[Kizzy]

Excellent video from the Victoria Derbyshire show here.

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/06/27/...up-deal-video/

Here's more evidence from a Fallon sky news interview that is indeed a bribe.

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/06/27/...mistake-video/

( Yes it's the canary however the interviews are the true source don't forget)

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'm sorry if this is harsh (and I know it is, maybe, a little harsh) but... the pain of his experiences is exactly why I personally don't think there's much point in debating with jet on the subjects of N.I. / the DUP / Corbyn etc... the emotion level there is clearly very high and there is just no objectivity. I did say that to jet I think on probably the first or second day after the DUP deal was suggested as some initially very balanced and informative posts quickly went sideways when old anger / emotions were stirred up.

Now I will say it is 100% understandable for people to have strong emotions attached to these things. No one is a robot, we all have our pressure points. However the chance of there being any sort of reasoned, balanced and grounded discussion on the subject with someone so heavily involved on a personal level is pretty much zero.

Maybe the reason you think I had no objectivity is because you didn't want to believe what I was saying, pure and simple, and that goes for not just you but for everyone who thinks they know better than someone who lived here and knew of Corbyn personally and his activities in the 70's and beyond when most of you didn't know the man from Adam. Why the hell would I bother to post untruths? I have never participated in political discussions here regarding Cons/Labour as I have no interest or loyalty to either party. A simple search will verify that. So do you think I suddenly appeared in Serious Debates to run down Corbyn because I don't like his dress sense or whatever?

Don't tell me I couldn't have a reasoned, balanced and grounded discussion when everything I said was met with a brick wall of disdain and dismissal, and in some cases twisted (not by you in this instance, but by Dezzy ) to create a diversion so he/she didn't have to respond in a reasoned, balanced and grounded way to my posts.

And this is not for you TS, (unless I've missed your references to it) but for those of you who begrudge the 1billion windfall - can you not forget May and her motives and be just a little tolerant that it's going to a part of your country that suffered decades of bombing leading to the loss of thousands of lives, homes and businesses and still hasn't recovered?

Jeez, I never wanted a United Ireland, but the way some of you are talking about my beloved N.Ireland, (which is a beautiful and friendly place, despite it's history), as if it's a piece of **** on the map, I'm not sure I want to be a part of the UK any more. If some posters on this forum are representative of UK mindsets (and I would hope not) you clearly have no feeling or empathy or any understanding whatsoever for this part of your country.

[the truth]

dup are conservative it's a legitimate merger

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by jet

Maybe the reason you think I had no objectivity is because you didn't want to believe what I was saying, pure and simple, and that goes for not just you but for everyone who thinks they know better than someone who lived here and knew of Corbyn personally and his activities in the 70's and beyond when most of you didn't know the man from Adam. Why the hell would I bother to post untruths? I have never participated in political discussions here regarding Cons/Labour as I have no interest or loyalty to either party. A simple search will verify that. So do you think I suddenly appeared in Serious Debates to run down Corbyn because I don't like his dress sense or whatever?

Don't tell me I couldn't have a reasoned, balanced and grounded discussion when everything I said was met with a brick wall of disdain and dismissal, and in some cases twisted (not by you in this instance, but by Dezzy ) to create a diversion so he/she didn't have to respond in a reasoned, balanced and grounded way to my posts.

And this is not for you TS, (unless I've missed your references to it) but for those of you who begrudge the 1billion windfall - can you not forget May and her motives and be just a little tolerant that it's going to a part of your country that suffered decades of bombing leading to the loss of thousands of lives, homes and businesses and still hasn't recovered?

Jeez, I never wanted a United Ireland, but the way some of you are talking about my beloved N.Ireland, (which is a beautiful and friendly place, despite it's history), as if it's a piece of **** on the map, I'm not sure I want to be a part of the UK any more. If some posters on this forum are representative of UK mindsets (and I would hope not) you clearly have no feeling or empathy or any understanding whatsoever for this part of your country.

