UUP Assemblyman warns of loyalist violence

David Ervine, newly of the UUP Assembly team, has warned of a violent loyalist reaction if cross-border co-operation proceeds without a local Assembly being in place. In what is likely to be the beginning of a new phase of loyalist (or should we now say UUP?) sabre-rattling in the run-up to November 24, the Assembly man ironically remarked that the DUP reaching a power-sharing arrangement with Sinn Fein would avoid this doomsday scenario.

  • bertie

    A terrorist wanting to have terrorists in government. I can see why that appeals to him.

  • Nevin

    Bertie, what do you make of the Irish government’s decision to add to its housing accommodation in Belfast?

    It already has accommodation for those civil servants attached to the BIIC Joint Secretariat and new premises are being built at Notting Hill in south Belfast.

    The number six has been mentioned and this has led to speculation that the current number of government departments will be reduced from ten to six.

    Perhaps this new building will be presented as a consulate to unionists (cf Cardiff and Edinburgh) and a nationalist ‘Hillsborough Castle’ to nationalists (joint stewardship).

  • baj

    I look forward to hearing Sir Reg justify his cosy alliance with the PUP/UVF after Dictionary Dave’s latest statement.

    Oh how I long for the good old days when Reg was in the vanguard of opposition to ‘the men of violence’

    Oh sorry hang on- it was the republican ‘men of violence’ that he used to put the metaphorical boot into.

    That’s alright then, no hypocricy there then, eh Reg?

  • Pat

    Does this idiot really think that the British and Irish Governments are not going to talk to each other on cross boarder matters just because he threatens violence?

    If there is no agreement between the politicians here then someone has to govern and as with any contries boardering each other they will co-operate with each other.

    Is this what the UUP has always termed as “Re-actionary violence” from Unionist terrorists? Is this the new way that the UUP delivers it’s threats if the are not consulted, via their new very own “Hitman” with viable terrorist credentials?

    Clearly the UUP has not changed from the days when Trimbles secretary stated that “Unionist violence was acceptable as it was in defence of the Union”. The UUP sending out their own version of Jackie McDonald to deliver the threat merely indicates they are still OK with Unionist violence – So much for Democracy then!!!!!!

  • bertie

    Nevin

    I haven’t made my mind up about it yet. I am of course suspicious, but then that won’t suprise anyone 😉

  • bertie

    “Trimbles secretary stated that “Unionist violence was acceptable as it was in defence of the Union”. ”

    Who was this and when was it said? I can’t imagine that Trimble’s secretary whatever that actually means would make public statements.

    Threatening renewed violence is what works in NI.

    Presumably Reg will continue to justify it the way people have justifed appeasing republican terrorism and we’ll hear more about bringing people in from the cold and we need to inclusive, it’s good to talk and they gave Trimble a medal for it.

  • Nevin

    Bertie, has Slugger debated the purpose of this new building?

  • bertie

    Nevin

    I don’t think so. If it has been dealt with here I missed it.

  • Nevin

    It would seem that either Dublin doesn’t think a new Executive will be formed or else a deal on joint stewardship has already been done. The latter would explain President McAleese’s ‘love affair’ with the UDA.

    How would joint stewardship operate? Presumably there’d be joint secretaries of state. There might also be joint ministries although I think, initially, there’d be joint permanent secretaries in the six new ministries. Perhaps the new building is to provide living accommodation for these additional senior civil servants as well as for meetings with Irish government ministers.

    I’m surprised John Laird hasn’t put down some questions in the House of Lords.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Unionism has always referred to the threat of loyalist violence to discourage anything that may look like all-Ireland encroachment. There is absolutely nothing new here.

    It’s not just the UUP either. The DUP leader talked up the threat of loyalist violence last September just because a parade got rerouted, can you imagine what he would do about moves towards an Anglo Irish Agreement type scenario ?

  • pith

    Bertie: “Trimbles secretary stated that “Unionist violence was acceptable as it was in defence of the Union”.

    “Who was this and when was it said? I can’t imagine that Trimble’s secretary whatever that actually means would make public statements.”

    It was about ten years ago. I think there was a retraction and a resignation.

