Belfast Disturbances

Fionn1952

schmittel wrote: »

Fair enough, it was an unnecessary snarky remark, but I am certainly not suggesting deporting Unionists or driving them out.

But downcow strikes me as the type of Unionist who feels British to their fingertips, and no amount of dialogue or offering concessions to change flags/symbols is going to change the fact that as a British person they do not want to live in Ireland.

Trying to come up with solutions that will make downcow feel better about a UI is futile. It's like Gregory Campbell's outburst on the recent debate: “You just do not get it. We are British, those three words.”

Downcow has repeatedly referenced Brexit saying it was democratically decided by their fellow voters, and thus they accept it and will live with it.'

In a UI one would hope that would be the same. But if not, the only solution as a British person who would rather live in Britain than Ireland, is to move to Britain.

That is the plain reality. And in any negotiations I'd rather see some moves by the British to make all sorts of concessions and incentives to entice the most loyalist Brits in NI to move to Britain than asking Ireland to make unpalatable changes for the majority that are unlikely to ever satisfy the minority.

Perhaps he is, and perhaps you're 100% correct that no concessions would convince those of that mindset.

The issue is that not all those from a Unionist background are; this group is a minority. While no amount of concessions will convince this minority, there are around a million people with a Unionist background in the North, and if certain relatively painless concessions can help the majority feel welcome and part of the state, then I would welcome it.

NI isn't all Gregory Campbells and Sammy Wilsons fortunately.

hometruths

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Perhaps he is, and perhaps you're 100% correct that no concessions would convince those of that mindset.

The issue is that not all those from a Unionist background are; this group is a minority. While no amount of concessions will convince this minority, there are around a million people with a Unionist background in the North, and if certain relatively painless concessions can help the majority feel welcome and part of the state, then I would welcome it.

NI isn't all Gregory Campbells and Sammy Wilsons fortunately.

Yep, I agree - we should be appealing to those who are willing to compromise, and in doing so perhaps we can compromise too.

Unfortunately we rarely hear those voices - it's the Gregory Campbells and Sammy Wilsons shouting loudest, because the elected Unionist members are among the most intransigent.

There is a good piece in the Irish Times today, written by a Unionist: Unionism not emotionally ready for conversation about united Ireland

The numerous political leaders espousing a united Ireland on the recent Claire Byrne Live programme engaged with these questions thoughtfully and explained how unionism – and indeed republicanism – should not be inflexible. So far, so reasonable.

Except it isn’t. Because the key tenet of unionism, at its essence, is its complete inflexibility. What is unionism without the union? I have listened with interest to calculations about how influential unionists could be in a new Ireland, making up perhaps 12 per cent of a new Dáil Éireann rather than a tiny fraction of MPs at Westminster. But what is the point of being “influential” in a new country whose very existence is at odds with your fundamental belief? Many fail to recognise this key point.

We're pissing in the wind if we think we can square this circle.

Sunny Disposition

There are a fair number who don't and won't want to know about a UI, but I do think a lot of Protestants in the west and around the border will come around much more quickly. Belfast is more difficult though, and a lot of North Armagh, North Down and Antrim.

Gregroy Campbell on TV a few weeks ago was indicative of some unionists though, saying it will never happen and we are British. The reality is that unionists are not a majority any more, and saying things like that just isn't realistic in the way it was when he was a young fella, or even 20 years ago. Hopefully more voters go towards Alliance, that's the natural home for disaffected unionists, who can see the DUP are a disgrace.

I actually think nationalist Ireland is trying quite hard to get a discussion going and wants to include unionists. Tbh they should take it up, but there'd be too many regressive voices shrieking against them.

Things are inevitably going to get worse for unionists. At the next election there could be an SF first minister, which I think will be very difficult for many of them, and understandably so to a point. Like, how have the party of the IRA reached this point? But that's democracy. And there's a good chance that they'll never get a unionist back in that office, Arlene Foster may be the last one.

Also, if there is a nationalist First Minister and an SF Taoiseach, there is going to be huge momentum towards a united Ireland. It does look like its impossible for NI to last another generation, but in fairness it wasn't supposed to last very long in the 1920s either.

The sooner unionism gets on board for discussion the better, the current situation can't hold in the long term, better to agree something sooner rather than later, before there's more violence.

bilbot79

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Don't worry downcow we won't burn you out, we'll pack your bags and give you a first class ferry ticket back to the motherland when it does happen.

I won't have you diss Downcow regardless of yours or his views. DC is a crucial participant on several threads which would just be incoherent, one-sided blether without him

downcow

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I don't think they are a " troll "

Just a " not an inch " unionist

I appreciate your support but let me assure you I am not a not an inch unionist. I voted yes to the gfa which takes me into at least the 50% most moderate

jm08

downcow wrote: »

I love your confidence about a UI in 30 years, but there is not a chance. Gfa has handed the decision to ni residents. They would have taken leave if their senses to walk away voluntarily from U.K.