I'm delighted for NI that it is getting this investment, the DUP much as I don't agree with their views and policies have seen an opportunity and grabbed it with both hands to improve their country, that is what we all expect the party in power to do

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by jet

Maybe the reason you think I had no objectivity is because you didn't want to believe what I was saying, pure and simple, and that goes for not just you but for everyone who thinks they know better than someone who lived here and knew of Corbyn personally and his activities in the 70's and beyond when most of you didn't know the man from Adam. Why the hell would I bother to post untruths? I have never participated in political discussions here regarding Cons/Labour as I have no interest or loyalty to either party. A simple search will verify that. So do you think I suddenly appeared in Serious Debates to run down Corbyn because I don't like his dress sense or whatever?

Don't tell me I couldn't have a reasoned, balanced and grounded discussion when everything I said was met with a brick wall of disdain and dismissal, and in some cases twisted (not by you in this instance, but by Dezzy ) to create a diversion so he/she didn't have to respond in a reasoned, balanced and grounded way to my posts.

And this is not for you TS, (unless I've missed your references to it) but for those of you who begrudge the 1billion windfall - can you not forget May and her motives and be just a little tolerant that it's going to a part of your country that suffered decades of bombing leading to the loss of thousands of lives, homes and businesses and still hasn't recovered?

Jeez, I never wanted a United Ireland, but the way some of you are talking about my beloved N.Ireland, (which is a beautiful and friendly place, despite it's history), as if it's a piece of **** on the map, I'm not sure I want to be a part of the UK any more. If some posters on this forum are representative of UK mindsets (and I would hope not) you clearly have no feeling or empathy or any understanding whatsoever for this part of your country.

When I say I think you're struggling for balance, it's not that I think what you're saying about Corbyn is wrong necessarily - I personally have seen another side to his character and have gone off him MASSIVELY since the tower fire - or that anything your saying doesn't have truth to it...

Its more that you've become so laser-focussed on Corbyn and his potential wrongdoing that you are less willing to hear or engage in criticisms of the Tories / the DUP / their alliance.

I guess it's important to remember that just because one side of something is bad... That doesn't mean that the other side of the coin is necessarily good. Even if you think it's "better", it's still OK to be able to criticise it... You don't have to Stan the opposition to "stick it to" the side you dislike more, I guess is what I'm saying.

In this case, I feel that increasingly, you're unwilling to look with a skeptical eye at the Tory/DUP deal because you immediately flip into "Corbyn would be worse!!" mode. But Corbyn isn't the discussion. Take Corbyn completely out of the equation and look at it in the most basic or terms... And the Tory/DUP alliance - even WITH the extra spending for NI - is potentially headed for real problems. It's not a good or desirable situation. What I mean by lacking balance is, it's gotten to the point where you are willing to pretend that it's all great, "because it isn't Corbyn". Your early posts on the topic included healthy criticism of the DUP too but that has all but evaporated now.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

You need to think how you come across at times.
Those in Scotland are aware of religious tensions particularly in Glasgow in the past.
Where hate,real hate as to just 2 football clubs was in evidence.
Everyone condemns the violence and killings in Northern Ireland.
I am full Irish on my Mother's side, I am also born Catholic.
I've seen when young the darker side of events in N Ireland, although my ancestry is from the South of Ireland.

Would I like a united Ireland,probably yes.
However bigoted sectarian parties still hold onto past glories,if that's an appropriate word.
They love shoving that at people every year.

It has nothing to do with being left,right or centre,it was hoped the UK and N Ireland had at least,while still condemning the past,were moving on at long last.
That is what should be the aim and what is endlessly worked at and for.
Not keeping the old hate and grievances to the forefront,thereby sacrificing all future for the past.

Let us Hope in keeping to the title of this thread, that agreement by both the DUP and Sinn Féinn comes about as to power sharing today.

