NationStates Jolt Archive

Northern Ireland's assembly elections took place yesterday, with the votes being counted today. I know there's something of a Northern Irish contingent here, so how about a little discussion thread?

Did you/how did you/would you vote? What do you think about how things are turning out?

Ye olde obligatory BBC coverage link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2007/nielection/html/main.stm)

Aye, I did everybody but the Tories and Sinn Fein. Went something like this:

Socialist
Green
Alliance
DUP
DUP
UUP
UUP
Make Politicians History
SDLP
And then the rest of them...

Constituency's Belfast South, by the way.


It's funny, I'm only just 21 yet that's the fifth time I've voted; 2xAssembly, 1x European, 1xGeneral, 1xCouncil

Doesn't look good for the SDLP and UUP.

Doesn't look good for the agreement to be implemented with so much support for the DUP.
I guess the majority of unionists thought the 30 years of the troubles were so much fun,
they'd like to have it all start up again in another generation.

Doesn't look good for the agreement to be implemented with so much support for the DUP.
I guess the majority of unionists thought the 30 years of the troubles were so much fun,
they'd like to have it all start up again in another generation.

More like the majority of Unionists just don't like the agreement. And don't like the idea of being in government with Sinn Fein when they still refuse to officially endorse the policing system, despite coming to 'acceptance' in January, even though the current arrangement was created more or less at their request.

Not liking the agreement =/= not wanting peace.

I consider it a victory that the Ayn Rand acolytes - the Pro-Capitalism Party - appear to have only got 22 votes, less than a third of what Rainbow George and his cronies achieved in the same constituency.

Doesn't look good for the agreement to be implemented with so much support for the DUP.
I guess the majority of unionists thought the 30 years of the troubles were so much fun,
they'd like to have it all start up again in another generation.

What could possibly give you that insane notion?

http://static.flickr.com/30/100183504_9299e59711_m.jpg

The truth of the matter is that theres some within the DUP who just don't want 'truck with Papism'. Ironically big Ian seems to be more forward looking than some of his own followers.....

jeebus, 22 out of 30,000. it's like the triumph of individualism.

Fear not. The Collective will hunt down and exterminate those dangerous free thinking 22 and erase all trace of them from the records.

I consider it a victory that the Ayn Rand acolytes - the Pro-Capitalism Party - appear to have only got 22 votes, less than a third of what Rainbow George and his cronies achieved in the same constituency.
Indeed, theres been one or two results I think can be celebrated all round. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6434765.stm)

I consider it a victory that the Ayn Rand acolytes - the Pro-Capitalism Party - appear to have only got 22 votes, less than a third of what Rainbow George and his cronies achieved in the same constituency.

jeebus, 22 out of 30,000. it's like the triumph of individualism.

What could possibly give you that insane notion?

http://static.flickr.com/30/100183504_9299e59711_m.jpg

The truth of the matter is that theres some within the DUP who just don't want 'truck with Papism'. Ironically big Ian seems to be more forward looking than some of his own followers.....

Ian declared his stance many years ago and there is no reason to believe it
has changed, as always though the unionists of all stripes will always try
to make out that they are the reasonable ones, they will always lie at some
point to make out that they wish to make things work. But nothing has changed
with them, at the heart their politics are about supremacy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/532279.stm

Ian declared his stance many years ago and there is no reason to believe it
has changed, as always though the unionists of all stripes will always try
to make out that they are the reasonable ones, they will always lie at some
point to make out that they wish to make things work. But nothing has changed
with them, at the heart their politics are about supremacy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/532279.stm

Sinn Fein laid out their stance years ago and there is no reason to believe it has changed.

See, isn't talking bullshit fun?

You seem, from the two posts in this thread, like the sort of person we need to leave behind, believing steadfastly that we need to remain in a position where neither side trusts the other at all and is more likely to shoot his opponent than sit down and work problems out.

And I really don't see what a link to a news story from 1999 has to do with anything.

Let's hope they get an Executive mapped out soon, which will be the sticking point. However, I don't know how much the parties differ on policy, and how difficult working out a common plan would be.

Can't be worse than a Hainocracy.

Sinn Fein laid out their stance years ago and there is no reason to believe it has changed.

See, isn't talking bullshit fun?

You seem, from the two posts in this thread, like the sort of person we need to leave behind, believing steadfastly that we need to remain in a position where neither side trusts the other at all and is more likely to shoot his opponent than sit down and work problems out.

And I really don't see what a link to a news story from 1999 has to do with anything.

