“the Good Friday Agreement represents a significant defeat for republicanism.”

As the Belfast Telegraph predicted, one of those other republican paramilitary groups repeated their claim of responsibility for the murder of Denis Donaldson today in Londonderry. And at the same demonstration, attended by a reported 200 people, RTE notes – “Martin Galvin, a former director of the Irish/American Noraid which helped support the IRA’s campaign during the conflict, was present along with Francis Mackey from the 32 County Sovereignty Movement, which supports the Real IRA.” Btw, they weren’t the only paramilitary displays in evidence over the weekend. The Irish Times report adds.

A [32 County Sovereignty Movement] statement said: “We are constantly asked; what is your alternative? The answer depends on who is asking the question. To those who call us traitors (Martin McGuinness) we say; any alternative but yours. “To those who call us anti democratic we say; let us negotiate without preconditions. To those republicans who genuinely seek an alternative we say; let us construct one together. “We must be clear that the Good Friday Agreement represents a significant defeat for republicanism.”

Except that the Good Friday Agreement wasn’t a defeat for republicanism in itself. It was an acknowledgement of a need to reverse out of the cul-de-sac that movement had driven itself into, as well as providing the means to do so.

Even though some Sinn Féin representatives may deny it, their party president has admitted as much.

The problem has been that that reversal has been accompanied by assertions from the same movement that it was, instead, still driving forward along the same road.

And those legacy issues remain.

But then, some people are “not very interested in [poking through the embers of the last 30 years]”..

Poisonous foundations and all that..

, , , , ,

  • picador

    Latcheco,

    So you equate people trying to speak some Irish with dissidents,

    Lies

    call WB a ghetto,

    Lies

    and sympathize with the plight of the planters.

    Lies

    And you’re not a unionist how again?

    Yawn.

    Grow up.

  • latcheeco

    Comrade,
    “If you don’t tow the line there’ll be civil war” is an old unionist threat to nationalists. It’s the main terrorist threat that has existed since the founding of the state and I am against terrorism and believe in standing up to it and anyway, I don’t believe it. Comrade, its an old Paisley line.

    And your armchair in Dublin is less comfortable how? Again you’re resorting to your stock of cliches and stereotypes.

    HTB,
    I ‘m sure Picador feels humiliated that you had to jump in on his/her behalf. I didn’t think pic was doing that badly.
    I believe a Kerryman whose allegiance is to Ireland has much more right to decide what goes on in Ireland than someone whose allegiance is to a foreign country.

  • picador

    latcheco,

    Dishonesty and misrepresentation really are your style. A perfect candidate for the so-called “true republican” cause.

    Go on. Quit your slabbering and join up. You know you want to. Just don’t expect any sympathy when you get caught.

  • latcheeco

    Picador,
    Is that all you’ve got? Na na nana na? lol

  • Robbie

    The level of the above ‘commentator’ has just been revealed.

    They were ‘offered bread but deserved steak’. Even the phrases are stock-Famine schlock, only to be uttered by someone who has never set foot in the North.

    A movement that has utterly lost, with followers as brainless as the living dead. Chin up.

  • latcheeco

    Nice try Rob Roy. You haven’t been paying very close attention have you Sherlock?
    For your info that was the reply Aldernice got when he visited the Kesh and then ran home in a huff. But it works just as well on all childish namecallers

  • latcheeco

    Nice try Rob Roy. You haven’t been paying very close attention have you Sherlock?

  • Robbie

    Aldernice?

    You mean – Alderdice? Well done. You’re getting better; just put the letters together, try and fit them so they work properly. Not the sharpest knife are we.

    Keep arguing about the GFA being some beacon of victorious sentiment for Unionism. Though Bew – you won’t have heard of him, no chance in a million long years, it’s a serious historian’s name – argued ‘the Unionists have won, they just don’t know it yet’, most of them were pretty damn displeased at the time. Doubt you remember that; doubt you’ve ever read a book in your life.

  • latcheeco

    Rob roy,
    Aldernice was deliberate. Work it out on the short bus going home.
    Bew from Queens? That Bew? Bew the Unionist? Wasn’t he an advisor to Trimble? How’d that work out?