Because if it doesn't and direct rule is imposed from Westminster.
Then with the DUP firmly having this govt in it's grip,that will likely open a very dangerous indeed can of worms again.

And what if the shoe had been on the other foot and Sinn Fein joined an alliance with Labour - I get the impression you would be okay with that - which would be sheer hypocrisy.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

You need to think how you come across at times.
Those in Scotland are aware of religious tensions particularly in Glasgow in the past.
Where hate,real hate as to just 2 football clubs was in evidence.
Everyone condemns the violence and killings in Northern Ireland.
I am full Irish on my Mother's side, I am also born Catholic.
I've seen when young the darker side of events in N Ireland, although my ancestry is from the South of Ireland.

Would I like a united Ireland,probably yes.
However bigoted sectarian parties still hold onto past glories,if that's an appropriate word.
They love shoving that at people every year.

It has nothing to do with being left,right or centre,it was hoped the UK and N Ireland had at least,while still condemning the past,were moving on at long last.
That is what should be the aim and what is endlessly worked at and for.
Not keeping the old hate and grievances to the forefront,thereby sacrificing all future for the past.

Let us Hope in keeping to the title of this thread, that agreement by both the DUP and Sinn Féinn comes about as to power sharing today.

Because if it doesn't and direct rule is imposed from Westminster.
Then with the DUP firmly having this govt in it's grip,that will likely open a very dangerous indeed can of worms again.

1. Because I spoke up for someone who was being treated with disdain? How do you come across?
2. People are indoctrinated into religion not born into it.
3. See your own words bold 4 and take your own advice re bold 3.
4. There are 2 sides in a conflict and both are part of peoples history. People don't forget loss and pain, that is entirely different to keeping alive old grievances.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by jaxie

1. Because I spoke up for someone who was being treated with disdain? How do you come across?
2. People are indoctrinated into religion not born into it.
3. See your own words bold 4.
4. There are 2 sides in a conflict and both are part of peoples history. People don't forget loss and pain, that is entirely different to keeping alive old grievances.

your 2nd point is untrue too generalised and offensive to billions

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by the truth

your 2nd point is untrue too generalised and offensive to billions

You are suggesting a baby is born with a religious affiliation?

Billions of people are offended by the idea religion is taught? Can't be helped I guess.


indoctrinate
ɪnˈdɒktrɪneɪt/Submit
verb
past tense: indoctrinated; past participle: indoctrinated
teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
"broadcasting was a vehicle for indoctrinating the masses"
synonyms: brainwash, propagandize, proselytize, inculcate, re-educate, persuade, convince, condition, discipline, mould; More
archaic
teach or instruct (someone).
"he indoctrinated them in systematic theology"

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by the truth

your 2nd point is untrue too generalised and offensive to billions

I think Jaxie's point is correct. People are generally taught religion as children and believe in what their patents believe. It is largely habit.

The only time a religous belief carries any weight is when someone adopts a belief in adulthood - and even then without knowing the circumstances i.e. Mental health, company they keep etc it is always questionable.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by the truth

your 2nd point is untrue too generalised and offensive to billions

On this I agree with you.

You are,for instance, born to a family you are part of that family not indoctrinated to it.

If your family has a religion you are born into that,as you are your family's way of life too.

Once older you can and do of course alter that state and may dismiss the religion,people also cut ties with family for many reasons.
That was as you say a very generalised possibly offensive comment I agree.
However I expected just that coming anyway.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

When I say I think you're struggling for balance, it's not that I think what you're saying about Corbyn is wrong necessarily - I personally have seen another side to his character and have gone off him MASSIVELY since the tower fire - or that anything your saying doesn't have truth to it...

Its more that you've become so laser-focussed on Corbyn and his potential wrongdoing that you are less willing to hear or engage in criticisms of the Tories / the DUP / their alliance.

I guess it's important to remember that just because one side of something is bad... That doesn't mean that the other side of the coin is necessarily good. Even if you think it's "better", it's still OK to be able to criticise it... You don't have to Stan the opposition to "stick it to" the side you dislike more, I guess is what I'm saying.

