“The pro union community can be assured of the level of contact and co-operation that exists”

“There was a range of topics discussed that looked at the present, and the future and the long term prospects for the pro union people of Northern Ireland.” The words of Danny Kennedy who has broken his party’s silence on the weekend meeting with Conservatives and the DUP in England. Mr Kennedy was accompanied by David Campbell, Mark Cosgrove and Tom Elliott. Peter Robinson, Sammy Wilson and Nigel Dodds represented the DUP.Mr Kennedy added:

“It remains to be seen if these discussions will be carried forward but I think most people from the pro union community can be assured and can welcome the level of contact and co-operation that exists.”

Asked whether agreed candidates were discussed for Fermanagh South Tyrone and South Belfast Mr Kennedy was reticent to expand:

He said “I am not going to discuss the talks in any detail. They were private discussions. They were useful to that extent.”

The Conservatives are rejecting any suggestion that the notion of ‘ a hung parliament’ was in their thinking in talking to both of the large unionist blocks.

  • BryanS

    seems reasonable to me.

  • Paul

    Eamonn you have posted this for discussion it seems both parties meet quite a lot on a wide range of issues me thinks you are stiring the pot and looking for something that isnt there.Hmmmm naughty naugty

  • Jimmy_Sands

    Anything that helps link the Robinsons to Cameron has got to be good.

  • someone

    As I posted in Brian Walker’s related thread:

    =============
    Given the profound dislike that UUP and CP members have for the DUP this all seems to me like just so much sh*t stirring by Eamonn Mallie. And nationally can you imagine the damage any association with the DUP would inflict on Cameron?

    So not going to work locally, not going to work nationally, and the whole thing based solely on Mallie’s interpretation of some very sparsely worded statements… Methinks Mr Mallie is being used by his DUP sources to generate some distractions.
    Posted by someone on Jan 20, 2010 @ 03:27 PM
    =============

  • Paul

    Well I didn’t think it was even worth posting the thread its clear to me eamonn mallie is stiring the pot.

  • Garza

    Someone, correct. Whats left of the UUP vote would never vote for the DUP and their brand of unionism, and hate them with a passion.

    I hope its just talks about parliament after the elections.

  • Paul

    hope its just talks about parliament after the elections.
    Posted by Garza on Jan 20, 2010 @ 03:44 PM

    I think that’s all it was garza there will be 18 CU candidates its Mr Mallie stiring with his big spoon.lol lol

  • someone

    Garza,

    As the BBC report:
    A senior Conservative spokesman said the discussions were focused on the current difficulties at Stormont.

    The spokesman said: “So far as the Westminster election is concerned, the only deal is the current deal between the Conservatives and the Ulster Unionists.

    “We will be putting up 18 Conservative and Unionist candidates at the next election,” he said.

    All CU voters can rest easy – this is just an attempt to destablise us by feeding disinformation to journalists who are not being critical enough of their sources before reporting.

    As Mr Cameron wisely opined “Too many tweets makes a tw*t”

  • Marcionite

    I don’t any association with the DUP would harm the Tories nationally, most people in England wouldn’t know who the DUP are let alone be able to place NI on a map. There are precedents for such arrangements in Europe. In Germany, the national CDU does not operate in Bavaria ,rather, the CSU operates there but both link up in the Bundestag as one party but locally in Bavaria (curiously also a backward socially conservative inward looking state just like NI), the CSU are v right wing and do not share the progressiveness if the national CDU. This does not ever seem to harm the CDU nationally. One can see an analogue here beteeen the Tories and UCUNF/DUP acting as one bloc in Westminster.

  • Panic, these ones like it up em.

    I hope the Tories are going to rule for all of the people of the UK.

    Mind you Maggie Thatcher promised that and kind of got sectional in practice though.

  • O-REP

    Hate to don the colours of Captain Obvious, but the absolute most this sort of thing is going to amount to is electoral pacts between the UUs and the DUs, and the odd horse trading arrangements with the Tories in the Conservative parliament that seems waiting to happen. The Unionist unity razzmatazz won’t happen.

  • someone

    Marcionite,

    You can be sure that the other main UK parties would be very quick at informing the electorate exactly who the DUP are if any hint of a deal were to appear. Conservatives have nothing to gain either nationally or locally from the DUP.

  • Marcionite

    I don’t think enlightening mr and mrs nigel brit will make a blind bit of difference. Besides, labour occupies a bit if a glass house as far as the dup are concerned so I doubt they would even want to throw stones.