  • Robbie

    Excellent wikipedia-ing latcheeco – a real swot. Queen’s tick, Unionist tick – yes he was one of those all right! – adviser to Trimble tick. Anything else not from the internet? From a book? Further research required.

    Here endeth the lesson. You’ve learned the FAINTEST OUTLINE POSSIBLE via Wikipedia of a serious Northern Irish historian. Now quit trolling, lying, and read up further.

  • latcheeco

    So you had to look up wiki to check what is common knowledge to everybody on here. Everybody is familiar with hs punditry on the T.v and in the tele. I’m sure one or two on here even were taught by him on the left hand side of the quad going towards Agincourt. I didn’t know that was on Wiki but you apparently did. You’re starting to look silly. More fool me for arguing with someone like you.

  • Comrade Stalin

    picador, you from North Belfast ? I’m from Glandore (well, sort of). Although now I’m in Newtownabbey.

    “If you don’t tow the line there’ll be civil war” is an old unionist threat to nationalists.

    Yes it is. I don’t like the fact that the unionists threaten violence any time they feel that what is important to them may be taken away. Nonetheless, if there is a way to avoid a civil war then those of us who have an interest in maintaining peace are duty-bound to take it. That is the compromise enshrined in the GFA which the Irish people chose to take.

    You are quite entitled to believe that this compromise sucks. Thanks for sharing.

    (By the way, if it isn’t clear by now, I’m not a unionist. I don’t mind if there’s a united Ireland. I just think there are more important things.)

    It’s the main terrorist threat that has existed since the founding of the state and I am against terrorism and believe in standing up to it and anyway, I don’t believe it. Comrade, its an old Paisley line.

    The fact that the unionists might be engaging in an illegal or morally wrong act if they attempted to resist reunification is neither here nor there. The fact is that they are prepared to do so, so it makes sense to find a compromise. The compromise has now been accepted and agreed by all. You need to come to terms with that.

    The other side of the coin is that it is very clear to everyone that there won’t be any further compromise on the issue of the border. As soon as 50%+1 vote on either side of the border for reunification, there can be no stopping that process. Everyone in Ireland is happy enough with that. Everyone that is, except a few also-rans.

    And your armchair in Dublin is less comfortable how? Again you’re resorting to your stock of cliches and stereotypes.

    I don’t live in Dublin, I live in Belfast. Well, greater Belfast to be precise. I used to live in Dublin, but only for a short time.

    I believe a Kerryman whose allegiance is to Ireland has much more right to decide what goes on in Ireland than someone whose allegiance is to a foreign country.

    When you talk about “allegiance to Ireland” what does that mean ? Whatever your allegiance is, it isn’t to the wishes of the Irish people.

  • Comrade Stalin

    What’s all this about Alderdice visiting the Kesh ?

  • latcheeco

    Comrade,
    If the Irish people are allowed to vote as one for or against UI and vote against then fair enough. But the GFA wasn’t it and you know it. If you’re so sure they prefer the GFA why were they not allowed to vote on the two options.

    My allegiance isn’t to the Queen or Peter the great but thanks for asking.

    Your point is that it’s acceptable (you might call that acceptance realpolitik) for unionists to threaten violence (you qualify it with reference to their feelings to make the threat sound ok) over partition but not nationalists because then they’ll be peace wrecking swines of limited intelligence and low moral character who’ll sell us all to hell in a handbasket and nobody’s mortgage will get paid. That’s a unionist perspective. Nationalists are thus held to a separate standard. No other country in the world would put up with it (except maybe Scotland).

  • picador

    latcheco,

    Seriously, it’s all very well being brave on the Internet.

    Shut up or join up!

    Comrade Djugashvili,

    GOTWU!

  • HeadTheBall

    Latcheeco,

    Picador is well able to look after himself, I weighed in only because I thought you were being grossly unfair (apologies, BTW, again for delay – those time zones).

    “I believe a Kerryman whose allegiance is to Ireland has much more right to decide what goes on in Ireland than someone whose allegiance is to a foreign country.”

