Former Blanket columnist Dr John Coulter maintains the looming leadership battle within the DUP is not so much about who succeeds Peter Robinson, but what direction the new leadership will take the party. This is the question he ponders in this exclusive article for Open Unionism.


The future development of the DUP depends not so much on the third dynasty of the party, but in which political direction the new leadership takes it.


The fundamentalist Paisley dynasty is over, and the modernising Robinson dynasty looks certain to come to a close, perhaps even before next year’s European and shadow super council polls.

The DUP – even under Paisley senior – has always been a movement which puts the survival of the party first. Everyone becomes expendable at some time in the DUP.

Many have been quick to write off Robinson since the dramatic Maze shrine U-turn. But Robinson is Unionism’s version of former Southern Taioseach Charlie Haughey, the great political survivor. And there certainly can be no doubting that like him or loathe him, Peter Robinson has been one of the great survivors – not just within the DUP – but in both Unionist and Northern Ireland politics.

Since it was formally launched in 1971 from its forerunner, the Protestant Unionist Party, the DUP has seen many a person axed for lesser allegations than the Robinson dynasty has faced.

While the DUP under Paisley senior has stolen the rival Ulster Unionists’ political clothes, policies, position within Unionism and ultimately voters and seats, the DUP has also inherited the UUP’s troubles.

The DUP as a movement will be wary that the UUP should have dumped First Minister David Trimble before the 2005 Westminster General Election. Trimble had become a political millstone because he failed to shift the UUP to the radical Right to combat the electoral surge from the DUP, which really went into top gear in the 2003 Assembly poll.

Who in the DUP will deem that Robinson has become a political liability and rather than keep him through the 2014 polls and hope Unionist voters do not either return to the UUP, or defect to other parties, the DUP should ‘persuade’ him to step down and allow a new leader to settle in well before next year’s elections?

There is a significant body of opinion in what now remains of the UUP that the party should have dumped Trimble after the 2003 Stormont drubbing, and put in a dynamic right-wing leader who could have built the party thereby avoiding the Westminster General Election disaster two years later.

The DUP faces a number of problems politically. Clearly, like all pro-Union parties there is the crisis of the increasingly low turnouts in the Unionist camp compared to the nationalist community. But with the Union flag debacle at Belfast City Hall and this summer’s parades disputes, especially at the Ardoyne Shops in north Belfast, is there the possibility that Unionists will return to the polling booths in their thousands as some form of political revenge mobilisation against the Alliance Party?

Another crisis is the gulf between the DUP and the loyalist working class. To gain power from the UUP, the DUP had to significantly invade – and hold – the UUP’s traditional middle class Unionist strongholds.

While the DUP successfully invaded the Unionist middle class, it did so while abandoning the DUP’s own traditional bastion – the Protestant working class. In this respect, the DUP has been unable to copy its Stormont Executive partners. Provisional Sinn Fein electorally hammered its SDLP rival by venturing emphatically into the latter’s Catholic middle class strongholds.

But Sinn Fein achieved this while still holding a firm grip on its traditional republican working class heartlands, as Sinn Fein North Belfast MLA Gerry Kelly’s prominent presence at the controversial Tyrone Volunteers event in Castlederg clearly demonstrated.

The DUP now faces significant opposition for the working class loyalist community from the UVF’s political advisor, the Progressive Unionist Party, and the even more hardline Protestant Coalition party.

The staunchly anti-European Union United Kingdom Independence Party is also making a strong bid to establish itself as a significant force in Ulster politics.

This was recently demonstrated with the high profile visit of its leader, Nigel Farage MEP, got an enthusiastic reception when he toured loyalist working class areas of east Belfast – once Robinson’s Westminster bastion.

Likewise, in his speech to supporters at the Stormont Hotel, Mr Farage hinted that in the forthcoming European election, it was the DUP seat held by Diane Dodds which was most at risk from UKIP rather than veteran MEP Jim Nicholson’s UUP seat, in spite of the disastrous 2011 Assembly showing for the Ulster Unionists.