    The more shinners are returned, the fewer de facto seats are needed to form a working Westminster majority (assuming they keep abstentionism as a policy) if I were a Tory, any DUP/UCUNF/SF gain is a victory. The only flies in the ointment would be the SDLP but I can’t see them holding South Belfast.

    Does anyone know if Eddie McGrady intends to fight again? If not, South Downs a gain for SF (Conor Murphy being one if the more able and articulate shinners about. Joe O’Dowd being the other, I digress)

  • Jimmy_Sands

    I think Nigel Brit has at least heard of Paisley and doesn’t like him.

  • Cynic2

    Don’t disregard Mallie’s report. This is potentially a very significant development – that’s why SF have been so quiet on it all day. Read between the lines. The talks have gone on for several days through a series of stages. A major unionist realignment is long overdue.

  • Mr. J.

    Marcionite,

    Very illuminating example of how a CU/DUP alignment would work in Westminster and be beneficial, my thanks.

    I still don’t quite see how such a pact would work at a local level? What benefits would it bring the DUP? Would they still be at each others throats in the Assembly?

    If so, I don’t see how any proposed pro-union coalition in Westminster could last.

    I’m not picking holes, just wondering.

  • Cynic2

    ” Would they still be at each others throats in the Assembly”

    …. depends if it goes to a full merger. reality is there are few policy differences between them or between them and the Shinners for that matter …..

  • Marcionite

    Mr J, CU are in Germany, not the UK. I refer you to my use of the word “analogue” it’s under “A” in the that big word book.

    The DUP could get junior ministries in Whitehall or other such spoils. Why would they do it? I think they realise the union is in real peril actually. Scotland IMHO is only two decades away at most from entering it’s own song into the Eurovision and the writing is truly on the union wall- ands it’s in green ink.

    Since many unionist mps (not all) are right wing, v little of a Tory programme would b hard to support. Since people in NI don’t vote according to economic policies, anything the Tories would do would not hurt DUP/UNCUNF one iota.

  • Marcionite

    My grandfather who was an avid republican predicted the Tory and UUP linkup and even warned unionists in the 1970s about it. Yes, everytime he saw groups if unionist councillors together he would yell “UCUNF” at them.
    At least that’s what I think he yelled.

  • Mr. J.

    Marcionite,

    CU – Conservative Unionists, I was referring to the UCUNF, but was in a hurry. Any more than three letters and I lose interest, that’s what Northern Irish politics does to a boy. Apologies, I’ll be more precise in future.

    I also thank you for your concern regarding my reading comprehension, but I am familiar with the term ‘analogue’.

    I suspect you may have misjudged my tone.

    As I said, I’m not trying to pick holes in the argument, but if you are of the opinion that the DUP consider the union to be in jeopardy, how would junior ministries in Whitehall help them? Would they not want to see local benefits that could help strengthen the union? Benefits that, for reasons already pointed out, the Conservative government would not be in a position to offer?

    Again, not picking holes, simply trying to get a better understanding of things.

  • I don’t believe Cameron can be saddled with the DUP. But any discussion on a UU DUP pact to select a first minister in the event of SF topping the Poll would need Conservative participation now, and even then mightn’t work.

    Look to the danger of the institutions crashing through SF winning the right to nominate a first minister and no unionist being willing to deputise. Then ask what Unionists can do to prevent that. By the letter of the law they need to bring back a party larger than SF in the next assembly. But perhaps they can achieve the same result with a pact before the election, though I’d guess it would be open to legal challenge.

  • tacapall

    When the deal is done and the Torys (If they do) get power and its not a hung parliament, it will be a case of “Tally ho boys off for a game of polo, Jeeves show the gentlemen out, the back door please and keep an eye on the silverware, you know those pesky Irish, common lot. perfidious albion, the Tories have never been the friend of Unionism when it came to Ireland, but once again Unionism will learn the hard way.

  • Chuck Loyola

    Bring back Fianna Fáil

  • Reader

    tacapall: …but once again Unionism will learn the hard way.
    Thanks, we’re always on the lookout for generous and supportive advice from republicans – we know you have the best interests of unionists at heart.
    No – wait…

  • tacapall

    Thanks, we’re always on the lookout for generous and supportive advice from republicans – we know you have the best interests of unionists at heart.