    I have no wish to be personally offensive but we have seen this debating style for years on Slugger and elsewhere and I am afraid it is a compound of sentimental tripe and circularity.

    To a unionist the UK is not a foreign country, it is his country. A unionist is just someone who believes that his particular corner of Ireland is best served, for now, by the British link. Your mission, should you accept it, is to persuade him otherwise. Equally, to which Ireland does our notional Kerryman owe his allegiance? The one that only ever existed as a united polity under the British Crown, or the one we have yet to create by working together a sight harder than heretofore?

    Don’t bother with either of those points/questions. Just consider this instead. You seem to be saying that our Kerryman has more right to decide because he agrees with you about mythic Ireland, the unionist less so because he doesn’t.

    That is a distinctly odd version of democracy.

  • Brian MacAodh

    The mythic Ireland you speak of is only mythic because of the undemocratic partition of our country.

    But what’s done is done.

  • Le Corbusier

    My allegiance isn’t to the Queen or Peter the great but thanks for asking.

    Yes, leechecco, your allegiance is obviously to a 19th-century construct of nationhood and an early 20th-century fascination with physical force.

    Thankfully those times have passed as far as the rest of the population is concerned and I just hope that the slow learners catch up soon. The Irish people have spoken, north and south: they chose peace. Get over it.

  • picador

    But what’s done is done.

    And Belfast might as well be the moon to your average Kerry person.

  • HeadTheBall

    Brian,

    Yes and yes.

    Some of my earlier posts make it clear, I hope, that I too wish that partition had never occurred, or had come about in a different manner, but it did occur and nearly a century ago at that, so, as you imply, we have a different ball game now.

  • latcheeco

    HTB,
    Hat’s off, that’s clever:) So by your standard Tyrone, Fermanagh, Armagh and Derry should have been allowed to secede from the pravince if they wanted to then? It’s not a style it’s a point of view. Because you disagree doesn’t make it less valid. Your (and Bono’s) sentimental tripe might be someone else’s patriotism.I’m not yet in the post-nationalist period thanks. I don’t want to be.Seems like Irish nationalists are the only people from whom post-nationalism is being demanded. Your idea that a country can be artifically divided up based on the wishes of a minority within it is just as strange to me as my view of democracy is to you.
    Le bustier,
    Your allegiance is to a backward semi-monarchic government whose rule in the North is maintained by the threat of violence and through a sectarian carve up of minor positions. What’s your point?
    Picador,
    So I have to be for the GFA or shut up? Really. That’s all you’ve got left? Isn’t only debating with people who agree with you a bit like talking to yourself?

  • picador

    latcheco,

    You don’t debate. You lie, you misrepresent and you slander. Then you repeat yourself again. Endless repetition does not a valid argument make. ‘Is that all you’ve got?’ one might say.

    And BTW stop claiming to speak for Irish nationalists because you plainly don’t.

    Briefly, get over yourself.

  • latcheeco

    Picador,
    Apologies for hurting your wee feelings.All meant in good fun. Remind me where you were slandered and lied to? If I have been repetitive (I don’t believe I have I prefer the word consistent) I’d much prefer that to ‘the GFA is the only show in town so shut up.” Your argument seems to be that if you disagree with the GFA ( or status quo) you’re a knuckle dragger and a spide who loved the troubles and should be shouted down. I think that’s puerile, offensive and a standard tactic often used in the past by unionists.

  • Le Corbusier

    Le bustier,

    Your allegiance is to a backward semi-monarchic government whose rule in the North is maintained by the threat of violence and through a sectarian carve up of minor positions.

    leechecco,

    I have no such allegiance.

    The North is not maintained through threat of violence and I couldn’t give a flyin’-feck if a united Ireland ever comes about. The outcomes of the GFA are far, far from ideal but they did at least represent a fairly honourable get out for both conflicting sides.

    You seem to be strongly hinting at some sort of preference for perpetual war? (I’d see a doctor if I were you about such aggressive tendencies and perhaps a quack about the status anxiety)

    Seriously, there are much more important things to worry about in life. Maybe when you grow up you will realise this.