So how do you feel about being a minority in Northern Ireland? How does that work for unionism, especially if Sinn Fein are the majority in Stormont?

downcow

bilbot79 wrote: »

I won't have you diss Downcow regardless of yours or his views. DC is a crucial participant on several threads which would just be incoherent, one-sided blether without him

You embarrass me, but I thank you

RobMc59

Fionn1952 wrote: »

So not Tony Connolly, random, 'other' non specified news feeds....which you're not going to share, but rather falsely attribute to Tony? I could take a guess at several, 'sources' who will be parroting it that might explain your reluctance to share.

Time will certainly tell, and I'm sure you'll be along to discuss further if you're mistaken.

I linked to Connelly's take on it,I'm sure you can look for the other news feeds its mentioned in.
Perhaps you and francie can provide a link to back your assertions the EU won't compromise?Or perhaps not.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I linked to Connelly's take on it,I'm sure you can look for the other news feeds its mentioned in.
Perhaps you and francie can provide a link to back your assertions the EU won't compromise?Or perhaps not.

I didn't say they won't, I said they are not currently.

They are still legally pursuing the UK to live up to the agreement they made. The UK are trying to buy more time. Fact.

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2021/0414/1209802-brexit/

Fionn1952

RobMc59 wrote: »

I linked to Connelly's take on it,I'm sure you can look for the other news feeds its mentioned in.
Perhaps you and francie can provide a link to back your assertions the EU won't compromise?Or perhaps not.

Care to point out where I've made any claims that the EU have stated anything at all on the matter except that they will meet with the UK? I gave my opinion on how things would go. What precisely have I stated that could require a source?

You falsely represented a quote and then started scrambling and backtracking when it was rightly pointed out and now you've got mystical, 'other news feeds' that you continue to avoid presenting (presumably either because you're fully aware they're laughable sources such as The Express or you're scrambling about to try and find something that could be in any way interpreted in that manner).

You're entitled to the opinion that the EU are definitely going to compromise; you've been promising they're going to blink first any minute now as long as Brexit negotiations have been ongoing, so I'll take it with a pinch of salt. You're not entitled to make things up and try and create a veneer of truth over it by attributing it to a respected journalist. The attempt to return the serve by asking me to provide sources for an opinion as a response to asking you to provide sources for something you've stated as a fact.....that's laughably transparent.

PokeHerKing

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I don't think they are a " troll "

Just a " not an inch " unionist

Which on a southern discussion board is the exact same thing imo.

PokeHerKing

bilbot79 wrote: »

I won't have you diss Downcow regardless of yours or his views. DC is a crucial participant on several threads which would just be incoherent, one-sided blether without him

You have a seriously high opinion of the poster if you think threads on boards with hundreds of contributers would be incoherent babble without that posters input. I do not hold that view nor do I think that view is grounded in any form of reality.

Ten of Swords

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Don't worry downcow we won't burn you out, we'll pack your bags and give you a first class ferry ticket back to the motherland when it does happen.

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Downcow is a low level troll. He/she has zero want or desire to understand or inform themselves of the 'other side. Anyone engaging with them at any kind of serious level is a fool imo.

Posts like this are not acceptable at all

Do not post in this thread again

batman75

downcow wrote: »

I love your confidence about a UI in 30 years, but there is not a chance. Gfa has handed the decision to ni residents. They would have taken leave if their senses to walk away voluntarily from U.K.

1. If you had said to me when I was a teenager, 30 years ago the UK would leave the EU I would have thought that nigh impossible. It's happened.

2. The population demographics are going against Unionists/Loyalists in N.I.

3. The holding of the Scottish Independence referendum was the first step in the breakup of the UK which I think will end up being Wales and England.

4. Listen to the clip a few pages back by that caller into the Nolan Show. Their is a feeling amongst the English people that they really don't give a hoot about N.I. Indeed they resent the financial drain on the UK finances caused by propping N.I. up.

5. I think alot of the unease in the Unionist community stems from the fact they have finally woken up to the realisation that for the first time in the history of N.I. a British PM doesn't give a toss about the province.

6. The death of Phillip and the upcoming, given her age, passing of Liz means that the affiliation to the Royal Family will effectively end. This affiliation is a huge connection for Unionists to Britain.

7. N.I. is a failed entity and the only logical solution is a united Ireland. N.I. was a Protestant creation to serve Protestant people who had, in their eyes, the misfortune to have Catholics living there.

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

I appreciate your support but let me assure you I am not a not an inch unionist. I voted yes to the gfa which takes me into at least the 50% most moderate

Just to double check - did you not say that you are a DUP voter/supporter?

