- This topic has 88 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
I don’t suffer from ‘selective amnesia’; if I did, as a Labour/Liberal voter in years to come I would conveniently ‘forget’ how much I loathed Tony Blair, even though he’s not making his millions be selling cigarretes [but still making millions in other ways; oil etc]. The Thatcher years were terrible for me and have probably shaped my life as it is now, and I won’t forget that. Anyways; lets all get together in ten years time when our friend Dave Cameron has been in charge and see if things are any better! Old and cynical, I am now.
Whilst I was thinking of politics and polititians and how disillusioned I had become with them, I remembered an article that the S.O. had shown me a few weeks ago that was in The Times; it was about Robin Cook’s resignation speech, which he hadn’t heard. I actually recorded it at the time because I wanted my daughter to hear what Mr Cook said [and, just as importantly, how he said it]. Not thinking that it might be on youtube, I have dug the tape out and, shock, horror, I have recorded over it. Anyway, it is on youtube and we shall make a point of watching it tomorrow..it might restore my faith in polititians…..slightly.
It’s about time the Republicans were given a chance to run affairs. The unionists in charge strike me as a bunch of neo-christian lunatics. They have to move on with the times, just like the dissidents need to also. That said, Martin McGuiness is a traitor to the republican cause of which he was no doubt an icon for many. How he could label present day IRA members as ‘traitors to the Island of Ireland’, while sitting beside a chief constable, is breath-takingly hypocritcal to say the least. I would imagine that has left a bad taste with a lot of republicans, and quite rightly so. He ain’t daft though, he knows that kind of traitorous comment would make him more popular with nationalist voters.
Mo – in one posting you say ……
The collective ‘greed’ of the unions was replaced with a ‘me for myself’ attitude in this country which prevails to this day and which I find very sad.
you then go on to praise Robin Cook who was one of the biggest "me for myself" politicians in the modern era.
Do agree with your comments re Cameron though – he will be ineffectual and useless – yet another "popularist" politician with no conviction.
The trouble is, nowadays, there are very few "conviction" politicians left anywhere in the mainstream political spectrum.
I don’t think that anyone has ever had a standing ovation in Parliament before; he sure fooled a lot of people when he gave up so much for his principles!
I don’t think that anyone has ever had a standing ovation in Parliament before; he sure fooled a lot of people when he gave up so much for his principles!
I don’t think he actually gave up that much – he only remained in the Blair cabinet for political expediency and under sufferance and was already on the way out.
He was an astute politician and he realised it would be better, for him and his image, to go as the “principled hero” rather than end up being slowly sidelined.
As for his speech he was a good orator and his speech was popularist with those who had reservations about the war – plenty of emotion and little substance.
As for principles in 1979 he was opposed to devolution yet four years later he was suddenly in favour of it – was he being popularist again, trying to protect his seat?
As Foreign Secretary he was behind Britain’s involvement in Kosovo – an action not sanctioned by the UN, yet he resigned because Britain was by-passing the UN in its planned action against Iraq – very consistent and principled.
At least we can agree on one thing, and that is that Mrs T never pretended to be nice [oops, forget the Francis of Asissi speech when she came to power…] cue smiley if I knew how to do them. I think we’ll have to agree to disagree ad infinitum!!
Paul is spot on here. Cook has been overly lionised i believe.
Goldikova, it would appear that you believe that the Unionists "should move on" and are christian maniacs, but not the same for the IRA eh? Traitors if they do so?
And he was refering to the Real Ira and so on wasnt he?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7934894.stm
What is the problem with that?
If, as seems, you do have a problem, then the conclusion is that you continue to strongly support attacks on innocents (ie Enniskillen) by these terrorists
But of course, the Real IRA arent race hate driven, religous maniacs at all are they?
The problem was when McGuiness was running the Provo’s was that there was no alternative. They were was no political solution. Once Bobby Sands was elected as MP the tide started to turn and now most republicans support the North Process which is obvious as Sinn Fein are going to become the Largest Political Party in NI.
I despise the DUP as there this Religious driven maniac….you only have to see there masses or whatever there called. Its like a devotion. There comments about Gay People are extreme!!!!!!!!!……I rather like the hardliners UUP who are have Trimble etc. While they arent fans of Sinn Fein they dont seem to have this religious stuff…and know exactly where they stand unlike the DUP.
The problem is now that Unionists are stalling….they dont want policing well the hardliners that are in both parties wont support it….so its time to ask the Unionists what they want?. Do they want a NI Governed by themselves or do they want a Conservative Goverment that runs the North from Westminster with a huge cut in money. Afterall The North is a pitholl…..a bottomless pit for the British Taxpayer.
I think that the SDLP (who had considerable support) and people like Gerry Fitt and John Hume would disagree with the first part of that wallace. I dont believe Bobby Sands election made much difference at all. That happened well before the current peace process was in place and if anything, led to a period of greater intransigence. Ultimately the movement forward was not down to any particular event (although attrocities like enniskillen probably concentrated some minds) but was simply a natural sensible progression.
a very underrated factor is simply that the UK and ireland are now part of the EU and these borders simply do not have the resonance they once did. Racists on both sides will continue to play up the myths and stupid romances of their superiority but most people have moved on
I much rather this European thing to be honest.