  • picador

    Apologies for hurting your wee feelings.All meant in good fun. Remind me where you were slandered and lied to? If I have been repetitive (I don’t believe I have I prefer the word consistent) I’d much prefer that to ‘the GFA is the only show in town so shut up.” Your argument seems to be that if you disagree with the GFA ( or status quo) you’re a knuckle dragger and a spide who loved the troubles and should be shouted down. I think that’s puerile, offensive and a standard tactic often used in the past by unionists.

    You have not hurt my feelings, merely irritated me with your blatant dishonesty of which you have just provided another example.

    You clearly think accusing people of being a unionist is some kind of trump card.

    Grow up. Or troll elsewhere.

  • latcheeco

    Le Bustier
    Again a silly point that only grown-ups appreciate the GFA and if you’re against it you’re for violence. I believe the effect of partition is important and worth worrying about. But that’s just me.

  • latcheeco

    Picador,
    I think your defences are all essentially unionist. Sorry!

  • Pete Baker

    picador

    “You clearly think accusing people of being a unionist is some kind of trump card.”

    You’d be surprised at how common a tactic that is.. [comment 14]

    “Good to see the unionist contingent taking an interest in far off Kerry.”

  • Le Corbusier

    leechecco,

    Good night, and good luck.

  • latcheeco

    Le bustier,
    Bonsoir, et bonne chance a vous aussi

  • picador

    Pete,

    I am sorry if I misrepresented you as a unionist. It’s just that, I genuinely believed that you were.

    And I do believe that by implicitly likening by debating style to latcheco’s you are guilty of seriously misrepresenting me. However I will allow others to be the judge of that.

    Latcheco,

    According to your logic the vast majority of the Irish people are now unionists. That is how obnoxious your attitude is. As you called me a unionist (again!) I feel able to say – without using slander or misrepresentation – that you, sir, are a fascist.

  • Piobaire Breac

    Another good debate involving Irish language, although the tribal politics stuff is disappointing although sadly expected.

    Stalin my comrade, there are many things to be thankful for in Irish-medium schools, although obviously no school is perfect.
    Recent DE results both north and south show that Irish schools are doing better in English than English only schools….Do you know why?. Could it be that they value language, bilingualism and multiculturalism!. Now here is a question for people who may have reservations…Should you not send your children to Irish-medium schools to make sure they get the highest standards of English? Thats what research is telling us. Food for thought.

  • Pete Baker

    picador

    Don’t sweat it. I’ve had much worse on Slugger.

    But I’m not likening your debating style to latcehoo’s.

    And it wouldn’t matter if I was a unionist.

    Your comment then would still be just another, admittedly lesser, example of one of those legacy issues to be faced by those who like to argue that when they say it’s right it is, and when they say it’s wrong then it’s wrong.

  • Pete Baker

    Piobaire Breac

    “Another good debate involving Irish language..”

    Except that’s not the actual topic..

  • latcheeco

    Picador,
    It is of course logically arguable that if you’ve consented to the union (albeit under duress) and even in the short term, then you are defacto a unionist. I’m not the first person to suggest this as hurtful and unpopular as it may be. But you went further than that. You offensively tried to caricature nationalist opponents of the GFA in the same way unionists used to caricature republicans (use of imperfect Irish,smug, offensive remarks on WB, internet warriors etc).Then you suddenly came over all sensitive. As PB’s post above shows, you can give but not take. Getting into a debate with you on the nature of fascism would be a whole other thread and you probably have to study for your upcoming exams.

  • picador

    Pete,

    What in God’s holy name are you blathering about?

    The comment I left on that other thread was very much tongue in cheek. I know what you generally blog about and it’s not rural matters in the territory formerly known as Saorstát Éireann.

    And no, I don’t believe that unionists are an inferior ‘breed’ as my earlier comments on the thread should demonstrate.

  • picador

    You offensively tried to caricature nationalist opponents of the GFA in the same way unionists used to caricature republicans (use of imperfect Irish,smug, offensive remarks on WB, internet warriors etc).

