![Northern Ireland [right]](img/ni.gif)
7th May 2005
David Trimble Steps Down
I'm sure cheers will be going up from DUP supporters all over Northern Ireland following David Trimble's announcement today that he was resigning from he Ulster Unionist Party. Trimble blamed republicans for the state of his party following yesterday's disastrous election results.
Announcing his resignation, Trimble said "I am pleased to have had the privilege of leading what I regard as the best and most democratic political grouping in Ulster."
David Trimble has blamed republicans for the current impasse and polarisation of the Unionis vote. The unwillingness of the republican movement to deliver disarmament as they promised by signing up to the agreement, meant that Unionists had become disillusioned with the whole process as they saw concession after concession drifting the other direction.
Or in his words:
"They have not themselves implemented the Good Friday Agreement. If they had, then they would have disarmed completely in May 2000, that is what they undertook to do, that is what they failed to do.
Rather than implement the agreement, the republican movement have exploited the agreement. The net result of all of that is that there is total disgust in the unionist community with them."
I laughed myself in the last few days of the campaign as I heard Sinn Fein and their supporters claiming to be "the largest pro-agreement party," because as far as I'm concerned, they are not pro-agreement. They say they are but conveniently enough, they're only for the bits of it they like.
Last night leading Ulster Unionists David Burnside and David McNarry had been voicing their opinions on Trimble's position. Burnside called for Trimble's resignation saying "If he hangs on after this, God help the Ulster Unionist Party. The more he continues as leader, the more he damages the UUP," and "I said last year he is past his sell-by date and I haven't changed my mind."
McNarry, an MLA and formerly a close advisor to Trimble, said that he expected Trimble's resignation to come this weekend and Lord Kilclooney (John Taylor) said he'd resign if he was in Trimble's position.
As I stated earlier I expected this too and Trimble has done the right thing. People close to Trimble agree that he was very proud of representing his constituency at Westminster and considered it an honour, however, after a defeat like the one his party suffered yesterday, the Ulster Unionists need a massive change to reinvent themselves for future campaigns.
The Ulster Unionist party chairman will now arrange a meeting of the party executive which will set a date for a special meeting of the Ulster Unionist Council to elect a new leader. It's at this meeting, Trimble says, he will formally resign. It's rumoured that he could be in for a swift return to Westminster as a Lord.
The main drawback of David Trimble's resignation for the party that I can see is the lack of an obvious replacement. Reg Empey, Michael McGimpsey and David Burnside have all been touted as potential successors but none seem an obvious choice.
McGimpsey is often criticised for lacking charisma and I think the party needs someone capable of capturing the imaginations of voters (and indeed non-voters) and I'm not sure he could do this.
Burnside has openly criticised Trimble many times over the last few years and I wouldn't like to see someone who would do that to his own party elected to lead it - and also because he would just lead them towards the position of the DUP, albeit perhaps based more in logic and rationale, with less blind faith and jingoism.
Reg Empey is probably my personal pick of these 3. Aside from the fact he managed to increase his vote this year, he seems to have the experience necessary to lead the party. That said, Empey isn't a young leader and I'm not sure he would have much in he way of new ideas, but of course I could be wrong.
Only time will tell if one of these men, or someone else, can inject some new life into the Ulster Unionist party in time to save it from becoming a natural junior partner to the DUP.
Comments:
Comment from:
Bob Wilson [Visitor]
'massive change to reinvent themselves for future campaigns.'
Can't see how. Especially as even if Conservatives continue to stand candidates and cream off 2.5-4.5% how could they ever unseat a sitting DUP MP?
I think it is time for a radical approach - UUP (or most of it) should merge with Conservatives - branding it as 'moving unionism back into the mainstream/ ending our exculsion from real politics' - this would give a strong new identity that could appeal to many traditional supporters, many non voters and even some SDLP voters
Yes some people would leave but the alternative is (slow?) death
Can't see how. Especially as even if Conservatives continue to stand candidates and cream off 2.5-4.5% how could they ever unseat a sitting DUP MP?