The peace process exists because Sinn Fein were willing to take risks
a great many risks and swallow an awful lot of shit.
There is simple, straightforward and easily verifiable proof of their changes,
there is none such for the DUP and their venerable leader.

The agreement was reached without any assistance in doing so from the DUP
as they withdrew from the negotiations.
The link from 1999 is relevant because it's Ian Paisley laying out his stance
to the agreement, i.e. to destroy it.
None of his actions since then have been in any way contradictory to his declared stance then.
Votes for his party are votes for the destruction of the agreement.

Ignoring that simple fact is not a sign of enlightenment and forward thinking
it is either genuine gullibility or determined dissembling.

Paisley and his DUP, have historically either refused point blank to work out
resolutions, or say they will and then constantly move the goalposts until
they either reach the point where they withdraw from the discussions
and blame some or all of the other participants.

If you wish to delude yourself about this that is fine,
but please at least consider the consequences of deluding others.

More like the majority of Unionists just don't like the agreement. And don't like the idea of being in government with Sinn Fein when they still refuse to officially endorse the policing system, despite coming to 'acceptance' in January, even though the current arrangement was created more or less at their request.

Not liking the agreement =/= not wanting peace.

No I know, but its a particular type of peace that those unionists want
It's the peace they had before the troubles began
It's the peace the confederacy wanted back at the time of the American
civil war.
It's the peace that the soviets wanted in Afghanistan in the 80's
and the peace the "coalition forces" want in Iraq

It's peace on their terms and only on their terms and to their benefit,
it's peace with the right to oppress.

Now the majority of Unionists may well wish exactly that position but
it does yet again underline and highlight the antidemocratic heart of unionism
as the agreement that the DUP opposed and still oppose was put to the people
as you know, in referendum and passed by 71.1% in a turnout of over 80%.

The peace process exists because Sinn Fein were willing to take risks
a great many risks and swallow an awful lot of shit.
There is simple, straightforward and easily verifiable proof of their changes,
there is none such for the DUP and their venerable leader.

The willingness to actually sit down and talk to Sinn Fein over the past year or two is evidence of something of a mellowing within Paisley. If he was sticking to his original plan then we wouldn't have the St. Andrews agreement or elections the other day.

And let's not forget that the IRA has been very fond of causing security problems whenever there was the opportunity of a breakthrough. Who's to say they've changed at all? All the governments say is that all the weapons they know of have been destroyed; what about the ones they don't know of?

The agreement was reached without any assistance in doing so from the DUP
as they withdrew from the negotiations.
The link from 1999 is relevant because it's Ian Paisley laying out his stance
to the agreement, i.e. to destroy it.
None of his actions since then have been in any way contradictory to his declared stance then.
Votes for his party are votes for the destruction of the agreement.

I think it's fairly clear that the DUP's position has shifted significantly since 1999. In 1999 they wouldn't have even considered sharing the leadership of an executive with Sinn Fein, yet they have been considering it, and they may even do it.

Ignoring that simple fact is not a sign of enlightenment and forward thinking
it is either genuine gullibility or determined dissembling.

It is neither genuine gullibility or determined dissembling it is a realisation of the fact that N Irish politics, on both sides, has moved on a a great deal in the last few years.

Paisley and his DUP, have historically either refused point blank to work out
resolutions, or say they will and then constantly move the goalposts until
they either reach the point where they withdraw from the discussions
and blame some or all of the other participants.

And Sinn Fein/IRA have historically failed to live up to their promises.

By the way, when are they going to give their support to the Police and join the Policing Board of the service created solely to placate them?

If you wish to delude yourself about this that is fine,
but please at least consider the consequences of deluding others.

Frankly, I think it is you who is deluding themselves; you refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe, the DUP and Paisley have shifted to a position where they could share power.

No I know, but its a particular type of peace that those unionists want
It's the peace they had before the troubles began
It's the peace the confederacy wanted back at the time of the American
civil war.
It's the peace that the soviets wanted in Afghanistan in the 80's
and the peace the "coalition forces" want in Iraq

It's peace on their terms and only on their terms and to their benefit,
it's peace with the right to oppress.

Now the majority of Unionists may well wish exactly that position but
it does yet again underline and highlight the antidemocratic heart of unionism
as the agreement that the DUP opposed and still oppose was put to the people
as you know, in referendum and passed by 71.1% in a turnout of over 80%.

I think that all you have demonstrated is that you don't understand "the majority of Unionists".

But, of course, that's the way of N Ireland; nationalists are the poor oppressed, and Unionists are the evil empire. I almost forgot for a minute. Almost dreamed that would be forgotten.

