Connor Applies for Election Court Review of FST Count

The BBC confirms that

Rodney Connor has asked the Election Court in Belfast to review his narrow defeat in Fermanagh and South Tyrone.

Sinn Fein’s Michelle Gildernew won the seat by just four votes after three recounts.

, , ,

  • drumlins rock

    Actually Pete you shuold give this one to UTV, they had the story up well over an hour ago.

  • doubt anything will come off it.

  • drumlins rock

    At the very least it will give a chance to question the Electoral Officers about some strange goings on.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Should be interesting but ultimately unlikely to come to anything. Does anyone know of a disputed election result being over-turned anywhere in the UK or Ireland in recent years?

  • I really do wonder what some people are thinking when they are voting voting for an abstentionist who denies proper representation to the constituency is beyond me. Rodney Connor deserves to be the MP for FST hes a good man and would represent all the people of FST.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Your comment may well have the moral high ground Paul, but ultimately the only thing that matters is the number of votes.

    I personally find it rather bizarre that four counts produced four different results and it’s certainly worth looking into in greater depth.

  • I can’t remember a general election result being overturned, here or in the UK.

    Im not even sure if, Mr Connor wins his case, he just ‘takes the seat’ or if there would be another election.

    Innocent until proven guilty, and guilt will be very hard to prove…

  • Tom

    Yes. The Lib Dems gained Winchester by two votes in ’97 and the Tory successfully challenged it and a by-election was held……………..which the Lib Dems then won by over 20,000 votes.

    Incidentally, is Michelle Gildernew the only MP with a majority fewer than the number of people in the constituency that their party has murdered?

  • Munsterview

    Anyone farmilar with the judicial process in these islands will know that The Justices ( or Injustices) as the case may be do not like intervening directly in the political system.

    There is a very good reason for this, it could very well become a two-way street and they want to keep power and privilege, especially their financial perks free of political scrutiny or interference.

    The refusal of certain Judges in the South to allow one cent be taken from their salaries or expenses while their office cleaners on minimum wages were squeezed for a few Euros, is a fine example of this disconnect and indifference to ordinary people or society while they have their ‘merks and perks’.

    This is why Their Lordships and their like of Southern well larded posteriors are such keen advocates of the separation of powers within the State.

    In effect they police themselves constantly breeching a fundamental concept of jurisprudence : Never be a judge in your own cause!

  • joeCanuck

    He may well be all that you say but he does not deserve to be MP. The people elected someone else.

  • joeCanuck

    It’s not in the least bizarre. Humans are involved in the process and you must know the old adage “to err is human”.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    There have been more than a few whispers and rumours, though they may well have been mere mischief making.

    Either way, Connor must reckon he has some sort of a case as it’s now three weeks down the line, giving him plenty of time to ‘cool off’ and take legal advice.

    You can be damn sure that if SF had lost by four votes they’d have every lawyer possible on the case.

  • joeCanuck

    I googled overturned UK election results and came up with nothing. I did find this on a BBC Q&A site:

    The (Electoral) Commission itself does not have the power to overturn election results, or order a re-run. The onus is instead on voters to launch a legal challenge.

    How does someone launch a legal challenge?

    Firstly, you need to issue an election petition to the Election Petitions Office. This has to be done within 21 days of the general election.

    Once you have issued your petition, you then have three days to pay the £5,000 fee, or at least show you have the means to pay. The decision on whether you have to pay upfront is made by a senior official at the Election Petitions Office.

    After your petition is issued, you then have 28 days to go ahead and make an application to the High Court.

    Two High Court judges would then rule on the application, and whether another election should be held in the constituency in question.

    This is no timetable for when this court hearing has to take place, but a spokeswoman for the Election Petitions Office says “the over-riding objective is to get it dealt with quickly”.

    If the application is successful, the person who made it gets his or her money back. If unsuccessful, then they would lose their £5,000.

  • you evidently have no idea of the history up there have you.

