Messages

You are right in the point you make, but what is it with unionism that any form of moderate thinking is quickly shot down as sell outs or lundys?

Well we have posters here telling us that you cannot be nationalist/republican if you use the term "Northern Ireland". 

This to an outsider looking in cuts out a fair swathe of middle ground.   It demonstrates a belligerent bind to the past as much as an extreme unionist like McAllister.    I write this because it implies:

1) The failures of the past mean that "Northern Ireland" cannot today or in the future exist in any acceptable way.   

2) The famous spirit of the GFA (evoke so often in Brexit discussions) surely is that Northern Ireland of today can work as all identities are accomondated.

3) 50% of those charged with no. 2 actually don't believe it can work.  They are sorely there waiting for the place to be dissolved.

I would the questions:

is it not possible to be uncomfortable with the formation of the state(let), the previous running of the state(let) but be satisfied enough with today's arrangement ?  Enough even to be able to utter the name of the place? Enough to accept that some will celebrate it and maybe turn some it to some kind of celebration of Northern Ireland as it is today?

<edit> otherwise for 50% of the current government their sole interest is waiting for the place to disappear?

/Jim.

Jesus Christ, 5G part of the conversation.

I saw John Waters on a webcast with Gemma O'Doherty.  He did make the point that it is no coincidence that the Spanish Flu kicked off after Marconi started Radio Transmissions and now 5G has kicked off Corona.   It's to do with "electrifying" the atmosphere apparently.

The argument is rock solid because if you disagree with it, it is purely because the fluoride in our water supply has made you docile.  (and those enlightened know really why there is fluoride in the water).

/Jim.

I think the presenter dealt well with that segment of  debate, he had a professional air of restrained incredulity.

The only one restrained in that interview is Ben. He restrained himself from saying outright that it bothers him to have Nationalists in the majority in the University.

/Jim.

[Man charged in connection with Lyra McKee murder]

Man charged in connection with Lyra McKee murder

Police in Northern Ireland have charged a 52-year-old man in connection with the murder of journalist Lyra McKee.

The man, who was arrested yesterday, has also been charged with possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life, and professing to be a member of a proscribed organisation.

He will appear at Derry Magistrates Court tomorrow.

PSNI Detective Superintendent Jason Murphy said: "I have always said a number of individuals were involved with the gunman on the night Lyra was killed, and while today is significant for the investigation the quest for the evidence to bring the gunman to justice remains active and ongoing."

Ms McKee was shot dead in Derry as she observed rioting on 18 April last year.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0212/1114882-lyra-mckee/

somewhat sensationalist
the guys charged  is alleged to have picked up some spent bullet casings from the shooter.
far be it from me to be the judge but it will be interesting to see teh attempt to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty of murder

I don't get how he can be charged with murder? Surely there has to be intent and I doubt it was their intent to kill Lyra McKee. Maybe one of our legal professionals can explain it?

Mens rea can also be established if a an action is deemed so reckless that it showed disregard for human life.   Firing into a crowd of people could be adjudged to be such an action.

Joint enterprise could be invoked for taking the shells away to remove evidence.

/Jim.

That's true. The quinn murder was not carried out by a sinn fein member but one member suggested Quinn was a criminal.

Maybe it's a best case for Sinn Féin that people are discussing the latter.   

If some in media listened to the Quinns or looked back over media in the last 13 years they might draw a very different conclusion about the former.

/Jim.

whats the obssesion in ireland with owning a house.

When I was setting out in the 90's fixity of tenure was a huge issue.  It appears to be today as well.  When things seem on the up landlord start to raise rents or look to sell on the appreciated asset.   There is little legal impediment to this.  I have a German buddy who owns a house and apartment.  He lives in house with family and rents out apartment.  Once apartment is looked after (independent government inspector can be invoked to check this), tenant pays rent (state rent control and reviews) he can only get the apartment back if he himself is homeless.

The fixity of tenure things goes back to the 1800s in Ireland (remember it was a key demand of the Land League).  I think it is part of our psyche now.

Long term in can mean not paying rent on a pension.  I would say a lot of people would fear being on a low state pension and trying to make the rent.

That's two reasons straight away.

/Jim.

I don't think Michael Martin will risk dividing the party over a decision to enter a coalition with Sinn Fein.
Even if he stood down I doubt that another party leader could effect close to a consensus on the issue.