A hallmark of Robinson’s leadership was his desire to attract more pro-Union Catholic voters to the DUP. Traditionally, this section of society tended to vote for either liberal Ulster Unionists or Alliance. Perhaps one reason that Robinson was having to do this was because many Protestant voters were abandoning the ballot box.

This section of Unionism had mainly been in the Protestant middle class and were dubbed ‘Garden Centre Prods’. But with the emergence of a significant section of working class Protestants who had switched off voting, a new problem emerged for all pro-Union parties – the so-called ‘Allotment Loyalists’; working class loyalists who have not even bothered to register, let alone vote.

The DUP’s problems were compounded by a regeneration of the PUP, which now sees its support at around the same level as the 1998 Good Friday Agreement when it secured two MLAs – the late David Ervine in East Belfast, and current leader Billy Hutchinson in North Belfast.

The DUP currently contains three significant factions which will have a major bearing on who succeeds Robinson. Firstly, the modernisers – these would be Robinson supporters and would like a leader who could carry on in the direction that party is currently taking. Stormont Ministers Arlene Foster and Simon Hamilton would champion this faction, with Arlene a major front runner to succeed Robinson.

Secondly, the loyalists – these are people who want the DUP to re-engage with its traditional working class Protestant roots. Former Finance Minister and current East Antrim MP Sammy Wilson – often know as Red Sammy because of his pro-socialist and working class politics – would be their champion.

And thirdly, the traditional fundamentalists. Once the dominant faction within the DUP and manipulated by the staunchly evangelical Christian Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster during the Paisley era. Its champion would be the East Londonderry MP Gregory Campbell.

However, the demise of the Paisley dynasty and the dilution of the fundamentalist faction is best seen in that neither Paisley Junior, from North Antrim, and South Antrim MP William McCrea, the Free Presbyterian cleric and leading Gospel singer, are viewed as serious contenders to succeed Robinson.

The pro-Paisley faction in the DUP also suffered a major blow when Paisley senior’s clergyman son was not appointed as minister of the Martyr’s Memorial Free Presbyterian Church in Belfast – Paisley senior’s spiritual stomping grounds for many decades since he founded the Free Presbyterian Church in 1951.

Direction-wise, the DUP has a number of choices. It could follow Robinson’s direction and battle for the middle ground in Ulster politics. But that route pitches the DUP into a vicious dogfight with other middle ground parties such as Alliance, the Northern Ireland Tories and Basil McCrea’s new moderate, pluralist Unionist party, NI21.

It can aim for Unionist unity or co-operation and try to form a coalition with its main rival, the Ulster Unionists. Perhaps even a merger is on the cards with the Mike Nesbitt party. The DUP could even enter an electoral pact with other pro-Union parties such as the PUP, Ulster Political Research Group, Jim Allister’s Traditional Unionist Voice, UKIP and even the new Protestant Coalition.

However, the key word here is ‘trust’. Do these other parties trust the DUP? In the past, the DUP has only wanted Unionist unity when it suited the Paisley or Robinson camps. If the DUP was under pressure, the party championed the cause of Unionist unity, but if the DUP was in the ascendancy, Unionist unity was a dirty phrase, never to be dabbled with.

Finally, the DUP can return to its Paisleyite roots as a champion for the strange alliance of working class loyalists and evangelical Christians. This DUP was to the hard Right on the constitution, but to the soft Left on bread and butter issues.

The more cynical observers could point to the number of former UUP members now in the DUP, especially in influential positions such as Arlene Foster and Jeffrey Donaldson. Certainly Foster as a leader could cement the moves towards co-operation, a coalition, and eventual merger with the UUP.

But there is still a considerable rump of DUP supporters and member who have been ‘hard core’ DUP from their early political careers. The only party they have been members of is the DUP. Would they appreciate being led by someone or a faction which had ‘jumped ship’ from other Unionist parties?