  • I totally agree with you SF who joe supports would of being shouting from the roof tops legal action etc.

  • well its clear if successful a by election will be called seems fair enough to me.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Couldn’t possibly comment on your second point Tom, but an interesting precedent there in the Winchester result.

    In the event of a rerun, the sparks really would start to fly, with the SDLP coming under huge pressure to withdraw and the local taxi system under even greater pressure as every nationalist/republican home in the constituency gets a wee knock on the door. Good times.

  • It really is a ‘rich mans game isnt it.

    I doubt legal aid applies but it should. For democracy to be fair it has to be free. How typical the deck is stacked even before the start.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Not sure who is stumping up Rodney’s £5000, but I’m sure SF would have found the money from somewhere if the shoe was on the other foot.

    The moment I heard the first result (Connor had won by a handful of votes) my first thought was ‘legal challenge.’

  • redhugh

    sure just give the seat to old rodders, that would seem fair enough to you aswell no doubt.

  • joeCanuck

    I have never been a SF supporter. But I do favour a candidate who gets the most votes being elected. I have condemned SF for not taking their seats. I would not vote for someone who wouldn’t.

  • redhugh

    ‘Innocent until proven guilty, and guilt will be very hard to prove…’
    has anyone been accused of any skuldugerry?
    all I see and hear is meaningless innuendos.

  • I read your comment re a by election, why should the SDLP withdraw? You’re right about the pressure but if SF are discredited in court, its a bit rich for them to expect honest parties to make way for one shown to be dishonest!

  • joeCanuck

    There would be a by-election. The Electoral Commission website says that no new candidates would be allowed but that a candidate could withdraw. If a by-election is held, the SDLP will face a huge dilemma.

  • Not at all, just looking at all the angles. I wonder why some shinners are so thin skinned.

    I wanted Michelle Gildernew to win, I was relieved when she won. I hope she holds the seat, but that none of that will prevent speculation, or free speech.

  • everybody on this whole forum knows where your political sympathies are.

  • I am not saying that at all if the election is over turned by a court of law and a by election is called then thats the law.I agree with the law do you.???

  • redhugh

    I didn’t mean you yourself had made those insinuations.

  • redhugh

    Yes I do, you clearly don’t with your ‘ connor deserves the seat,proper representation’ crap.
    More people voted for Gildernew, the LAW determines she WON the seat.

  • joeCanuck

    Everyone except you, apparently.

  • Redhugh

    Thank you, perhaps on this occasion it was me being over sensitive.

  • joeCanuck

    Yes about the rich man’s game. But note that it isn’t just the losing candidate who can request the review. Any registered voter in the constituency can.

  • Anyone rich enough it seems. I dont know if you read Munsterviews comment above. He is so right…

  • lmao keep digging joe.

  • look if the law says that the election has to re run thats the law whats up afraid the sinners might lose the court case.???

  • Daithí

    If joeCanuck is correct, then it looks to me as though all that is happening today is a “stop the clock” excercise.

    If joeCanuck is correct, then Rodders has 3 days to convince an official at the “Election Petitions Office” (what do they do for the rest of the year?) that he is good for £5,000.

    Then he has 28 days to make his real decision…

  • redhugh

    SF are not taking a court case.

  • G O’Neill

    I think this is the bitter last roll of the dice for unionists in FST- after years of gerry mandering they are having to stomach the idea that this seat like others in the north is lost to them for good.

    In any event a re-run of the election would simply mobilse even more of the nationalist vote to come out and to rally behind gildernew.

    And Paul you might not like democracy when it doesn’t reflect your views but you are simply going to have to accept that the people voted for an abstenionist because they do NOT want to be represented in the British Parliament- You don’t have to like it but you should get used to it!

  • Glencoppagagh

    ‘refusal of certain Judges in the South to allow one cent be taken from their salaries or expenses’

    I thought they’d all caved in by now. Those who haven’t are utterly despicable. They should be named and shamed at the vey least.