I think it is time for a radical approach - UUP (or most of it) should merge with Conservatives - branding it as 'moving unionism back into the mainstream/ ending our exculsion from real politics' - this would give a strong new identity that could appeal to many traditional supporters, many non voters and even some SDLP voters
Yes some people would leave but the alternative is (slow?) death
8th May 2005 @ 00:06
Comment from:
David Vance [Visitor]
· http://www.atangledweb.typepad.com
Beano,
Elect Sir Reg - Trimble lite - and continue to die. I believe that a much more RADICAL change needs to happen. I think the question is a fundamental one: WHY do we need a UUP? Bob Wilson maybe aproaches the area that needs looked at - I favour a radical transformation of the UUP - and without going into all details here - I agree with Alex Kane that ANY of the candidates you mention will lead to potential extinction.
Elect Sir Reg - Trimble lite - and continue to die. I believe that a much more RADICAL change needs to happen. I think the question is a fundamental one: WHY do we need a UUP? Bob Wilson maybe aproaches the area that needs looked at - I favour a radical transformation of the UUP - and without going into all details here - I agree with Alex Kane that ANY of the candidates you mention will lead to potential extinction.
8th May 2005 @ 11:05
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
DV my problem is that I can't see anyone else in the UUP as an alternative.
Bob - I had wondered myself about a merger with the Conservatives again. I think it has to be at least worth considering - the problem is do the Tories want to be associated with a party that's currently heading in the wrong direction as far as election results go?
Bob - I had wondered myself about a merger with the Conservatives again. I think it has to be at least worth considering - the problem is do the Tories want to be associated with a party that's currently heading in the wrong direction as far as election results go?
8th May 2005 @ 12:53
Comment from:
Steven [Visitor]
A good leader to the Ulster Unionist Party, should be David Burnside
8th May 2005 @ 21:05
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
Steven - Burnside is effectively DUP lite. Why would anyone vote for such a man when they could just vote DUP?
The Ulster Unionists need to differentiate themselves from the DUP, not half-heartedly mimic them, a policy which failed them during this campaign.
The Ulster Unionists need to differentiate themselves from the DUP, not half-heartedly mimic them, a policy which failed them during this campaign.
8th May 2005 @ 22:44
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
Just read this article in the Sunday Life mentioning Lord Kilclooney (John Taylor). Have to admit to not knowing an awful lot about him (mostly before my time). Sounds like a reasonable choice from what the article says though.
9th May 2005 @ 00:38
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
A more satirical look at Trimble's downfall courtest of The Northern Irish Magyar
9th May 2005 @ 09:50
Comment from:
Bob Wilson [Visitor]
I think, in an ideal world, the NI Tories would want to continue the long struggle to build their own party in NI. I was chiefly looking at the situation from a UUP angle. Pragmatically it might suit both however.
Not only is there the electoral problem I alluded to above for UUP. Perhaps more pressing in the financial one. Newsletter points out MP allowances and policy grant sustained the Party. Moreover, Lord Ballyedmond is first and foremost a Trimblite (actually first and foremost he is a Tory but that another matter). He is unlikely to continue to finance the Party - esp if anyone like Burnside takes over.
I here from UUP sources that Lord Taylor has been raising the merger idea if so it is a turn up for the books! Reg is known to opoose the idea on the petty Ulster view - 'sure you can't trust them they let us down in the past' This of course overlooks the fact that by being seperate from Tories unionism was in a poor position to build relationships - and ironically only started to do so when Laurence Kennedy outflanked them.
Lady Silvia is a leftie so that to creates a problem
Not only is there the electoral problem I alluded to above for UUP. Perhaps more pressing in the financial one. Newsletter points out MP allowances and policy grant sustained the Party. Moreover, Lord Ballyedmond is first and foremost a Trimblite (actually first and foremost he is a Tory but that another matter). He is unlikely to continue to finance the Party - esp if anyone like Burnside takes over.
I here from UUP sources that Lord Taylor has been raising the merger idea if so it is a turn up for the books! Reg is known to opoose the idea on the petty Ulster view - 'sure you can't trust them they let us down in the past' This of course overlooks the fact that by being seperate from Tories unionism was in a poor position to build relationships - and ironically only started to do so when Laurence Kennedy outflanked them.