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

While we're waiting for time to tell, any chance you can provide us with these non-Connelly texts so that we can understand what he's not saying?

Here`s a link from a different viewpoint which mentions negotiations on how trade rules are applied.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/hopes-rise-ni-protocol-changes-will-ease-tension-40301624.html

Fionn1952

RobMc59 wrote: »

Here`s a link from a different viewpoint which mentions negotiations on how trade rules are applied.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/hopes-rise-ni-protocol-changes-will-ease-tension-40301624.html

Even in the notoriously biased Belfast Telegraph, it states

"progress was being made in negotiations about how to apply the new trade rules under the Northern Ireland Protocol"

So no mention of changes or compromise, just discussion around how the UK will implement the agreement they signed up to. Not quite the cake suggested, and quite aligned with what I predicted earlier in the thread.

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Even in the notoriously biased Belfast Telegraph, it states

"progress was being made in negotiations about how to apply the new trade rules under the Northern Ireland Protocol"

So no mention of changes or compromise, just discussion around how the UK will implement the agreement they signed up to. Not quite the cake suggested, and quite aligned with what I predicted earlier in the thread.

Shh, don't give them any hint that it's the same deal they already have. If the dog doesn't eat his dinner you put it back in the tin and serve it again tomorrow!

RobMc59

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Even in the notoriously biased Belfast Telegraph, it states

"progress was being made in negotiations about how to apply the new trade rules under the Northern Ireland Protocol"

So no mention of changes or compromise, just discussion around how the UK will implement the agreement they signed up to. Not quite the cake suggested, and quite aligned with what I predicted earlier in the thread.

The Belfast Telegraph also quotes the Financial Times over how to apply rules,is that `notoriously biased` too? `New implementation of the protocol`sounds like compromise to me but as you say,that`s my opinion.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

The Belfast Telegraph also quotes the Financial Times over how to apply rules,is that `notoriously biased` too? `New implementation of the protocol`sounds like compromise to me but as you say,that`s my opinion.

You are reading it wrong or wilfully misquoting it...it says 'new trade rules' (the Protocol, Withdrawal Act) not 'New implementation of the protocol'

"progress was being made in negotiations about how to apply the new trade rules under the Northern Ireland Protocol"

The new trade rules have been there since the agreement was made.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are reading it wrong or wilfully misquoting it...it says 'new trade rules' (the Protocol, Withdrawal Act) not 'New implementation of the protocol'



The new trade rules have been there since the agreement was made.

You`re reading it wrong francie,it clearly says(as shown below) in a stand alone sentence
`The new implementation of the Protocol could ease trade in steel and medicines, and deal with everything from soil on plant bulbs to the construction of border control posts.`

Fionn1952

RobMc59 wrote: »

The Belfast Telegraph also quotes the Financial Times over how to apply rules,is that `notoriously biased` too? `New implementation of the protocol`sounds like compromise to me but as you say,that`s my opinion.

Whatever fig leaf you need Rob, work away if it makes you feel better. It looks like a compromise because you're scrambling to find a compromise after boasting about it with regards to a Tony Connolly tweet. You were called out because the tweet said nothing of the sort and now you're looking for absolutely anything which could with the most generous of interpretations be considered to imply even the potential for compromise rather than just acknowledging that you completely oversold what was actually being discussed in your haste to call out a win for Britain.

Much like you have over and over again across multiple threads in your time posting....they just never seem to materialise as you've predicted and then you disappear off for a while and don't bring it up again.

I suspect we'll be in for much of the same again. You're convinced this time will be different.....time will tell.

Seth Brundle

RobMc59 wrote: »

You`re reading it wrong francie,it clearly says(as shown below) in a stand alone sentence
`The new implementation of the Protocol could ease trade in steel and medicines, and deal with everything from soil on plant bulbs to the construction of border control posts.`

Are you trying to suggest that there's a new protocol? That is not on the table and if it was, it would need to be discussed and agreed with the individual member states. There is nothing on the horizon for NI apart from what has been agreed between the two parties and ratified (but pretty much left un-implemented) by the UK. The EU have held off ratififying it until all member states are happy with it.
The article is simply referring to the implementation of the protocol agreed before Christmas.
You are seeing something that really isn't there.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

You`re reading it wrong francie,it clearly says(as shown below) in a stand alone sentence
`The new implementation of the Protocol could ease trade in steel and medicines, and deal with everything from soil on plant bulbs to the construction of border control posts.`

Fair enough, I don't have the full article. But even so, that still doesn't mean compromise, all it means is the Protocol will be implemented in a way it wasn't before. And the EU has pointed out the UK wasn't implementing it properly.