    Again this is nothing but lies and misrepresentation which can be shown by a re-examination of the thread – not that anyone will be inclined to bother at this stage.

    And you are an internet warrior. I stand by that.

  • picador

    latcheco,

    You are the biggest victim on the planet. God help you. I feel sorry for you. I am sorry that I persecuted you.

    Oíche mhaith

  • latcheeco

    And that famous debating style would of course be “shut up, get off the internet, and join up”
    Pete,
    Dyslexia, typing error, or slight from moderator?

  • latcheeco

    Slan mucker,
    You’re good value :)Sleep well, no hard feelings.

  • picador

    Ok, one last bite as the irony is too rich

    As PB’s post above shows, you can give but not take.

    The hated unionist comes to your aid. Ha, ha.

    Can’t stoop much lower than that, eh 😉

  • latcheeco

    Pic,
    Strange bedfellows indeed. Who’d have thought it? You must be vindicated then:) I might disagree with Peader bocht but you have to respect the consistency of his politics. He wouldn’t sell his convictions down the river.
    Oiche maith

  • picador

    Strange bedfellows indeed…He wouldn’t sell his convictions down the river.

    Whoops he just did!

    A very cheap intervention.

    Sin é

  • Dave

    “And that famous debating style would of course be “shut up, get off the internet, and join up” – latcheeco

    Plus, the old reliables, “Everybody, ignore his argument because I call him a troll” and “Please shut up because I find your argument to be offensive.”

    They are constitutional unionists but cultural nationalists. They have formally renounced their right to self-determination as members of the Irish nation, accepting that right to self-determination that constitutionally applies to them is Northern Irish (a nation wherein sovereignty over its state resides with the UK parliament). They now have a cultural aspiration to reside within an Irish nation-state rather than a right. If, of course, those who would rather remain within the UK continue to exercise their legitimised veto to that effect, then they “will just have to be tolerant of that.” The right to self-determination now resides legitimately with the Northern Irish nation, and those who formerly claimed that the right lay with the Irish nation have now accepted that they have an aspiration and not a right.

    Constitutional law is not the relevance that they were led to believe it is – a deception that was required in order to get them to sign up to the legitimacy of British rule. Declaring that you have no right to an Irish nation-state means that you now have to convince others that it is in their best interests to live in one. Aspirations, unlike rights, do not impose any moral obligation on others. They haven’t even made a start on convincing those who are now legitimised as members of the British nation (rather than formerly a tradition within the Irish nation) why it is their best interest to live within an Irish nation-state – probably because those who are British will always rightfully conclude that it is in their best interests to remain within the UK. Instead, their game plan is try to normalise British rule and then try to extend British rule into the south by extending the GFA into it.

    Irish unity then becomes, not the attainment of an Irish nation-state for those who are now constitutionally unionist, but rather the dismantlement of the Irish nation-state and its replacement with a replica of Northern Ireland. So, although they have now moved to being constitutional unionists, that is not the limit of where the British state intends to shift them. They are to become cultural unionists in due course.

  • Dave

    Typo: “Constitutional law is not the [b]ir[/b]relevance that they were led to believe it is…”

  • latcheeco

    Careful Dave,
    Your dangerous. They’ll label you a terrorist apologist and call you an internet warrior if you haven’t drunk the koolaid 🙂

  • latcheeco

    Oops! Typo:you’re dangerous

  • latcheeco

    But then again:
    “Much madness is divinest sense
    To a discerning eye;
    Much sense the starkest madness.
    ‘T is the majority
    In this, as all, prevails.
    Assent and you are sane;
    Demur,–you’re straightway dangerous,
    And handled with a chain.”

  • picador

    Vast majority of Irish people now unionist traitors – Dave & latcheeco.

    I’ve heard it all now!

    Dissident republicans don’t do irony but if they did, they probably wouldn’t be dissident republicans.