  • Nevin

    CS, and if Mary McAleese and her husband have been engaging in a con job with elements in the UDA?

  • Garibaldy

    Nevin,

    Did Hain not say during the week, blogged here, that Dublin had been overhyping what joint stewardship would mean? In reality, nothing different in any way shape or form to direct rule.

  • Bunter

    Ervine’s intervention comes for two reasons.

    a) The UVF are feeling marginalised and angry because the UDA is getting all the media and government attention recently. This is a ‘better not forget about us’ type of statement.
    b) It is a deliberate contradiction of the ‘Ulster is safe because Bertie told us so’ line from the UDA ‘thinkers’ who visited Dublin the other week.

    Loyalist paramilitaries hate no one half as much as they hate each other.

    I’m sure the DUP will be impressed by the UUP’s ally threatening violence if they don’t go into an executive with Sinn Fein.

  • maura

    Bunter: I’m sure the DUP will be impressed by the UUP’s ally threatening violence if they don’t go into an executive with Sinn Fein.

    Unionists, DUP or whomever, have always threatened violence, this is nothing new. Which sheds some light on their hypocrisy on the concept of violence, doesn’t it?

  • Dualta

    Nationalists won’t be bullied by such talk, or by the actions which it threatens.

    If Unionists continue to refuse to allow Nationalists a say in the running of our own society by engaging in power sharing then we expect our political representatives to push for our interests to be represented by the Irish government.

    We will not accept government by London.

  • Bunter

    Maura and Dualta

    Try and consentrate.
    It is the DUP (friends of the UDA) the UVF is trying to bully.

  • Bunter

    And while you’re at it, try to conCentrate as well.

  • heck

    bertie
    “Trimbles secretary stated that “Unionist violence was acceptable as it was in defence of the Union””.

    I don’t recall that but I do recall david trimble meeting with loyalist hit man billy wright (aka king rat) at drumcree in July 1997 to try and get a bunch of orange knuckle draggers down the garvaghy road. His outer links with loyalist death squads have been detailed in “The Committee” by Sean McPhilemy, published by Roberts Rheinhart.

    let’s face it all this crap from unionists about “no guns in government”, “no talking to terrorists” “no criminality” is simply bull s***.

    The issue is “no fenians in government” and until the sovereign governments face down unionists on this issue and stop pandering to their excuses there will be no assembly.

    Bring on plan B and face down ervine, the uup/UVF, the UDA and the DUP. (and the PSNI/UVF)

  • bertie

    The DUP seem more than prepared to go into coalition with the SDLP. Are they not “f*****s”?

  • heck

    bertie

    yea right, give me a break

    they had the chance in 1974 when paisley and peter punt were part of the UWC strike which brought down the power sharing government which included such upity fenians as paddy devlin, gerry fitt and John Hume.

    now that nationalists have elected somebody else unionists claim that maybe the stoops are ok (they would ‘nt be if SF were’nt the leading nationalist party.)

    Bertie –you have no right to veto who represents me. It is my vote that decides not yours. The unionist veto has never been taken away and that is the block on progress in Nor Iron.

    Bring on plan B. (and improve on it so it really is JA.)

  • Garibaldy

    Heck,

    Surely the problem with Plan B is that the people you decide you want to represent you have no say in anything. Perhaps the way round this is for PSF to review its Westminster abstentionism, and bring pressure to bear there too, or would you not be in favour of this. It seems to me that, apart from policing, this is the last of the sacred cows

  • Greenflag

    Just more horse manure to add to the 40 year high pile already foisted on the failed ‘entity’.

    ‘Bring on plan B. ‘

    Another waste of time – Bring on ‘repartition’ instead and lave Ervine & UVF/DUP/UUP/UDA to fight out amongs themselves who gets to be top dog in a smaller 2 county sized NI .

  • heck

    Garibaldy

    The way I see JA working would be for unionists to take their seats (and swear their oath to their queen) in Westminster and nationalists to take their seats in Dublin. They would then be in a position to represent their constituents to the two governments who would defend the interests of the two communities.

    As part of this I would like to see the Euro and the pound as legal tender in Nor Iron

    And I would like to see Irish troops billeted in areas like North Belfast so that if the PSNI/UVF do act up nationalists have someone to turn to.