RobMc59

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Are you trying to suggest that there's a new protocol? That is not on the table and if it was, it would need to be discussed and agreed with the individual member states. There is nothing on the horizon for NI apart from what has been agreed between the two parties and ratified (but pretty much left un-implemented) by the UK. The EU have held off ratififying it until all member states are happy with it.
The article is simply referring to the implementation of the protocol agreed before Christmas.
You are seeing something that really isn't there.

No Seth,not a new protocol.I hope things like a bit of soil on a plant won`t be a problem or a fishtail sticking out of a box won`t be viewed as a major crisis by EU border inspectors in NI.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

No Seth,not a new protocol.I hope things like a bit of soil on a plant won`t be a problem or a fishtail sticking out of a box won`t be viewed as a major crisis by EU border inspectors in NI.

Importation of soil into the Single Market will be an issue.

RobMc59

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Whatever fig leaf you need Rob, work away if it makes you feel better. It looks like a compromise because you're scrambling to find a compromise after boasting about it with regards to a Tony Connolly tweet. You were called out because the tweet said nothing of the sort and now you're looking for absolutely anything which could with the most generous of interpretations be considered to imply even the potential for compromise rather than just acknowledging that you completely oversold what was actually being discussed in your haste to call out a win for Britain.

Much like you have over and over again across multiple threads in your time posting....they just never seem to materialise as you've predicted and then you disappear off for a while and don't bring it up again.

I suspect we'll be in for much of the same again. You're convinced this time will be different.....time will tell.

I think you`re being unfair about other threads Fionn .Some of those threads generally don`t tolerate any kind of UK viewpoint.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

Here`s a link from a different viewpoint which mentions negotiations on how trade rules are applied.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/hopes-rise-ni-protocol-changes-will-ease-tension-40301624.html

RobMc59 wrote: »

The Belfast Telegraph also quotes the Financial Times over how to apply rules,is that `notoriously biased` too? `New implementation of the protocol`sounds like compromise to me but as you say,that`s my opinion.

Fair play to you for addressing the question. Unfortunately, you have been the victim of journalistic "integrity" in that the Belfast Telegraph puts its own spin on the report in the FT: the phrase "The new implementation of the Protocol" does not appear in the original.

The Reuters version of the report reads:

The UK’s strong engagement in the technical talks on implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol had raised hopes that an understanding could be reached, the FT said, citing EU diplomats and officials.

From an agency with no iron in that fire, that's quite a different emphasis, wouldn't you say?

What the FT original does say is the followng:

The UK and the EU are making progress in talks on how to apply post-Brexit trade rules in Northern Ireland, raising hopes of an agreement that could help reduce tensions that have spilled over into violence on the streets of Belfast.

Officials on both sides said that recent days of intensive contacts had given cause for optimism that the UK and EU can craft a “work plan” on how to implement the Northern Ireland protocol

“[Talks] are advancing on a technical level and probably we will see a [Frost-Sefcovic] meeting rather sooner than later”, said one EU diplomat, while cautioning progress depended on firm commitments from the UK and its “unequivocal support” for the Brexit withdrawal agreement.

But EU diplomats and officials also cautioned that more work remains to be done, especially on the thorny issue of applying food safety checks. Difficult talks also lie ahead on the timetable for putting particular measures in place.

Everything in that article is about Britain doing what it agreed to do when Frost negotiated and Johnson signed the NIP. The compromise on the part of the EU is an apparent acceptance that the special-needs child that is Brexit Britain has a more serious disability than the psychiatrists diagnosed, and the UK's obligations are going to have to be explained to Johnson
one
word
at
a
time.

Fionn1952

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think you`re being unfair about other threads Fionn .Some of those threads generally don`t tolerate any kind of UK viewpoint.

I know I've previously taken (probably somewhat below the belt) jibes about you being banned from other threads on the topic, but in this case I'm specifically talking about the content and rhetoric of your posts. It isn't about having a UK viewpoint; you're British....of course you hope for what is best for your country, my criticism is of how you come across in a gloating manner, popping into a thread to tell us all about the latest slice of cake coming, and then disappear when it doesn't materialise.

I don't think I'd even mind if you presented it as what you're hoping to see rather than seeming like you're bragging about what is going to happen (putting aside the very stretched interpretation of Tony Connolly's tweet on this specific matter), or if you discussed it further afterwards, but it's just drop in, tell us how everything is coming up roses, doesn't happen, Houdini.

Jizique

RobMc59 wrote: »

No Seth,not a new protocol.I hope things like a bit of soil on a plant won`t be a problem or a fishtail sticking out of a box won`t be viewed as a major crisis by EU border inspectors in NI.

That soil ban has been in place since the 70s, perhaps even before joining the EU.
Even army vehicles being moved to NI used to have to be hosed down to ensure no soil entered NI