In this case, I feel that increasingly, you're unwilling to look with a skeptical eye at the Tory/DUP deal because you immediately flip into "Corbyn would be worse!!" mode. But Corbyn isn't the discussion. Take Corbyn completely out of the equation and look at it in the most basic or terms... And the Tory/DUP alliance - even WITH the extra spending for NI - is potentially headed for real problems. It's not a good or desirable situation. What I mean by lacking balance is, it's gotten to the point where you are willing to pretend that it's all great, "because it isn't Corbyn". Your early posts on the topic included healthy criticism of the DUP too but that has all but evaporated now.

Nowhere did I say it was all great, or that any party was all great, please don't put words into my mouth. The only positive thing that I can see at present is the 1 billion for N.Ireland.

It's not that I lost balance, more that I responded to misconceptions that people have about my part of the country and the DUP. I don't like the party, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to correct misconceptions about them. I dislike Sinn Fein intensely, and am only too glad to criticise aspects of their past/present, but if someone posted something negative that I knew wasn't true I'd correct that as well.
And now I've finished here. Have a very nice day TS, and hopefully we'll discuss again under more pleasant circumstances sometime.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I'm delighted for NI that it is getting this investment, the DUP much as I don't agree with their views and policies have seen an opportunity and grabbed it with both hands to improve their country, that is what we all expect the party in power to do

Absolutely.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I'm delighted for NI that it is getting this investment, the DUP much as I don't agree with their views and policies have seen an opportunity and grabbed it with both hands to improve their country, that is what we all expect the party in power to do

Of course I don't blame the DUP for grabbing this chance.

And no doubt NI does need a lot of investment.

My issue is solely with us being repeatedly told there 'is no money' and then May managing to find this amount for her to cling onto power.

Can;t blame the DUP for wanting the best for NI. Much like you cannot really blame Sturgeon for her constant wanting of better for the Scottish than the rest of the UK get.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Of course I don't blame the DUP for grabbing this chance.

And no doubt NI does need a lot of investment.

My issue is solely with us being repeatedly told there 'is no money' and then May managing to find this amount for her to cling onto power.

Can;t blame the DUP for wanting the best for NI. Much like you cannot really blame Sturgeon for her constant wanting of better for the Scottish than the rest of the UK get.

She's having to put aside quite a stash to get out of Europe no doubt - I can't see how one more billion can make much difference especially when it is for the greater good - no Corbyn.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

She's having to put aside quite a stash to get out of Europe no doubt - I can't see how one more billion can make much difference especially when it is for the greater good - no Corbyn.

How about the NHS? The depleted police force? Education and public services in general? All could have benefited from the money used to keep May in power.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

How about the NHS? The depleted police force? Education and public services in general? All could have benefited from the money used to keep May in power.

Not at that stage - if she made another u-turn that late in the game she would have had no majority and Corbyn may have got in.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Not at that stage - if she made another u-turn that late in the game she would have had no majority and Corbyn may have got in.

Maybe that would have been for the best considering she wasted a billion to stay in power when public services are gasping for air.

What she did is indefensible and if the situation was reversed I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way.

[DemolitionRed]

Even with the DUP they have a majority of... em... SEVEN. That's not a practical "working majority" and not sustainable for 5 years. A couple of heart attacks, a couple of Tory MPs resigning. It will take less than a year for all this gerrymandering to go ****! majority gone. So the logic is there has to be another election later this year in the hope of getting a working majority.

And elections, cost lots of money and are paid for out of our pockets. I don't doubt that we are all going to be put through this ordeal of political flag waving again. The only good thing about that is, the Labour Party now have the smell of Tory blood in their nostrils. All May would be doing would be consolidating her defeat!

[the truth]

Originally Posted by jaxie

You are suggesting a baby is born with a religious affiliation?