    No – wait…
    Posted by Reader on Jan 20, 2010 @ 06:10 PM

    Okay then here you go teach you a little history,

    http://www.bl.uk/learning/langlit/sounds/find-out-more/northern-ireland/

    The Plantation of Ulster that began in 1609 was a planned process of settlement aimed at preventing further rebellion among the population in the north of Ireland. This part of the island was at that time virtually exclusively Gaelic-speaking and had shown the greatest resistance to English colonisation. From the early seventeenth century onwards, Irish lands were confiscated and given to British settlers — or ‘planters’ — who arrived in increasing numbers, bringing the English Language with them. Large numbers of settlers came from southwest Scotland and thus spoke a Scots dialect, while the remaining settlers came predominantly from the north and Midlands of England. By 1830, for instance, Londonderry had a population that was 25% Scots, 25% English and 50% Irish.

    Well can Unionism embrace “Facts” or would you rather stay swimming around in your little pond, wake up to the twentieth century, the horse and cart has been replaced by the automobile, mankind is exploring the stars,

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire

    Political boundaries drawn by the British did not always reflect homogeneous ethnicities or religions, contributing to conflicts in Kashmir, Palestine, Sudan, Nigeria and Sri Lanka. The British Empire was also responsible for large migrations of peoples. Millions left the British Isles, with the founding settler populations of the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand coming mainly from Britain and Ireland. Tensions remain between the white settler populations of these countries and their indigenous minorities, and between settler minorities and indigenous majorities in South Africa and Zimbabwe. British settlement of Ireland has left its mark in the form of divided Catholic and Protestant communities in Northern Ireland.

    Its not like Irelands problems are unique its all happened before as the facts above show, the common denominator in the conflicts, is Britain. Wake up fellow countrymen and realise where your future lies.

  • paul kielty

    tacapall,

    Sad, but an accurate description of, not just tory, but nearly all shades of british parliamentary attitute to all people this side of the water.
    A couple of months before xmas, I was watching BBC’s live coverage of westminister. It was n.Ireland questions. The place was totally empty. As time drew near, say 20-25minutes, before Gordon Brown’s slot, the british MP’s started to arrive in increasing numbers. I think it was Sammy Wilson, who found it increasingly difficult to be heard above the din of chuckling and laughing, and was being totally ignored. Last to speak, I think, was Iris Robinson. At this stage it was very hard to make out anything she was saying at all. Some members were talking and laughing only feet from her. She sat down, the speaker announced PMQ’s, and the cheer went up!
    It was and is evident to anyone, it that when it comes to the Irish of all shades, they don’t give a toss. It is a charade. It must have felt absolutely humiliating for Sammy and Co!

    The house-trained Irish!!

  • danielmoran

    I’m sure, Paul, that sammy must have been hoping no ‘taigs’ were watching. that really eats at DUP knuckledraggers, that nationalists might get any laughs out of unionists being ignored by british people.

  • Cynic2

    Ah yes Tacapall, its all the fault of the Brits. You forgot about them starting WW II as well when they declared war on that nice Mr Hitler because he wouldnt give into their demands.

    But forgive me, aren’t you perhaps a little selective in the memory department on some of the historical issues . It does sometimes come from reading Wikipedia articles which can be written by a 15 year old in Seattle working on a school project. So lets have a look at a couple of your points.

    First there’s all that colonising they did. Shocking. Why, they started up America and Candaa and New Zealand and Australia. So presumably you impose some mass clan guilt too on the Irish who provided perhaps the largest group of settlers for at least 3 out of those 4 countries. Or was it that the Brits made them settle there and eliminate the native peoples. Forced them into it? Made them do it. But of course as the Most Oppressed People Ever they cannot possibly be at fault. Oh no.

    Then its also strange you dont mention the Spanish and Portugese in South America and Central America. The clue is that countries there tend to speak Spanish and Portuguese. Now they did things far more unspeakable than anything the Brits got up to but of course that was all done in the name of the True God and Holy Mother Church . And of course there was the Spanish Inquisition in Europe and Bloody Mary burning all those Protestant dissenters in England. So do we assume that you are OK with that because it was divinely inspired and are not just taking a racist position on the British

  • Cynic2

    Paul

    Almost as warm a welcome as SF get in Dail Eireann

  • Marcionite

    Mr J , I misinterpreted your use of CU and I apologise for my insinuations about your reading ability.

