Northern Ireland Westminster General Election

liamtech

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Wee Bryson is definitely rousing the rabble. Absolutely wants violence.

https://twitter.com/andreemurphy/status/1198228764733382657?s=21

They are excerpts from this article

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/op...ngry-1-9152301

BonnieSituation wrote: »

In short, no.

That cohort of loyalism just need something to píss and moan about.

This is the new thing.

They'll move back onto stuff like Italian and Ivorian flags and "uisce" on manholes in time. As it was ever thus.

Middle of the road Unionism is deserved of attention. These headbangers need to be ignored.

It does seem to be the way of the Extreme Unionist - to be in a permanent state of offense to anything that is not 100000% British -

Stop moaning ffs

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Think it's naive to say loyalist threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

One has to understand the loyalist interpretation of the events of the past few weeks. Most commentators, and certainly down here, perceive the arrangement that Johnson came up with to be a betrayal of the DUP and the concerns of loyalists. 'Look at how little they regard you over there' we say.

Having listened to loyalists on radio shows and reading their opinions online, their perception is very different. As far as they are concerned, what happened was a consequence of the dissident republican threats relating to the possibility of a hard border on the island. 'Look at how those threats garnered results' is what they say.

In other words, as far as loyalism is concerned if there is a customs border in the sea then it won't be because Johnson and the Tories sold out their brand of unionism for their own personal gain, but because their old nemesis republicanism threatened violence to get their way - and ended up being successful.

We might not like that analysis but that is how they are seeing it, and it's why not only have they not turned on the DUP, but on the contrary have turned on more moderate unionists for even thinking about challenging them in marginal seats.

Exactly what I’m seeing and hearing too. The utter refusal to acknowledge who actually go them there is astounding. And they’ll never admit that. But with luck the moderate middle ground who are the majority, do know who got them there.

liamtech

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Think it's naive to say loyalist threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

One has to understand the loyalist interpretation of the events of the past few weeks. Most commentators, and certainly down here, perceive the arrangement that Johnson came up with to be a betrayal of the DUP and the concerns of loyalists. 'Look at how little they regard you over there' we say.

Having listened to loyalists on radio shows and reading their opinions online, their perception is very different. As far as they are concerned, what happened was a consequence of the dissident republican threats relating to the possibility of a hard border on the island. 'Look at how those threats garnered results' is what they say.

In other words, as far as loyalism is concerned if there is a customs border in the sea then it won't be because Johnson and the Tories sold out their brand of unionism for their own personal gain, but because their old nemesis republicanism threatened violence to get their way - and ended up being successful.

We might not like that analysis but that is how they are seeing it, and it's why not only have they not turned on the DUP, but on the contrary have turned on more moderate unionists for even thinking about challenging them in marginal seats.

It is so complicated - and entirely related to the main issue - in my view, a HARD Brexit (leaving CM/CU) is incompatible with the GFA

• On one hand i am content that the BoJo deal doesnt place a trade border on the 6 counties - but then it does so by placing it between NI and GB - so one side was always going to be angered
• But then this is the consequences of the Hard Brexit the DUP wanted - there was going to be a trade border - but they banked on it being in their favor - i.e. increasing the North South Divide - total backfire, but they are responsible

I really only raised this matter after reading the article which i posted previously, which was in effect the minutes of a Loyalist meeting in the North - and also looking at the looks of sheer delight on the faces of Bryson, and Jim Allister - they seem to be arguing, with some success that this is the end of Power sharing

Having listened to loyalists on radio shows and reading their opinions online, their perception is very different. As far as they are concerned, what happened was a consequence of the dissident republican threats relating to the possibility of a hard border on the island. 'Look at how those threats garnered results' is what they say.

In other words, as far as loyalism is concerned if there is a customs border in the sea then it won't be because Johnson and the Tories sold out their brand of unionism for their own personal gain, but because their old nemesis republicanism threatened violence to get their way - and ended up being successful.

That is their argument in a nut shell - as daft as it sounds - they get stung by GB - they attack republicans and nationalists - i suspect if NI Loyalist areas were hit by meteorites, they would find a way to blame nationalists

Kermit.de.frog

Can the organisers of these meetings be arrested for incitement to hate and violence?