Billions of people are offended by the idea religion is taught? Can't be helped I guess.


indoctrinate
ɪnˈdɒktrɪneɪt/Submit
verb
past tense: indoctrinated; past participle: indoctrinated
teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
"broadcasting was a vehicle for indoctrinating the masses"
synonyms: brainwash, propagandize, proselytize, inculcate, re-educate, persuade, convince, condition, discipline, mould; More
archaic
teach or instruct (someone).
"he indoctrinated them in systematic theology"

Putting words into other peoples mouths is such a kindergarden way of debating. I said nothing of the kind and you know it.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by the truth

Putting words into other peoples mouths is such a kindergarden way of debating. I said nothing of the kind and you know it.

Were I purporting to quote you and feed words into your mouth like toast, there would have been no question mark asking if this is what you mean.

I said Babies aren't born with religion and are indoctrinated. You said that was offensive, I gave you a dictionary for indoctrinate which basically means to teach or instruct. I asked if that was what you were saying. Read it all back it'll make sense and actually it isn't at all offensive.

I can quite cheerfully be rude about religion, but on this occasion I was just stating a fact. If you can prove it's not a fact and that children are born with religious inclination and it isn't taught to them, please do, I'll happily listen.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Were I purporting to quote you and feed words into your mouth like toast, there would have been no question mark asking if this is what you mean.

I said Babies aren't born with religion and are indoctrinated. You said that was offensive, I gave you a dictionary for indoctrinate which basically means to teach or instruct. I asked if that was what you were saying. Read it all back it'll make sense and actually it isn't at all offensive.

I can quite cheerfully be rude about religion, but on this occasion I was just stating a fact. If you can prove it's not a fact and that children are born with religious inclination and it isn't taught to them, please do, I'll happily listen.

That is not what you said and not what I replied to, as you know
You are being totally disingenuous again (dishonest) as for indoctrination, there are thousands of influences that help form who we become, religions are just 1 of them and all religions are all different and all religious people are different. You seem to generalize about all religions and all religious people as being the same with the same beliefs which is entirely untrue

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by the truth

That is not what you said and not what I replied to, as you know
You are being totally disingenuous again (dishonest) as for indoctrination, there are thousands of influences that help form who we become, religions are just 1 of them and all religions are all different and all religious people are different. You seem to generalize about all religions and all religious people as being the same with the same beliefs which is entirely untrue

What I said is there in black and white. If you are reading into it something I'm not saying that isn't really my problem.

This thread isn't religious chat 101 but if you want to discuss doctrine I'll happy chat to you in private message about it. And yes you are quite right I do talk about religion being the same thing, a huge fantasy. But I'm not sure how relevant that is to my saying children aren't born with religious affiliations. The fact is a baby doesn't have those kind of opinions.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Of course I don't blame the DUP for grabbing this chance.

And no doubt NI does need a lot of investment.

My issue is solely with us being repeatedly told there 'is no money' and then May managing to find this amount for her to cling onto power.

Can;t blame the DUP for wanting the best for NI. Much like you cannot really blame Sturgeon for her constant wanting of better for the Scottish than the rest of the UK get.

Ah yeah the money thing is ridiculous 7 years of austerity they are rolling in cash

[Kizzy]

Well well well... Proof that it isn't 'government' money, or 'conservative' money.
It's OUR money.

'Parliament will need to approve the release of £1bn in funding for Northern Ireland promised to the Democratic Unionist party by Theresa May to secure its support after the general election, the government has conceded.

Challenged by the campaigner Gina Miller about the legal basis for releasing the funds, which have not yet been made available, the Treasury solicitor, who heads the Government Legal Department, said it “will have appropriate parliamentary authorisation”, adding: “No timetable has been set for the making of such payments.”

Replying to a legal letter from Miller and the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), Jonathan Jones said the government intends to use “long-established procedures, under which central government requests the grant of money by the House of Commons” in order to pay out the funds it promised the DUP in the controversial agreement in June.'

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ller-challenge