  • Glencoppagagh

    ‘the people voted for an abstenionist because they do NOT want to be represented in the British Parliament’

    The majority voted for non-abstentionist candidates.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    There are never any seats lost ‘for good’ — SF have been having a nice little run electorally, but how long can you keep increasing what is effectively a protest vote built on the false promise that you can somehow deliver a UI when you’ve signed up to the exact opposite?

    On the day SF got their vote out — by a majority of four it would seem. Fair play to them. And fair play to Rodney if he can force a by-election — I’d bet the farm SF would be doing exactly the same in his shoes.

    With the SDLP looking unlikely to drop their future candidates, the next run, whenever it happens could just as easily be another knife-edge.

    Either way it’s a fascinating prospect.

  • propaganda

    Should rather launch an United Unionist inquiry into those 2000 or so Unionist voters that did not turn out.

    Over-confident of Rodney Connors success? Perhaps it was the sweet smell of victory on May 6th
    they decided whats the point.

    Or they knew it was Gildernews for keeps.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Rather more worryingly I had a tenner on Michelle and won £22. If the result is over-turned can Paddy Power sue me?

  • I agree, absolutely fascinating. I don’t know if Im looking forward to another count, or not…

  • Munsterview

    “……I really do wonder what some people are thinking when they are voting voting for an abstentionist who denies proper representation to the constituency is beyond me. Rodney Connor deserves to be the MP for FST hes a good man and would represent all the people of FST……”

    This is part of a longer post already up elsewhere but relevant here

    Republicans are now working towards implementing that past and current mandate ‘to break the connection’, to enter into Parliament of the oppressor is to refasten rather than loosen and unfasten these ties. There is no middle ground.

    In the recent election these two choices were clearly put to the Nationalist /Catholic Electorate simple terms, SDLP were for taking their seats as Mp’s., Sinn Fein were pledged not to take their seats.

    To the nearest thousand, 110,000 ( less 30) voters backed the SDLP, …. 172,000 (less 48) backed the Sinn Fein stand. In short for every two votes the SDLP got to go in Sinn Fein got three to stay out.

    Could their mandate be any clearer ? Anyone advocating Sinn Fein taking their seats is in fact demanding that they ignore the will of their voters and betray their electorate’s intentions.

    That segment of the political market is already very well catered for North, South and across the water without any need of Sinn Fein’s participation on that same broken promises trail.

  • FST Ciaran

    Michelle’s was elected on the basis that she abstains from the foreign parliament that is Westminster and that is that there is nothing more to discuss on it. I do wonder who is footing the bill for this legal challenge. If I remember correctly the failed 2001 challenge cost over £50,000. I would say the orange order should be able to pull that money out from under the bed. Everyone seems to be taking the blame and anger is being sent in all directions. Independent Stevenson was heckled at the count, the chief electoral officer was said to have had a poor attitude, chants of terrorist aimed at Michelle during her victory speech, a columnist from the Impartial Reporter was branded sectarian, and yes the two high court judges who will inevitably rule that the result was lawful will be branded morons.
    Below a letter I sent into the impartial reporter published today:
    DEAR SIR – Now that the dust has settled on the Fermanagh and South Tyrone election and opinions have been made known I feel compelled to write regarding the attitude of a small number of pro Connor’s supporters who have wrote many letters to this paper over the past two weeks. I have read many absurd views including accusations of electoral fraud and dirty tricks on the part of Sinn Fein however the most preposterous accusation was made only last week against a Sinn Fein activist in which a writer to this paper accused that activist of saying “keep the prod out” while handing out literature at a polling station on election day. Any such ridiculous accusations serve no purpose in today’s politics but only serve to stir up hatred. Arlene Foster said she has yet to come across one single protestant who voted for Michelle Gildernew yet I know of three friends all first time voters who did and so I really do wonder if Arlene Foster considered the fact that the electorate unionist or otherwise were not happy with the bill Rodney Connor has left the rate payer in Fermanagh or if she took into consideration the area’s current socio-economic uncertainty associated with the Quinn Group which meant many of the electorate would have viewed the sitting Sinn Fein MP, Michelle Gildernew, as the best placed to assess imminent needs of the whole community during the next four or five years. Furthermore, the fact that she is Minister for Agriculture at Stormont is extremely important in an area heavily dependent on the rural agricultural community and so I am certain that these bread and butter issues would have encouraged many traditional unionists to vote for Michelle as opposed to voting for a candidate with no experience in politics. I agree that losing is never easy but nevertheless we live in a democracy and the people’s verdict is final and no amount of ludicrous accusations can change that. I do hope that regardless of the result in any future elections no such views filled with hatred will be expressed such as quotes of “no surrender” but for now I will leave you to ponder on the words of former US President Richard Nixon. “You must never be satisfied with losing. You must get angry, terribly angry, about losing. But the mark of the good loser is that he takes his anger out on himself and not his victorious opponents or on his teammates”.
    FST First Time Voter