Lady Silvia is a leftie so that to creates a problem
9th May 2005 @ 10:44
Comment from:
Michael [Visitor]
Yes Sylvia Hermon is left of centre but she couldn't force the party too far left anyway. So perhaps the UUC needs confidence in its own ability to control the party direction, and elect who ever would do the best job at getting voters back and getting non voters out.
If the leader had absolute power wee Jeffrey, Burnside, Smyth etc would not have been able to oppose trimble or his policies.
If the leader had absolute power wee Jeffrey, Burnside, Smyth etc would not have been able to oppose trimble or his policies.
12th May 2005 @ 11:27
Comment from:
Michael [Visitor]
A lot of rumbling about Hermon not being credible...
Esp from DUP boy Stalford.
I urge UUC delegates not to be led by the Paisley Youth.
If Hermon is not a credible leader explain why. I can certainly see its a major break with tradition, but we may only have one throw of the dice left.
from a UUP man
Esp from DUP boy Stalford.
I urge UUC delegates not to be led by the Paisley Youth.
If Hermon is not a credible leader explain why. I can certainly see its a major break with tradition, but we may only have one throw of the dice left.
from a UUP man
12th May 2005 @ 11:33
Comment from:
stephen [Visitor]
I hope you do elect hermon as leader, that will definitely be the end of you lot.
And good riddance.
We have lost so much to sfira because of the spineless leadership of trimble, it makes me sick.
Keep murderers out of government.
And good riddance.
We have lost so much to sfira because of the spineless leadership of trimble, it makes me sick.
Keep murderers out of government.
12th May 2005 @ 15:41
Comment from:
Logybird [Visitor]
· http://egoletters.blogspot.com
Apart from Lady Sylvia, I've come across a reasonable Ulster Unionist who could do the job.
Dermot Nesbitt anyone?
Dermot Nesbitt anyone?
13th May 2005 @ 09:37
Comment from:
stephen [Visitor]
logybird, are you having a laugh?
The 'nerd' nesbitt is probably, no, definitely worse than even trimble.
It is essential that if the UUP really want to save themselves, they MUST appoint an anti agreement leader, or, someone with some distance from the previous 'leader'.
I personally hope they do neither, and if they appoint hermon, empey, taylor, nesbitt, or anyone within the trimble camp, they will definitely get stuffed in every election to come...
Happy days.
The 'nerd' nesbitt is probably, no, definitely worse than even trimble.
It is essential that if the UUP really want to save themselves, they MUST appoint an anti agreement leader, or, someone with some distance from the previous 'leader'.
I personally hope they do neither, and if they appoint hermon, empey, taylor, nesbitt, or anyone within the trimble camp, they will definitely get stuffed in every election to come...
Happy days.
13th May 2005 @ 13:02
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
You personally hope they do neither so they will get "stuffed" in coming elections?
So you admit then that your priority is to annihilate the Ulster Unionists?
Do you believe that the only choice for Unionist voters being a right-wing, religious, authoritarian party would be a good thing? If nothing else, it would probably stop me voting at all (or drive me to the Alliance if the Tories weren't standing).
By the way, Arlene Foster and others resent the term "Anti-Agreement," since they are only anti the "Belfast" Agreement. They would argue that they want an agreement too, just not on the terms Trimble signed up to. I therefore find it strange that you choose to use the term 'Anti Agreement' as something positive.
So you admit then that your priority is to annihilate the Ulster Unionists?
Do you believe that the only choice for Unionist voters being a right-wing, religious, authoritarian party would be a good thing? If nothing else, it would probably stop me voting at all (or drive me to the Alliance if the Tories weren't standing).
By the way, Arlene Foster and others resent the term "Anti-Agreement," since they are only anti the "Belfast" Agreement. They would argue that they want an agreement too, just not on the terms Trimble signed up to. I therefore find it strange that you choose to use the term 'Anti Agreement' as something positive.
13th May 2005 @ 13:22
Comment from:
Concerned Loyalist [Visitor]
I am a DUP voter, but a loyalist first and foremost.
Trimble had many faults and I am not sad to see him go.
I detested his patronising manner and felt he wasn't in touch with reality on occasions, most notably when he trusted the unreformed sectarian killers and their supporters in Sinn Fein/IRA, letting them into government before disarming one Armalite.