    The JS being proposed is a pale imitation of what I want but it is a start.

  • declan

    Heck

    “The JS being proposed”

    Thats because JS is not being proposed, is it?

  • bertie

    heck

    74? wise up man. A lot of them didn’t even have the vote then.

    One the bulk of the opposition is to a council of Ireland and they were quite right to resist forced powersharing.

    At the moment they would be more than happy to go into governement with SDLP.

    The majority has a right to veto who gets into government.

  • Garibaldy

    Heck,

    I can see the logic behind your vision. But can’t see it.

  • Garibaldy

    can’t see it happening that should read

  • heck

    declan

    is’nt there some form of words call “joint stewartship” to describe what is being proposed-closer cooperation between the two governments in running northern ireland? I know peter, “sell out”, hain has said it is not JA and I take him at his word–but hopefully it is a start.

  • Loyalist

    The unionist veto has never been taken away

    Thats right heck and dont forget it, nationalists and fenains are the policitical minority here, live with it.

    Youll have powersharing when we say so and not before, sort out the murdering, robbing scummbags you voted for then well consider sharing power but not before!!!

    Rule Britannia

  • gareth mccord

    how does ervine know of threats of violence from the uvf? he claims he doesnt know about their drug dealing, racketeering, extortion, murders and continous death threats against victims families. HOW MANY FACES DOES THIS ERVINE HAVE!!

  • Dave

    Democracy, the will of the people whatever happened to that? The British and Irish Government can’t just decide to move on because it suits their purpose to do so. The people of Northern Ireland do have political representatives and these are the people both government must talk WITH. Besides is this not the problem (British/Irish governments) pulling the strings in whatever direction to their benefit.

    I don’r need the likes of dictionary Dave or anyone else for that matter to inform me that there will be trouble ahead should the two governments decide to ignore the will of the majority. Either you believe in democracy or you don’t. Should a referendum be held and a united Ireland become a reality via the democratic system, I would abide by the will of the majority, then move?

    I wouldn’t try to change political decision taken by the people via armed revolt (like some I could name) The viable way forward is an Independent Northern Ireland this will be good for both communitas as there would be no threat of a united Ireland and no rule from the British government. The British and Irish would be trading partners no more than that.

    lets move forward and get some independence for the people of Northern Ireland. If I can listen to the foggy dew you can listen to the sash, just like they used to when you weren’t born (probably)

  • Dave

    This was carson vision

  • kensei

    “The DUP seem more than prepared to go into coalition with the SDLP. Are they not “f*****s”?”

    Oh, they are fine as long as they can chose the fenians, rather than the the fenians that the fenians actually chose.

    “Democracy, the will of the people whatever happened to that?”

    It has spoken. A referenda approved the GFA. We operate under its rules. It says that SF go into the Assembly here, as they have a ssignificant mandate. The only way to avoid this, is to subvert democracy and bring the whole thing crashing down.

    “The British and Irish Government can’t just decide to move on because it suits their purpose to do so.”

    They can decide to try and enforce the democratic will of the people, though.

    “The people of Northern Ireland”

    Read: Unionism.

    “do have political representatives and these are the people both government must talk WITH. Besides is this not the problem (British/Irish governments) pulling the strings in whatever direction to their benefit.”

    Though if we want to get really picky, and you insist on the one Nation nonsense, the supreme democratic body of the UK is the Westminister Parliament. There is no Constitution, and Acts of this Parliament are absolute. From that perspective, democracy says it can do whatever it damn well wants.

    Course, if you don’t like that system, there is a neighbouring system which has a Constitution, and rights that can’t be overridden by simple act of Parliament. Maybe you should consider joining?

    “I don’t need the likes of dictionary Dave or anyone else for that matter to inform me that there will be trouble ahead should the two governments decide to ignore the will of the majority. Either you believe in democracy or you don’t.”

    Excellent, then with the facts as above and the other fact that YOU DON’T GET TO PICK THE OTHER SIDE, we should have the Assembly up by September.

    “Should a referendum be held and a united Ireland become a reality via the democratic system, I would abide by the will of the majority, then move?”