While North Belfast MP Nigel Dodds is both an ‘original’ DUP man and commands a very strong degree of respect among UUP voters and members, his recent highly publicised health problem at Westminster has thrown up serious questions as to his physical ability to lead the party. He has the respect and expertise, but does he have the health, especially a DUP which is now on the back foot with the loyalist working class?

So, who are the three key candidates with the directional abilities to succeed Robinson? Firstly, Arlene Foster’s experience and her former UUP credentials could lead the party into a better coalition with the UUP.

Secondly, Sammy Wilson can kick start the DUP’s traditional links with the loyalist working class.
And finally, the Christians in the DUP could rally behind Gregory Campbell as the dark horse and bring the DUP back to its 1971 roots.

Likewise, does the DUP want to go for a Belfast-based leadership, or a leader who will rally rural activists?

Under Robinson’s leadership, the DUP has become the old liberal O’Neillite Unionist Party under another name.

I have made no secret that I want to see a single Unionist Party representing all shades of pro-Union opinion using a pressure group structure. In this respect, if I was a DUP member voting for a new leader, I would plump for Sammy Wilson.

As a life-long supporter of the Ulster Unionist Party, I have always had a high regard for the bread and butter politics of Red Sammy. The massive Church vote likes him, but he is not a raving fundamentalist who hammers other denominations in the way in which the Free Church used to criticise other Protestant denominations.

Whoever wins the DUP leadership battle – assuming, of course, that Robinson decides it is in his own best interests to go – that person’s strategy must be to form a Unionist Coalition which will mobilise pro-Union voters. That person will have to defeat the twin evils of voter apathy and fragmentation.

Just as the UUP leadership eventually became a poisoned chalice, is there also the danger being DUP boss could hold the same political cup of poison? At the moment, does the pro-Union community ‘trust’ the DUP, and would a knee-jerk to the 1985 Council policy of ‘Smash Sinn Fein’ work in the Assembly?

Has Robinson one last political trick up his sleeve to stabilise his leadership, or like Maggie Thatcher, Ian Paisley senior and Gordon Brown, are the men in grey suits hovering for a coup?

In what direction might a new DUP leadership take the party?

Former Blanket columnist Dr John Coulter maintains the looming leadership battle within the DUP is not so much about who succeeds Peter Robinson, but what direction the new leadership will take the party. This is the question he ponders in this exclusive article for Open Unionism.


The future development of the DUP depends not so much on the third dynasty of the party, but in which political direction the new leadership takes it.


The fundamentalist Paisley dynasty is over, and the modernising Robinson dynasty looks certain to come to a close, perhaps even before next year’s European and shadow super council polls.

The DUP – even under Paisley senior – has always been a movement which puts the survival of the party first. Everyone becomes expendable at some time in the DUP.

Many have been quick to write off Robinson since the dramatic Maze shrine U-turn. But Robinson is Unionism’s version of former Southern Taioseach Charlie Haughey, the great political survivor. And there certainly can be no doubting that like him or loathe him, Peter Robinson has been one of the great survivors – not just within the DUP – but in both Unionist and Northern Ireland politics.

Since it was formally launched in 1971 from its forerunner, the Protestant Unionist Party, the DUP has seen many a person axed for lesser allegations than the Robinson dynasty has faced.

While the DUP under Paisley senior has stolen the rival Ulster Unionists’ political clothes, policies, position within Unionism and ultimately voters and seats, the DUP has also inherited the UUP’s troubles.

The DUP as a movement will be wary that the UUP should have dumped First Minister David Trimble before the 2005 Westminster General Election. Trimble had become a political millstone because he failed to shift the UUP to the radical Right to combat the electoral surge from the DUP, which really went into top gear in the 2003 Assembly poll.

Who in the DUP will deem that Robinson has become a political liability and rather than keep him through the 2014 polls and hope Unionist voters do not either return to the UUP, or defect to other parties, the DUP should ‘persuade’ him to step down and allow a new leader to settle in well before next year’s elections?

There is a significant body of opinion in what now remains of the UUP that the party should have dumped Trimble after the 2003 Stormont drubbing, and put in a dynamic right-wing leader who could have built the party thereby avoiding the Westminster General Election disaster two years later.

