Saturday, April 19, 2008

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

1. Amen.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 11:23 AM

2. Sounds like he’s trying to build support for the TUV.
   Divide and conquer.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 12:41 PM

3. There was dyslexic loyalist on the lower Ormeau Road last week pleading with security staff to allow him to enter Havelock House as he wanted to join Jim Allister and the UTV.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 12:55 PM

4. The irony is Jim Allister and his mates are the only people who will believe those comments, including McGuinness himself.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 01:04 PM

5. In your dreams McGuinness!

   The fact that the DUP are the controling party in NI politics is thet barrier stopping you and your party fom achieving many of your unachievable goals. The mere fact that you are sitting in a British government i.e. Stormont is a contradiction of you republicanism.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 01:14 PM

6. “There are unionists who believed that if you give power to nationalists it means the end of the union as they know it and they are absolutely right,” he said.

   Slight but important error there from Mr McGuinness.

   ‘it means the end of the union as they KNEW it and they are absolutely right,” he said.

   The ‘old union’ is at an end from the perspective of the political power relationship between those for and against the Union. But the Union can’t be undone without a majority of votes from within Northern Ireland so in that sense the Union is not at an end but at a new if uncertain beginning. That beginning could be the beginning of the end or the end of a new beginning or the beginning of a new end ? 

   As for March being ‘unstoppable ‘ Also unstoppable is April , May and especially July . It would appear that the DFM is playing to the gallery a little in advance of his FM having to play to his ‘gallery’ as we approach the ‘march’ season yet again which unusually for March is held in July .

   Warning shot across the bows for the new FM.  The ‘battle a day’ has begun . And we already know in advance how it will end .

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 01:20 PM

7. I dont even think McGuinnes believe those comments he has to say it because he knows Sinn Fein have signed up to a British state and a british Police force he must keep up the protence to keep his followers on board

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 02:31 PM

8. Gosh, isn’t getting cheaper and cheaper to gull the gullible? All it seemingly takes these days to shut the sheep who vote Sinn Fein up is words, words, words. Well done MI5: you lot certainly haven’t gone away.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 02:43 PM

9. I give to Tuesday for a piece on Jim Allister’s website about this.  However I will not believe him, unlike others, I will see what is happening in Stormont were unionists have stopped many of the Republican incentives that the British and Irish Govt’s handed to them.

   Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 03:41 PM

10. Sinn Fein isn’t a party which seeks the end of the union with Great Britian, they are a tool of the United Kingdom which seeks to consolidate the union with Great Britian by ensuring that a formerly disenfranchied minority are fully integrated into it.

    A major part of that integration process is constantly reassure the formerly disenfranchied minority that the best expedient to reject the legitimacy of the union is actually to accept the legitimacy of it. That way they will be fully integrated by the time they realise the Machivellian machination by which their original aims were cleverly but abjectly betrayed.

    It was rather tactless of Ahern to admit that voodoo, magic, emergent processes, organic developments, etc, were not an effective laternative to bluprints and plans.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 04:17 PM

11. Maybe I’ll report that without the hurried typing. Sorry!

    Sinn Fein isn’t a party which seeks the end of the union with Great Britain; they are a tool of the United Kingdom which seeks to consolidate the union with Great Britain by ensuring that a formerly disenfranchised minority are fully integrated into it.

    A major part of that integration process is constantly reassuring the formerly disenfranchised minority that the best expedient to reject the legitimacy of the union is actually to accept the legitimacy of it. That way they will be fully integrated by the time they realise the Machiavellian machination by which their original aims were cleverly but abjectly betrayed.