    @G O’Neill you are absolutely correct in the points you made. We now have the very organisations responsible for the most horrendous cases of discrimination here complaining that they didn’t manage to get enough people to vote for them. It’s laughable. Michelle won fair and square.

  • HeinzGuderian

    Ach sure ‘Michelle won,fair and square’……….THREE different counts,THREE different results……………Michele’s response if defeated by FOUR votes would have been…………………’we will challenge this in the courts’ !!

    Until a decision has been made,Michelle may continue to administyer British Rule at Stormont !! :O)

  • FST Ciaran

    @HeinzGuderian – Ah thank you. This is a good example of the poor attitude I am talking about. One of the things I really liked about Michelle in this election was from the word go she knew she had a challenge and she knew was up against all shades of unionism in a sectarian headcount but she remained dignified and very professional throughout and paid tribute to Rodney in her election speech. God I could only imagine what Foster or Connor would have said should the people have returned him as MP. Not a chance in hell would he/she have shown the same courtesy. He would not even acknowledge her when the two passed after Michelle’s speech. I think her attitude has really brought a breath of fresh air to politics in this part of Ireland and she is quite right when she said she has not got an ounce of sectarianism in her which is more than can be said for Foster/Connor who last any credibility for being fair when the initiated this sectarian headcount in FST.

  • FST Ciaran

    P.s Heinz it was four counts. . .

  • joeCanuck

    Provisional bets, even odds, up to 10 pounds, winnings to the tip jar; first comers.

    1. There will not be a by-election.
    2. If there is a by election, Connor will lose by more than 4 votes.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Yeah if SF had tanked by four votes I’m sure it would have been a case of ‘cheers lads good match see yas in 5 years’ and smiles all round.

    From what I heard SF had a solicitor on the road after they went down in the first count. Sure as night follows day they’d be mounting a legal challenge if it had gone the other way and someone else would be asking where the £50k was coming from.

    It’s easy to be magnanimous when you’ve just scraped home with a 60k salary for non-attendance in the bag.

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    Provisional bets? Nice turn of phrase Joe

  • Jordan

    Hopefully a bi-election is held for more people will turn out. In the 2005 westminster election if you added the UUP and DUP votes it would have beaten Sinn fein by about 4,000 votes!! where did the thousand unionist voters that voted in 2005 go that voted in 2010?? Though i don’t think taking the decision to court will get anything.

  • PaddyReilly

    What I think would be funny is Connor getting his appeal, a bye-election and the SDLP deciding not to stand this time round.

  • Reader

    Munsterview: Could their mandate be any clearer ? Anyone advocating Sinn Fein taking their seats is in fact demanding that they ignore the will of their voters and betray their electorate’s intentions.
    And what of the voters who switched from the SDLP to SF in the last 10/15 years? Are you counting them as committed abstentionists?

  • Drumlin Rock

    Got a weird one for you, the Lords cost Unionism the seat, I’m sure there are more than 4 Lords in the constituency who are denied the vote but almost certainly would vote unionist!