    To answer your points, do you reallythink our local mos gave evolved enough to take their first steps out if the swamp and onto the dry dull land of normal nonsectarian politics? One can see the very strain and stress the poor things suffer in Stormont pretending to be concerned about education and economic issues

    Perhaps the TUV could make merry with failed Tory policies but in the short term, giving our local bumpkins some Westminster goodies would be as ameliorating to them as giving Fr Dougal that elusive pork chop during his trip to the Bigger Island

  • danielmoran

    Malachi… msg 21. I would guess that most Nationalist voters are giving their votes to SF, not for that party’s own sake, but knowing that Unionists wouldn’t risk serving as deputy to Marty, and in that case nats will prevent unionists from being in power here anymore.
    At the St Anderews agreement results coming out in ’07, the DUP saw that they had an eight seat moajority, and conveniently forgot that they let their voters cast their votes assuming DUP wouldn’t get into bed with shinners,and it was too late to take thoise votes back. [DUP could pay dearly in the next election for that swindle. But it wasn’t only the DUP who misused their votes, given by nats in the belief SF would never let DUP rule effectively as in the old days.SF lost support while in stormont. I think they’ve got the message from nats now. Stormont won’t see another day in action after the assembly elkection yields it’s results.

  • paul kielty

    Cynic2,
    To say that the Irish were the largest group of settlers in 3 out of 4 of the above countries is way of the mark. Its incorrect.

    Cynic2,
    ‘Almost as warm as SF get in Dail Eireann’.

    Lol…Fair play, your not far of the mark there!!

    I suppose the difference is that if partition was ended tomorrow and elections held for the new Dail, SF would be a major player and therefore would be impossible to ignore.
    Paradoxically, the same would apply to unionists, whom would wield electoral power year in year out. Potential power and influence, which they can only dream about in westminister. A scenario which will never occur in the UK at any time in the future!

  • tacapall

    So do we assume that you are OK with that because it was divinely inspired and are not just taking a racist position on the British
    Posted by Cynic2 on Jan 20, 2010 @ 06:41 PM

    First of all “NO” Im agnostic and I support no political party I dont vote and never have, but Im Republican minded, and not “drive them into the sea” variety, I dont agree with geezers with pointy hats burning anyone at the stake just like your own witchfinder general geezers, As for the Irish being the “Irish who provided perhaps the largest group of settlers for at least 3 out of those 4 countries” You forgot to mention that the Majority of them were forcibly placed there by the English, as for America, well are you really proud of that, the British have taught them well in the art of murder and oppression in countries where they dont belong. The Australian government has at least started to undo the wrongs that were perpetrated against the native aborigines, maybe you could ask them to teach you a few of them. And as for starting world war two, you would be better off asking The British Royal Family about that.

  • Marcionite

    Does anyone really know for sure that unionists wouldn’t serve under a nationalist FM? I keep hearing this and it’s becoming something of a “received wisdom” that happens not to be based on truth. What possible grounds could unionists have under the GFA/St Andrews agreement fir them to refuse to serve?

    And yes, the Brits were responsible fir WW2. They didn’t really need to declare war just because Poland was invaded. Churchill was deemed “that warmonger” by Lord Halifax. And dint b under the illusion that WW2 was fought bybthe allies to save the Jews, their full plight wasn’t known til after the war ended. If holocausts were a reason to start wars, then what about Stalin’s and Mau’s and Pol Pots exesses? No world war then let me tell you

    I’m not saying the Uk was wrong to start WW2, in fact I’m glad they did but they did start it

    wasn’t the Irish famine a holocaust? Even Isaac Butt changed to nationalism at the horror of what was done in the name of the union jacksy. Unionists, we will not sneer if u change tack and join us. U r our lost brothers please awaken from your imperial dreams and slumbrs and rise and shine to the sun of the republic. Don’t be scared of republics, the USA, Germany, France are republics and theybfont bite

  • Rory Carr

    “They were private discussions.” – Danny Kennedy

    Indeed. The very idea of the public seeking to know the nature of any discussions in which those, either seeking or already holding, public office might be involved is so…so…so…well, really…how dare they? How very dare they?

  • Driftwood

    paul kielty
    Your point about influence in the Dail was made in the letter bottom right of this article in ‘Fortnight’ several years ago:(apologise for another hyper link)

    http://www.jstor.org/pss/25560969

    And indeed Dennis Kennedy (whatever happened to…)od The Cadogan Group (again, whatever happened to…)makes some points that show there is nothing new under the sun here.

  • DisgustedinDERRY

    Cynic2

    You write: “Or was it that the Brits made them settle there…”

    British policies in Ireland such as the ‘corn laws’ and ‘Laissez faire’ as well as the ‘Irish poor law act of 1838’ and ‘The Gregory clause’ forced Irish people to emigrate to countries such as America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. That is historical fact and can not be denied by apologist of oppression such as yourself.

    On the topic of the meetings at the weekend, the key phrase is ‘pro union community’ and the fact that these elected representatives have now stepped back 50 years. When an elected representative takes office, they are charged with representing their whole constituent, not just the voters who put them in office. It is for this reason that our statelet was thrust into conflict 40 years ago. Partisan politics have no place in a so called democracy, especially not one such as ours that has suffered so much at the hands of unionism, Irish or English.

