The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 3) Mod Notes and Threadbanned List in OP

FrancieBrady

Loyalism has no support from the police or the British army. They know this, as a military force it is a beaten docket and it knows it is done.

Hence all it can muster is a few deluded souls meeting in the upstairs rooms of pubs and the ordering of teenagers on to the streets to wreck their own areas.

Moderate Unionism wants no part of it either, which is why Unionism is in turmoil and imploding
There is no Carson or Paisley going to emerge to lead them either. All they can muster is a Poots/Allister/Aitken/Bryson.

People on this thread need to get real.

Any further news on IRA bomber, native Derry woman, and Republican hero Martina Anderson being asked to stand down as a MLA by a free stater from Rathgar who never saw active duty?

Big call by Mary Lou.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Moderate Unionism wants no part of it either, which is why Unionism is in turmoil and imploding
There is no Carson or Paisley going to emerge to lead them either. All they can muster is a Poots/Allister/Aitken/Bryson.

People on this thread need to get real.

Moderate unionism and stupid unionism ignited those riots
They'll cop on and next you'll see is them promoting a new improved protocol,that they will promote as a concession to save the union
Its a double edged sword for nationalists
Loyalists don't fill in catholics on the depth of their hate
Back in the 80's and 90's they wrren't as under pressure demographically as today
Pretending they'll lie down and projecting jingoistic flagism on them,which is way divorced from the reality of feelings in the Republic anyway is a mistake that medium term will cost lives

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

Moderate unionism and stupid unionism ignited those riots

What?

Moderate Unionism winces when these lads go out on the streets, and they do it every year.

Mistaking it for a 'campaign' capable of achieving anything is ridiculous.

jm08

costacorta wrote: »

Don’t think he is saying Unionists not accepting democracy more like dissidents like you have at the moment the likes of the real IRA etc . As I once said it would be great If you could get the DUP and SF and their bigoted supporters to just F Off to somewhere and let the ordinary folk live in peace ..

OK should have said loyalists will find it very difficult to accept Sinn Fein as the biggest party in NI.


For the record, dissident republicans don't vote for Sinn Fein, ordinary people from a nationalist perspective do though. Similarly with the DUP, ordinary unionists vote for the DUP (they could vote for the UUP, but they don't). Similarly with SF voters, they could vote for the SDLP, but they don't.



You must think that nearly everyone in NI Ireland are bigots at that rate.

jm08

Marine Layer wrote: »

Moderate unionism and stupid unionism ignited those riots
They'll cop on and next you'll see is them promoting a new improved protocol,that they will promote as a concession to save the union
Its a double edged sword for nationalists
Loyalists don't fill in catholics on the depth of their hate
Back in the 80's and 90's they wrren't as under pressure demographically as today
Pretending they'll lie down and projecting jingoistic flagism on them,which is way divorced from the reality of feelings in the Republic anyway is a mistake that medium term will cost lives

Live are going to be lost anyway - basically what loyalism is facing is being either ''under the thumb'' of Sinn Fein in NI or ''under the thumb'' of Dublin. Both equally bad option as far as they are concerned, wouldn't you think, so will kick off anyway!

jm08

jm08 wrote: »

Live are going to be lost anyway - basically what loyalism is facing is being either ''under the thumb'' of Sinn Fein in NI or ''under the thumb'' of Dublin. Both equally bad option as far as they are concerned, wouldn't you think, so will kick off anyway!

If thats their thinking,its daft
They should follow Cora Sherlock on twitter for what catholics think of the Dublin governments in recent years
More protestant than London
They've nothing to fear down here,only influence to gain
Theres a job of work education and information to be done and a lot of humility needs learning along the way

FrancieBrady

jm08 wrote: »

Live are going to be lost anyway - basically what loyalism is facing is being either ''under the thumb'' of Sinn Fein in NI or ''under the thumb'' of Dublin. Both equally bad option as far as they are concerned, wouldn't you think, so will kick off anyway!

Susan McKay, journalist from a Unionist background sums up the pickle Unionism/Loyalism finds itself in and IMO there is little sign of a saviour for them, in my opinion, the time is approaching fast for the governments to act, or be responsible for bloodshed again.

walshb

BBC1 21:00 hours tonight. The Heist: hour long documentary on the North’s bank robbery.

walshb

walshb wrote: »

BBC1 21:00 hours tonight. The Heist: hour long documentary on the North’s bank robbery.

Sam McBride helped produce it, so that’s the Twitter shinnerbots covered with their ‘everyone is against us’ narrative.

I presume that fat psychopath, Bobby Storey, will be named as the ringleader and organiser?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Susan McKay, journalist from a Unionist background sums up the pickle Unionism/Loyalism finds itself in and IMO there is little sign of a saviour for them, in my opinion, the time is approaching fast for the governments to act, or be responsible for bloodshed again.

Last two opinion show a drop in support for a UI. What action should be taken considering a UI currently isn't wanted?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Last two opinion show a drop in support for a UI. What action should be taken considering a UI currently isn't wanted?

I keep telling you this but you blithely ignore it.

Support for a UI is way ahead of where support for Scottish Independence was when it's Referendum was called. Support there massively increased once a plan was published.
There is zero reasons to think it won't here as well.

All we are waiting for is when the SoS reckons it is time to fulfil the spirit of the GFA and give nationalists their chance to convince.

That could come at any moment if for instance Unionists pull down Stormont or the Scots get their second referendum.

It is now irresponsible for us not to plan for it and have very real top level conversations about it.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I keep telling you this but you blithely ignore it.

Support for a UI is way ahead of where support for Scottish Independence was when it's Referendum was called. Support there massively increased once a plan was published.
There is zero reasons to think it won't here as well.