I abhorred the way he didn't listen to the Unionist/Loyalist people when he agreed to the dismantling of the RUC, it's name and structures, to give us a police force that incorporates institutionalized sectarianism and descrimination of Protestants.
I detested him for not addressing bread and butter issues in loyalist communities, such as parity of esteem for housing, with nationalists benefitting exponentially from central-heating and other renovation work, while Protestant families lived in ghastly abodes which could be described as no more than squalors. Basically, he turned his back on doing any work to aid the regeneration of run-down loyalist areas, examples of which are too numerous to name.
Having said all of this, I honestly don't know who could replace him. Reg Empey is not a leader, and is too old anyway, Dermot Nesbitt does indeed look and talk like a nerd as "Stephen" pointed out and Lady Sylvia Hermon from "awfully posh" North Down will never get the working-class vote.That leves David Burnside who I think has more in common with the DUP than the UUP, and John Taylor a.k.a. Lord Kilclooney.
Taylor has always struck me a born leader, but age is against him, and perhaps his time passed when he was overlooked in favour of Trimble.
I feel he would be the best of a bad bunch if I'M being frank.
He'd be the best candidate to appeal to the working, as well as middle-class, to the liberals and more traditional unionists. He has guts and character which was illustrated when he survived a Provo gun-attack in which he was repeatedly shot in the face, thus the reason for his prominent jaw. He showed immense bravery just hours after leaving hospital, by standing on the balcony at Stormont and waving out to the crowd, in effect giving a two-fingered salute to the scum who tried to murder him.
In summary, the UUP need to sort themselves out and do it quick. They need to halt the intransigence shown in South Belfast and Fermanagh-South Tyrone, where if they had of given the DUP a free-run, South Belfast, a safe Unionist seat, would not have been lost to nationalism, and Fermanagh-South Tyrone would have been wrestled away from militant republicanism. We need strong leadership, and the UUP need to deliver, just as their co-unionists, the DUP have.
Trimble had many faults and I am not sad to see him go.
I detested his patronising manner and felt he wasn't in touch with reality on occasions, most notably when he trusted the unreformed sectarian killers and their supporters in Sinn Fein/IRA, letting them into government before disarming one Armalite.
I abhorred the way he didn't listen to the Unionist/Loyalist people when he agreed to the dismantling of the RUC, it's name and structures, to give us a police force that incorporates institutionalized sectarianism and descrimination of Protestants.
I detested him for not addressing bread and butter issues in loyalist communities, such as parity of esteem for housing, with nationalists benefitting exponentially from central-heating and other renovation work, while Protestant families lived in ghastly abodes which could be described as no more than squalors. Basically, he turned his back on doing any work to aid the regeneration of run-down loyalist areas, examples of which are too numerous to name.
Having said all of this, I honestly don't know who could replace him. Reg Empey is not a leader, and is too old anyway, Dermot Nesbitt does indeed look and talk like a nerd as "Stephen" pointed out and Lady Sylvia Hermon from "awfully posh" North Down will never get the working-class vote.That leves David Burnside who I think has more in common with the DUP than the UUP, and John Taylor a.k.a. Lord Kilclooney.
Taylor has always struck me a born leader, but age is against him, and perhaps his time passed when he was overlooked in favour of Trimble.
I feel he would be the best of a bad bunch if I'M being frank.
He'd be the best candidate to appeal to the working, as well as middle-class, to the liberals and more traditional unionists. He has guts and character which was illustrated when he survived a Provo gun-attack in which he was repeatedly shot in the face, thus the reason for his prominent jaw. He showed immense bravery just hours after leaving hospital, by standing on the balcony at Stormont and waving out to the crowd, in effect giving a two-fingered salute to the scum who tried to murder him.
In summary, the UUP need to sort themselves out and do it quick. They need to halt the intransigence shown in South Belfast and Fermanagh-South Tyrone, where if they had of given the DUP a free-run, South Belfast, a safe Unionist seat, would not have been lost to nationalism, and Fermanagh-South Tyrone would have been wrestled away from militant republicanism. We need strong leadership, and the UUP need to deliver, just as their co-unionists, the DUP have.
13th May 2005 @ 14:03
Comment from:
Logybird [Visitor]
· http://egoletters.blogspot.com
If the UUP get a more DUP-like leader, who will represent pro-Belfast agreement Unionists? (There must still be some.)