    Are you confused on what you would do inthat situation?

    “I wouldn’t try to change political decision taken by the people via armed revolt (like some I could name)”

    That’s something, at least.

    “The viable way forward is an Independent Northern
    Ireland this will be good for both communitas as there would be no threat of a united Ireland and no rule from the British government. The British and Irish would be trading partners no more than that.”

    Yeah! A country with an inbuilt Prod majority without the Brits to keep the excesses in line because it embrasses them in front of the world! 40% and increasing percentage of the population who STILL consider themselves Irish and wamt to join with the neighbouring state. That is an incredible model of stability!!!

  • bertie

    “Oh, they are fine as long as they can chose the fenians, rather than the the fenians that the fenians actually chose. ”

    It has to be up to any party to chose who it is prepared to go into government. That is democracy.

  • IJP

    Heck

    JA neither could or would work that way.

    In 1998 we agreed to NI forming part of the UK, with cross-border bodies. The deal is an international one – to coin a phrase, ‘it won’t just go away, you know’.

    What you will see is ever-more cross-border cooperation and a lot of say by the Irish Government on what happens in the North.

    You will not see it played out as you suggest, though, because that wasn’t the deal and because in any case the bill for the Irish Government would come to €4 bn (half subvention) each year for a start…

  • IJP

    Comrade

    Very well said.

    Unionists have been just as good at threatening violence if they don’t get their way as Nationalists have – indeed, if 1974 is anything to go by, you could argue they’ve been even better.

    So while they talk a good game about democracy, if democracy threatens their hegemony, suddenly it goes out of the window. The word ‘majority’ does not appear in any definition of ‘democracy’ – but don’t expect any Unionist to make that point.

    Creeping de facto Joint Authority will begin on 25 November… and it’ll be largely because of the failure of Unionists to do a political deal and to sell the need for compromise to the people they represent.

    Leadership that’s shirking…

  • Dave

    kensei

    Yes, the assembly should be up and running by the end of the year, that way SF/IRA will be part of the Government after all this is the only road open to them, isn’t it? I don’t have a problem of sharing power with a peaceful opposition or of SF/IRA following the system of democracy as this will be the final proof if needed to show the that their thirty five terror campaign against the people of Northern Ireland was pointless. They of course already know this, that is why they are into politics. What will happen if SF/IRA get beaten at the ballot box? will they say this is democracy for you or is it back to murdering those who stand in their way?

    SF/IRA have to do what the rest of the political parties are doing, support of policing will do for starters, no private “army” which all that entails, no more ballot and bomb tactics and no more cheating at the polls, etc. and no more terrorising their own community by way of intimidation.

    Remember SF/IRA are an international terrorist organisation who have tried to bombed their way into government and found to their cost that that is not the way things are done in a democracy.

  • bertie

    IJP your comments about unionists are bigoted, taking bigotry to apply to constitutional loyalty.

    Whether or not the word majority appears in the definition of democracy is not a point that I am likely to make as I cannot easily envisage a conversation where it would be relevant.

    The importance of democracy is that it is about the majority not being dicated to by the minority and that the majority not making the outcomes of that democracy apply differently to the minority. Individual rights also have to be protected.

    I could say but don’t expect a non unionist to understand this but that would be one of those odious generalisations.

  • heck

    Greenflag . You and I seem to be looking at the problem of Nor iron from the same perspective. I read the thread on repartition and you defended your position in an articulate manner. I was impressed. I wanted to contribute but I was reading it from work.

    We both agree that Nor Iron is a “failed political entity”. CJ was right

    We both recognize that 55% of the population view themselves as British and 45% of the population view themselves as Irish.

    We both are trying to imagine a state of affairs were both the 55% and the 45% have their national identities recognized.

    You have proposed the repartition of the north and in theory it does address the underlying causes of instability.

