'Brotherly Love': The Irish Question...

[Mick F]

Good ol' Mitch was on RTE earlier with Jeffrey Donaldson.....Mind you that is progress....the two of them appearing in the same PAL TV frame!!!!!!

[Dinger]

Originally Posted by Mick F

Good ol' Mitch was on RTE earlier with Jeffrey Donaldson.....Mind you that is progress....the two of them appearing in the same PAL TV frame!!!!!!

Old Jeff is a 'different' one. Him and 'his' plan for the future of NI. Can you imagine leaving control of here in the hands of 'grey' Jeffrey?

Used to laugh my arse off when he was on TV in that boring monotone voice of his talking about he was the saviour of NI.

True mate not often those two are on the same TV screen.

Dinger

Hear the one about the assassin who had 3 bullets left and had 3 more men to kill on his list
Saddam
Mugabe
Jeffery Donaldson

So he shot Jeffery 3 times!

[Mick F]

Originally Posted by Dinger

Hear the one about the assassin who had 3 bullets left and had 3 more men to kill on his list
Saddam
Mugabe
Jeffery Donaldson

So he shot Jeffery 3 times!

Which was followed by this sound CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK

OH GOD WHY ONLY THREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tonto]

Originally Posted by Dinger

Hear the one about the assassin who had 3 bullets left and had 3 more men to kill on his list
Saddam
Mugabe
Jeffery Donaldson

So he shot Jeffery 3 times!

Nice

[Dinger]

Originally Posted by Mick F

Which was followed by this sound CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK

OH GOD WHY ONLY THREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK Mick here is the toughest question for any Irishman

3 bullets as before and had to choose between Jeffery Donaldson and Daniel O'Donnell?

Is there an answer?

Mmmm

Dinger (for me I think Daniel just edges it)

[Mr T.]

This is not just about it coming down to a photograph as evidence of proof - this is Paisely's stock-in-trade bloody-minded intransigence!

Now I'm normally not one to entertain The Times (Murdoch's rag and all that), but Tim Hames has some highly cognisant, reasonable and even-handed remarks here; although, and speaking as a Catholic of Irish descent, if I was an employer (say in an NHS hospital) and an applicant stood before me interviewing for a job as, say, a surgeon, and claimed to have 15 years experience and to have worked at some of the best Swiss clinics, and I then asked to see his/her accreditations, degree diplomas and references, and then all he/she was willing to reply was "Ah, you'll just have to take my word for it...." I might not being inclined to give that applicant the job...

Still, with the list of referees from both sides of the 'community' over the water being onhand to witness the caches' destruction, I'd would be willing - at this stage in the game - to have a little trust in humanity.

If this were to go ahead and then Adams and his IRA buddies did go back on their word, then they stand never to be taken seriously again.

I'll toast peace any day of the week And the only way to achieve that is by establishing a working plural democracy, and for both sides to divest themselves of the siege-mentality they've worn like a cloak of honour for more time than is reasonably becoming or progress-inducing...


December 08, 2004

Analysis

For want of a photo, agreement is lost
By Tim Hames

IF IT looks insane, that is because it is. An agreement so comprehensive in scope, so profound in implication and so improbable after so much history seems to have been brought down by a dispute about a photograph.

Yet there it is. The Rev Ian Paisley’s terms for power-sharing were that decommissioning should not only be done, seen to be done by General John de Chastelain and his team, witnessed by two clerics, but also captured on film for the benefit of a wider audience later.

The IRA is equally determined that it will not be humiliated. We are back to the politics of “no surrender”.

What makes this doubly frustrating is that anyone with any sense of Ulster politics appreciates the enormous progress that has been made towards disarmament.

Even as the Good Friday agreement was signed in 1998, the IRA had no intention of surrendering its arms to anyone. “Not one bullet” was the slogan daubed on walls across West Belfast and it was not political posturing.

The organisation had put itself into cold storage at a number of points in the past, even dumped some weapons at certain times, but the destruction of them to satisfy the political demands of Unionists was unthinkable.