Irish/British etc is just a nationality. As you say clive Borders are not seen in Europe and thats a good thing. Even if we give some power away to the Suits in Brussels….i think its been a positive thing.
DUP/SINN Fein would both take us out of Europe!!!!!
DUP/SINN Fein would both take us out of Europe!!!!!
See they have some good points then
Grimes
Yet more awful facts
They’d tax you to death in France, yet for the past 5 years it’s been voted the country most people would like to live in.
Why didnt you simply check the tax rates before looking. I knew you were wrong but heres the link
http://riviera.angloinfo.com/countries/france/intax.asp
Rates are lower than ours perhaps? Top rate kicks in at a much higher level
Not good enough when this information is so easy to find
Clive, Clive, Clive. Google and Wikipedia are your friends. You might have conned me had I not taken the trouble to check. They don’t just levy income tax and ‘council tax’ in France, they have all manner of other taxes – even personal income tax, after the rise to 50% here, is still potentially much higher. Corporation tax is higher. Why, hey even tax on the production of goods. And as for their wealth tax! How about that!
Here is a quote from Wiki(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_France):
‘Despite a downward trend registered since 1999, the tax burden in 2007 (43.3% of GDP) remains at a high level, both historically and in comparison with other countries. OECD countries have experienced an increase in the tax burden since the mid-60s comparable to that of France, rising from 25% of the GDP in 1965 to 36% in 2005. That of the countries of the European Union has increased by nearly 12 percentage points of GDP over the period. Efforts to control the increase in the tax burden have been made by the states of the OECD: the tax rate decelerated during the 90s and has decreased slightly since 2000. This is why France continues to be among the OECD countries whose tax rate is the highest. Taxes account for 45% of GDP against 37% on average in OECD countries. The overall rate of social security and tax on the average wage in 2005 was 71.3% of gross salary, the highest of the OECD. The levels of social security contributions are particularly high (16.3% of revenue against 9.4% in average for OECD). The social security budgets are larger than the budget of the national government. The budgets of both the national government and of social security organizations run deficits.’
And bear in mind, moreover, that Gordon’s super-tax threshold rise to 50% is very (Old) Labourish; and there’s likely to be more to come.
Back to the drawing-board Clive… But have a look at these.
Read this, too: particularly, the section: ‘Going French’.
And here’s a little someting for you and Insomniac. Don’t think it doesn’t come close to the record of the right in this country. Always, the mega-wars and the cataclysms, and Old Labour to pick up the pieces again. It’s beginning to happen now.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di … 89×7480585
A few gems, here, too, Clive – the second and third were mentioned in passing above:
•Taxe assimilee (sundry tax) is a tax only paid in certain areas, particularly popular holiday resorts as the local authorities must spend more on amenities and upkeep.
•Taxe professionelle (professional tax) is paid if you want to use your property to work from home.
•Impot sur la fortune (wealth tax) does not apply to most first time buyers in France as a couple’s annual income has to exceed €720,000.
Paul is spot on here. Cook has been overly lionised i believe.
Goldikova, it would appear that you believe that the Unionists "should move on" and are christian maniacs, but not the same for the IRA eh? Traitors if they do so?
And he was refering to the Real Ira and so on wasnt he?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7934894.stm
What is the problem with that?
If, as seems, you do have a problem, then the conclusion is that you continue to strongly support attacks on innocents (ie Enniskillen) by these terrorists
But of course, the Real IRA arent race hate driven, religous maniacs at all are they?
Where do i start with your absolute rubbish and lies, Clive ? You’d do a sterling job for a right wing rag, so you would.
You said i don’t believe the dissidents should move on, even though i said with regards to unionists, "They have to move on with the times, just like the dissidents need to also."….this shows quite clearly i said they should move on.
My point above just mocks your idiotic assertion that i approve of terrorist attacks. I don’t approve of any terrorist attacks, and the British army and security forces were as big a terrorist as anyone else during the troubles – no matter how much you try and tart things up.
And as for you saying the Real IRA are religous maniacs, i don’t believe they are. I’m under the impression that the Republican cause is about politics, and not religion. Infact the founding father of republicanism would have been protestant, but you know better Clive.
Try and think things through before opening your cake hole, please. You have this habit of being ignorant to anything that isn’t British. If a Briutish soldier kills an innocent civillian, he is no better than someone in Al Queda or the IRA who kill a civillian, regardless of what you think.
Republican movement is simple
Aim: To remove British Occupation of Northern Ireland and have a 32 County Ireland state. No religious intent what so ever…unlike the DUP who keep on about Catholics etc. Just so happens there is the religious divide between Unionist and Republicans.
I cant forsee any NI without Republican factions…..there is too much grief and hurt for there not to be. Problem is there very unintelligent folk, who cant see past the past so to speak
Republican movement is simple
Aim: To remove British Occupation of Northern Ireland and have a 32 County Ireland state. No religious intent what so ever…unlike the DUP who keep on about Catholics etc. Just so happens there is the religious divide between Unionist and Republicans.
I cant forsee any NI without Republican factions…..there is too much grief and hurt for there not to be. Problem is there very unintelligent folk, who cant see past the past so to speak
You have got to be joking. It’s no secret that the republicans have always had very smart people within their ranks. Security reports would have used the phrases ‘well co-ordinated and sophisticated’ more often than not when talking about them.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.