New anti Agreement blog…

This looks like it might be worth keeping a regular eye on. It’s an anti agreement blog that seems to be keeping a weather on how the DUP is running things on the ground in the run up to the election.


  • There is more content on the following url:

  • Percival

    Bertie Campbell of the Long March fame, is the man behind this blog!

  • the sparrow

    very infantile blog.

    How long’s it going to last? 1 month, 2 months…..

  • Jesus Christ

    The blog might die but it won’t be alone. Gerry Mad Dog Adams is now saying he wants to meet the bloggers and dissidents before they whack him. Gerry must be reading the signs. He wants them to abandon the reactionary “not an ounce, not a bullet” strategy and to take up the revolutionary Republican mission missionary position with Big Ian on top and MI5 doing it from behind doggy style.
    “In a message to the dissidents who have issued death threats against him and other senior party representatives, he said: he wanted to meet with these organisations to brief them in detail on current developments and impress upon them his belief that the current Sinn Féin strategy is the best way forward for the nationalist community and for the wider republican struggle.

    Mr Adams told the dissident republicans still committed to violence that they had no strategy for delivering Irish unity and independence and that they have no popular support and their actions were counter-productive.”

    He sounds so Gerry Fitt before Gerry was burned out. But he is the leader of Sinn Fein whose willing executioners will follow him through to the bitter end.

    So, plenty to blog about in this emerging Irish Fourth Reich.

  • PP

    Can’t wait for this group to soundly spell out the alternative to what the DUP is doing at the moment.

  • Balloo

    Yes the way the DUP soundly spelt out the alternative in their manifesto in 2005…

    Get real, the DUP have sold out what they stood for in 2005. They got the protest vote and have ended up doing what they lambasted Trimble for doing.

  • Percival

    Sorry Balloo that’s not an answer to the question. Where would Campbell et al take us? What is your alternate plan to St. Andrews?

    Oh yes, sit in grand isolation while the Secretary of State screws our community to the floor, but at least we’ll be able to complain, carp and errrr…. that’s it. Wise up.

  • DK

    Jeepers, this is just like that other thread about the dissident republicans – delete as applicable and post ad nauseum

    “what are your alternate plans for policing/st. andrews?”

    “The leadership of DUP/SF have sold us out”

    “It’s all the fault of the British Government” – suitable for both that one.


  • Observer

    DUP counter argument: show us the alternative.

    This is big news as it marks a major change in DUP Policy. I’m suprised many haven’t realise this.

    However I know of many DUP members who don’t like the St. Andrew’s Agreement but are indeed backing it because they’ve been told too.

    What happened to the ‘principled’ Unionist?

    As has been said on other blogs, by David Vance – I think; the UUP sought to ‘meddle’ Irish Republicanism but the DUP are seeking to mess with Unionism. i.e. Trimble thought he could control Republicans, but failed. The DUP are seeking to sell a pup to the Unionist community and indeed to the very people who voted for their ‘no surrender’ stance.

    I ask DUPes, are you surrendering? How can you think this deal is any better than what has been put before the people before?

    You are accepting Government with Sinn Fein-IRA.

    I would acknowledge however in private discussions with DUP members that as soon after the 2003 elections they said: ‘We can’t undo what has already been done.’ That may be the case, to an extend. But thats not what you said in 2003 or indeed 2005.

    The DUP’s Christopher Stalford, once an adament anti-agreement Unionist backs this deal which is ineffect the Belfast Agreement, perhaps even worse than so. I don’t mean to pick on an individual as this position is universal across many DUPes.

    Had the UUP been at the helm, how would the DUP have reacted? Answer: Like any opposition, unless of course you are the Ulster Unionist Party. If I may quote as what was reported in the Newsletter some weeks ago from a meeting of the DUP before Christmas. Paisley was reported to have said, in answer to a question: ‘You can say anything you like in opposition.’

    This is a major ‘u’ turn. I do not respect people who lie to their electorate.

  • Steaky

    I have never trolled nor had any desire to troll however after reading that blog I am giving it serious consideration.

  • McBurney


    Where was the alternative you looked for to the Belfast Agreement? It’s certainly not the St. Andrews Agreement, which is, at best, a supplement of it.