The DUP faces a number of problems politically. Clearly, like all pro-Union parties there is the crisis of the increasingly low turnouts in the Unionist camp compared to the nationalist community. But with the Union flag debacle at Belfast City Hall and this summer’s parades disputes, especially at the Ardoyne Shops in north Belfast, is there the possibility that Unionists will return to the polling booths in their thousands as some form of political revenge mobilisation against the Alliance Party?

Another crisis is the gulf between the DUP and the loyalist working class. To gain power from the UUP, the DUP had to significantly invade – and hold – the UUP’s traditional middle class Unionist strongholds.

While the DUP successfully invaded the Unionist middle class, it did so while abandoning the DUP’s own traditional bastion – the Protestant working class. In this respect, the DUP has been unable to copy its Stormont Executive partners. Provisional Sinn Fein electorally hammered its SDLP rival by venturing emphatically into the latter’s Catholic middle class strongholds.

But Sinn Fein achieved this while still holding a firm grip on its traditional republican working class heartlands, as Sinn Fein North Belfast MLA Gerry Kelly’s prominent presence at the controversial Tyrone Volunteers event in Castlederg clearly demonstrated.

The DUP now faces significant opposition for the working class loyalist community from the UVF’s political advisor, the Progressive Unionist Party, and the even more hardline Protestant Coalition party.

The staunchly anti-European Union United Kingdom Independence Party is also making a strong bid to establish itself as a significant force in Ulster politics.

This was recently demonstrated with the high profile visit of its leader, Nigel Farage MEP, got an enthusiastic reception when he toured loyalist working class areas of east Belfast – once Robinson’s Westminster bastion.

Likewise, in his speech to supporters at the Stormont Hotel, Mr Farage hinted that in the forthcoming European election, it was the DUP seat held by Diane Dodds which was most at risk from UKIP rather than veteran MEP Jim Nicholson’s UUP seat, in spite of the disastrous 2011 Assembly showing for the Ulster Unionists.

A hallmark of Robinson’s leadership was his desire to attract more pro-Union Catholic voters to the DUP. Traditionally, this section of society tended to vote for either liberal Ulster Unionists or Alliance. Perhaps one reason that Robinson was having to do this was because many Protestant voters were abandoning the ballot box.

This section of Unionism had mainly been in the Protestant middle class and were dubbed ‘Garden Centre Prods’. But with the emergence of a significant section of working class Protestants who had switched off voting, a new problem emerged for all pro-Union parties – the so-called ‘Allotment Loyalists’; working class loyalists who have not even bothered to register, let alone vote.

The DUP’s problems were compounded by a regeneration of the PUP, which now sees its support at around the same level as the 1998 Good Friday Agreement when it secured two MLAs – the late David Ervine in East Belfast, and current leader Billy Hutchinson in North Belfast.

The DUP currently contains three significant factions which will have a major bearing on who succeeds Robinson. Firstly, the modernisers – these would be Robinson supporters and would like a leader who could carry on in the direction that party is currently taking. Stormont Ministers Arlene Foster and Simon Hamilton would champion this faction, with Arlene a major front runner to succeed Robinson.

Secondly, the loyalists – these are people who want the DUP to re-engage with its traditional working class Protestant roots. Former Finance Minister and current East Antrim MP Sammy Wilson – often know as Red Sammy because of his pro-socialist and working class politics – would be their champion.

And thirdly, the traditional fundamentalists. Once the dominant faction within the DUP and manipulated by the staunchly evangelical Christian Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster during the Paisley era. Its champion would be the East Londonderry MP Gregory Campbell.

However, the demise of the Paisley dynasty and the dilution of the fundamentalist faction is best seen in that neither Paisley Junior, from North Antrim, and South Antrim MP William McCrea, the Free Presbyterian cleric and leading Gospel singer, are viewed as serious contenders to succeed Robinson.