  • FST Ciaran

    Regardless of the outcome in Connors’ legal challenge no one can deny that to date this has been an incredible election for Sinn Fein in this constituency. There is no one single person who cannot say it was a very tough battle for Michelle and the entire Sinn Fein team and the party no doubt have came out of this election ten times stronger than when they entered and more mobilised whilst unionism in the constituency has been left broken and in bits which is reflective in the action taken today. Yes Sinn Fein in Fermanagh will be more financially stable with the money gained but that is so far down the list of reasons why SF needed to retain this seat. If anything we owe it to the late Bobby Sands MP to keep this seat out of the grubby hands of the Orange Order. Michelle should have been taking legal advice anyway regarding the astonishing number of postal/proxy votes rejected for no legitimate reason and even the Chief EO admitted this on radio. Discrimination and corruption is still rife in many areas including the electoral office but with the will of the people we will stamp this out once and for all!!

  • Drumlin Rock

    Daithi, there is also some queries that the election officals need to answer and this could be the best way to go about that, win or lose.

  • I think its the ‘incredible’ that has some people worried…

  • JoeJoe

    Jordan, buddy, you are into wishful thinking when you focus on saying the total combined unionist votes in previous westminster elections with Sinn Féin, and thus implying that for SF to beat a combined unionist is suspicous.

    The above thinking ignores the fact that the nationalist vote (SF & SDLP) is greater than the unionist combined vote { I know it’s awful!). You weren’t cheated out of the seat. The attempt to treat SDLP Irish nationalist voters like crap, and to combine the unionist vote to claim the place for Britain, was met with SDLP voters moving to SF. Don’t ya think?

  • Munsterview

    Those voters made the same choice as all other Nationalist / Catholic voters,

    a ) vote SDLP, get an MP taking a seat, attending the house and speaking on the issues of the day or

    b ) vote Sinn Fein, Sinn Fein and get an MP that will not attend the House or speak there.

    That is not to claim for one moment that the abstention issue is a burning topic or a matter of profound consideration for either existing SDLP voters ‘loan voting Sinn Fein’ or even for all Sinn Fein voters.

    In 1918 Sinn Fein went before the electorate with that as the primary issue a vote for Sinn Fein was also a vote mandate not to go to Westminster and to set up a home parliament. That now has been Sinn Fein’s position for almost a century…… 92 years in fact. All voting Sinn Fein knew this!

    If the British respected an Irish Six-County MP and the will of those that elected them, then the British Government would not have allowed Bobby Sands MP. to die the way he did or change the rules immediately after to make it impossible for any of his political prisoner comrades to be ever elected again in such circumstances.

    In short…… yes you paddies can have an election but we will dictate to you as to who you cannot vote for an as to who of your candidates are acceptable to us.

    Then again the Brits always had trouble with free speech in Ireland, if you are ever passing through Mitchelstown stop and have a look at the Celtic Cross there. The names are those of unarmed civilians peacefully gathered for a Land League meeting who were shot down by the R.I.C in the late 19th century.

    Finally as to respecting Irish MP. even death the Brits still have a problem with them. There is a road near the British Embassy in Iran known as The Bobby Sands road with a simple memorial to him there. Since it was erected shortly after his death, it has been a British Embassy top priority to have the road renamed and the memorial removed.

    So much for respecting an MP their electorate or what they stand for, alive or dead!

  • drumlins rock

    jordan your missing the fact 4,000 votes switched from SDLP to SF,

  • FST unionists should patent the method for converting sour grapes into a great vintage whine.

  • HeinzGuderian

    Sure if Michelle loses,aul Gerry can always cheer her up with a rendition of,’Always look on the bright side of life,’while sipping their whine !! :O)

  • Monkdewallydehonk


    Good on You Mate!. As you say, when I lived in NI, as a moderate Nationalist, I personally didn’t + don’t agree with abstentionism.