  • Balloo


    Going on past form all you have to do is get the protest vote, wait a few years, and then do exactly the same thing as your predecessors did.

    The DUP were the anti-agreement party, they took away the swing voters from the UUP and demolished the UUP at the polls. Now they have accepted the Belfast Agreement through SAA with more concessions for republicans. How do you expect people to react?

    There are people out there who cannot accept powersharing with unrepentant terrorists. The DUP played to these same peoples fears and stood against Trimble on the ticket of no power-sharing with Sinn Fein/IRA. If the deal is done the Paisley and McGuinness will run this country froma joint office. It is blantant hypocrisy.

    Campbell as in David Campbell the UUP chairman? Well you’d be best of asking him.

  • Percival


    So what exactly is your idea of how we move forward and defend our community’s interests?

    I would genuinely appreciate an answer to this question as neither Vance, nor Foster nor any other of the people who are running apound like headless chickens accusing Paisley (or in your case Christopher Stalford????) of sell-out seem able to offer any alternative course of action that the DUP could pursue.

    What would you do differently?

  • Couldn’t agree more Observer.

    The “what is the alternative?” line was thrown at the DUP time and again by Trimble and the UUP.

    Turns out that the DUP “alternative” is the same policy.

    Percival, Balloo isn’t the only person answering questions. The DUP have gone strangely quiet.

    Donaldson used to be very keen on writing into the papers. He is strangely quiet now. Why? Because he had adopted Trimble’s policy after spending years attacking Trimble.

    He and the rest of the DUP are hypocrites.

  • interested

    Obviously made up of the kinds of people we’ve seen at their ‘rallies’ so far – you know the ones – those organised and ran by Clifford Peoples et al.

    Frankly when you’ve got 500 disaffected republicans venting their anger in Londonderry it kind of puts the 10 people this lot managed to muster last night in North Antrim into perspective.

    Interesting to see the first post was by ‘Drumcree’. Wonder how he/she will take it when Portadown District enter the direct talks which they are on the verge of going into…… Might give all the nutters something else to rage against.

  • Percival


    No, not David Campbell: Bertie Campbell who was one of the movers and shakers behind the Long March rallies a few years back.

    If you actually read the DUP Manifesto (y’know the one that’s been “binned/abandoned/reneged upon, bla bla bla”) you would see that the DUP actually set out certain tests to be met by republicans before they could enter government. If republicans meet those tests then we should proceed, but not beforehand.

    The problem I have with the likes of Vance and Foster is that they are very well prepared to cry foul and accuse the DUP of all sorts, but aren’t prepared to tell us all what they would do that is so much better. So what’s it to be Balloo, isolated impotence a la 1985 or should we actually take some responsibility for directing our own future rather than leaving it in the hands of people like Peter Hain?

  • And one of those conditions was that it wouldn’t be under d’Hondt.

    An other was that “the community is convinced the IRA has been stood down”. It hasn’t. They are still issuing statements.

    The problem I have with the likes of Stalford and the rest of the people in the DUP is that, unlike Foster and Vance who have been consistent, the DUP try to stifle debate.

  • interested

    The problem with David Vance, Ivan Foster, Bertie Campbell and the rest actually is that they just aren’t honest enough to come out and state that they will never accept Sinn Fein into Government in any circumstances.

    Yes they feel betrayed by the DUP because they were voting for the DUP on the basis that they would keep SF out of Government forever….., despite the fact that this clearly was/is not DUP policy.

    I only spotted the one convicted terrorist on show last night… not sure about the other 9 pictured at the protest.

  • I can only speak for myself but I am honest enough to come out and say that I will never accept the IRA in government in any circumstances.

    D’Hondt (as the DUP told us for years) is undemocratic. There should be no place for anyone with convictions for murder in the government of a democratic country.

  • I Wonder


    You’re happy with Tony Blair as PM then?

    After all, he never acted in any way to bring about wrongful death…?

  • interested

    Fair enough – you say that SF will never be acceptable under any circumstances – that is honest and I commend you for it.