  • paul kielty

    Marcionite,

    Good point about a nationalist/republican FM!
    How could a unionist refuse to serve under(its really side by side) a FM,without looking extremely undemocratic and hate-filled to the rest of UK/Ireland, and the world?

  • The (Conservative) spokesman said: “So far as the Westminster election is concerned, the only deal is the current deal between the Conservatives and the Ulster Unionists.

    “We will be putting up 18 Conservative and Unionist candidates at the next election,” he said.”

    Unless the sane(r) wing of the DUP are asking to be amalgamated into the Conservative Party (which is not *completely* beyond the realms of possibility) that would appear to be that on the question of pacts for Westminster. Funnily enough a rather relevant comment somehow omitted in his excitement by Mr Mallie.

  • Reader

    Rory Carr: Indeed. The very idea of the public seeking to know the nature of any discussions in which those, either seeking or already holding, public office might be involved is so…so…so…well, really…how dare they? How very dare they?
    Should all political parties publish the records of all of their meetings? And is there any party you would like to identify as having set a good example?
    DisgustedinDerry: On the topic of the meetings at the weekend, the key phrase is ‘pro union community’ and the fact that these elected representatives have now stepped back 50 years.
    So – have you never heard SF talking about the ‘nationalist community’?

  • paul kielty

    Driftwood’

    Cheers.

  • DisgustedinDERRY

    Reader

    No response to the issue of murderous intent??

    Your an idiot as I have proven.

  • tacapall

    Derry, ffs, dont be reminding them of, corn laws, Irish poor law act, and the Gregory clause, they will check to see if they are still in the statute books and see if they could enact them, as for Laissez faire they could ask Peter and Iris about that Im sure they support that. When the “Blue Bloods” get into power the Unionist are going to be taught a harsh lesson in politics, they are mere “cannon fodder” in the Tory battle for power, whats the very most they could give them, Voluntary Coalition, a return to Unionist majority rule, the only way Unionists get that is if they invent a time machine, are they going to rule on their own for theres not a chance the Shinners or the SDLP are EVER going for that.

  • Panic, these ones like it up em.

    Well I am a plain speaking man and

    I do not trust politicians

    But I reserve my very best distrust for Tory

    politicians.

  • Cletus The Slack Jawed Yokel

    Im glad that the Tories have clarified things, the flapping on here last night was way way too premature, occasionally ridiculous and really gave away what a myopic bunch we are here.

    AS I mentioned then and repeat now, yes the Tories have one eye on parliamentary arthimetic but the Tories have been made very aware of the progress of the latest devolution talks by the NI Secretary himself and his mandarins. They are involved in this one, particularly about ensuring a maximum sell of P&J devolution to the unionist community. There’s also a recognition that they are likely to be the next government.

    Here’s the odd thing though…look at the people the DUP sent and look at who the UUP sent. Would you say that the DUP team looked a bit more heavyweight? Did the UUP hierarchy have other plans that they couldnt change?

    The reality is rather more parochial. Sir Reg and friends I suspect was up for some politicking on P&J until Cameron suggested he should respond to the DUP overtures. Maybe some in the UUP didnt quite think this was the way things were going to go and there is some readjustment going on.

    And again I repeat the Tories are unlikely to need the DUP after May 2010 to keep them afloat.

  • Driftwood

    Paul Kielty
    I liked the Dennis Kennedy article. He seems to swatting some sad DUP supporting flea who seemed to have got out of his depth.

    Fortnight still runs online and there are usually some good articles…
    eg

    http://www.fortnight.org/archive/current/articles/articleb.html

    ps The Commons is only ever full or nearly so when the big guns are in action. Otherwise dreary playing to the (public) gallery.

  • Coll Ciotach

    As I am sure you all know I fervently hope SF pull the plug on Stormont.
    And it would be a cause for extreme joy if they are returned in any subsequent election as the largest party and the unionists fail to appoint a deputy first minister.
    This would obviously end the English Ulsterisation Policy as how could any nationalist party accept to deputise to unionists thereafter?

    A perfect end for an imperfect statelet. Joint Authority here we come and lets sicken the Brits out of that arrangement.