    My problem with repartition is the practicalities of bringing it about. I can only imagine the chaos that would happen if one day Honest Tony announced that he was going to redraw the border. With my solution a simple decision by Bertie would allow the elected representatives from the six counties to sit in the Dail. This could happen next week without difficulty. (There are already senators and a president from NI.) Anyone from NI with and Irish passport could be given a postal vote for the next Irish president. The last time I was in south Armagh I was in a pub in Camlough that had one till in euros and one in sterling so a dual currency in not impossible (did’nt Mrs Thatcher propose something similar for Britain?) A joint committee of both governments to appoint judges is not impossible. There are lots of small things that can be done gradually to build on “plan B” without provoking the PSNI/UVF to go ape shit.

    Bring it on!!! Either JA will grow out of plan B or unionists will wise up and implement the GFA. It is a win-win situation.

  • IJP

    Bertie

    Well if you’re taking that line, then what Unionists have not come to terms with is that they are not the “majority”.

    Not for the first time, I’ll point out that 97% of the UK population live in Great Britain…

    That’s a whopping “majority”. And it’s about to deliver the minority (in NI) into de facto joint authority…

    That’s what your obsession with “majorities” does for you…

  • kensei

    “It has to be up to any party to chose who it is prepared to go into government. That is democracy.”

    Actually, no, here you don’t get that choice without subverting the whoile system. If you’d like things to work like that, there is a neighbouring state with precisely those rules. Perhaps you’d consider joining?

    “Yes, the assembly should be up and running by the end of the year, that way SF/IRA will be part of the Government after all this is the only road open to them, isn’t it? I don’t have a problem of sharing power with a peaceful opposition or of SF/IRA following the system of democracy as this will be the final proof if needed to show the that their thirty five terror campaign against the people of Northern Ireland”

    Read: Unionism

    “was pointless. They of course already know this, that is why they are into politics.”

    Excellent. Why the fuck are you moaning then? You are also labouring under a common confusion. SF represent the 20-odd percent of the population here that voted for them. Common confusion, glad I could clear it up.

    “What will happen if SF/IRA get beaten at the ballot box? will they say this is democracy for you or is it back to murdering those who stand in their way?”

    No idea! If there is a vote for a United Ireland, will Lotyalist cause bloody mayhem? No idea! Hypotheticals are irrelevant! What I do know, is that we can all work so it doesn’t happen. The future doesn’t arrive on a plate.

    “SF/IRA have to do what the rest of the political parties are doing, support of policing will do for starters, no private “army” which all that entails, no more ballot and bomb tactics and no more cheating at the polls, etc. and no more terrorising their own community by way of intimidation.”

    Actually, no, under the rules they just need a mandate.

    “Remember SF/IRA are an international terrorist organisation who have tried to bombed their way into government and found to their cost that that is not the way things are done in a democracy. ”

    The IRA is gone. I know it’s hard, but it’s time to get over it.

    And I note you ignore the inconvient facts about democracy because you don’t like them. Sigh.

  • bertie

    IJP

    More generalisations! Being a Unionist just means advoicating the Union, even some Allinace supporters are Unionists

    In NI Unionists are the majority in relation to the constitutional status.

    My “obsession” with majorities is about my obession with democracy and what it safeguards. I wish others were so obsessed

    As I said one of the important features of real democracy is that the majority should not make the ourcome apply differently to the minority, which is what or governement continually does. This is not what I mean by Democracy and it is certianly not “dictated” by its tenets

  • bertie

    “”It has to be up to any party to chose who it is prepared to go into government. That is democracy.”

    Actually, no, here you don’t get that choice without subverting the whoile system. If you’d like things to work like that, there is a neighbouring state with precisely those rules. Perhaps you’d consider joining? ”

    Actually yes anything else is profoundly undemocratic.

  • bertie

    Apologies if this article has already been featured here.

    http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=44&si=1666188&issue_id=14466

    She hits the nail beautifully on the head here
    “When democracy embraces terrorism, it is not terrorism that becomes tamed – but democracy that becomes contaminated. And that applies whether it is loyalist terrorism or republican terrorism. “

  • Nevin

    [i]In 1998 we agreed to NI forming part of the UK, with cross-border bodies.[/i]

    IJP, there were three strands to the Agreement. Why has the East-West dimension not received the same attention as the North-South one? Are our links to GB any less in need of development than those to the RoI?

  • Loyalist

    In 1998 we agreed to NI forming part of the UK, with cross-border bodies.