    But then, why the f**k do you care less about d’Hondt – you clearly dont want the Shinners around whether the Ministerial posts were allocated by d’Hondt or through some kind of Play your Cards Right gameshow.

    Even if d’Hondt was scrapped tomorrow youve already said you wouldnt be happy anyway so your opposition would just move on to some other issue, ad infinitum until you were just making up fairly thin excuses just to cover the fact that you wont accept SF in Government no matter what they ever do (oh wait, some people are nearly there already).

    If your issue is that you will never ever accept them SF in Government then can you at least be honest enough to admit that DUP policy has not been that SF will never be acceptable in Government.

  • Balloo


    As Hanson pointed out first of all the d’hondt mechanism is still in place.

    A total end to all paramilitary and criminal activity – still to be achieved.

    Transparent decommissioning – what happened to the photographs?

    IRA standing down – as far as I am aware the structures are still in place.

    It is obvious that the DUP have not delivered what they have promised the unionist people of N.I. It is therefore very easy to understand how uncomfortable many former supporters and members of the DUP now are.

    ‘So what’s it to be Balloo, isolated impotence a la 1985 or should we actually take some responsibility for directing our own future rather than leaving it in the hands of people like Peter Hain?’

    Its down to blackmail then…

  • Comrade Stalin


    DUP counter argument: show us the alternative.

    Isn’t it ironic. I remember the DUP press conference on the night before the Agreement was announced. PUP members crashed the meeting and yelled (from behind the cameras) “what’s your alternative ?”…

    What happened to the ‘principled’ Unionist?

    As has been said on other blogs, by David Vance – I think; the UUP sought to ‘meddle’ Irish Republicanism but the DUP are seeking to mess with Unionism. i.e. Trimble thought he could control Republicans, but failed. The DUP are seeking to sell a pup to the Unionist community and indeed to the very people who voted for their ‘no surrender’ stance.

    Vance is the man who won’t condemn the King David Hotel bombing, a bomb attack in which a number of British civil servants died. If you want principled people, I’d suggest you look elsewhere.

    Who is going to lead unionism if it ditches Paisley ? Fact of the matter is, the person who winds up as the unionist leader will be the person pressurized by the British government, and will be the person who inches closer to joint government with SF. You can’t escape it.

  • interested

    Very useful post from you – which demonstrates why the DUP are not yet in Government. There are issues to be sorted out before Government can be set up.

    Maybe you’d like to give an honest answer to the earlier question. Are Sinn Fein ever going to be acceptable for Government under any circumstances in your opinion?

    If not then clearly all the issues you raise are simply a smokescreen. At least Hanson was honest enough to admit that.

  • Iraq is a mess. I make that clear on my blog. However, death on the battle field is not murder.
    Any way, have fun. I’m off for my tea.

  • Interested

    Good to see that the defenders of freedom of speech have been busy at their work.

    The Voice for Democracy people were foaming at the mouth telling us that DUP members were not being able to question their candidates fully and how this was such a disgrace that people were being silenced and how freedom of speech was of such importance.

    Not sure how they square those facts with their removal of posts from the site simply because they are being criticised in them……… So much for freedom of speech!!

    At 16:57 the site looked like this..
    First Post

    Fifteen minutes later not only had they deleted posts criticising their motley crew, but even their own original post telling us how wonderful their press coverage had been.

    (note the panel on the left hand side which shows total number of posts – gone from 6 to 5)

    So much for freedom of speech Bertie Campbell

    So much for freedom of speech then Bertie! Must have been a long march to the computer in order to silence your critics!

  • Balloo


    I’m not a “Never, never, never, never” unionist. I want a government that will work and not die through deadlock. Sinn Fein are not fit for government at this moment in time.

    There are many issues to sort out, but why then call an election for March time? Are all these issues going to be sorted before or after? A referendum may be more fitting if the way forward is based on the SAA which is the bastard offspring of the Belfast Agreement.

  • PP

    The DUP were stupid to present their electoral victories as the road to undoing all the damage done by Trimble et al.

    However is the pain that republicans are feeling over the StAA agreement a bluff?