The willingness to actually sit down and talk to Sinn Fein over the past year or two is evidence of something of a mellowing within Paisley. If he was sticking to his original plan then we wouldn't have the St. Andrews agreement or elections the other day.

DUP and Paisley have on many occasions pretended to be honest participants
only to move goalposts constantly until talks fall apart or the talks continue
with all other parties but without them


And let's not forget that the IRA has been very fond of causing security problems whenever there was the opportunity of a breakthrough. Who's to say they've changed at all? All the governments say is that all the weapons they know of have been destroyed; what about the ones they don't know of?


It's been common for unionists to claim security problems, such as when
trying to claim that arrests in Columbia have any relevance to Ireland
and dodgy spying claims which eventually lead to the primary person
claimed to have been spying on unionists on behalf of Sinn Fein actually
turning out to be a spy on Sinn Fein bought and paid for by the British.
It was successful in bringing an end to a functioning assembly and boosting
DUP support which presumably was its aim.


I think it's fairly clear that the DUP's position has shifted significantly since 1999. In 1999 they wouldn't have even considered sharing the leadership of an executive with Sinn Fein, yet they have been considering it, and they may even do it.


They have done nothing of any substance to indicate their stance has changed in any way from 1999's declarations.
As they have now won the majority unionist vote it should not be long before
the goalposts are moved again.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0308/breaking61.htm


It is neither genuine gullibility or determined dissembling it is a realisation of the fact that N Irish politics, on both sides, has moved on a a great deal in the last few years.

On all sides other than unionism, politics has indeed moved on.
Unless you consider that currently not utilising the yelling of NO without even pause for breath
as your main political tactic to be some kind of major movement.


And Sinn Fein/IRA have historically failed to live up to their promises.

Sinn Fein has lived up to most if not all of their promises although I am hard
pressed to think of any they have not lived up to.
IRA were not party to the agreement and anything they have said or done
is above and beyond any requirement on them as due to unionist tactics
there were NO requirements on them AT ALL.


By the way, when are they going to give their support to the Police and join the Policing Board of the service created solely to placate them?


I would suggest you ask them. But suggesting the policing board was purely
for Sinn Fein is purely untrue. All nationalist parties wanted at least that.
Sinn Fein as I recall wanted the abolition of the RUC and its replacement
with a police service without its history of pro unionist bias.

Many unionists felt even changing the name was a step too far.
Which lets the rest of the world understand exactly who is moving to reach
peace and reconciliation and who is moving goalposts.


Frankly, I think it is you who is deluding themselves; you refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe, the DUP and Paisley have shifted to a position where they could share power.

I also refuse to believe that if I clap my hands tinkerbell will come back to life
neither my attitude towards the DUP nor my attitude to fairies is delusional.

I think that all you have demonstrated is that you don't understand "the majority of Unionists".

But, of course, that's the way of N Ireland; nationalists are the poor oppressed, and Unionists are the evil empire. I almost forgot for a minute. Almost dreamed that would be forgotten.


Ah I see it is you who are delusional and I am presuming at this stage
a DUP voting unionist as you so clearly prefer to pretend that non unionists
were not systematically denied proper representation not to mention accommodation
due to unionist gerrymandering. Jobs of course were routinely also denied them.
And violent reaction to peaceful civil rights marches helped launch the place
into the troubles that followed.

In one sense of course you are right
I do not understand the majority of unionists,
their short sightedness,
their desire for domination over their fellow Irishmen,
at great cost to all sides
their blinkers and ignorance leave me baffled.

One day republicans will have the majority and if unionists don't want them
behaving politically towards unionists as unionists currently behave towards republicans then unionists need to make sure the assembly has a history of being run and that means starting now.

Of course, unlike unionism, republicans getting what they want
would be a united Ireland with democratic election of representatives
in a proportional representation system meaning unionists would have far
more say in the running of the entire island of Ireland than they will
ever have over the running of the six counties as part of the UK without
devolution.
But unionists would not be happy as the pretence of democracy has always
been more favoured by them than the actuality of it.
A police force with no historical practice of politically based bias might
of course also be a choking point for unionists in that situation
A constitution guaranteeing everyone equal rights regardless of religion
might also be too much to bear for any reasonable and responsible unionist.

And let's not forget that the IRA has been very fond of causing security problems whenever there was the opportunity of a breakthrough.



examples? and don't even consider bringing up the MI5 led stormontgate or the as yet unsolved bank robbery.