    It was rather tactless of Ahern to acknowledge that voodoo, magic, emergent processes, organic developments, etc, were not an effective alternative to blueprints and plans.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 04:19 PM

12. Well, what would you expect him to say,the truth is that he is dFM in a NI executive,committed to exclusively peaceful means,supporting the PSNI,and the principle of consent.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 05:09 PM

13. Pete I do not see how the two statements are repdiating each other.

    Marty is saying that nationalism will become dominant

    Bertie is saying when it becomes dominant they will be welcome with open arms

    To me the statements are complimentary

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 05:35 PM

14. >>There are unionists who believed that if you give power to nationalists it means the end of the union as they know it and they are absolutely right<<

    Call me one of the sheep if you like, and aye my mind might not be very Machiavellian, but for the life of me where is the falsehood in the above statement? Unionists have fought tooth and nail not to acquiesce to power sharing because to do so was a step towards a united Ireland.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 05:44 PM

15. I must have missed the ‘welcome with open arms’ part of Ahern’s caveat. He is fully aware that any change to the constitutional status of Northern Ireland which seeks to annex that entity to the Republic of Ireland is subject to a veto that is held by the voters of the Republic of Ireland. That’s how democracy works. Persuading a portion of Northern Ireland’s Protestants to vote for a united Ireland is a small part of the battle. You also have to persuade the overwhelming majority of Northern Ireland’s Catholics and the electorate of the Republic of Ireland to vote for it. In reality, the agenda is that people will accept the unalterable nature of the constitutional status quo over time, seeing it as impracticable to amend it further and contented with the improvements in the political and social status quos that have been granted to the formerly disenfranchised minority, particularly regarding formal links to the Republic of Ireland. Ahern acknowledges that Sinn Fein’s violent past served to make unity impossible, and that if they (and others) continue to behave themselves, then there is a slim prospect that the attitudes of Northern Ireland’s protestants to unity may soften. That’s what Ahern is referring to.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 05:57 PM

16. PE ,

    ‘Unionists have fought tooth and nail not to acquiesce to power sharing because to do so was a step towards a united Ireland. ‘

    Remember old chinese saying journey of thousand miles begins with first step.  Mathematics say if one step (one yard approx ) takes 40 years then how many years in journey of thousand miles ? 

    1,760 x 1,000 x 40 = 70400000 AD or about 70.5 million years. Somehow I have the feeling that we all may have lost interest in a UI by then .
    If Northern nationalists want a UI sooner they need to spend more time in bed with their wives -less time in the pub and also follow the pope’s pronouncements re contraception , condoms etc down to the last letter (no pun intended)

    Dave ,
    ‘Ahern acknowledges that Sinn Fein’s violent past served to make unity impossible, and that if they (and others) continue to behave themselves, then there is a slim prospect that the attitudes of Northern Ireland’s protestants to unity may soften. That’s what Ahern is referring to.

    That’s the Ahern message in a nutshell . And also the proviso that if it never happens we need to be ‘tolerant’ of the fact .

    Of course GF has another solution which would replace the political objective of a UI with a ‘different ‘ objective ‘ but as it has recently been aired on another thread and gave rise to some agitated responses it will be left unmentioned on this occassion.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 08:14 PM

17. As a republican I do believe that where we are today is far better than a decade ago, both on a day-to-day basis and in terms of the larger political picture. I’m not going to put a arbitrary date, say Easter 2016, and say there will be a UI by then. But I do think much will happen in the next 10-15 years that will move things in the right direction (from a nationalist perspective).

    I’m not much for the “Sinn Fein abandoned republicanism by administering British rule/law” argument. The SNP never had the same historical hangups about recognizing the police or taking part in governments that esentially were part of a “British” administration. Their situation is no different from Sinn Fein’s. However, you don’t hear anyone claiming today that the SNP is somehow less serious about their core belief in independence, or less effective in achieving it, because they are entered the nefarious “system”. Because Irish republicanism in the 20th century has been so dogmatic about certain issues for so long, when these policies are dropped for a more pragmatic approach some people treat it as selling the family silver.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 09:28 PM

18. Posted by Dave on Apr 19, 2008 @ 04:19 PM
    “A major part of that integration process is constantly reassuring the formerly disenfranchised minority that the best expedient to reject the legitimacy of the union is actually to accept the legitimacy of it. That way they will be fully integrated by the time they realise the Machiavellian machination by which their original aims were cleverly but abjectly betrayed.”

    I see. Us taigs are thick.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 10:09 PM

19. Us taigs aren’t thick; but we taigs might or might not be. I dunno.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 10:50 PM

20. “Sinn Fein isn’t a party which seeks the end of the union with Great Britian, they are a tool of the United Kingdom which seeks to consolidate the union with Great Britian by ensuring that a formerly disenfranchied minority are fully integrated into it. “

    It is a Pax Romanus, thing, Rome eradicates a serious inconvenience (trouble in the forum) by handing out a few senatorial honors to a difficult province.