If a hardline figure does take charge there will undoubtedly be those driven towards Alliance who will struggle to admit that they are a liberal unionist party.
If a hardline figure does take charge there will undoubtedly be those driven towards Alliance who will struggle to admit that they are a liberal unionist party.
13th May 2005 @ 14:09
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
beano, read my letter in the belfast telegraph today, and you will see clearly I am in favour of a rejuvenated unionist grouping.
I do believe that the pro agreement uup members have no place in Unionism at all, they should go to the Alliance party and get it over with.
I do not agree with the religious overtones in the DUP, but at least they are stronger and not as easily fooled as the UUP.
Thats why they are now the largest party.
The Anti- agreement thing is pedantic nonsense, everyone knows what I mean by anti-agreement.
I do believe that the pro agreement uup members have no place in Unionism at all, they should go to the Alliance party and get it over with.
I do not agree with the religious overtones in the DUP, but at least they are stronger and not as easily fooled as the UUP.
Thats why they are now the largest party.
The Anti- agreement thing is pedantic nonsense, everyone knows what I mean by anti-agreement.
13th May 2005 @ 14:43
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
Concerned Loyalist, I was with you, until you mentioned J.D Taylor.
The unionist community, or, those in the know have not forgotten his 'bargepole' remark.
This was done, WITH the 6 points of decommissioning complete with a timetable, and yet, the agreement he signed up to was WORSE with point 5 taken out, ie the timetable!
He is not respected by the electorate, and has too much pro agreement baggage.
I stand by this remark;
If the UUP do not appoint an Anti Belfast Agreement leader, they will die.
Simple.
The unionist community, or, those in the know have not forgotten his 'bargepole' remark.
This was done, WITH the 6 points of decommissioning complete with a timetable, and yet, the agreement he signed up to was WORSE with point 5 taken out, ie the timetable!
He is not respected by the electorate, and has too much pro agreement baggage.
I stand by this remark;
If the UUP do not appoint an Anti Belfast Agreement leader, they will die.
Simple.
13th May 2005 @ 14:48
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
I disagree that Arlene's objections to being labelled anti-agreement are pedantic. Essentially it makes those people sound as if they don't want any agreement. They are simply anti-GFA. That said it probably won't stop me!
Moving on; being pro-agreement and being unionist are not mutually-exclusive. I am not saying the GFA was right or wrong, but it's obvious you can be both at once, so why should those people (on that basis anyway) join a non-Unionist party like the Alliance just because they are pro-GFA?
Moving on; being pro-agreement and being unionist are not mutually-exclusive. I am not saying the GFA was right or wrong, but it's obvious you can be both at once, so why should those people (on that basis anyway) join a non-Unionist party like the Alliance just because they are pro-GFA?
13th May 2005 @ 14:50
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
Incidentally, now that the UUP has said it will not share power with Sinn Fein any time soon - does that not in essence make them 'anti-agreement' anyway?
They won't actually say that, but they talk about reforming the agreement - which is really what the DUP/SF deal would have been anyway.
They won't actually say that, but they talk about reforming the agreement - which is really what the DUP/SF deal would have been anyway.
13th May 2005 @ 14:52
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
beano, I think the Alliance are unionist in essence, with a small 'u'.
I do object to 'gfa' being used, it is the Belfast Agreement.
If you insist, I will use 'Anti-Belfast Agreement' if you stop using 'gfa'? ok?
I would argue that being pro Belfast Agreement is itself contradictory to being a Unionist, as the agreement was and is still, in my opinion an all-Ireland template, a view shared by both governments,SDLP,SFIRA, and in fact, everyone except the uup!
Your last comment however is interesting, and begs the question to be asked what exactly is the underlining strategy of the UUP?
Are they now moving to 'out dup' the dup to try and gain some credibility, and/or votes?
Problem is, the unionist community will not forgive them for leaving us exposed, and the constitutional position left hanging by a thread, in spite of promises which were worthless.
The most annoying thing is, they were told, time after time, after time, and they just would not listen.
Now it is too late, and I for one, am very very happy to see the end of them, they got their rewards- eventually.
I do object to 'gfa' being used, it is the Belfast Agreement.