  • Dave

    Latch, I’d only be dangerous if the people determined anything around here. Anyway, they are constitutional unionists, so that is a fact (unwelcome when subterfuge, self-deception and lies are in style). The misnomer is constitutional nationalist when it is used to mean Irish nationalists in NI. That would depend on whose constitution they are upholding, wouldn’t it? If they are upholding the British constitution, then they are not Irish nationalists. The constitution they are upholding, and operating in accordance with under the Northern Ireland Act 1998, declares that British sovereignty is legitimate, restating the Unionist Veto as it has exercised since partition. It is one thing to operate within a political system under protest, declaring that system to be illegitimate (as nationalist politicians did in NI before signing the GFA), but it is quite a different matter to declare it to be legitimate. So, as the two tribes have both signed up to the same constitution, they’re both constitutional unionists.

  • latcheeco

    Picador,
    You’re up late? Trouble sleeping?
    The logic is that if you assent and agree to a unionist veto then de facto you’re unionist. It’s arguable Pic. Now go back to bed before your muttering at the computer wakes everybody.

  • picador

    How long will it be until we hear ‘vast majority of Irish people now legitimate targets’?

    These people are absolute fanatics. Of that I am no longer in any doubt.

  • picador

    L,

    Squealing child nearby. What’s your excuse? Afraid you’ll miss a united Ireland if you fall asleep?

    The logic is that if you assent and agree to a unionist veto then de facto you’re unionist.

    As I’m sure you’re aware it’s 50% + 1, but no matter.

    ‘Vast majority of Irish people now unionist traitors’ says die-hard fanatic.

    Go and howl at the moon.

  • latcheeco

    Pic,
    So once again all you’ve got is the repetition of the mantra you’ve been taught “if you don’t agree with the GFA your a crazy fanatic who wants to kill people”
    Oiche mhaith

  • picador

    L

    ‘All I’ve got’ is that you and your overly verbose fellow fanatic have exposed yourselves for the self-righteous extremists that you really are.

    By declaring that the majority of the Irish people are unionists – and thereby traitors loyal to a foreign country – you remind me of Dr Ayman al-Zahwari when he declared anyone opposed to Salafist Islam to be apostate and thereby liable to be slaughtered – i.e. arrogant in the extreme.

    Secondly ‘I have got’ the blogger to once again reveal his pettiness towards anyone who he perceives as espousing a pro-GFA republican viewpoint – to the extent of intervening on the side of ‘republican’ fanatics.

    As you are quite obviously suffering from the effects of lasting indoctrination I will leave you to wallow in quasi-religious certainty and give others a chance to comment.

    It has been an experience and I am sure that you will now have the final word.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Comrade,
    If the Irish people are allowed to vote as one for or against UI and vote against then fair enough. But the GFA wasn’t it and you know it. If you’re so sure they prefer the GFA why were they not allowed to vote on the two options.

    Everybody knows that the GFA was not a poll on the border. I haven’t once pretended that it was. I think you are confusing the subtleties here.

    As I explained above, a 32-county vote on partition would lead to a civil war. A civil war is a bad thing. Lots of people would die. We’ve avoided that by everyone agreeing to a compromise. The compromise is that we won’t have a 32-county border poll. Instead we’ll have dual consent between the two states on this island.

    It’s completely pointless arguing about the Irish people being “denied” a 32 county border poll. The GFA referendum means that the Irish people have willingly compromised on the issue of a 32-county poll as part of their support for efforts to try to find a peaceful solution.

    My allegiance isn’t to the Queen or Peter the great but thanks for asking.

    You’re the one who brought allegience up, and now you’re dodging my question.

    Your point is that it’s acceptable (you might call that acceptance realpolitik) for unionists to threaten violence (you qualify it with reference to their feelings to make the threat sound ok) over partition but not nationalists because then they’ll be peace wrecking swines of limited intelligence and low moral character who’ll sell us all to hell in a handbasket and nobody’s mortgage will get paid.

    That is the definition of “acceptable” that people voted on in the GFA. Partition is a reality.

    My personal view (and this part is not reflected in the GFA) is that partition was a symptom, not a cause, of the division in the Irish people. Getting rid of partition will not get rid of the division.

    That’s a unionist perspective.