    However, Paul’s classic comment about Connor making a good candidate for all the people (i.e. all those in the OO who were instrumental in his nomination!). – is a total joke.

    Paul – how dare you lecture anyone about “everybody knows …where your political sympathies lie”? Ditto for you – try taking your orange sash off before effectively calling anyone else a bigot!

    If the UCUNF had done what they said they would do – and stood a candidate in every constituency, things might have been different. I’m no fan of SF or Gildernew but, as a Catholic, I’d really put my faith in the OO rubber stamped Connor to represent my interests in an “impartial” manner.

    The fact that you so avidly back him really emphasises the point as you’re so clearly concerned about equality for Catholics/Nationalists- heavy on the irony in case you hadn’t noticed.

    The fact is that Cons/Unionists went for the age-old basic “Keep the Taigs Out” vote and you lost – good!

    Only if Cameron (and more importantly Ulster Unionists) keeps promises to open UCUNF to all religions and none, will they have a chance and quite possibly a decent one.

    However, until they have the wit and balls to dump the OO and the “approval” of fools like Saulters will they have a chance.

    In case you hadn’t noticed, in the UK (which U so long to be a part of) the OO have long since – Drumcree, Billy Wright, The Quinn children etc – been exposed as a bigoted anachronism.

    Try putting forward a candidate who doesn’t have to be approved by the OO, Apprentice Boys, and Black Institution etc and see how much that improves your fortunes.

    If UCUNF (and you) can’t move beyond that – and it’s pretty clear that U in particular can’t, then stopping yapping that you’re hand-picked OO approved puppet didn’t get elected

  • Cushy Glenn

    keep on repeating the lie if you want, monk, but it still won’t be true. Connor was NOT picked by the Orange Order; there was no meeting in an Orange Hall to select him; and UCUNF is so desperate that it would welcome any new blood from any creed or none. In fact Connor makes Ken Maginnis look like Ivan Foster, and probably lost quite a lot of hardline Unionist votes.
    And if you really must wallow in MOPEry, there might be better causes than seeing the boot on the neck to prevent someone sitting at home taking a salary and allowances for not doing the job she stood for. Abstentionism only makes sense if you don’t contest the election for the parliament that you claim is foreign.Otherwise what’s the point?

  • kevin moran

    Given that Sinn Fein won last time around by ‘persuading’ an election official to keep open a polling station after the close of the poll to stuff the ballot why the surprise that the 2010 election result is equally rotten?

    Since the days of Bobby Sands the nationalist voters of FST have been happy to vote in large numbers for the Murder Party. If they have no morals on that it’s a small step to cook the books as it were.

    Along the border Protestants have learned to keep their heads down, that is those whose heads are not six feet under courtesy of their nationalist ‘neighbours’, and this is evident at election time. It is not disquiet with a single unionist candidate or any other political concern. It is about not wanting to run the gauntlet at polling stations that are a very cold house for Protestants.

    So Rodney keep the £5k in your pocket and leave the fat bird in the seat. Concentrate rather on devising ways to ensure that voters feel safe to vote in, for example, a border poll when the votes really will matter.

  • Munsterview

    Kevin M

    Would not ‘fear of intimidation’ and having to ‘run the gauntlet’ qualify any such Unionist or indeed any other voter of any other political outlook that could make such a valid claim entitled to a postal vote? I would have thought so. If not it should be the situation, but if it was, then no doubt, other claims of ‘interference with the electoral process’ would arise.

    After all Republicans are doing their bit, the dead no longer vote, ( admittedly this practice had to be abandoned because most of the dead republicans did not agree with the peace process and could be not relied on, rather than moral issues but whatever, it’s ended anyway) and they are happy with normal electoral practices.

    And why not, they are winning!

    Poling stations are becoming a ‘Cold House For Protestants’ quite simply because the numbers are no longer there to return Unionist candidates despite all past gerrymandering of constituencies boundaries to give a disproportionate return of elected representatives of Unionist views. Those days are almost gone too!