If you insist, I will use 'Anti-Belfast Agreement' if you stop using 'gfa'? ok?
I would argue that being pro Belfast Agreement is itself contradictory to being a Unionist, as the agreement was and is still, in my opinion an all-Ireland template, a view shared by both governments,SDLP,SFIRA, and in fact, everyone except the uup!
Your last comment however is interesting, and begs the question to be asked what exactly is the underlining strategy of the UUP?
Are they now moving to 'out dup' the dup to try and gain some credibility, and/or votes?
Problem is, the unionist community will not forgive them for leaving us exposed, and the constitutional position left hanging by a thread, in spite of promises which were worthless.
The most annoying thing is, they were told, time after time, after time, and they just would not listen.
Now it is too late, and I for one, am very very happy to see the end of them, they got their rewards- eventually.
13th May 2005 @ 15:05
Comment from:
Concerned Loyalist [Visitor]
Who do you suggest then Stephen? As I said, Taylor is the best of a BAD, BAD bunch!
I'll still vote DUP but unionism needs an alternative IF, and that's a big if, the DUP let us down, just as the UUP have.
I'll still vote DUP but unionism needs an alternative IF, and that's a big if, the DUP let us down, just as the UUP have.
13th May 2005 @ 16:30
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
The fact that the 2 main Unionist parties currently share the same position on power-sharing illustrates the need for the UUP to differentiate itself in another way.
As well as making sound 'business' sense (every product needs a unique selling point), I personally would like to see a Unionist party that doesn't have such strong ties to and common policies with a fundamentalist religious organisation like the Free Presbyterian church.
Equality (it's not a dirty word, Sinn Fein have just made us think that) for one. Tolerance, attracting economic investment, doing something concrete to save our grammar schools from abolition.
One example I've already given is the readiness of William McCrea to call for a film (which he hadn't watched, obviously) to be banned because he thought it was a bit rude. The famous swings incident in Ballymena (OK it was 20 years ago but I believe McCrea's outburst about 9 Songs illustrates that the attitudes haven't changed much. This was one of the things that made me want to start this blog that I never really got around to posting about).
I want a more socially liberal (or perhaps less conservative?) unionist party to vote for. The Alliance are nice and all, but they're not Unionists and they don't like our grammar schools much.
As well as making sound 'business' sense (every product needs a unique selling point), I personally would like to see a Unionist party that doesn't have such strong ties to and common policies with a fundamentalist religious organisation like the Free Presbyterian church.
Equality (it's not a dirty word, Sinn Fein have just made us think that) for one. Tolerance, attracting economic investment, doing something concrete to save our grammar schools from abolition.
One example I've already given is the readiness of William McCrea to call for a film (which he hadn't watched, obviously) to be banned because he thought it was a bit rude. The famous swings incident in Ballymena (OK it was 20 years ago but I believe McCrea's outburst about 9 Songs illustrates that the attitudes haven't changed much. This was one of the things that made me want to start this blog that I never really got around to posting about).
I want a more socially liberal (or perhaps less conservative?) unionist party to vote for. The Alliance are nice and all, but they're not Unionists and they don't like our grammar schools much.
13th May 2005 @ 17:19
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
concerned loyalist, I simply think that anyone other than Burnside will be irrelevant, and not improve their prospects of survival.
Beano, I agree 100% with your second paragraph, in fact, not much wrong with all of your post, to be fair.
As I said before, read my letter in the tele, and I think you will find a common piece of ground there....
Edited to fix formatting and link, beano
Beano, I agree 100% with your second paragraph, in fact, not much wrong with all of your post, to be fair.
As I said before, read my letter in the tele, and I think you will find a common piece of ground there....
Edited to fix formatting and link, beano
13th May 2005 @ 17:27
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
ta beano, have a good weekend, speak monday.....
13th May 2005 @ 21:00
Comment from:
Bob Wilson [Visitor]
Mr Cooper you have a very poor understanding of anything
'a broad church to encompass all of the unionist electorate's views'
Your letter states - this is simply code for 'rally the Prods' Why do we have to have 6 county Prod parties? You are patsies for the Provos. They were scared when the NI Tories tried to break the sectarian mould and tried to have Laurence Kennedy killed. You play right into their hands with your anti British introverted nonsense. Why do you not join a mainstream UK party? - are you a defeatist at heart who cannot make an articulate case for the Union so reverts to 'what we need is one single unionist party' idiocy. Don't you understanding that the UK Govt can ignore this mickey mouse local parties no matter how 'unitied' they are and regardless of how many votes they get?