    No more bombs in London. That’s success.

    The traditional importance of Ireland was the symbolism it had to Britain, and Empire and latterly Royal Navy. It is EU politics these days. A different empire so to speak.

    G.

    Posted by  on Apr 19, 2008 @ 11:30 PM

21. “...it will be left unmentioned on this occasion.” - Greenflag

    Now I’m curious about what it was. Incidentally, the working position of the mandarins within the Irish DoFA is that no solution other than a federal Ireland would likely be practicable. Essentially that means that Northern Ireland remains as British as it is but that the cost of financing that nationalist indulgence transfers to the taxpayers of the (Federal) Republic of Ireland.

    “But I do think much will happen in the next 10-15 years that will move things in the right direction (from a nationalist perspective).” -doctor

    The problem with this thinking is that it is purely of the wishful variety. We know that unity is subject to a poll, so if the thinking was to be based on the actual rather than the wishful, then it should be supported by polls that show that there is an increase in support for unity. I think it odd that no one who proffers this sentiment commissions a Mori poll, for example, to support it.

    The other problem you have is that improving the status quo will ensure that people are more supportive of it. That has the corresponding effect of ensuring that there is less incentive to change it. I suspect that if you could compare support for unity as it stands now and as it stood 10 years ago, that you would see a marked drop in support for it rather than there being any tangible gain.

    “Because Irish republicanism in the 20th century has been so dogmatic about certain issues for so long, when these policies are dropped for a more pragmatic approach some people treat it as selling the family silver.” -doctor

    On the contrary, Irish republicanism always supported working for constitutional change within the system. The Provos had their own agenda, but they never were Irish Republicans. Currently, that agenda is to integrate their violent membership into the United Kingdom via the machinations of their political wing, Sinn Fein. Again, their aims are utterly irrelevant to Irish unity, just as the always were.

    “Us taigs are thick.” - Briso

    It’s a case of being genuinely naive rather than thick. But then again, attempting to bomb your way to a united Ireland was pretty thick as a strategy, wasn’t it? Ah well, British Intelligence helped the leaders of Sinn Fein to see the light about that one. I agree with the poster above who said that Martin McGuinness doesn’t believe a word of his own bullshit. He knows who really controls the agenda and it isn’t him or his party.

    “It is EU politics these days. A different empire so to speak.” - Gregory

    Spot on. And an empire that is being created simply because people don’t beleive it is an empire. It shows how much people will surrender when they don’t beleive they are surrendering anything.

    Posted by  on Apr 20, 2008 @ 12:41 AM

22. “The problem with this thinking is that it is purely of the wishful variety. We know that unity is subject to a poll, so if the thinking was to be based on the actual rather than the wishful, then it should be supported by polls that show that there is an increase in support for unity. I think it odd that no one who proffers this sentiment commissions a Mori poll, for example, to support it.”

    Yes, except when I talked about things getting better from a nationalist viewpoint I was talking about the increasingly closer ties between north and south and the fact that the southern establishment seems to have ended their mentality of pretending the north doesn’t exist. To name just a few things. “Britishness” as a concept has come under some heavy scrutiny in the last few years throughout the UK; I don’t think it will ease in the years to come.

    “The other problem you have is that improving the status quo will ensure that people are more supportive of it. That has the corresponding effect of ensuring that there is less incentive to change it. I suspect that if you could compare support for unity as it stands now and as it stood 10 years ago, that you would see a marked drop in support for it rather than there being any tangible gain.”

    Is there any tangible proof of any of this? Or is of the purely wishful thinking variety? At any rate, if things do get better I think people who are “soft” nationalists would see unity as something achievable rather than something that would be nice years down the road. It would also mean some unionists, even if the union is still their preferred option, wouldn’t see Irish unity as the coming of the apocalypse.

    “On the contrary, Irish republicanism always supported working for constitutional change within the system. The Provos had their own agenda, but they never were Irish Republicans. Currently, that agenda is to integrate their violent membership into the United Kingdom via the machinations of their political wing, Sinn Fein. Again, their aims are utterly irrelevant to Irish unity, just as the always were.”