The pro-Paisley faction in the DUP also suffered a major blow when Paisley senior’s clergyman son was not appointed as minister of the Martyr’s Memorial Free Presbyterian Church in Belfast – Paisley senior’s spiritual stomping grounds for many decades since he founded the Free Presbyterian Church in 1951.

Direction-wise, the DUP has a number of choices. It could follow Robinson’s direction and battle for the middle ground in Ulster politics. But that route pitches the DUP into a vicious dogfight with other middle ground parties such as Alliance, the Northern Ireland Tories and Basil McCrea’s new moderate, pluralist Unionist party, NI21.

It can aim for Unionist unity or co-operation and try to form a coalition with its main rival, the Ulster Unionists. Perhaps even a merger is on the cards with the Mike Nesbitt party. The DUP could even enter an electoral pact with other pro-Union parties such as the PUP, Ulster Political Research Group, Jim Allister’s Traditional Unionist Voice, UKIP and even the new Protestant Coalition.

However, the key word here is ‘trust’. Do these other parties trust the DUP? In the past, the DUP has only wanted Unionist unity when it suited the Paisley or Robinson camps. If the DUP was under pressure, the party championed the cause of Unionist unity, but if the DUP was in the ascendancy, Unionist unity was a dirty phrase, never to be dabbled with.

Finally, the DUP can return to its Paisleyite roots as a champion for the strange alliance of working class loyalists and evangelical Christians. This DUP was to the hard Right on the constitution, but to the soft Left on bread and butter issues.

The more cynical observers could point to the number of former UUP members now in the DUP, especially in influential positions such as Arlene Foster and Jeffrey Donaldson. Certainly Foster as a leader could cement the moves towards co-operation, a coalition, and eventual merger with the UUP.

But there is still a considerable rump of DUP supporters and member who have been ‘hard core’ DUP from their early political careers. The only party they have been members of is the DUP. Would they appreciate being led by someone or a faction which had ‘jumped ship’ from other Unionist parties?

While North Belfast MP Nigel Dodds is both an ‘original’ DUP man and commands a very strong degree of respect among UUP voters and members, his recent highly publicised health problem at Westminster has thrown up serious questions as to his physical ability to lead the party. He has the respect and expertise, but does he have the health, especially a DUP which is now on the back foot with the loyalist working class?

So, who are the three key candidates with the directional abilities to succeed Robinson? Firstly, Arlene Foster’s experience and her former UUP credentials could lead the party into a better coalition with the UUP.

Secondly, Sammy Wilson can kick start the DUP’s traditional links with the loyalist working class.
And finally, the Christians in the DUP could rally behind Gregory Campbell as the dark horse and bring the DUP back to its 1971 roots.

Likewise, does the DUP want to go for a Belfast-based leadership, or a leader who will rally rural activists?

Under Robinson’s leadership, the DUP has become the old liberal O’Neillite Unionist Party under another name.

I have made no secret that I want to see a single Unionist Party representing all shades of pro-Union opinion using a pressure group structure. In this respect, if I was a DUP member voting for a new leader, I would plump for Sammy Wilson.

As a life-long supporter of the Ulster Unionist Party, I have always had a high regard for the bread and butter politics of Red Sammy. The massive Church vote likes him, but he is not a raving fundamentalist who hammers other denominations in the way in which the Free Church used to criticise other Protestant denominations.

Whoever wins the DUP leadership battle – assuming, of course, that Robinson decides it is in his own best interests to go – that person’s strategy must be to form a Unionist Coalition which will mobilise pro-Union voters. That person will have to defeat the twin evils of voter apathy and fragmentation.

Just as the UUP leadership eventually became a poisoned chalice, is there also the danger being DUP boss could hold the same political cup of poison? At the moment, does the pro-Union community ‘trust’ the DUP, and would a knee-jerk to the 1985 Council policy of ‘Smash Sinn Fein’ work in the Assembly?

Has Robinson one last political trick up his sleeve to stabilise his leadership, or like Maggie Thatcher, Ian Paisley senior and Gordon Brown, are the men in grey suits hovering for a coup?