'a broad church to encompass all of the unionist electorate's views'
Your letter states - this is simply code for 'rally the Prods' Why do we have to have 6 county Prod parties? You are patsies for the Provos. They were scared when the NI Tories tried to break the sectarian mould and tried to have Laurence Kennedy killed. You play right into their hands with your anti British introverted nonsense. Why do you not join a mainstream UK party? - are you a defeatist at heart who cannot make an articulate case for the Union so reverts to 'what we need is one single unionist party' idiocy. Don't you understanding that the UK Govt can ignore this mickey mouse local parties no matter how 'unitied' they are and regardless of how many votes they get?
13th May 2005 @ 23:57
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
thank you Bob, you are way too clever for me, and the rest of us it seems.
Your comments are both unqualified, and rather ill advised.
Do you know me? Do you know the level of my knowledge on everything?
Why should we not have one party for the unionist community to unite all of our unionist opinion?
I would not join a mainstream party, because labour are a bunch of lying scum, same for the tories, remember major and his stomach churning, and the lib dems? dont make me laugh.
I am more than capapable of making a case for the Union, but prefer to do so from within Unionism, not with tory lah de dahs who are no use to man nor beast.
I suggest you have a wee read about Unionism and pay attention to the current state of Unionism, and what is needed to strengthen our hand.
I believe it is a broad church to encompass all of the Unionist electorate.
If you do not agree, then tell me why, other than a pitiful comment about the government ignoring us.
Your comments are both unqualified, and rather ill advised.
Do you know me? Do you know the level of my knowledge on everything?
Why should we not have one party for the unionist community to unite all of our unionist opinion?
I would not join a mainstream party, because labour are a bunch of lying scum, same for the tories, remember major and his stomach churning, and the lib dems? dont make me laugh.
I am more than capapable of making a case for the Union, but prefer to do so from within Unionism, not with tory lah de dahs who are no use to man nor beast.
I suggest you have a wee read about Unionism and pay attention to the current state of Unionism, and what is needed to strengthen our hand.
I believe it is a broad church to encompass all of the Unionist electorate.
If you do not agree, then tell me why, other than a pitiful comment about the government ignoring us.
14th May 2005 @ 06:02
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
Bob, I have to ask, where you drinking when you wrote your diatribe above?
Actually, my support has been for the UKUP, a party with an integrationalist approach, which blows your 'anti-british introverted nonsense' accusation out of the water.
Yes, Im sure the IRA were shitting themselves when the tories tried to break into NI!
Perhaps you can write something constructive, starting by telling me and other unionists why the conservative party would be a party to support, or join, and why they could be relied upon to frustrate the rise of sfira?
Your past record is almost as bad as the UUP's.....
I wont even start about ancram shaking hands with adams, anglo irish agreement, mayhew singing, awk, I cant even take you lot seriously, neither can the english it seems.
By the way, why not take trimble to be your new leader, he would suit your party very well.
Spineless, a compulsive liar, and a habit of appeasing the IRA...sounds like a conservative ok!
Actually, my support has been for the UKUP, a party with an integrationalist approach, which blows your 'anti-british introverted nonsense' accusation out of the water.
Yes, Im sure the IRA were shitting themselves when the tories tried to break into NI!
Perhaps you can write something constructive, starting by telling me and other unionists why the conservative party would be a party to support, or join, and why they could be relied upon to frustrate the rise of sfira?
Your past record is almost as bad as the UUP's.....
I wont even start about ancram shaking hands with adams, anglo irish agreement, mayhew singing, awk, I cant even take you lot seriously, neither can the english it seems.
By the way, why not take trimble to be your new leader, he would suit your party very well.
Spineless, a compulsive liar, and a habit of appeasing the IRA...sounds like a conservative ok!
14th May 2005 @ 08:54
Comment from:
beano [Member]
· http://www.everythingulster.com
The Tories haven't been perfect but neither have the local Unionist parties.