    As to the current situation in Fermanagh / South Tyrone, learn to live with it ! By next election it will be just another secure Sinn Fein and the same ‘cliffhanger’ ten vote margins etc will be repeated at some other Constituency Count as the numbers fall slowly but surely Sinn Fein’s way constituency after constituency.

    Get used to it, it is called democracy and while it may be a relatively recent political development in the Six Counties, it may surprise you to learn that it exists and works in all European Countries. Some have even been living successfully with it for hundreds of years!

  • joeCanuck

    You can only make the assertion about no OO Hall meeting with total confidence if you are privy to where he was selected and who did the selecting. Care to share your knowledge with us. If you don’t know, then your assertion is simply a belief, not a fact.

  • G O’Neill

    Awh Democracy isn’t so much fun when you don’t get the outcome you want? If you have any evidence of Electoral fraud ring the police – until then stop with the the sour grapes.

  • Munsterview

    I would thought that aside from oranges that is the only kind of fruit that certain sections of the populace feel safe to use ?

    Come on now, ‘parity of esteem’ must also apply to the diets on the other side! A wee bit of tolerance, you lot had to subsist long enough on Humble pie, you know what it is like……. that will fare will taking a bit of getting used to by them.

  • Drumlin Rock

    Munster, it is also an unwritten rule of “democracy” just about anywhere in the world, if the vote is within a hairs breadth then you call in the lawyers, be the same in France New Zealand, USA or wherever,

  • lamhdearg

    If they did not overturn the 2001 result when the rules on closing at a certain time where broken (under threat of violence) what chance now. Rodney would be better to knuckle down and work With Michelle for the betterment of the people of F.S.T. Is betterment a word?

  • Battle of the Bogside

    I suppose England is a big place and the Tories and Labour collectively murdered possibly millions over the years. So I can’t answer your stupid question until I take into account the whole of the not so united Kingdom.

  • Mike

    Say a word on how respecting MPs and their electorate, or free speech tallies, with murdering Robert Bradford or Ian Gow, will you Munsterview? Or indeed Assesmbly members, as in Edgar Graham?

    Can you also say a word about bombing furniture stores in relation to all this?

  • Mike

    “Get used to it, it is called democracy and while it may be a relatively recent political development in the Six Counties, it may surprise you to learn that it exists and works in all European Countries. Some have even been living successfully with it for hundreds of years!”

    Thankfully Ms Gildernew and comrades have caught up with the rest of us and accepted democracy in the last decade or so.

    Especially respecting the democratic principle of consent rather than trying to overthrow it with mass murder.

    Progress indeed that they can “live successfully” with it now.

  • Munsterview

    Sorry; forgot there for a moment that killing MP,s and Peoples represenratives was a Crown Prerogative only ! I will bear that in mind in future o,k!

  • Munsterview


    Another one to be done by the numbers I see….

    Election 1918……. all thirty two counties. Brits fully controlled the process, armed soldiers, fixed bayonets everywhere.

    twenty eight counties, 87.5% voted for Sinn Fein and a thirty two county Republic

    four counties, 12.5% voted against the Republic.

    Result : England ignored the wishes of the 87.5%, gave the 12.5% their own Statelet and by Armed Force compelled the other 87.5 % of the counties to accept the result.

    To add insult to injury they even included two counties that had voted to stay with the Republic.

    Soo…! while it was perfectly all right to for England to use force to compel 87.5 % of the counties to accept the will of 12.5 % of the counties as the permanent solution, under the threat of, to quote Loyal George directly on the matter ” Immediate and terrible war’ it was wrong afterwards for any of that 87.5% to use force to redress the terrible wrong ?

    Obviously there is something here regarding the British Concept of Democracy that I am not seeing, perhaps you will kindly explain. Oh yes, one more thing, please do not use British English to do so, apparently some of us down here have a problem with using that also, or so I have been informed yesterday!