Paisley says results signify burial of GFA

Seabird

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Messages
78
PAISLEY SAYS RESULTS SIGNIFY BURIAL OF GFA

http://www.iais.org

DUP leader Ian Paisley has said the general election results
had seen the burial of the "so-called agreement".


Mr Paisley was speaking outside the House of Commons, where
he and the party's other eight MPs will be sworn in on Thursday.


He warned new NI Secretary Peter Hain to "heed the ballot
box and listen to what the people of Ulster are saying".


Mr Paisley said if the secretary of state's intention was to
confront the unionist people he would fail.


He added that the DUP "would not be talking to the IRA now,
tomorrow or ever".
 


Justin

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
60
Paisley's position has never been so mainstream ie the desire to politically exclude SF and the threat of change they represent dominates unionism and has sneaking regard in large sections of Irish and British political opinion.Although I think the IRA should leave the stage the idea that it will then be full steam ahead in getting the agreement working is very dubious imo.Could be political instability and then renegotiation is equally possible in the period ahead,risky as that is in terms of inviting conflict..
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
73
I welcome the realignment of unionism. Gets rid of this "moderate unionism" nonsense.

The reality for republicans is at least we know where we stand now. From Paisley and co we will have the definitive bottom line. No false posturing. Just good old straight talking. Paisley has said to the unionist community. We don't have to share power. We don't need equality. We can avoid our responsiblities and just wish our way back to the good old days of discrimination and gerrymandering. Of course, he will discover soon that his fantasy cannot become a reality. The croppies are lying down no more. The thrust of the GFA is irreversible.

In the eyes of the international community he will be ridiculed if he trys to avoid his responsiblities to share power in a divided untenable statelet.

He should look at the map on this page. If he thinks that the people represented by Sinn Féin or for that matter SDLP MPs are going back, he will be a laughing stock.

Unless he is willing to for once to demonstrate a wee bit of humility, he will be the consumate false prophet to his people.
 

badinage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
776
Cormac Donaghey said:
I welcome the realignment of unionism. Gets rid of this "moderate unionism" nonsense.

The reality for republicans is at least we know where we stand now. From Paisley and co we will have the definitive bottom line. No false posturing. Just good old straight talking. Paisley has said to the unionist community. We don't have to share power. We don't need equality. We can avoid our responsiblities and just wish our way back to the good old days of discrimination and gerrymandering.
Cormac, its very dangerous to assume that an extremist represents the whole community. Paisley is doing the exact same thing now - he's assuming the fact that a majority of Nationlists have voted for Sinn Fein means that a majority of Nationalists support the use of violence to ethnically cleanse Protestants (I know that wasn't the IRA's aim, but that's how Paisley views it). He thinks anyone who votes for Sinn Fein approves of Kingsmill, Enniskillen, La Mons, etc. The reality is that many Sinn Fein voters used to be SDLP voters, and are now voting for SF as they believe it will push more intensely in negotiations - they may still be totally opposed to the use of violence.

As far as I can see, Unionists believe Sinn Fein don't negotiate in good faith. Unionists therefore have voted for the party they believe will be bullied as little as possible in the upcoming negotiations. For you to go and make a leap and decide that this means Unionists secretly want a return to pre-1969 days, is dangerous.
 

hiker

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
1,950
Maybe we should re-join the United Kingdom and fight the UK general election as the new Irish Party.
No problems with a majority then. :twisted:
 

Libero

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
2,994
Cormac Donaghey said:
I welcome the realignment of unionism. Gets rid of this "moderate unionism" nonsense.

The reality for republicans is at least we know where we stand now. From Paisley and co we will have the definitive bottom line. No false posturing. Just good old straight talking. Paisley has said to the unionist community. We don't have to share power.
If you really believe this, why support negotiations towards the GFA or a renegotiated settlement?
After all, if all unionism is so intransigent, why not go back to war?

Or are you relying on the governments to give us Sunningdale Mark II?

I agree with badinage, the Provos have themselves to blame for most of Paisley's new support.
 

badinage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
776
MacCoise said:
i hope he lives to see a united ireland
he'd probably be the leader of the political wing of a vicious loyalist paramilitary organisation setting off bombs in Dublin, or at least an apologist for them and inspiration to them.

Don't let triumphalism get in the way of a peaceful future.
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
73
Libero said:
Cormac Donaghey said:
I welcome the realignment of unionism. Gets rid of this "moderate unionism" nonsense.