    Then everyone in Ireland is a unionist ? I don’t think that’s true.

    Nationalists are thus held to a separate standard. No other country in the world would put up with it (except maybe Scotland).

    Yes, because the alternative is to put up with a civil war.

  • Comrade Stalin

    latcheco:

    It is of course logically arguable that if you’ve consented to the union (albeit under duress) and even in the short term, then you are defacto a unionist.

    Earlier you accused me of deploying the “if you’re not for us, you’re against us” argument. Isn’t that what you’re doing here, by essentially arguing that anyone who doesn’t agitate against the union is a unionist ?

    Anyway, you’re wrong. A unionist is a person who is ideologically (either through conviction or tradition) committed to the union.

    In other words, a person who can foresee a time when a united Ireland might be a good thing – is not a unionist. A person who thinks that the union is a terrible thing, but will go along with it for the time being for the sake of peace and quiet – is also not a unionist. They aren’t unionists because they aren’t committed to the union. Of course, they may not be entitled to call themselves republicans – that’s a different matter. But they’re not unionists.

    Your definition essentially means that everyone in Ireland is a unionist because they have chosen to accept, rather than agitate against, the union. This is nonsensical.

    And I think I already said quite clearly that there is nothing wrong with being opposed to the GFA. I have no problem with that. I do not believe that everyone who opposes the GFA supports the dissidents. However, it is clear in your case that you favour some kind of civil war, not because you oppose the GFA, but because you have said yourself that you believe that it’s more important to “stand up” to the loyalists than take the peaceful option which, necessarily, implies that the men who threaten violence are getting away with it. Have I got you right ?

  • Píobaire Breac

    Pete baker or is the Peat baker or Turf burner. If you actually read some of this stuff you would see that stuff in Irish included… I never said exclusively on Irish but if you read the earlier stuff it is in here. Anyway. Be good and stay awake
    P

  • latcheeco

    Morning Comrade,
    I said it is arguable that accepting the union made you a unionist if you voted for it. Administering it even more so. You disagree because you voted for it. Fair enough

    I said clearly previously that I don’t believe in the civil war myth because I think it’s the tactic of a bully.Remember when I said it was an old Paisley tactic after you brought the spectre up. I think it’s so clearly contrary to the unionist interest that it’s a non-runner. What would be the goal, repartition? I don’t think Unionists are stupid. That’s my opinion and I don’t believe that means, as you entusiastically claim, that I want civil war. You turned “I don’t believe in the civil war myth” to “you want civil war.” Your suggestion that I’m crying out for one against MI5’s alphabet gangs is puerile. I believe doomsday is a myth that should have been challenged.You suggest the GFA or war are the only options for nationalists and that if you don’t go with one then you’re by default threatening the other. I don’t buy it.
    Off the top of my head for example one option could be that London could give a firm withdrawal date that was long enough away (say 2050/2060)that it didn’t scare anybody, soundly reasoned on demographics, and which would give everybody time to acclimatize, offering unionists an excellent deal in return for their percieved loss(as a nationalist I think they’ll actually be gaining) while at the same time disarming any arguments for violence (however tenuous). That would be much more practical than the nebulous 50+1 which could happen in ten years for all anybody knows, and which nobody is prepared for, and is much more likely to cause panic given the GFA’s sectarian themmuns v. usuns horserace setup which is even now being propagated by self-interested parties.

    Almost everyone believes unificatiion is going to happen eventually anyway so why bullshit around in neverneverland? Why not just bite the bullet (no pun intended) and start preparing people decades before. I appreciate that’s offensive to unionists but I’m a nationalist and think it’s reasonable. My point was that something like this wasn’t, I think, unattainable for nats. given the support and moral force of half the north-east of the country and practically all of the rest and (if you believe it) London’s much vaunted desire to get out. But amid all the fanfair and celebrity, negotiations were allowed to get sidelined into irrelevant nonsense about guns buried in bogs and how many seats the Women’s Coalition should have, which is why tiny cracks are appearing now. That doesn’t mean I’m calling for jihad as some comdeians repetitively suggest.