  • Driftwood

    *were*, and archive. I think the last edition was a year ago as evidenced by this rather optimistic piece by Chris McG

  • danielmoran

    someone…. msg 4. I agree, and what if, as mentioned by a university figure on utv this evening, there are personality clashes of long standing [in both parties, also internal spats and mutual disdain insides either party and intra party disagreements] all in the very seats being targetted,andisn’t Jim Allister going to inevitably benefit from instances where the chosen candidate is DUP, but who is privately against the link with shinners?. Anyway, after the expenses saga, isn’t this all going to make unionist voters say, Why should we care which party up there is on top, if the union is safe? what have we learned from the expenses scandal, about our own politicians? This hasn’t been thought through, or if it has, somebody in these parties needs sacking.

  • Marcionite

    Coll Ciotach – I agree with u to a point, god help us though without a wall of incompetent mla’s to bolster against english toryism. This is ulsterisation by the back door. Nationalists should b vigilant.

  • Reader

    DisgustedinDerry: No response to the issue of murderous intent??
    I doubt it came up in the talks unless they contemplated an old Provo becoming First Minister. Funny how the terms ‘Gerry Kelly’ and ‘murderous intent’ go together.

  • DisgustedinDERRY

    Reader

    Vis a vis ‘Tory’ and ‘murderous intent’

    There is always two sides to a coin. The trouble with the heads side of this coin is that the British government/army have yet to accept that it murdered the very people it was charged with protecting, something Gerry Kelly has had the courage to do.

    British government/army=cowardice and lies!!!

  • tacapall

    Coll Ciotach – I agree with u to a point, god help us though without a wall of incompetent mla’s to bolster against english toryism. This is ulsterisation by the back door. Nationalists should b vigilant.
    Posted by Marcionite on Jan 20, 2010 @ 08:49 PM

    True ! But Nationalists cant change anything standing outside the building, but if you haven’t got a set of keys then you cant get in, “Equality” is the keyword, if the Tories come to power, we have nothing to fear, an International Agreement is binding, they cannot change it without the consent of Nationalists. That is not going to happen, it would open up a pandora’s box for the Tories, something Britain cannot afford when it comes to, reputation, integrity,and goodwill in their quest for power and social standing in Europe and the rest of the World.

  • BryanS

    I suppose the difference is that if partition was ended tomorrow and elections held for the new Dail, SF would be a major player and therefore would be impossible to ignore. Quote from some idiot
    —————————–
    Have you not got it into your thick heads that SF are a beaten docket in the south and that even if a referendum was held in the north about a united ireland, and only ‘nationalists’/catholics were allowed to vote it would still not result in a united ireland. Further if a referendum was held in the south the majority would still not want us in a united ireland. the rest of the country – Ireland – has moved on from your sectarian 17th centuary bigotry. get real. start to live. go out find a job and stop living on the social welfare your despised taxpayers have kept you in for years.

  • Marcionite

    I agree but until now, tories at least pretended to be honest brokers. Now they are part of the political landscape. U can’t be dispassionate if u decide to get into bed with one if the protagonists. I can’t see Sammy Wilson as a Tory though. It would be fun for them to explain supporting welfare cuts to their voting fodder in the loyalist estates though

    Cameron has no understanding of anything outside his county set. I hope Scotland cuts itself free but if it does, where does that leave Wales and NI? would England still be enthused by the idea of the Uk?

    The smart money is SF gambling on Scottish independance, leaving England to perpetual Tory rule as at a stroke they’ve removed 65odd labour mps. This implies that Tories would no longer need NI unionists. Assuming SF pull the plug, would Tory Boy be really arsed with administering joint authority?

    By the way, can someone tell me how I can create a new threat here? Please!!!!!!!!!!!!?

  • Would you say that the DUP team looked a bit more heavyweight?

    Perhaps the DUP were frightened by that stage of further damage re the next day’s (Sunday) tabloids, hence the arrival of the nervous first team to…well, attempt to sort out whatever on Saturday, principally with the Conservatives.

    A happy coincidence for them then that the rumours flying around last week never saw the light of day on Sunday.

  • tacapall

    Ireland – has moved on from your sectarian 17th centuary bigotry. get real. start to live. go out find a job and stop living on the social welfare your despised taxpayers have kept you in for years.
    Posted by BryanS on Jan 20, 2010 @ 09:14 PM

    You are having a laugh surely, A Unionist having the b***s to utter bigotry, and even quoting 17th century, by the way maybe you could get a “modern” dictionary and look up the spelling of it instead of stereotyping anyone who disagrees with your 16th century mindset. Its obvious you have the intelect of a field mouse, do you know what the word “pluralist” means. The rest of the world have caught on to it and know it makes sense, you are like a ford anglia, the rest of the world are a ford focus, you just haven’t evolved yet, maybe you cant, but ah well we will just outbreed you.