The unthinkable has, nonetheless, slowly materialised. First, the provisionals agreed that some of their arms dumps could be inspected and made inoperable, then engaged in small acts of decommissioning, and last October disposed of a very large quantity of arms — estimates range as high as 40 per cent of their entire stock in front of General de Chastelain — but the deal within which this deed was wrapped swiftly collapsed.

In the light of that experience, some may wonder why the IRA and the Sinn Fein leadership were prepared to consider the much larger step of effectively declaring the war to be over, allowing outsiders to join General de Chastelain in two massive disposals of arms and then turning what was once the most effective terrorist organisation in Europe into an “old boys’ association”.

The answer rests in a complicated mix of internal and external politics. The death of Joe Cahill, the veteran IRA “Godfather”, in July removed the last of the post-1945 founding fathers from the IRA Army Council.

He had been particularly hostile to any steps that could be portrayed as surrender. With his passing, Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness acquired a tighter grip on Irish republicanism than they had ever had previously.

Furthermore, Sinn Fein had overtaken the SDLP as the dominant political party among Roman Catholics and could be confident of totally eclipsing its rival if the IRA put the gun to one side permanently and thus became fully “respectable”. And Sinn Fein also knew that if it could reach an understanding with Mr Paisley then that bargain would stick, whereas it had already been shown that David Trimble and the Ulster Unionist Party were fragile partners.

If the willingness of Mr Adams to accept the marginalisation of the IRA is explicable, the position of Mr Paisley and the DUP is harder to fathom. They had to demonstrate to their community that they had negotiated a better deal than Mr Trimble had and could ever manage. This they could have done on what they were offered. The photograph does not seem necessary for the DUP to claim a major political victory.

This is probably the view shared by Peter Robinson, Mr Paisley’s long-serving deputy, and Nigel Dodds, his pragmatic colleague. Their leader was not convinced.

His public references to “sackcloth and ashes” last week, and then his absolutist stance on photography on Monday, leaves the suspicion that he was not prepared to put his signature to any final settlement for Ulster.

The paradox of his position is that if this political impasse endures, it will be the Unionist community and its political leaders who will be marginalised.

Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern will be tempted to trade political concessions to Sinn Fein for IRA disarmament on terms the two prime ministers, not the DUP, deem acceptable. That is a high price to pay for a missing photograph.

[Ali_Mc]

This is quite a complicated question, and as simple as it might seem to put it in black and white, it is not quite right to do so. It is politicians that we are dealing with here, and a certain amount of wheeling and dealing must be taken into account, moreso when talking about Ian Paisley, Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness. They are are having to take the opinion of extreme elements of their communities into account when reacting to an announcement or an action and this should be allowed for. The toleration of silly comments by politicians can be seen as a step forward in the political arena of Northern Ireland! As much as frustration is justified over the slow pace of progress on the negotiations, we should all be thankful that we have arrived at a position that these two parties can represent their communities in Northern Ireland and (so far at least) engage in negotiations to bring the country forward. Long may it last and hopefully it will bring positive developments!

Ali

P.s Although I cannot support this allegation personally, I have been informed that Daniel O'Donnell is actually quite a nice fella! No, please, don't faint!....

[Mr T.]

[Dinger]

Originally Posted by Ali_Mc

P.s Although I cannot support this allegation personally, I have been informed that Daniel O'Donnell is actually quite a nice fella! No, please, don't faint!....

He may be but he has tortured us for so long with his quaffed, dyed hair and his tight jeans and convertable cars! I'm so sorry but I just can't forgive him. I am still a bit raw.

Dinger

[Mick F]

Originally Posted by Dinger

OK Mick here is the toughest question for any Irishman

3 bullets as before and had to choose between Jeffery Donaldson and Daniel O'Donnell?

Is there an answer?

Mmmm

Dinger (for me I think Daniel just edges it)

AAAAHHHHH ya swine!!!! the torture of it all....Jeff or Danny??????

Does battering one of em with an empty gun count??????