote: »

Every Political Party in the South supports re-unification as long as thats what the majority in the North want.

Its a non runner that the South would reject it unless the main parties are even bigger hypocrites than we thought.

Every political party supported the extension of the oireachtas remit on investigations.

Nearly every political party supported various EU referenda.

Only FF opposed the abolition of the Seanad.


Correct if I am wrong but didn't all of those referenda sail through on the back of widespread political party support?

Crooked Jack

Godge wrote: »

Common sense.

Oh right, so basically nothing more than your opinion, like I said.

Godge wrote: »

Who in their right mind would want to add on an extra jurisdiction with two communities that don't get on with each other and are making no effort to get on and will leave you with a taxation headache, an expensive policing bill and a risk that violence would spread South?

Who in their right mind wouldnt want to unite the national territory, get rid of stupid and expensive duplication on the island, get rid of the idiotic practice of having two jurisdictions on an island this size competing for jobs and investment, restructure and shake up the Irish political system, finally bring an end to a conflict that's almost a millenium old and market a new, reunified Ireland to the world as a place open for business and pleasure.

Your talk about violence and policing is nothing short of scaremongering. It's been made quite clear that all this will happen when the majority wants it, meaning there would have to be significant unionist support. Even with the full support of the state behind them loyalist paramilitaries were able to achieve nothing apart from killing random civilians and internecine feuding. Take the support of the state away and a chunk of their own people, not to mention the fact that reunification is the end game, there's nothing to fight for, and it's obvious your talk of violence is rubbish.

Godge wrote: »

It is not rocket science to conclude that once a serious debate takes place about the North that support in the South will wither away. Of course, in another 20 years you will have learned to get on and the Orange Order will be able to have their parades, marching bands, flags and bunting while the SF/IRA apologists will be able to have their bomber commemorations in peace. Then we might look at reunification.

I'd say the opposite, I'd say once a serious debate takes places people will finally start to see the real challenges and opportunities it affords, rather than trucking out the same old empty "we cant afford it" rhetoric.
The second part of this paragraph just strays into the typical ignorance youre so fond of spouting so I'll just skip over it.
Your last sentence is very telling. My whole argument is that we should have this debate, get all the facts out there and let the people decide, you, on the other hand, have once again elected yourself to speak for everybody in the 26 counties.