But, of course, that's the way of N Ireland; nationalists are the poor oppressed, and Unionists are the evil empire. I almost forgot for a minute. Almost dreamed that would be forgotten.

why would it be forgotten? when you had the interior minister of apartheit south africa on a trip to the north saying he would love the special powers act but would never get it passed, alarm bells should ring. you are on the wrong side of history here and defending a mentally ill bigots right to pervert the democratic will of the electorate is surprising from a normally sensible poster like you.

DUP and Paisley have on many occasions pretended to be honest participants
only to move goalposts constantly until talks fall apart or the talks continue
with all other parties but without them

Yeah, it's called politics. But the fact that the DUP have gone in with the St. Andrews Agreement is a sign that they may be prepared to move on from that, to some extent anyway.

It's been common for unionists to claim security problems, such as when
trying to claim that arrests in Columbia have any relevance to Ireland
and dodgy spying claims which eventually lead to the primary person
claimed to have been spying on unionists on behalf of Sinn Fein actually
turning out to be a spy on Sinn Fein bought and paid for by the British.
It was successful in bringing an end to a functioning assembly and boosting
DUP support which presumably was its aim.

Yeah, not what I was referring to. The IRA has/had a habit of causing problems whenever it came to an important point in political discussion. Hoaxes, bomb scares, the occasional shooting.

They have done nothing of any substance to indicate their stance has changed in any way from 1999's declarations.
As they have now won the majority unionist vote it should not be long before
the goalposts are moved again.

1999 - 'we will not even speak to Sinn Fein'

2006 - 'we have come to an agreement with Sinn Fein and will hopefully be in government with them'

How is that not a change in stance? It's absurd to claim that it is anything else.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0308/breaking61.htm

Posturing, pure and simple.


On all sides other than unionism, politics has indeed moved on.
Unless you consider that currently not utilising the yelling of NO without even pause for breath
as your main political tactic to be some kind of major movement.
Well, that wasn't mainstream unionism.

Sinn Fein has lived up to most if not all of their promises although I am hard
pressed to think of any they have not lived up to.

They still haven't got involved in the policing system created for them, unlike every other major party.

IRA were not party to the agreement and anything they have said or done
is above and beyond any requirement on them as due to unionist tactics
there were NO requirements on them AT ALL.

Bullshit.

I would suggest you ask them. But suggesting the policing board was purely
for Sinn Fein is purely untrue. All nationalist parties wanted at least that.
Sinn Fein as I recall wanted the abolition of the RUC and its replacement
with a police service without its history of pro unionist bias.

the policing board wasn't created for Sinn Fein, but the entire policing system we have no was created to appease them.

Many unionists felt even changing the name was a step too far.
Which lets the rest of the world understand exactly who is moving to reach
peace and reconciliation and who is moving goalposts.

Changing a policing system to keep terrorists happy is something that I can't imagine ever being particularly good.

I also refuse to believe that if I clap my hands tinkerbell will come back to life
neither my attitude towards the DUP nor my attitude to fairies is delusional.

Equally, I refuse to believe that Sinn Fein/IRA have changed from the murdering bastards of the past into truly pro-democracy politicians.

Ah I see it is you who are delusional and I am presuming at this stage
a DUP voting unionist as you so clearly prefer to pretend that non unionists
were not systematically denied proper representation not to mention accommodation
due to unionist gerrymandering. Jobs of course were routinely also denied them.
And violent reaction to peaceful civil rights marches helped launch the place
into the troubles that followed.

Where have I said anything even comparable to that? How could anybody deny that what you have mentioned there happened?

What I am saying is that it's ludicrous to claim that Unionists of today are the same as the Unionists of then, and it's ludicrous to suggest that what you have referred to is an accepted aim of any credible section of the Unionist community.

Oh, and by the way, I'm really a Unionist. I'm not really a Nationalist. I may have mild Unionist leanings, but they are based on an acceptance that NI has reached a form of balance; we have peace, a decent society, low crime, good education, but many other social and political problems which need to be addressed before any mention of unification. I don't massively care either way on the issue of unification.

In one sense of course you are right
I do not understand the majority of unionists,
their short sightedness,
their desire for domination over their fellow Irishmen,
at great cost to all sides
their blinkers and ignorance leave me baffled.

You do realise that this isn't 1970, right?

One day republicans will have the majority and if unionists don't want them
behaving politically towards unionists as unionists currently behave towards republicans then unionists need to make sure the assembly has a history of being run and that means starting now.

Do you honestly believe a demand that a party who wants to get into government should fully support the police and justice system is unreasonable?