All we are waiting for is when the SoS reckons it is time to fulfil the spirit of the GFA and give nationalists their chance to convince.

That could come at any moment if for instance Unionists pull down Stormont or the Scots get their second referendum.

It is now irresponsible for us not to plan for it and have very real top level conversations about it.

The GFA has nothing in it saying to give nationalists a chance to convince. Support is dropping again and there has never been a majority in favour. It has never been likely to pass and as per the GFA a poll shouldn't take place.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The GFA has nothing in it saying to give nationalists a chance to convince. Support is dropping again and there has never been a majority in favour. It has never been likely to pass and as per the GFA a poll shouldn't take place.

Again...the Scots would never have been given a chance had decisions been based on opinion polls taken in the absence of a plan.

A great deal of what has happened since the GFA has been based on the 'spirit' of the GFA.

Is allowing nationalists a chance to persuade in the 'spirit' of the GFA? I think it is, in equality and parity of esteem contexts.

you have to ask again...what are partitionists and unionists afraid of if they are so confident in these polls?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again...the Scots would never have been given a chance had decisions been based on opinion polls taken in the absence of a plan.

A great deal of what has happened since the GFA has been based on the 'spirit' of the GFA.

Is allowing nationalists a chance to persuade in the 'spirit' of the GFA? I think it is, in equality and parity of esteem contexts.

you have to ask again...what are partitionists and unionists afraid of if they are so confident in these polls?

How is giving more weight to the nationalist vote in opinion polls parity of esteem?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

How is giving more weight to the nationalist vote in opinion polls parity of esteem?

Because the absence of a proposal/plan unfairly weights the status quo...stands to reason.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because the absence of a proposal/plan unfairly weights the status quo...stands to reason.

Not a chance Unionist would participate with such a blatant breaking of the GFA.

Won't happen anyways but the GFA is clear.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Not a chance Unionist would participate with such a blatant breaking of the GFA.

Won't happen anyways but the GFA is clear.

How would it 'break' the GFA?

The SoS can decide on whatever grounds he/she wants, and is not under any constraints.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How would it 'break' the GFA?

The SoS can decide on whatever grounds he/she wants, and is not under any constraints.

If a number of opinion polls showed a majority for unification and the SoS refused a border poll would you consider that breaking the GFA?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

If a number of opinion polls showed a majority for unification and the SoS refused a border poll would you consider that breaking the GFA?

The SoS can't actually break the GFA in deciding. It is his/her decision and it is not constrained.
Would he/she be criticised in the above scenario...certainly would.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The SoS can't actually break the GFA in deciding. It is his/her decision and it is not constrained.
Would he/she be criticised in the above scenario...certainly would.

Either scenario is breaking the spirit of the GFA. It clearly says likely to pass. Just because that has no legal basis doesn't change that.

It's a weakness in the GFA but can't see either side tolerating opinion polls being ignored.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Either scenario is breaking the spirit of the GFA. It clearly says likely to pass. Just because that has no legal basis doesn't change that.

It's a weakness in the GFA but can't see either side tolerating opinion polls being ignored.

Perfectly reasonable to think it is likely to pass if there is a proper plan.

Allowing people to achieve what they aspire to democratically is core to the spirit of the GFA.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Perfectly reasonable to think it is likely to pass if there is a proper plan.

Allowing people to achieve what they aspire to democratically is core to the spirit of the GFA.

They don't aspire to it in NI. It's the minority position presently.

Think you are really clutching here. Not a chance it will happen that way.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

They don't aspire to it in NI. It's the minority position presently.

Think you are really clutching here. Not a chance it will happen that way.

44% in the north want a Border Poll, 39% don't and 17% are undecided. 69%, 19% and 17% in the south.

Are you going to ignore that?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

44% in the north want a Border Poll, 39% don't and 17% are undecided. 69%, 19% and 17% in the south.

Are you going to ignore that?

The numbers that would actually vote for a UI are on a downward trend. It wouldn't pass. Are you going to ignore that given "likely to pass" is written in the GFA?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The numbers that would actually vote for a UI are on a downward trend. It wouldn't pass. Are you going to ignore that given "likely to pass" is written in the GFA?

Because there is no plan/proposal. I believe there would be a much closer vote if there was. You have to pay attention to that fact and that the status quo will always be favoured without an actual vision for what a UI will be.

The majorities now want a poll...how long can that be denied is the question.

jh79

Nothing stopping any party from coming up with a plan now. As John Doyle said the subvention is not the true cost of unification. There is no secret economic info to come from the British that is required for a plan. The required data is already available.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because there is no plan/proposal. I believe there would be a much closer vote if there was. You have to pay attention to that fact and that the status quo will always be favoured without an actual vision for what a UI will be.

The majorities now want a poll...how long can that be denied is the question.

The plan could easily push votes in the other direction.

Your subjective opinion that a plan will shorten the gap is hardly justification for placing more worth on nationalist votes in opinion polls. Far from parity of esteem.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Nothing stopping any party from coming up with a plan now. As John Doyle said the subvention is not the true cost of unification. There is no secret economic info to come from the British that is required for a plan. The required data is already available.

It isn't going to be a referendum based on a political party's plan.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The plan could easily push votes in the other direction.

Your subjective opinion that a plan will shorten the gap is hardly justification for placing more worth on nationalist votes in opinion polls. Far from parity of esteem.

This is just a modern version of lie down croppy boy.

Majorities in both jurisdictions want a border poll, should they be given one, is the question asked. The Scots were given one with a lot less indicating support.

Your opinion on how a poll would go is irrelevant.