23 comments:

  1. " Sinn Fein achieved this while still holding a firm grip on its Traditional republican working class heartlands "

    Noticed this myself especially when the green doors are being knocked coming up to election times-along with the other doors-most of those who are opposed/against Sinn Fein never even supported the party before the GFA-yet they tell you that they wont vote for the party as if they would make some kind of difference to the out-come-

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michaelhenry,

    do they paint their doors green?!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. MH

    I recon SF have lost a huge section of republican support. Or more accurately left them behind in their rush to a position of political 'respectability/acceptance'. As long as SF retains a huge chunk of SDLP voters this is camouflaged in the guise of republican success.

    Republicans aren't interested in SDLP mk2. But good luck to you who are. There's good came out of it all for sure, but the SF methodology was bad.

    The republican societies look to me to reflect and contain the republican communities on the ground. I will follow with genuine interest and hope their development.

    As for the DUP, I'd like Jim Alister to take over that party, I love a good laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It wont matter who leads these dinosaurs,nothing will change them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Michaelhenry tell us what kind of difference SF are making...

    Now don't give us the party shite that SF are opposed to the cuts or that they are calling for this or that.

    Tell us what they have changed since they have taken to following the DUP's lead in running NI for the Brits.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Protestant people. They are a bottom feeder party that thrive on anti-Irish hatred. Amongst Loyalist extremists they were hated for leading them up the path to acts of violence and then ditching them once caught or placed under public scrutiny.
    I myself have dealt with the DUP once and it was out of sheer need than actual want. I had needed to get some papers certified for University and had always gone to the Sinn Fein office for this. However, I have called into the DUP in East Belfast as I was passing through the area and was placed under a near racist assault. I was plain out asked if I even voted and if I had voted for the DUP. I was then asked, if I was even from the area!
    The 2 ladies stated they could not help as they were just “ civilians “ and the MLA was away. I was under the impression that MLA'a were also civilians. The next day I went along to my local Sinn Fein office and had my papers signed and returned the day after. My experience also included a cup of coffee and a chat.
    I have friends who are also from DUP areas who were treated like crap by the DUP when they had gone for help. Funny enough, it was actually Peter Robinson whom they had a meeting with. He avoided eye contact and did nothing to help them. Same for Edwin Poots with another of their friends. Both of these concerned parties went along to Sinn Fein instead and had everything sorted out ASAP for them. The list goes on.
    As a teenager in a loyalist area, we obviously had the DUP canvas the area for votes. However, despite the poverty and lack of amenities within the area, they never lifted a finger to help the youth or the elderly. It was instead the PUP and UPRG who had gone to get new housing, speed ramps, new playing areas etc. I do not support either of those groups but I will give them praise where it is due.
    My honest opinion is that the DUP have failed the Protestant community. Failed them big time. The recent flag protests caused by their 40,000 horrid leaflets against the Alliance was yet again evidence of their sheer lack of concern for the people they claim to be for and yet again, whipping up the underclass into a sectarian frenzy.
    Now we have a battle for the working class support between the DUP and the PUP. The PUP are also doing nothing but exploiting the community.
    My main issues with the DUP beyond their sectarian nature is their ideas of Creationism, bible thumping and complete inability to run a government. We have a health minister who believes the world is 6,000 years old and states that gay people are sub human. I just can not support that at all.
    Sammy Wilson is just, well, we all know.
    I must add that I was introduced to 3 DUP politicians, 2 of which were MLA's. This was in June 2011. They openly spoke of how they hated anybody coming to their offices for help if they had not voted for them. They hated all the Polish people turning up also. That really sickened me.
    Over the past 2 years we have heard Robinson try and call for Catholics to vote for the exact same party that has and still does treat them as 3rd class citizens. Unionism is in major decline and right now the loyalist community is in a war of tearing itself apart. It is lashing out at anything and anyone and the DUP is trying to exploit the community to keep themselves in power.

    Sorry that my post may have been a tad off topic. I felt I needed to type this out and share it with other readers here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mackers, Sinn Fein the Youngins took to painting pillar boxes green in order to try and fool people - tourists maybe - that we had sneaked into a United Ireland.