The reality for republicans is at least we know where we stand now. From Paisley and co we will have the definitive bottom line. No false posturing. Just good old straight talking. Paisley has said to the unionist community. We don't have to share power.
If you really believe this, why support negotiations towards the GFA or a renegotiated settlement?
After all, if all unionism is so intransigent, why not go back to war?

Or are you relying on the governments to give us Sunningdale Mark II?

I agree with badinage, the Provos have themselves to blame for most of Paisley's new support.
Did you actually read my post that you now quote from? It doesn't look like it from your response.

Of course, unionism is intransigent. Why? Because it has yet to have a De Clerk type leader that outlines the reality of the political landscape in the six counties and stays the course. They are yet to have a leader that is willing to consciously accept that they must share power with whoever the nationalist people elect to represent them.

I accept that Ian Paisley and the DUP are the undisputed leaders of unionism. Sinn Féin could avoid their responsiblities to reach agreement with them on the way forward. We could use him waving gun licences on the hilltop. We could use Ulster Resistance and those berets in the Ulster Hall. We could refer to all the unionist paramilitaries that said that Paisley's speeches motivated them to kill catholics.

But we recognise the need to move on. Unionism will have to do the same. There is no alternative
 

eurocrat

Active member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
231
Am I the only one who noticed that pro-aggremnet parties are still in the majority in NI?

SF+SDLP+UUP+ALLIANCE = Lots more the DUP

Maybe there is still an anti-argeement wing in the UUP but I can't imagine why they wouldn't have voted for the DUP. Plus the UUP only MP is a strong support of the Agreement. THe majority still favours the agreement, however Mr Paisley has never been a big fan of Democracy in the past.
 

Libero

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
2,994
Cormac Donaghey said:
But we recognise the need to move on. Unionism will have to do the same. There is no alternative
Well, for all your rhetoric, there is an alternative: direct rule from London. Not only is it a theoretical alternative to power-sharing, it is the actual status quo.

I know that you, I and nearly everyone else here will agree that it is an inferior alternative and unacceptable for all sorts of reasons. But that doesn't stop it being a handy fallback for unionists, especially those of the DUP tendency. No amount of sloganeering will change that, though disarmament by the IRA might.

Of course as I have said elsewhere (and again we'll agree on this), disarmament may not be enough for Paisley. Then the governments have a role to play although it is hard to see any Assembly working without the DUP. Sadly, it is also hard to see any Assembly working full stop with the SF and DUP going at each other like fighting cats, though that is a debate for elsewhere.

Cormac Donaghey said:
I accept that Ian Paisley and the DUP are the undisputed leaders of unionism.
I don't agree and neither does Pat Doherty.
From page 7 of today's Irish Times...
"Mr. Paisley should remember that he talks for the DUP, not anyone else." He said the DUP leader "cannot claim the mantle" of talking for the entire [unionist] electorate" and was not in a position to lecture the incoming Northern Secretary. "He only speaks for the DUP," said Mr. Doherty. "His party only got 34 per cent of the people's vote. We got 25 per cent. The SDLP and Ulster Unionists got about 17."

Shock! Horror! Libero agrees with Pat Doherty :wink:
 

padraig

Active member
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
208
Website
www.sinnfein.ie
eurocrat said:
Am I the only one who noticed that pro-aggremnet parties are still in the majority in NI?

SF+SDLP+UUP+ALLIANCE = Lots more the DUP

Maybe there is still an anti-argeement wing in the UUP but I can't imagine why they wouldn't have voted for the DUP. Plus the UUP only MP is a strong support of the Agreement. THe majority still favours the agreement, however Mr Paisley has never been a big fan of Democracy in the past.
eurocrat, you are right in that point, but that would require the two goverments to move forward without the DUP, which they won't do, yet the same two goverments have no problem doing the same in theory without Sinn Fein.

The interesting point is that all parties had to to agree to implement the GFA in order to be able to stand for the assembly elections, the DUP have not lived up to that commitment, by stating they will not enter powersharing with Sinn Fein, so the DUP could be expelled from the assembly for refusing to implement the agreement.
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
73
Libero said:
Cormac Donaghey said:
But we recognise the need to move on. Unionism will have to do the same. There is no alternative
Well, for all your rhetoric, there is an alternative: direct rule from London. Not only is it a theoretical alternative to power-sharing, it is the actual status quo.