    Yes that was 8 yeaars ago, time to move on
    Time to give the people of NI another say as that clearly failed.

    Tony bliar got elected in 2005 does that mean the british people should not have another vote ?

    Let the unionist voice be heard!

    RULE BRITANNIA

  • Dave

    kensei

    oops sorry if i have annoyed you, i didn’t realise that the truth would hurt that much.

    It seems that you have let your mask slip, silly auld you.

  • Marcus

    Loyalist

    You are correct that Unionists can prevent a local power sharing assembly. However, that is the limit of your “power”.

    The days of a Unionist Veto = Direct Rule = pro-Unionist status quo are gone.

    If the Unionists don’t agree a deal with the ELECTED representatives of nationalism by Nov 24th, the UK + RoI govts will simply move on.

    This govt (which will be around for at least another 2.5 years) is hardly afraid to upset Unionists – the demise of the RUC, UDR, RIR etc.

    I’m not claiming joint authority but joint stewardship will mean a lot more than a couple of tourism committees – as some unionists like to delude themselves i.e the idea for 7 councils based on the demographic spread of NI is a direct result of RoI input.

    With the demographics moving the way they are, this will be the start of an admittedly lengthy but ultimately 1 way process.

    Likewise, some Unionists like to delude themselves that the UK electorate will prevent this. I’ve lived in various parts of England for over 20 years and, believe me, the vast majority of the UK electorate don’t give a s**t about NI.

    If Tony Blair was prepared to go against massive mainstream opposition i.e. the Iraq war, he’s hardly going to worry about an extremely small part of the UK electorate who care about NI.

    Personally, I hope that there is no local agreement. In an local assembly, the DUP can use disruptive and delaying tactics. In Westminster, their numbers are insignificant so the govt can simply move on without them if required.

    Therefore, I think the the interests of NI Catholics/Nationalists would be better served at a national level.

    Either way, the outcome will be increasing influence in NI affairs from the RoI govt – live with it!!

  • Donnacha

    Loyalist, I’ve been hearing the unionist voice for the past 40 years and all it has said is “No”.
    Ervine’s “warning” of loyalist violence in the evertuality of cross-border co-operation is simply the same old tune being re-played yet again. Plus ca change….

  • Pete Baker

    Garibaldy

    “Did Hain not say during the week, blogged here, that Dublin had been overhyping what joint stewardship would mean? In reality, nothing different in any way shape or form to direct rule.”

    Well he first said it back in May, in front of a Commons Committee with a majority of Labour MPs.. but it’s been a consistent message ever since, and not just from the British Government.

    That hasn’t stopped some parties from continuing to ignore those statements though..

    ANYway.. here’s where it was last detailed on Slugger – “It’s almost like a fruit ripening”

  • heck

    Pete,

    I don’t dispute that plan B will be nothing more that a few committees dealing with waterways, energy, and tourism and some deal in mobile roaming charges and cross border cost sharing on health. It’s the potential.

    If unionists still refuse to see their nationalist neighbours as equals six months later Bertie can add Dail membership. (Especially if there is a close election and SF can exercise some leverage). If they still refuse to wise up add a joint panel to appoint judges. (Part of a law and order deal?)

    If they still refuse to budge–maybe give the garda power to investigate PSNI/UVF malfeasance. A garda team based in Belfast–a deal for SF to support the police maybe.

    In a year or two maybe a minister or two from the free state government as part of the direct rule team of ministers. Free State slots in the appointment of quango members (the parades commission would get unionist attention!)

    Plan B is not JA but it could be–if unionists want it that way and refuse to implement the GFA

  • E Carson

    Thank God the UVF will hold the line. The Provos may have given up their weapons without achieving a single core goal but the UVF are not so foolish.
    There will be no surrender.

  • Dualta

    Bertie,
    You may say that this statement by Ervine is more to do with threatening the DUP than threatening Nationslists, but I think you are, in the main, wrong.

    Any use of violence by Loyalists will, I guarantee it, result in the death or injury of Nationalists, not DUP members.

    If the threat is to a third party, then it is to the British and Irish governments. Effectively what Ervine is saying is that if they push ahead with plan B, then there is a strong chance that Loyalists will murder Nationalists in protest.