    Maybe the green doors are another part of this cunning plan?

    ReplyDelete
  8. AM-

    " do they paint their doors green?!!-

    Nope-most people are on a electoral register-and it is colour coded by the party-
    SF people are green-
    Stoops are red-
    Unionists are blue-
    Yellow are those you are not 100 per cent about but mostly vote Sinn Fein or would give you a preference-
    That's why you can see during an election campaign that the next house is a green door and you'd have no problem getting a cup of tea or using the toilet if you needed to-handy info when you are in some country area-

    ReplyDelete
  9. Michaelhenry,

    I reckon the yellow ones would be SF voters alright!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. The DUP, TUV..Libs, Labour & the Conservatives...UKIP, Alliance (my jury is out on SF as they don't frequent Westminster as often as the rest)..nothing but a bunch of wankers..

    Somedays there were as many as 800 clicks to porn in one day..Now there are just over 600 MP's..

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just as I thought would happen...

    Michealhenry popped out to answer Mackers and hid from my question.

    Come out...Come out...Wherever you are...Michaelhenry!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I would vote for "Maitiu Connel".

    To me he doesn't speak with a forked tongue, and , would do a better job for all communities.

    FRANKIE:

    Sure aren't they all a load of tossers!.

    Whats the use of voting? , don't they all do the same , line their own pockets.

    So , why vote, to be ruled by a British /German/Russian Monarch.

    Unionists would never accept the truth though. They state their Monarch is British, They see with their eyes closed and that is the major problem, they are too brainwashed with blinkers on , as are SF voters , SF do nothing for there communities, but they can give Loyalists communities Sports centers , playground and parks for the kids, and, "Which I have nothing against" , they were needed ,what did they get, The wee Belfast Mayor getting a few slaps , just to say thank you from loyalists.
    Oh, Just one more thing , I can't see Protestant working class people voting for Ukip, There to British.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The porn carry-on is a shocker. Fiddling with themselves whilst fiddling their expenses. At least they are able to multi-task. We can be thankful (as far as we know) Michaelhenry is on nothing more controversial that TPQ and FB all day. Superior public reps in 'nordyland'?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Larry,

    I know, that auld porn. Those MPs would never have been allowed on a republican wing in the blocks now!!!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mackers

    There's quite some truth in that assertion. Porn was 'officially' frowned on as I recollect. Maybe a few decent porn mags would have affected the 'conditioning' process that churned out all those unquestioning 'plastic people' for the SF surrender agenda. Serious when you consider guys doing life feeling like lepers for even considering looking at a 'dirty-book'. Now THAT'S control at work!

    Maybe an idea for Stormont, open up an Ann Summers shop there and a big banana bar. Might take their minds off the religious claptrap.

    ReplyDelete
  16. @Itsjustmackers:
    Yes there is great irony that is lost on the PUL community in regards to the monarchy. The ever so German, Greek and Dutch monarchy that they are. Most do not realize that the name Windsor was created to avoid any public disorder / loss of control over the common man during the world war. If only people had taken action against Prince Philip. The same man who's own brother walked with and supported the Nazi party.
    I was taught Irish history from an early age and also started to learn the Irish language at 11 years old. King Billy was of great interest to myself at a young age. I wanted to know, what is all the fuss about. My mates all sang about king billy but nobody had a clue about any of it really. It was a great eye opener to know that he went into battle carrying the church of Romes own flags and banners. Was paid and influenced by the Pope to defeat James. That the almighty king billy was married to a Catholic. He clearly was not a sectarian man and was driven by power. I wonder what he would make of the OO if he were able to see them?

    Of comedic value, we now have Jamie Bryson standing for European election.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Whats the use of voting?

    It'sjust..I don't vote. Never have and I doubt I ever will. The goverment always gets in and they all piss in the same pot.

    Maybe one day if there is a credible alternative to SF. But at the minute there isn't any. I understand both RNU & The Societies are sorting out teething problems etc..