    The Provos came about in part because the Republican leadership of the late ‘60s were planning to drop abstentionism and the general disdain for politics which dominated Sinn Fein/IRA for 40-50 years. Republican Sinn Fein today believe that they are carrying on that tradition. Btw, the Provos aren’t republicans? In that case, what is republicanism and how do the Provos not meet those standards?

    Posted by  on Apr 20, 2008 @ 01:29 AM

23. “Yes, except when I talked about things getting better from a nationalist viewpoint I was talking about the increasingly closer ties between north and south and the fact that the southern establishment seems to have ended their mentality of pretending the north doesn’t exist.” - doctor

    How could we not be aware that Northern Ireland existed when the Provos were busy robbing our banks, kidnapping our businessmen, and filling our TV screens with images of decapitated bodies? The economic cost of the Provos’ campaign of mindless violence was felt by every taxpayer in the Republic of Ireland. You’re lucky we can’t recover the costs in the form of a special tax on the citizens of Northern Ireland because if such were possible and put to a democratic vote, we surely would. The people would, but, of course, the politicans continue to donate large quantities of Irish taxpayers money and transfer Irish jobs to that part of the United Kingdom. The people know full well that you lot are taking the piss and couldn’t give a toss for the best interests of the citizens of the Republic, thinking only of your own interests.

    “Is there any tangible proof of any of this?” - doctor

    Yes, and there is much tangible evidence of it, not least being support for the PSNI, support for the economic development of Northern Ireland, and a very merry return to Stormont, etc. No longer do we hear Sinn Fein drumming up business for their party by saying that Northern Ireland is a failed state that can never be made to work. In practice, they’re busy reversing all of their previous mantras and policies.

    “In that case, what is republicanism and how do the Provos not meet those standards?” - doctor

    A Republican is anyone who supports the Republic of Ireland, supporting its constitution, its laws, its courts, its elected authority, etc, and who supports its founding principles, i.e. self-determination, independence, equality and non-sectarianism, and sovereignty. In case you failed to notice, neither the Provos nor their mouthpieces, Sinn Fein, supported the Republic or its institutions, seeking to overthrow it and replace it with a Marxist dictatorship by shooting protestant Irishmen in the back of their heads, wholly ignoring the principle of self-determination in regard to the right of the people to choose their own government and in regard to their expressed wish to seek unity by exclusively peaceful and democratic means. They are not Republicans by any objective standard. A Republican - and this part is optional - would seek unity between all of his fellow countrymen. As Ahern pointed out, the actions of the Provos served to make unity impossible in the short or medium term, meaning that a long term of quarter to half a century is needed to reverse the damage that Sinn Fein and the Provos did to the cause of Irish unity. Republicans, my arse. The Provos could not have done a better job of keeping Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom even if Carson himself had designed them for that purpose.

    Posted by  on Apr 20, 2008 @ 02:13 AM

24. The people would, but, of course, the politicans continue to donate large quantities of Irish taxpayers money and transfer Irish jobs to that part of the United Kingdom.

    Posted by Dave on Apr 20, 2008 @ 02:13

    Think you’re forgetting we elect the politicians. “That part of the United Kingdom” is part of my country as far as I’m concerned and I have no problem whatsoever with my Government giving financial assistance. The people of the North have suffered more than most. To me (from Dublin) I see no difference between someone from Donegal or Derry or from Cavan or Fermanagh. And my children and their children and their children will feel the same. That’s the difference. British people have zero emotional attachment to the North and therefore despise subsidising it.

    Posted by  on Apr 20, 2008 @ 04:05 AM

25. Dave,
    <1>I think it odd that no one who proffers this sentiment commissions a Mori poll, for example, to support it.</i>

    The last poll in the Irish Republic was 1998 and 95% supported the idea of a united Ireland.

    You talk of loyalty to the State and its Constition but don’t seem to consider Article 3 relevant.

    It seems to me that you are the one giving up on founding principles of Irish Republicanism when you come out with comments such as “In reality, the agenda is that people will accept the unalterable nature of the constitutional status quo over time”.

    Posted by  on Apr 20, 2008 @ 11:07 AM
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.