    So, whichever direction you think the threat is aimed, those who will suffer most from its realisation will be Nationalists.

    That said, I’ll repeat my first point. We will not be bullied by threats of violence. We will not accept government by London or by Unionists.

    Such government has, on every occasion in the past, proven to be not in our interests. We want political fairness.

  • bertie

    “Bertie,
    You may say that this statement by Ervine is more to do with threatening the DUP than threatening Nationslists, but I think you are, in the main, wrong. ”

    I didn’t say it.

    “We will not be bullied by threats of violence. We will not accept government by London or by Unionists. ”

    That sounds like a threat. If you were a democrat you would accept both.

  • McGrath

    “Thank God the UVF will hold the line. The Provos may have given up their weapons without achieving a single core goal but the UVF are not so foolish.
    There will be no surrender.

    Posted by E Carson on Aug 07, 2006 @ 02:57 AM”

    It seems your defenders are in the process of being “paid off”.

    http://www.sluggerotoole.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_basis_of_a_civilised_society/

    One can only assume that after being paid off, those that don’t retire will no longer have the support of their old employer.

  • Tony Clifton

    This is fairly silly, Ervine said that a people without a voice, with a will imposed upon them later rather than sooner attempt to force people to listen to them (violence). To me it seems more like an analysis of human nature than any type of threat.

    It basically defines the very existence of the IRA etc… and for that matter any physical force grouping/civil protestors the world over.

  • Dualta

    Bertie,

    you [i]did say that the UVF is threatening the DUP.[/i]

    In response to my assertation that the statement by Ervine tells of a threat to Nationalists you said:

    “[i]Dualta. Try and consentrate.
    It is the DUP (friends of the UDA) the UVF is trying to bully.[/i]”

    You have also accused me of issuing a threat. I can see nothing in my post which resembles a threat. Please point it out to me.

    Lastly, in my books democracy means self government. Not the government of others or someone who considers me to be ‘other’.

    Also, when the border was drawn, it was done so in a way to render Catholics and Nationalists a permanent minority.

    So when people claim that I am not a democrat for not being willing to accept Unionist or direct British rule, I tend to ignore them and concentrate on building a better society for all of my people on this island.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Dualta: “Lastly, in my books democracy means self government. Not the government of others or someone who considers me to be ‘other’. ”

    In its purest form, democracy is five wolves and three sheep voting on what to serve for dinner. It most definately is the tyranny of the majority, hence the attachement in some quarters to the notion…

    What is needed is democratic elections as a component of a more equitable government, where the rights of the minority and the individual are protected from the tyranny of the majority.

  • Dualta

    Dread,

    Self, in this instance, means ‘the group’. I would consider devolved government in NI, under the terms of the GFA, as self-government by Unionists and Nationalists.

    We are, to a large degree, in agreement on the mechanisms.

  • DK

    Tony: Hello Bertie, looks like there will be no agreement by November. Now, as long as we are going to share governing the place, will you also share the bill?

    Bertie: No, costs too much.

    Tony: If I can get that figure down to a reasonable level would you consider it?

    Bertie: Maybe. Thanks for the jumper by the way.

    Tony: Yes, George left it behind so I thought I should start saving money straight away

  • bertie

    Dualta

    You have mixed me up with Bunter.

    I didn’t accuse you of issueing a threat I said that “We will not accept government by London or by Unionists” sounded like one. It depends what you mean by not accept as to whether it actually is one.

    “Lastly, in my books democracy means self government. Not the government of others or someone who considers me to be ‘other’” I don’t know who the others are. Democracy means that the people of a country govern the country. Labout govern this country. I suppose that it would consider LibDems and Tories as other.

    Dread

    Democracy is not about the tyranny of the majority but to prevent the tyranny of the minority.

    “In its purest form, democracy is five wolves and three sheep voting on what to serve for dinner. It most definately is the tyranny of the majority, hence the attachement in some quarters to the notion… ”

    In its best form, The five wolves would have to apply the outcome equally to themselves.