    (JMO) if they are both to make in roads into SF then they need to get their messages out. Apart from sites like this, I don't hear much about them. I'd like to turn on Nolan at 9am one day and listen to SF on one side and a credible spokes person from 'dissent republicanism' taking them on.

    Gerry Adams legacy in West Belfast (if compared to a school report) would read something like.."Could do better".....

    I have a problem in understanding both Ray McCartney & Gerry Kelly siding with Adams.

    As for the porn business..Kinda makes a mockery of call me Dave's crusade on stopping me looking a porn!!!!! It's a bit like John Major telling the world about 'family values' when he was giving Edwina one for Ulster..

    ReplyDelete
  18. Frankie, would it not be a better proposition ,that SF do something rather than nothing, rather than upholding and being the overseers of the occupation of this island, that they withdraw their support from the legitimising of occupation. Imagine that, a political party actually representing those who without ? endorse them. In our collective dreams.lol.

    ReplyDelete
  19. SF should walk away from the hill feel te love. But they wont. SF are no longer socialist. Why they up hold British laws etc..That one is lost one me. I can understand SF (or any party) trying to make the police etc accountable. But they (police) are only accountable to themselves.

    Feel te love, I don't live in Belfast anymore..Grew up in Ardoyne and circumvented the conflict. I was never spread eagled against a wall or abused by the police/BA. I was stopped the odd time and asked..Name, Age, Address etc...That's the height of it. Seen the odd riot (generally the aftermath)..

    Looking at home from a distance the interment march..It was a great opportunity to reach out to loyalists and ask them to march too (maybe it was asked, I don't know)..They (PUL-ers) complain that the HET inquires are one sided etc..Imagine CNR-ers & PUL-ers marching together for the same reasons (just like the relief riots)..I don't see the difference between a republican or loyalist getting locked up for two years at 60yrs of age for something he/she may have committed back when I was still at Holy Cross Boys. It shouldn't happen. As an outsider I believed that the GFA was line in the sand. I believed that until I discovered The Blanket (that was around 2005/6-ish)..Now I know different. My kids will never grow up knowing what an oxymoron (peace line) is...Or living beside one.

    Call me Dave stood in parliament and said "Yes, bloody Sunday was murder"..No one charged. Stalker, Samson, Stevens 1,2 &3...No state forces locked up. A few months back Panorama 'pulled' a program that would have shed light on murders carried out by the BA in the early 70's..At the same time a report in the Daily Mail carried a story about an ex BA/MRF solider saying "Yes we murdered, sometimes with a nod from N° 10, sometimes not)..

    My problem (hope this makes sense, does in my head)..Feel te love, there is yourself, Anthony,Gerald Hodgkins and a host of others came through the same conflict as Ray McCartney & Gerry Kelly. And yet they side with Gerry Adams. Something doesn't add up.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Frankie, I am not singling you out, but about the report. "COULD DO BETTER". Are you tryn to wind people up. COULD THEY DO ANY WORSE. FFS look at investment into East Belfast. I fucking hate SF, I cant help it but I know I hate them for good reason. Ther are many people out there with there own reasons, I have mine and I will see them down.

    ReplyDelete
  21. fucking hate SF, I cant help it but I know I hate them for good reason.

    Feel te love, I'm sure you do and several others too. Personally, Ive never felt hate. I don't know what it is to hate..The 'enemy' pisses me off..But hate;For what?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Frankie

    I feel nothing but dismay. At the good people sacrificed/wasted for egos. SF are best let get on with it. Republican groups in the future will hopefully rip of their green rag and expose them, but the 'people' here aren't worth a day in jail.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Frankie:

    "fucking hate SF, I cant help it but I know I hate them for good reason."

    Hate can make you ill.

    The only way to get at those who intentionally sold out everything for their own political and monetary gains is to continue to dig into their past , their secret meetings with MI5 and the British Government.

    I knew a bloke who hated them that much , he used to lose his temper and punch the doors in his flat , sadly he became really disturbed and had to see shrinks, he is no longer with us today.

    ReplyDelete