NIMAN

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Think it's naive to say loyalist threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

One has to understand the loyalist interpretation of the events of the past few weeks. Most commentators, and certainly down here, perceive the arrangement that Johnson came up with to be a betrayal of the DUP and the concerns of loyalists. 'Look at how little they regard you over there' we say.

Having listened to loyalists on radio shows and reading their opinions online, their perception is very different. As far as they are concerned, what happened was a consequence of the dissident republican threats relating to the possibility of a hard border on the island. 'Look at how those threats garnered results' is what they say.

In other words, as far as loyalism is concerned if there is a customs border in the sea then it won't be because Johnson and the Tories sold out their brand of unionism for their own personal gain, but because their old nemesis republicanism threatened violence to get their way - and ended up being successful.

We might not like that analysis but that is how they are seeing it, and it's why not only have they not turned on the DUP, but on the contrary have turned on more moderate unionists for even thinking about challenging them in marginal seats.

Totally correct. Republicans are to blame for everything sure.

There is no way their beloved brethren in Britain would ever sell them out, cos they all love the unionists in NI.

They will never accept that the majority of the British public couldn't even tell you what the history or current politics of NI is. Nor can they accept that most politicians in the UK couldn't care less about NI politics, unless they need their votes to prop up a Government.

liamtech

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Can the organisers of these meetings be arrested for incitement to hate and violence?

that is the question - 100% - but they are also clever not to EXPLICITLY endorse terrorism - they leave that to random leaflets handed out by guys in balaclavas and sunglasses

BonnieSituation

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Think it's naive to say loyalist threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

One has to understand the loyalist interpretation of the events of the past few weeks. Most commentators, and certainly down here, perceive the arrangement that Johnson came up with to be a betrayal of the DUP and the concerns of loyalists. 'Look at how little they regard you over there' we say.

Having listened to loyalists on radio shows and reading their opinions online, their perception is very different. As far as they are concerned, what happened was a consequence of the dissident republican threats relating to the possibility of a hard border on the island. 'Look at how those threats garnered results' is what they say.

In other words, as far as loyalism is concerned if there is a customs border in the sea then it won't be because Johnson and the Tories sold out their brand of unionism for their own personal gain, but because their old nemesis republicanism threatened violence to get their way - and ended up being successful.

We might not like that analysis but that is how they are seeing it, and it's why not only have they not turned on the DUP, but on the contrary have turned on more moderate unionists for even thinking about challenging them in marginal seats.

Sorry, but that's ALWAYS what they do.

No matter what happens, "something something themmuns something".

They always threaten and we're always told to "be mindful of unionist concerns".

But people make the same mistake in equating these clowns with normal sensible Unionists. And that's only because we give them oxygen and attention.

They drive me demented.

Kermit.de.frog

They seem to be endorsing violence implicitly if not explicitly from what I read there.

Stop moaning ffs

I don’t know what to make of pieces like this. It’s a great read. But are they amping clowns like this by giving them oxygen or is better to call them out?

https://twitter.com/jude42/status/1198624808390610944?s=21

derrymcorry

Bryson rejects the GFA because it includes power-sharing and border poll provisions. He is in the minority.

Post-reunification I'd imagine he would turn to loyalist violence.

Stop moaning ffs

Why every candidate up there doesn’t have emma de souzas citizenship case front and center of their campaign is beyond me

Junkyard Tom

derrymcorry wrote: »

Loyalist violence.

To achieve what exactly? Unionists are a minority in the north, in Belfast, in Derry and in 4 of the 6 counties. What would be their demands?

NIMAN

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

To achieve what exactly? Unionists are a minority in the north, in Belfast, in Derry and in 4 of the 6 counties. What would be their demands?

They want it to go back like it was between 1925-1968, before those umpity Catholics got notions.

Stop moaning ffs

The absolute neck on this one.

https://twitter.com/beltel/status/1198565149117943808?s=21

FrancieBrady

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The absolute neck on this one.

https://twitter.com/beltel/status/1198565149117943808?s=21

It's what's called a 'salvage' operation.
Tight election in some seats means any vote counts.

liamtech

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's what's called a 'salvage' operation.
Tight election in some seats means any vote counts.