  • interested

    “I’m not a “Never, never, never, never” unionist. I want a government that will work and not die through deadlock. Sinn Fein are not fit for government at this moment in time.”

    Which I think you will find is actually current DUP policy. SF still have to deliver if they are to be considered fit for Government. All the Voice 4 Democracy group and others are doing at the present time is helping lift the pressure away from Sinn Fein. If you want to be part of that then fine.

    If the biggest problem you foresee in the future is deadlock then I think you’ve just pointed out at least a measure of DUP success. Frankly I’d rather have deadlock than unaccountable Ministers doing what they please. Perhaps you would prefer differently though.

    “There are many issues to sort out, but why then call an election for March time? Are all these issues going to be sorted before or after?”

    The DUP didnt call the election, the Government did. I wasnt aware of Ian Paisley having the power to set election dates. If the Government want to move the date back then I’d imagine the DUP wouldnt exactly complain.

    Whether or not SF are fit for Government by March or any other date is completely up to them. If they’ve met the conditions then all well and good – if not then we’ll just have to wait some longer. They will be sorted out when they are sorted out – lets face it, deadlines havent worked in the past, the Assembly was supposed to be suspended on Nov 24th – it wasnt. Its conditions and not the calendar which dictate these things. That is how it has been in the past and that’s how it will continue.

    “A referendum may be more fitting if the way forward is based on the SAA which is the bastard offspring of the Belfast Agreement.”

    yeah yeah yeah…. of course it is. After all it has an Assembly functioning so therefore it must be the Belfast Agreement. Some detail rather than rubbish would be useful.

  • Balloo

    The Belfast Agreement has not been scrapped – only practical changes have been made to it (SAA, para. 4; Annex A)

    “Practical” changes such as largest party as opposed to largest designation for First Minister. See link below. What a great deal!

  • Well now, having been accused of dishonesty by the redoubtable “Pervical” (Warm welcome awaiting you the next time you visit ATW, my friend) and “Interested”, perhaps I may be permitted to reply.

    What is my alternative to the Belfast Agreement/SAA? God, is that the best you little peace processors can come up with to ask.

    SIMPLE. The alternative to cutting corrupt deals with the IRA and their loyalist doppelgangers is NOT to do so, but to instead insist that they cease their barbarity because it is wrong and will not be tolerated. There is no reason for pandering to the men and women of violence in order to gain a devolved Assembly, if that be what we wish.

    I don’t. I would be quite happy with a Grand Committee at Westminster consisting entirely of NI MP’s who are gthen iven the final say over all issues relating solely to NI. I favour the abolition of the Assembly and the turning of it into a nice Supermarket – nth rate talking heads costing us tax-payers millions per annum doesn’t cut it economically or strategically. The Assembly is good for the hanger-ons, the parasites, the lobbyists, but for ordinary people….?

    Reformed Councils, with minimal powers, would be good. Who wants little Hitlers messing in our local affairs, costing us a fortune?
    We need to scrap the quangos, bin the utterly useless Commissions (less jobs for the boys, but there again, you did ask for alternatives)and start becoming responsible ourselves for how we live. Do you REALLY need the Health Promotion Agency to tell you to exercise a bit more?

    I am ALSO on record saying that Irish insurrectionists should NEVER be allowed into any form of government. Can’t you read? Unlike the spineless UUP, and the now weak-at-the-knees DUP, my position has been entirely consistent. No terrorists in Government, today, tomorrow or ever. Is that clear enough or perhaps you discern constructive ambiguity in my words?

    You see, most Countries get by without putting those in power who seek to destroy the very country that funds their salary. I’m afraid Irish Republicans have been indulged too long, and hence we read the drivel served up on this thread by the usual Slugger suspects.

    Bottom-line; Not ALL Unionists are political whores, bought off by the scent of power at Stormont and those who retain principle, such as those behind this new blog, get my congrats. The blogosphere is not quite as tame as the local MSM, and the more unionist voices who speak up and spell out DUPlicity, the better.

    Now then, have I made myself clear?

  • nancyboy

    Only just got logged in for the first time today…Good grief not Bertie Campbell…again!