I know that you, I and nearly everyone else here will agree that it is an inferior alternative and unacceptable for all sorts of reasons. But that doesn't stop it being a handy fallback for unionists, especially those of the DUP tendency. No amount of sloganeering will change that, though disarmament by the IRA might.

Of course as I have said elsewhere (and again we'll agree on this), disarmament may not be enough for Paisley. Then the governments have a role to play although it is hard to see any Assembly working without the DUP. Sadly, it is also hard to see any Assembly working full stop with the SF and DUP going at each other like fighting cats, though that is a debate for elsewhere.

[quote="Cormac Donaghey":30dyux1p]I accept that Ian Paisley and the DUP are the undisputed leaders of unionism.
I don't agree and neither does Pat Doherty.
From page 7 of today's Irish Times...
"Mr. Paisley should remember that he talks for the DUP, not anyone else." He said the DUP leader "cannot claim the mantle" of talking for the entire [unionist] electorate" and was not in a position to lecture the incoming Northern Secretary. "He only speaks for the DUP," said Mr. Doherty. "His party only got 34 per cent of the people's vote. We got 25 per cent. The SDLP and Ulster Unionists got about 17."

Shock! Horror! Libero agrees with Pat Doherty :wink:[/quote:30dyux1p]

Decent post, Libero

I see you or the IT journalist put the word unionist in brackets. If he (Pat Doherty) meant that the DUP do not speak for the entire electorate, both unionist and nationalist, I would agree with him. If you or the IT journalist accurately reflected him in bracketing the word unionism, then I disagree. Yes, Libero, even shinners are allowed to disagree.

You are of course right to point to the alternative of ongoing direct rule. I would be confident that it is not a viable long term for any of the political parties in the six counties. Yes, the IRA have a role in confidence building but by christ so does Paisley and the DUP.
 

DOD

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2003
Messages
642
Please don't post death wishes, its beneath this site. This is the point where I have to apologise in advance if anyone finds a thread where I may have wished something similar on Thatcher.
 

Libero

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
2,994
Cormac Donaghey said:
I see you or the IT journalist put the word unionist in brackets.
I did since I didn't want too long a post!
I was being accurate though. Doherty was responding to Paisley's pompous warning to Peter Hain: "Heed the ballot box. Listen to what the people of Ulster are saying. If you're going to confront the Ulster unionist people, then you're going to fail."

Pat Doherty was quoted as speaking in response to this statement by Paisley, which he described as "his usual bluster".

Cormac Donaghey said:
If you or the IT journalist accurately reflected him in bracketing the word unionism, then I disagree. Yes, Libero, even shinners are allowed to disagree.
Let's hope Pat sees it that way :wink:

Cormac Donaghey said:
Yes, the IRA have a role in confidence building but by christ so does Paisley and the DUP.
Not only do the DUP have a role in confidence building, they also have an official monopoly on invoking the name of the Lord.
So not only are you going to hell, you've have all of eternity to disagree with Pat Doherty when you get there. :wink:
 

AlphaZeus

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
3
DOD said:
Please don't post death wishes, its beneath this site. This is the point where I have to apologise in advance if anyone finds a thread where I may have wished something similar on Thatcher.
Death hopes not okay either?
 

bilderberg

New member
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
4
I think going by the elections and the political map of the north of the Island as seen here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005 ... gion_6.stm

there should be a referendum throughout the Island of Ireland or even re-negotiation in any future deal that the constituencies of Fermanagh/ South Tyrone, Newry and Armagh, Mid Ulster and west belfast are allowed join the Republic and seperate itself from British rule.
I think the principal of consent in the GFA is out of date 10yrs on and without seeing any possible agreement between DUP and Nationalism in forming a government it only makes sense. The remaining constituencies could remain within the UK and take their seats in Westminster.The principal of consent as it now stands is no more than a Unionist veto and will only sideline the nationalist voice to no mans land. The position of the Sdlp and their decision on such a move would be important if they did not back the move by going to westminster instead they would eventually self destruct as their argument for a united Ireland would be destroyed.It needs to be addressed if the GFA is to be re-negotiated.
 

bilderberg

New member
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
4
I should have included Foyle in those constituencies and south down as they are both over 70% Nationalist. I think everybody ie. SF, Sdlp Irish Gov. British Gov need to wake up and see that re-negotiation of the GFA is the only way forward and will benefit all.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top