Its a sad sign of the times when i prefer to be here, in the NI thread, discussing the outrageous positions of the DUP, Bryson et al - rather than be in the General Election Thread arguing with one user - and getting nowhere

But yes it is a salvage operation - and its far too late

BTW is she on Mark Carruthers this week? He is interviewing each leader each week and im DYING to see him demolish the DUP -

FrancieBrady

liamtech wrote: »

Its a sad sign of the times when i prefer to be here, in the NI thread, discussing the outrageous positions of the DUP, Bryson et al - rather than be in the General Election Thread arguing with one user - and getting nowhere

But yes it is a salvage operation - and its far too late

BTW is she on Mark Carruthers this week? He is interviewing each leader each week and im DYING to see him demolish the DUP -

Not sure who is on. But I'm also sure Arlene will brazen it out with that high moral ground defence the DUP always go into. 'The Union defended' will be how it is seen in the heartlands.

Mr.Nice Guy

BBC Talkback had a debate with the candidates for Emma Little-Pengelly's South Belfast seat, probably the most at-risk DUP seat. You can listen to it here (begins around 3:20):

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000bnh9

Didn't think much of the unionist candidates or the chap from Aontu. Uncomfortable bit from the UUP's Michael Henderson when the host William Crawley asked him what his problem was with Jeremy Corbyn. "His links with the IRA in the past and he's for a merger in Ireland with the Republic" is his reply. Crawley responds: "Like Sinn Fein, but you've gone into government with them." There follows several seconds of uncomfortable silence before he mumbles something about how he has more power than SF do.

Think Claire Hanna was the best candidate, even despite some bloke in the audience complaining about her claiming she had worked harder than anyone to stop Brexit and bizarrely demanding over and over that she 'prove this'.

L1011

That seat has now reached a point where if Hanna doesn't get it the only larger upset would be Corbyn getting an overall majority.

derrymcorry

Young voters are sharing their views on The Top Table on BBC One now.

golfball37

Claire Hanna is an excellent candidate. Even Jim Allister is on record as saying she is the NI politician he admires the most in terms of being capable.

Fluorescence

I'm only newly registered to vote in NI and thought my constituency was East Belfast, turns out we're just about still in South. Is Clare Hanna the best person to vote for if you're trying to oust Little-Pengelly? I've heard great things about her but also don't want to waste a vote on a weak candidate. This first-past-the-post system is ridiculous

L1011

Fluorescence wrote: »

I'm only newly registered to vote in NI and thought my constituency was East Belfast, turns out we're just about still in South. Is Clare Hanna the best person to vote for if you're trying to oust Little-Pengelly? I've heard great things about her but also don't want to waste a vote on a weak candidate. This first-past-the-post system is ridiculous

Yes. Nobody else has a chance.

Until Pearse Doherty becomes the leader of Sinn Fein, they're pissing into a north, south, east and west tempest.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Until Pearse Doherty becomes the leader of Sinn Fein, they're pissing into a north, south, east and west tempest.

TBH I think SF are caught in a couple of binds here.

One, the change of leadership after such a long term was always going to be turbulent.
Two, they have taken a stand on rights and are dammed if they give in and dammed if they don't.

Stewball

liamtech wrote: »

BTW is she on Mark Carruthers this week? He is interviewing each leader each week and im DYING to see him demolish the DUP -

Is this on tonight?

Mr.Nice Guy

SF's Mary Lou McDonald faces Mark Carruthers on The View tonight. You'd imagine Arlene Foster will be next week.

liamtech

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

SF's Mary Lou McDonald faces Mark Carruthers on The View tonight. You'd imagine Arlene Foster will be next week.

Tonight will be interesting

-Abstentionism
-Abstentionism
-Abstentionism
-Border Poll
...
-Abstentionism

NEXT WEEK - will be a public execution - Foster doesnt stand a chance against Carruthers

For Forks Sake

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

SF's Mary Lou McDonald faces Mark Carruthers on The View tonight. You'd imagine Arlene Foster will be next week.

Is Michelle O'Neill not able to defend her area?

Mr.Nice Guy

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Is Michelle O'Neill not able to defend her area?

Well McDonald is their leader so it makes sense she'd do it. Think she'll do better than O'Neill would too.