Of course, unlike unionism, republicans getting what they want
would be a united Ireland with democratic election of representatives
in a proportional representation system meaning unionists would have far
more say in the running of the entire island of Ireland than they will
ever have over the running of the six counties as part of the UK without
devolution.
But unionists would not be happy as the pretence of democracy has always
been more favoured by them than the actuality of it.
A police force with no historical practice of politically based bias might
of course also be a choking point for unionists in that situation
A constitution guaranteeing everyone equal rights regardless of religion
might also be too much to bear for any reasonable and responsible unionist.

You're off your head. Right now I can't tell if you're being serious or if you're parodying hardline nationalists. Everything you have said so far; the vitriol, the hatred of 'the other side', and the sheer spite, is a way of thinking that belongs many years in the past.

examples? and don't even consider bringing up the MI5 led stormontgate or the as yet unsolved bank robbery.

No, I'm referring to the IRA tactic (which thankfully seems to have been dropped) of security alerts at key points in the political process.

And as for the Northern Bank robbery, it's not completely unsolved:
"On 17 February the Gardaí announced it had arrested seven people and recovered over £2 million, including £60,000 in Northern Bank notes, during raids in the Cork and Dublin areas, as part of ongoing investigations into money laundering. The Gardaí did not officially confirm that the raids were related to the Northern Bank robbery, but made the arrests under the Offences Against the State Act, the republic's chief anti-terrorism law.[7] Those arrested are reported to include several men from Derry and a former Sinn Féin councillor. A suspected Real IRA member was arrested at Heuston Station, along with two others. Money to the sum of €94,000 was found in their vehicle, in a washing powder box.[8] One of the men, Don Bullman from Co. Cork, was charged on February 18 at the Special Criminal Court with IRA membership.[9]"
Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Bank_Robbery#Arrests_and_investigation_developments)
(Yes, I'm aware that it's Wikipedia, but every statement made there has an associated source, it just happens to be a decent summary of the matter.)

why would it be forgotten? when you had the interior minister of apartheit south africa on a trip to the north saying he would love the special powers act but would never get it passed, alarm bells should ring. you are on the wrong side of history here and defending a mentally ill bigots right to pervert the democratic will of the electorate is surprising from a normally sensible poster like you.

Because the Special Powers Act was 1971. 37 years ago. Well, sorry for hoping that in 37 years things had changed a little. But the truth is that it's time to forget the old evil empire unionists vs freedom fighter oppressed republican bullshit, NI is a completely different world now.

Where have I ever defended the actions of the Stormont government? Come on, right here and now, show me a quote from me which defended their actions. I guarantee you that you will not be able to find one and, frankly, I'm offended that you would even think I would make such a statement.

Changing a policing system to keep terrorists happy is something that I can't imagine ever being particularly good.
.

...unless it was a morally bankrupt force involved in numerous sectarian activities itself...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6286695.stm

...unless it was a morally bankrupt force involved in numerous sectarian activities itself...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6286695.stm

That is a reason for changing it. That is an excellent reason for changing it. But that was not the reason it was changed.

That is a reason for changing it. That is an excellent reason for changing it. But that was not the reason it was changed.

Again all nationalists wanted it abolished and a new force constituted,
one without the history the RUC had clocked up right up to and for all
I know, past the signing of the agreement.

What they got was a name change!
Surprisingly then Sinn Fein did not jump at supporting it.
But neither did they walk away or bring the assembly to a crashing halt.
It was unionism and specifically the DUP who did that.

There is little point in debating you though Nadkor
I have a better and more suitable idea.


I will bet you £20 pounds that there will be no power sharing agreed to by the DUP by March 26th.

And if I am wrong I will happily post it or paypal it to you, for I would love
to be wrong, are you prepared to take the bet?

That is a reason for changing it. That is an excellent reason for changing it. But that was not the reason it was changed.

Well its been known to have taken place in far more areas than that, and the dogs in the street knew it....Nor was it only catholics that suffered because of it. It had to go.


As for Unionism, I accept that Paisely and a number in his party have (as far as I can decipher) resigned themselves to some form of deal with the "fenians". However it remains to be seen what the Willy McCreas amongst them do, as I have a strong feeling that their problem is not with "terrorism", nationalism or any other -ism than 'papism'.

Just waiting for the DUP's traditional unionist twisting of truth and reality
to explain not working the agreement. I reckon they are dangling the prospect
of potential agreement (hedged with enough nonsense for sane people to know they are lying) to get some financial benefits such as of course the exemption
from water rates. Once they have as much as can be got out of the prospect
they will then come back full force with all their reasons for not abiding by the agreement voted on and passed by all the people of the six counties in 1998.

Sure its only 2007 now, no point in rushing it when they can carry on being
obnoxious and quite deranged bigots for at least another couple of decades.