  • bertie

    meant to add

    and that is part of the attachment that I have to it.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    bertie: “Democracy is not about the tyranny of the majority but to prevent the tyranny of the minority. ”

    Stuff and nonsense. Democracy, unalloyed by checks and balances, is all about majority rule.

    bertie: “In its best form, The five wolves would have to apply the outcome equally to themselves. ”

    Seeing as Northern Ireland doesn’t qualify as “best form,” under the heading of “democracy,” I feel compelled to ask “what’s your point?”

  • bertie

    I repeat. its benfit and what it’s aim is, is to prevent the tyranny of the minority.

    My point is about the nature of what democracy is about and is in answer to your comment about your interpretation.

  • Cahal

    “its benfit and what it’s aim is, is to prevent the tyranny of the minority. ”

    The problem with democracy is, you can always draw a new line around a minority to convert it to a majority.

    NI – case in point.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    bertie: “I repeat. its benfit and what it’s aim is, is to prevent the tyranny of the minority. ”

    And it achieves this by imposing the tyranny of the majority.

    bertie: “My point is about the nature of what democracy is about and is in answer to your comment about your interpretation. ”

    And my reply to you is that arguing best cases is inapplicable — N.I. doesn’t qualify.

    N.I. is the gerrymandered rump of the isle of Ireland that exists as a seperate political entity precisely of a tyranny of the minority.

  • Donnacha

    I think what Bertie means by his references to “tyranny of the minority” is “tyranny of the nationalist minority”. Doesn’t seem to be a problem when a minority of the population of the island (Unionists) use force to ignore the wishes of the majority….

  • BooBoo

    UUP: Dire warnings of the political dangers of Plan B

    UUP/UVF: Dire warnings of the terrorist dangers of Plan B.

    The UVF is now the UUP’s armed wing.

    The UUP is hurtling towards moral bankruptcy at the same speed it is hurtling towards financial bankruptcy. It is now so dependent upon the grants and expenses that are part and parcel of the Assembly that it will say and do anything to keep it afloat.

    BooBoo

  • tiny

    Does this idiot really think that the British and Irish Governments are not going to talk to each other on cross boarder matters just because he threatens violence?

    Did he threaten or warn?

  • lib2016

    There’ll be no repartition – the EU wouldn’t stand for the ethnic cleansing required, nor will there be anything like joint authority since someone has to have the final say on what happens here.

    There will of course be a slow steady transfer of direct rule from London to Dublin as the unionist community continues to decline in relation to the nationalist community, but then we all knew that was going to happen eventually and the only thing new is that the joint bodies are currently being set up so that Ireland can be run as one single economic entity – the natural state of affairs.

    The unionists are rattling their rusty sabres again. So what’s new about that? They have been at it since 1912 and without an Orange Card to play at Westminster it means nothing.

  • bertie

    Darth

    my point is about the principle of democracy. What is happening ina ny particular part of the world does not alther that. Arguing best cases in applicable if you are talking about democracy and what it was and should be. If you were talking about something else that’s up to you but I was talking about democracy!

    They tyranny on the minority re partition was that The majority in Ulster did not get to decise what happened to their Province. However that happened before most of us were born and it is two late to get those three counties back as time has givn them the right to self determination.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    bertie: “my point is about the principle of democracy. What is happening ina ny particular part of the world does not alther that. Arguing best cases in applicable if you are talking about democracy and what it was and should be.”

    Unalloyed democracy is the tyranny of the majority. Period, full stop. Unless it is alloyed with the principles of another system of government, all you have is majority rules. You make talk ideals all you want, so long as you acknowledge few to none of them reside in Northern Ireland, the culmination of the fears of a tyrannical minority.

    Funny, your ability to blow hot and cold with the same breath…

  • Democracy is government by the people. Whether it is a tyranny of the majority or not rather depends on the people involved. At its best it is NOT such a tyranny.

    To prevent tyranny, democratic societies generally have constitutional safeguards (written or otherwise), and provisions for due process and legal checks and balances on the power of the executive and the legislature. In the UK there is the Human Rights Act – the republic has a written constitution, with legal review of legislation (if I recall).

    In both societies minorities have been disadvantaged and oppressed – but things are not all bleak, and they are on the whole improving.