  • BryanS

    outbreed? you are having a laugh. The Muslims are out breeding your sectarian nonsense.

    I remember the Ford Anglia, but what are you on about? sad twit.

  • An uncomfortable outcome for Unionism resulting directly from the agreement between the UUP and the Tories is that there is unlikely to be any agreed Unionist candidate in SB and FST unless David and Owen are prepared to eat a very large quantity of their own words. Hopefully if this is the case, they will start tucking in soon.

    Those of us hoping for a more Unionist friendly government when the Tories assume power will be disappointed that they appear to have not supported the DUP line, as per the text of the STA, that there is no deadline for devolution of Police and instead seemed to have swallowed the SF propaganda. It will also be interesting to see how the UUP and Tories will view their link up with each other if the UUP end up with less seats (zero) than the TUV(one).

  • BryanS

    Mod U
    Please do not despair.
    All will be well. Trust me.

  • tacapall

    I remember the Ford Anglia, but what are you on about? sad twit.
    Posted by BryanS on Jan 20, 2010 @ 09:40 PM

    You are Homo erectus whilst the rest of the world are Homo sapien. Get it now ! I was talking about the people of this country, Catholic and Protestant, whatever race or religion they are, will outbreed your 16th century mindset, thats why I used the word “Pluralist” in the paragraph obviously you didn’t look it up. Oh and by the way I dont care what peoples’ religion is, they can pray to a mountain goat for all I care, as long as they give equal status and freedom to everyone else.

  • BryanS

    Taca
    I have read some of your posts and if there is anyone who dosen’t understand pluralism here you win the prize.

  • BryanS

    and the word is ‘sapiens’ did you not have a free education?

  • tacapall

    and the word is ‘sapiens’ did you not have a free education?
    Posted by BryanS on Jan 20, 2010 @ 10:14 PM

    Of course I got “free” education, why shouldn’t I, but you obviously did not ! Homo Sapiens is not plural, idiot, and Unionists like you could never understand the definition of “pluralist” just like you cant understand the definition of “Equality”

  • DisgustedinDERRY

    BryanS

    I read some of your posts and your a racist fool!!!

  • BryanS

    Excellent.
    At least I am striking a chord.
    D i Derry
    what alovely person you are.
    I guess I am racist in your eyes because I criticise welfare scroungers like you who have nothing else to do all day butblog your vitriol.
    I suspect you are not retired like me !
    Fool is an interesting word to use in the context of a reasoned debate.

  • BryanS

    and I think the rest of the world might be plural? hence ‘sapiens’

  • tacapall

    and I think the rest of the world might be plural? hence ‘sapiens’
    Posted by BryanS on Jan 20, 2010 @ 10:57 PM

    http://scienceblogs.com

    “Sapiens” Is Not A Plural

    Category: Biology • Language
    Posted on: September 9, 2008 8:20 AM, by Martin R

    We interrupt this broadcast to explain something to everybody who has ever used the expression “a homo sapien”. Sapiens is not a plural. It is an adjective ending in an S, just like erectus, afarensis and neanderthalensis. (It means “wise”.) You would never say “a homo erectu”, right? Don’t try to learn Latin from Del tha Funkee Homosapien.

    I suspect you are not retired like me !
    Fool is an interesting word to use in the context of a reasoned debate.
    Posted by BryanS on Jan 20, 2010 @ 10:54 PM

    Its retarded, not retired you mean, so you’re one of them retired Unionists, upper crust, stiff upper lip and all that “old boy” complete with handlebar moustache, couple of corgi dogs and a portrait of the biggest money scrounger of the British tax system on your wall, bet when it comes round to july, there you’ll be, sash and bowler hat at the ready to invade other residents areas with your swords and kick the pope bands, and homo erectus overweight knuckles scraping the ground stragglers, with their beer at the ready to all march to your religious ceremonies.

  • someone

    Homo sapiens is a singular phrase – homo is singular noun meaning man, sapiens is an adjective form derived from the verb to know and is also singular so that it agrees (grammatically speaking) with the noun it is describing. The reason the phrase is singular is that it is a species name, cf. the use of collective nouns.

  • alf

    I think BryanS reads alot of stormfront

  • Mrazik

    Is this the kiddies corner?

  • Stephen Blacker

    BryanS looks to have taken the spelling honours.

  • Erasmus

    Further if a referendum was held in the south the majority would still not want us in a united ireland.
    Speaking as one of those voters who helped consign SF to ‘beaten docket’ status in the south I would have to strongly disagree with the above statement.