    So let’s see who is lined up in the continuity unionist camp – so far the most publicly outspoken people have been – Kenny McClinton convicted killer – Gary Blair, convited killer – Cliffor Peeples convicted terrorist – Suzanne Peeples, wife of the aforesaid Clifford Peeples, convicted terrorist – Jack mcKee, serial resigner from the DUP – Ivor McConnell, son in law of David Calvert, chucked out of the DUP – oh and Ivan Foster along with the man of the hour Bertie Campbel. Isn’t it strange that every single time there is a serious political situation in the Province wing commander Bertie pops up with yet another entirely negative, thoroughly divisive campaign that sets one unionist against another while boasting a 100% failure rate in every campaign he has set up.

    Normally he manages to surround himself with people who are at least semi-literate and articulate, but boy on this occasion, his line up of backers is a real doozie. Hope this isn’t playing the man – but c’mon – bottom feers or what?

  • Rubicon

    Mick – I don’t identify typos in posts (I’m guilty of too many myself).

    I wonder if you meant “weather eye” or “weather”.

    I know the DUP are responsible for all bad things – but we’ve howling winds and snow forecast. Are the DUP that powerful?

  • darth rumsfeld

    “Donaldson used to be very keen on writing into the papers. He is strangely quiet now. Why? Because he had adopted Trimble’s policy after spending years attacking Trimble.

    He and the rest of the DUP are hypocrites.

    Posted by Hanson on Jan 18, 2007 @ 04:37 PM”

    Not true Hanson- Donaldson was always in favour of powersharing- that’s why he stayed with Trimble till the morning of Good Friday. He was opposed to the terms for SF entering the coalition, and would have preferred they weren’t in it at all. So while I don’t share his view, he can’t be accused of having changed his position, nor is he yet on Trimble’s ground. Now his present leader is of course an entirely different matter…..

  • Percival


    What if the terrorists stop being terrorists?

  • Interested, I am opposed to SF/IRA in gov because they are unrepentant terrorists. THAT is the core issue for me.

    The believe that 30 years of the gun and the bomb were justified.

  • Percival

    Oh and by the way, I never once called you dishonest – save the slurs and address the points.

  • You implied it, Percival, read your own post.

  • Percival

    No I did not imply it either. I assure you dishonesty was not in my mind at all, when I said you had no alternative and reading your post above its clear you don’t.

  • I Wonder

    DV is not dishonest, but inconsistent in the expression of his “principled” views as these are entirely conditioned by the medium in which they are communicated.

    How many people would accept a reference to black people as “grinning coons” on the BBC?

    Guess which blog carries THAT description in recent weeks?

  • Percival

    I wonder…

    You are joking, aren’t you?

  • disgusted

    Well if we simply have to add nasty racism to the list of traits associated with the people involved with V4D then its hardly a surprise.

  • Observer

    The Alternative:

    I pretty much agree with Mr. Vance – and by the way – I’ve never met the guy.

    Scrap the NI Assembly. Devolution in a UK-wide context has led to the disintegration of the Union, high-expenditure – just look at Scotland and boasting many members personal eago’s as well as creating far too many politican’s. Westminster politics is enough to deal with.

    I would support councils with more powers, in the NI context such as Planning etc in line with the rest of the UK. This also provides local democracy.

    Our 18 elected and sitting MP’s should govern NI from the NI Grand Committee, through Westminster – our National Parliament. Give them somthing to do!

    I once used to believe in devolution, but it will not work.

    The DUP have sold the Unionist people out. People voted for them in good faith. Sinn Fein had more than enough chances to prove themselves,

    People vote for Sinn Fein, but people also vote for the Lib Dems and their not in Government.

  • I Wonder


    Were there a substantial minority of the population of England and Wales which regarded itself as French, and had not their French interests not been represented in government for fifty years, I imagine there might well have been considerable unrest in that population and a parliamentary system devised to engage that minority in the processes of government to ensure that their interests were recognised.

    Certain Unionists and I am sure, a certain party in England and Wales would not regard the interests of that constituency as legitimate and would similarly wish to exclude them from government. Such conflict can be resolved either peacefully, through politics, or through violence.