Imo the best bet for a coalition is FF FG GP, no more minority party government. The inclusion of the Greens into the mix will change the dynamics of the coalition and make the arrangement somewhat palatable.

Obvious as it looks I think they won't do that.  Making the Shinners leaders of opposition will help them grow even more support.   Clipping away at the sidelines, getting the airtime that leader of opposition gets.

I think FF/FG would rather not face that.

/Jim.

If you are thinking of building in the south I would hold out for a free house from the Shinners.

/Jim.

I'd say SF now have a tranche of voters that are not very loyal to them and who'll move away if they do not deliver.

and that's the way it should be as FF and FG are finding to their cost.

If you promise €5 on the pension you can do that soon enough, you can even allow people get the pension at 65. If you promise more houses and better transport you cannot easily bring these things into existence quickly. You can take long term decisions that help these things, it isn't clear that this class of voter looks at the planning or long term which is why we are where we are.

For health all parties are locked into Sláinte-care.  In the short-term firing money at new hires may or may not reap dividends.   The quickest way is to use National Treatment Purchase fund to clear waiting lists.  However, I am guessing that would be anathema to Shinners as it's supporting private medicine. 

The pension increase should be doable in "fiscal space" and any coalition partner would let it go.  The pension age is a longer term item.  In the short-term it wouldn't have a huge impact.  Looking at social welfare spend and demographics in the Republi it is a huge ticking time bomb though.

I think anyone other than Fine Gael would happily accept investment in social housing.  However 6.5billion will not give 100,000 houses plus I don't think you could even find the builders for that kind of volume.  I would guess the likes of FF would certainly agree to some kind of injection there.

Property tax:  You cannot pull that from local authorities without giving them some sort of central money.  Otherwise you will see the roads in rural Ireland going back to the sh1t we had in the past.   Some kind of exemption for lower paid people might wash but completely removing such a source of funding for local government would be calamitous.  It's also strange to see a left-wing party against taxing such an obvious wealth asset as property.

Income tax:  cutting the lower parts of USC could be done but will leave a hole to be filled.   Raising tax on high earners may not sit well with the 1,000 doctors and consultants they want to hire for the health service but I think some comprise could be made.

The hiring spree for health, justice and Gardai will be problematic unless the wealth tax truly delivers but I would see potential coalition partners agreeing an increase of some sort in all those areas.

Special Criminal Court:  Not a hope of carrying that.

Border Poll:  Being in government could help pressure the Brits but it's in the gift of the Secretary of State.  I think Brexit and Scotland will have a lot more influence on this than the Irish Government.

I think a rent-freeze could be done.

Stopping the insurance rip off - remains to be seen what can be done there.   I note in child-care that two of the biggest players have left Ireland altogether.  That doesn't suggest that they were making huge profits from their high premiums. 

I would say in any negotiations they can get more spending on services but no way will there a hope of running deficits so it will have to be done within fiscal limits and with whatever wealth tax income they can get.

Dealing with the private businesses like banks, insurance companies may prove problematic.   They can push more scrutiny but it's a difficult one to legislate for.  As for multi-nationals any changes to corporate tax rates will be watched with interest by London.   Boris is a weasel and if he senses a chance it's no problem to move all those brass-plates from Dublin docklands to London.


Gestures towards pensions, USC etc.. will be made but not fully to the level in Shinners' manifesto.

Unity stuff will be optics.

Special Criminal Court:  Neither FG or FF (even some of smaller parties) will countenance abolition.   Neither FF or FG would allow Shinners hold Justice or Defence portfolio as it would tear their own internal party support apart.

FG are running away and painting Meehawl and FF into a corner here.  After 9 years in government (mostly doing the heavy lifting of austerity) they would prefer to be largest opposition party, critiquing from the sidelines.

FF will be faced with coalition with Shinners or going back to the country and the Shinners becoming the largest party by popularity and seats.

/Jim.

The real point being that these things are not "black and white", never mind "black and tan". But with the objectivity and detachment that a century brings, reasonable people may come to a more all-round view of events and people.

Of course this is the nub of the matter. . Most who study irish and family history find this all-round view.  I have a grand-uncle who was in the DMP, two grandfathers who were in IRA, one of whom joined the Civic Guards directly in 1921.  I appreciate the nuances of this. 