For one thing the Tories have real policies on real issues. Not only that but they have always been a Unionist party and the Unionists in Westminster took the Tory whip until 1972.
Not to mention the fact that had a Tory MP from Northern Ireland rebelled against the Anglo Irish agreement perhaps it might have meant something? (perhaps not, but I'm sure it would have been more influencial than a couple of backwoodsmen shouting and screaming).
The major downside is a loss of influence when the Conservatives weren't in power, but lets face it, I don't think they've any more influence now than they would if they were in the Tory party.
All that said, the Conservatives are not as exreme as the likes of Paisley and his ilk, maybe the BNP would suit better?
For one thing the Tories have real policies on real issues. Not only that but they have always been a Unionist party and the Unionists in Westminster took the Tory whip until 1972.
Not to mention the fact that had a Tory MP from Northern Ireland rebelled against the Anglo Irish agreement perhaps it might have meant something? (perhaps not, but I'm sure it would have been more influencial than a couple of backwoodsmen shouting and screaming).
The major downside is a loss of influence when the Conservatives weren't in power, but lets face it, I don't think they've any more influence now than they would if they were in the Tory party.
All that said, the Conservatives are not as exreme as the likes of Paisley and his ilk, maybe the BNP would suit better?
14th May 2005 @ 10:23
Comment from:
stephen cooper [Visitor]
Perfection is expecting a bit much, but at least a firm stance on crucial issues on opposing terrorism, rather than appeasing it is the key issue here at the minute, both the uup and the tories have been very, very poor on this.
Most parties here have real policies on real issues as well, but we cannot move on to covering them, as we are held back by neanderthals(ira etc), who continue to use violence and the threat of such to get their way.
Nothing would have mattered against the anglo irish agreement as we seen. I stood alongwith hundreds of thousands at the city hall, thatcher didnt give one iota.
If unionism was absorbed into a tory party of the present size, then any coherent and robust stance against the sfira movement could be vetoed and crushed easily.
Why would any unionist at present want to give up their position gained by telling the truth and standing against terror over to a bunch of lying tories?
Totally illogical.
One last thing, what do you mean, the bnp would suit what exactly better?
Do you mean a merger? be serious!
Most parties here have real policies on real issues as well, but we cannot move on to covering them, as we are held back by neanderthals(ira etc), who continue to use violence and the threat of such to get their way.
Nothing would have mattered against the anglo irish agreement as we seen. I stood alongwith hundreds of thousands at the city hall, thatcher didnt give one iota.
If unionism was absorbed into a tory party of the present size, then any coherent and robust stance against the sfira movement could be vetoed and crushed easily.
Why would any unionist at present want to give up their position gained by telling the truth and standing against terror over to a bunch of lying tories?
Totally illogical.
One last thing, what do you mean, the bnp would suit what exactly better?
Do you mean a merger? be serious!
14th May 2005 @ 11:03
Recent Posts
- About Everything Ulster's Election 2005 Site
- Everything Ulster Moved
(1 comments) - Everything Ulster to be Reborn
(4 comments) - Hermon: UUP Must Be More Liberal
(7 comments) - Council Elections - It's not that bad.... is it?
(13 comments) - Withdrawn Councillor Elected Anyway!
(3 comments) - DUP Soaring In Council Elections
(1 comments) - DUP Take Early Lead
- German Neo-Nazis: The New MOPEs
(5 comments) - David Trimble Steps Down
(30 comments) - Election 2005 Post-Mortem
(12 comments) - North Down: Hermon Elected
(3 comments)
Archives
- Election 2005 Blog
- October 2005 (1)
- May 2005 (33)
- April 2005 (37)
- March 2005 (9)
- more...
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| << < | > >> | |||||
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 | ||||||
Links
- Northern Irish Magyar
A Norn Irn ex-pat in Hungary - Portadown News
Spoof Northern Ireland News - Slugger O'Toole
Top N.I. News/Politics Blog - StadiumForBelfast
Keep Northern Ireland Sport in Belfast - Young Unionists
Blog by the Young Unionists (UUP)
Syndicate this blog 
What is RSS?
powered by
Content © EverythingUlster.com 2005 unless otherwise stated