    Everything I have seen indicates that Mr Vance regrets that insufficient violence was deployed here to crush the “insurrectionsts” by which defintion he means all shades of Irish nationalism and republicanism. Do you, similarly, share those views?

  • Observer

    Mr. Vance is well capable of defending himself in the comment you attribute to him individually.

    I am clear when I say, I am opposed to all violence, particularly if it is of a political nature and against a legitimate state.

    I opposed loyalist paramilitarism as much as republican violence.

    However, I would argue that loyalism became more powerful when the IRA re-newed their bloody campain in 1969. The IRA gave them reason for violence.

    I deplore any collusion that may have occured between the British Government and loyalist, as well as any republican group(s).

    However the IRA fought an illegal war against a legal state in its own right and its people. Successive Westminster Governments have weakened at the knees when it comes to dealing with IRA/Sinn Fein or indeed loyalism. Remember what Blair was reported to have said to Durkan’s SDLP ‘the trouble is, is that you don’t have guns’.

    John Major should have stuck to his policy of denying IRA/Sinn Fein a place at the negotiating table in 1996 before any act of decomissioning, symbollic or otherwise occured. This wouldn’t be the Governments response to modern Islamic terrorists. Maybe if this had happened this wouldn’t be such a mess now.

    I support a political process, but what has happened in the last ten years is dispicable. Sinn Fein have played the process to their advantage and Governments as well as Unionist politicans have given in.

    I am for a fair democratic society. Hence why I oppose D’Hondt and support fair and effective Government free of terrorists, reconstructed or otherwise.

    I would have had reservations about 1998’s deal, but supported it, like many right thinking people in the interests of peace. But Sinn Fein really made a mockery out of the process, playing Unionism and meddling with democracy.

    All I ask for is fair, stable and accountable Government, free from the shackles of D’Hondt and terrorists.

  • interested

    It seems so far that 2 main reasons for opposition have been raised: SF=terrorists and the use of d’Hondt.

    If you hold the position that SF can never be acceptable for Government under any circumstances, as many of the anti-St Andrews people seem to, then frankly no wonder you’re opposed, because you’d be opposed to any agreement and no wonder you feel let down by the DUP because you clearly didnt listen to what they were saying over the last 3 years and more.

    If you believe that SF still aren’t fit for Government then you are in line with DUP policy – they still have to prove their credentials, up front and in full before any Government will be set up. If you believe that an end to terrorism and criminality with a testing period, plus full and tested support for the police isn’t enough, allied with the removal of their structures then fankly it would seem that you’re just putting up new barriers to cover the fact that deep down you wont accept them under any circumstances.

    As for d’Hondt – If you can eventually accept SF in Government then clearly they’re going to hold some Ministerial posts – the way in which they are allocated for the time being (d’Hondt) may not be the best way to do things but it will be reviewed in the future and its not going to mean the end of the world as we know it.

    “I support a political process, but what has happened in the last ten years is dispicable. Sinn Fein have played the process to their advantage and Governments as well as Unionist politicans have given in.”

    Funny how all the anti-St Andrews people moan about how Sinn Fein have used the political process to their advantage and about how they box unionists into a corner. Then on the other hand they complain when the DUP play the Shinners at their own game, box republicanism into a corner, help bring about the biggest split within republicanism in over 20 years and actually deliver some successes for unionism.

    The level of defeatism within some sections in unionism is quite outstanding. Just because the Ulster Unionists gave in doesnt mean all unionists will. Then again it would seem that there are some within unionism who quite like defeat – its much easier to deal with to constantly have SF as a big bad bogeyman who can never be defeated. Much more comfortable that way.

  • Observer,

    Thank you for the kind words.

    No Wonder,

    You’re tiresome and I really see no need to defend myself from the slurs you make. I have made NO such comments as the one you quote, but since ATW receives as many comments per day as Slugger, and as I do not see every comment, I have no idea if that which you said appeared. Check with Mr Slugger if he has recall of every stupid comment on this site!

  • I wonder…

    Tiresome it may be to see your position revealed to those to whom you attempt to appear reasonable and in principle, opposed to violence. Feel free not to defend yourself, as your position is untenable. The phrase I quote is not a slur: readers are invited to Google the words “coon” and “tangled web” to check the authenticity.