There are some sensitivities  that Flanagan et al have blundered into:

1) The RIC as a "civic" police force.   It's a subject of debate if they were or not.  Going right back to the famine times there was the issue of their relationship with the ordinary folk.  They were always armed.  In my own county (Clare) pension records show that over 50% were "British" rather than "Irish".   They certainly never seem to have the "man on the beat" acceptance that much of the DMP had.  (outside of the G-Division).

2) The role the RIC found themselves in from 1918 - 1921 certainly could be seen as opposing the foundation of the very state that would now officially commemorate them. 

3) The fact that the "Black and Tans " were (deliberately) part of the RIC.  As a collective their actions were universally (even in contemporary British press and politics) regarded as criminal and unacceptable.

When Leo got into government I remember a controversy around his creation of heavily funded communications unit.  Still from a communications point of view they completely mishandled this commemoration and the issues above.   Other parties seem unaware or nonplussed about this but the Shinners went straight for number 3.  Flanagan made reference to online responses in his list of excuses.  However, there is a valid point that this went from an "RIC" commemoration to a "Black & Tan" commemoration on Twitter and it swept like wildfire. 

Also not inviting other party leaders but inviting council mayors?  Another own-goal.  Given that local republican representatives were most visible and targeted by Black and Tans?

Whoever is running that "comms unit" needs to take a long hard look.

/Jim.

UEFA said it would be an open draw for 2009 play offs. Then realised France was in there, so they changed the rules and made the draw seeded.

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/given-frustrated-by-fifa-seeding-move-1.752483

/Jim.

I presume they'll warm up the Ireland, Scotland and Romania balls to ensure home finals, should they make it. They've made no secret of their preference for host nations to qualify.

This is UEFA, the "warming the balls" trick is too subtle.  Remember in 2009 they just changed the rules the day before the draw.   Teams were seeded according to World rankings to give France, Portugal and Russia the advantage.

/Jim.

. It is all in an attempt to steer the debate down to low based gutteral orange v green politics and away from their own handling of Brexit. It appears to be working very well for them so far since I have heard very little real debate about Brexit in the media.

I saw their first election video where they spoke of a vote to keep Corbyn out.   Given the bi-party nature of UK politics (due respect to Lib Dems and local parties but they need a hung parliament to partner with one of the big two) then I guess the corollary is true:  a vote for DUP is a vote for Boris.  Of course Boris will want to ram the "Surrender Act" through.

Given that I suppose it's natural for them to steer away from the topic.   Keeping themmuns out is all they have left to offer.

/Jim.

It works in his favour if it's successful, if the directors step down and the business goes on the market. It works in his favour if the campaign of violence and intimidation is threatened against anyone else who wishes to purchase it other than SQ.

This is the same family, let us not forget, that hid assets to the value of hundreds of millions in order to renege on debts they had accumulated. They decided the taxpayer would have to pick it up.

It's quite clear SQ couldn't give a damn about anyone but himself.

Another executive was on Pat Kenny's radio show yesterday and he made a couple of points.  Firstly, he claims it was their intention from the start to get Sean Quinn "back behind his desk".  He said they were to revive and maintain company while Quinn "rehabilitated" financially.   Secondly, he said that under no circumstances would his parent company put the business on the market.  He said the risk for them of setting a precedent of conceding to these tactics would far outweigh the cost of just shutting the whole lot down.   

So basically he said anyone thinking that Sean Quinn or anyone else would profit from them walking away was purely delusional.

/Jim.

I have a Now TV box for the likes of Game of Thrones and boxsets etc.  They're a decent piece of kit and have the likes of YouTube and other apps etc.  My subscription is around 7.99 per month and that gets loads of sky content except movies and sports.

I have bought the odd Sky Sports day pass in the past for big matches (before I found other avenues) and they do the job. A bit pricey but the quality is good. 


Just be careful if you decide to just go with the app on his phone as I don't think they support chromecast.

The boxes are pretty cheap anyway and you normally get a month or so free movies or whatever with them.  Or even a free sports pass.   

Thanks I was thinking I will get a box or stick with a free monthly sports pass. 

After that just use it to get a day/weekly sports pass on occasion.   

/Jim.