  • tacapall

    Further if a referendum was held in the south the majority would still not want us in a united ireland.
    Speaking as one of those voters who helped consign SF to ‘beaten docket’ status in the south I would have to strongly disagree with the above statement.
    Posted by Erasmus on Jan 21, 2010 @ 12:26 AM

    Erasmus dont bother trying to talk sense to these centenarians, who have them big brass horns they put to their ears instead of mordern hearing aids, probably wear monocles as well. They still believe the earth is flat and that the earth is the centre of the universe.

  • Garza

    What is it about every UUP/Tory thread that people pounce upon and spew history lessons at each other?

    Are people troubled about this new alliance?

    Alot of people on this thread has to stop quoting the past and look to the future. Crap was done by both sides, time to move on.

  • tacapall

    Alot of people on this thread has to stop quoting the past and look to the future. Crap was done by both sides, time to move on.
    Posted by Garza on Jan 21, 2010 @ 12:56 AM

    Garza people can move on and indeed want to, but theres others who believe theres a tier system when it comes to human rights and equality, these people must be dragged into the 21st century. Look at the mindset when you challenge them,

    “go out find a job and stop living on the social welfare your despised taxpayers have kept you in for years”.

    I suppose thats what private education does to you.

  • Cynic2

    The problem is, in what direction do we move on?

    The reality is that we have all voted for a system. That system either works or it doesn’t because our politicians can’t manage it. But in any case we have a new constitutional framework. NI remains part of the UK until we vote otherwise. Some posters here seem to have swallowed the SF line – let me recall what it was – ‘a united Ireland by 2016’ and then ‘ a united Ireland in my lifetime’. Don’t fret too much on this. It will have changed again in another 12 months

    The reality is that all of that is nonsense and assumes that all Catholics will vote for a United Ireland. Best way to resolve that is perhaps top hold one. As a Unionist I am very comfortable with that idea because I know the result. So do you. And it will stay that way for the foreseeable future.

    So, sadly, the old rhetoric of ‘Brits Out’ (remember that slogan that you shorted and believed) wont work. The Brits you really want out live here. There are over 1 million of them and you need to learn how to live with them, hard though it may be for you to cope with people who have different views from your own and a different sense of identity.

  • BryanS

    Exactly Cynic2.
    Why will they not address the reality of today instead of living in the sentimental dreamworld of a united ireland? It has cost a lot of lives for nothing.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Daniel,

    At the St Anderews agreement results coming out in ‘07, the DUP saw that they had an eight seat moajority, and conveniently forgot that they let their voters cast their votes assuming DUP wouldn’t get into bed with shinners,and it was too late to take thoise votes back.

    Sorry, but you’re quite wrong here on a number of counts.

    The St Andrews Agreement was concluded in the latter part of 2006. At the same time, the DUP were making several noises about the conditions under which devolution would be restored, including Ian Paisley who strongly hinted at this during an assembly debate on 9th September. The Assembly at that time was not the formal Northern Ireland Assembly, but a Transitional Assembly designed explicitly to facilitate the resumption of devolved government.

    Then in January 07 you had Sinn Fein announcing its support of the PSNI. This was one of the key conditions laid down by the DUP.

    Despite all these noises which made it blindingly obvious to anyone that devolution would return and that Sinn Fein would be in government, unionist voters chose to endorse the DUP overwhelmingly. So, I do not accept that those who voted DUP did so in the belief that devolution would not resume.

  • tacapall

    The reality is that all of that is nonsense and assumes that all Catholics will vote for a United Ireland.
    Posted by Cynic2 on Jan 21, 2010 @ 08:06 AM

    Its laughable that you imply that Nationalism does not speak for all Catholics, yet further down your post,

    “The Brits you really want out live here. There are over 1 million of them and you need to learn how to live with them”

    You claim to speak for all of them. How can you then claim that they are all “Brits” are you saying no protestants believe they are “Irish”, furthermore if you had read the posts more thoroughly, you would see that United Ireland was never mentioned, I dont support Sinn Fein, and I imagine,like yourself want a peaceful future, the direction for Unionists, Brits if you like, is to accept Nationalism as equal partners in Government, that their “Identity” is just as valid as your own, not “Alabama” back of the bus style.
    is inevitable,

  • danielmoran

    ‘I do not accept that those who voted DUP did so in the belief that devolution would not return’

    That seems to be backed up by the fact that Bob McCartney fared so badly, still a sizeable share of the DUP feels they were cheated by not being told during the campaign whether Paisley would go for it, so we’ll see if Sunny Jim gets a significant tranche of the traditional DUP vote next time out.