    The word that comes to my mind is “shameful” when I see such things and am obliged to highlight their use to those who think you civilised.

  • Observer


    Regardless of the issue with SF, the d’Hondt mechanism is not democratic.

    I am no defeatist. I seek fair and stable Government for the good of all the people of Northern Ireland.

  • I’m not sure I’ev ever praised anyone on Slugger before, but Interested’s last post makes a very sound point. Here’s the tragedy: the UUP whined whenever the DUP was ‘unconstructive in opposition [ie 2nd place]’. Well, the UUP’s now soundly in 2nd place/opposition, and if it believed in being ‘constructive’ then of course it ought to have rowed in behind such signal successes as the DUP have gained. But have they? Of course not. Which is why I for one will be glad when the party folds.

  • Karl Rove,

    The problem is that the DUP “successes” are as an insubstantial as Sir Reg’s idea of leadership. The real issue here is that the UUP have proven singularly of coming up with any meaningful challenge to DUP treachery.

    I wonder,

    Thanks for trolling back to old ATW stories, including the one you managed to pull your quote from. I hadn’t seen it before as it was published by an ATW writer when I was on holidays. I think name-calling a terrorist who plants a bomb in a crowded Durban bar which kills three women and mutilates a further 69 is the least one could do. Hanging would be better, but then one must remember this is peace process land, where killers are hero-worshipped and the perverse values of insurrection gilded in the fools gold of those who cannot distinguish between right and wrong. Now “I Wonder”, be a good girl and trawl some more through MY back articles if you want to show ATW’s credentials…off you go now….

  • I wonder…

    Fair enough David.

    Next time you’re on H & M, break away from all those insular Northern ireland issues and try making a stout defence for the circumstances (such as those you outline) in which you believe it acceptable to call a black person a “coon.” See how much airtime you get. 😉

    As for being “a good girl”…

  • I Wonder,

    Glad to hear you’re looking forward to my next appearance on H&M – good for the ratings factor. Cheers.

    And Hey – if “Nigger” is good enough for Lefty saint John Lennon, and if my hero Elvis Costello can use “White Nigger” and almost get to number one, and if even comdeians at the Edinburgh fringe can use the N word – not sure why you have such a hang up with an ATW writer using similar slang.

    For what it’s worth, and I’m sure you know this, I don’t choose such terms in my commentary – apart from the EC variant, which I see as having NOTHING to do coloured people. Why us anti-terorist in government types are the White Niggers of good old Peace Process land. Now, if only I can put that to a soaring melody…!

  • I wonder…


    You need to be careful. That was a logical argument, well expressed, persuasively invoking the memory of my musical deity and you didn’t even accuse me of being “a terrorist sympathiser.”

    I’m tempted to say something like “well done, David” but that’s been said before. 🙂

  • ..AND as sincerely 😉

  • Voice 4 Democracy

    Dear all,

    I have just visited your site as I have been busy with our own.

    All I would like to clearly state is that Mr Clifford Peoples is not a member of our organization.

    It is an interesting strategy to discredit people by association however please at least get the association correct.

    Perhaps those who are making such claims should get their facts straight before making criticism.

    May I also state that it is apparent that our ‘friend’ making such statements, no matter what they say IS a member of the DUP. Maybe he could answer why he is so concerned about our campaign if he render’s us insignificant.

    Good luck with your smear campaign, we will continue to tell the truth in very question asked of us, and therefore will permit people to make their own decisions, based on the facts.


  • Grassy Knoll

    Perhaps the personal bitterness of the UUP towards the DUP (who even to this day keep a page of cartoons mocking Trimble on their website), combined with the embittered elephant-memories of all shades of Unionism towards those deemed to have betrayed the cause, has made co-operation difficult.

    Sometimes, it is easier to forgive your enemy than your friend.

    Regarding the point about Sinn Féin being forever unacceptable for power-sharing in Northern Ireland: personally I’d like to see Fianna Fail organising in NI elections, and so I wonder if The Soldiers of Destiny would be considered far enough away from “gun politics” to be palatable for power sharing?