[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Withano

Those who voted for a party that would even consider the fascist cluster**** could be a good place to start

Don't be silly, the last seven weeks have taught us that The Casino Party can do no wrong.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Yep I have been astounded by the hate on here at a democraticly elected party. I feel sorry for any members from NI that they have had to put up with it.

Sickening

[MB.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Yep I have been astounded by the hate on here at a democraticly elected party. I feel sorry for any members from NI that they have had to put up with it.

Sickening

You appear to be confusing democracy with immunity from criticism, which is kind of the opposite

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by MB.

You appear to be confusing democracy with immunity from criticism, which is kind of the opposite

Incorrect. I am pretty sure that I can distinguish between criticism and sheer prejudice based on arrogance and hate

[Novo]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Yep I have been astounded by the hate on here at a democraticly elected party. I feel sorry for any members from NI that they have had to put up with it.

Sickening

Build my Gallows for new National Anthem LT? Make the Liberals stand and applaud democracy in all its glory

[MB.]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

They look more like a bunch of thugs to me.

And right there you've summed up the DUP in a nutshell

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by MB.

And right there you've summed up the DUP in a nutshell

Nope just the intellectual Labour youth. A picture tells a thousand words.

[Withano]

Can you paste the full article Brillo. You've read it, right? Others cant read it unless they're subscribed to the website, which you deffo are, right?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Can you paste the full article Brillo. You've read it, right? Others cant read it unless they're subscribed to the website, which you deffo are, right?

It appeared as the full article when I posted it. Unfortunately it is not the case now for those have not subscribed. Not much I can do about that.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

It appeared as the full article when I posted it. Unfortunately it is not the case now for those have not subscribed. Not much I can do about that.

Mhmm convenient.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Mhmm convenient.

Anyone can subscribe for free for one article a week. There you go with the usual paranoia and attempts to undermine. The article is there and like anything of quality it costs - in money or effort.

It certainly exposes the left for the total hypocrites they are and the reasons for their hysteria. Great article! Read or not - no skin off my nose.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Withano

Can you paste the full article Brillo. You've read it, right? Others cant read it unless they're subscribed to the website, which you deffo are, right?

I got nosy, so here it is...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...byn-get-power/

The election result was rather exciting for Jeremy Corbyn and his followers. "We are ready to serve this country," he promptly announced. The Labour leader's supporters have been boasting of how he oversaw the party's biggest increase in vote share since 1945. This gave Emily Thornberry the licence to dismiss suggestions that the party had lost the election, declaring on Sky News magisterially: "No, I don’t think that we did".

Yet those swept up by this collective delirium will have found it hard to escape the conclusion this week on seeing Theresa May in Downing Street reshuffling her cabinet that Labour had not actually won. Corbynistas may feel their time in office has come, but have been forced to accept reality on looking at the electoral landscape.

The Conservatives picked up 55 more seats than Labour, meaning that Mrs May only need to work with her "friends and allies in the Democratic Unionist party" to have a majority in the Commons. Even if Jeremy Corbyn teamed up with the SNP, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru and the Greens, his 314-strong "progressive alliance" would not be big enough – and it would still be out-numbered by the Tories's 317 MPs alone.

Corbynistas have never come this close to power, so falling at the final hurdle – last week's general election – will have been hard for them. They have decided that the best way to get over their disappointment is to take it out on the DUP for cementing the Tories' grip in power.

The vitriol from the Left has come thick and fast. Owen Jones called them "gay-hating, anti-choice terrorist-sympathisers". "They have nothing to bring to a modern body politic," Zoe Williams opined. "The DUP are the closest thing we have in this country to institutional religious extremism, all ancient hatreds and bigotries so dated it is like arguing with the past."

Tempting as it may be for them to stick it to Mrs May's new allies, they have forgotten two things. First, the Tories aren't looking to draft the DUP into Government; they just want their backing to get business done in the Commons on key areas like Brexit. They aren't so much "jumping into bed" with the DUP as sleeping in separate beds but occasionally having dinner together.

Second, Labour was more than happy to talk to the DUP about how they could work together in past elections. Gordon Brown was reported by US officials in 2010 to be "doing whatever he can to hold on to power", a process which required one of his cabinet ministers to work on an "economic package for Northern Ireland to win support from the DUP... for Labour".

Labour tried again to woo the DUP in 2015, one of its MPs Ian Paisley has said, although such a prospect will have been snuffed out as soon as David Cameron's surprise majority became clear.

That hasn't stopped Labour from trying to stir the pot. The party has wheeled out grandees – former Northern Ireland secretaries Peter Hain, Shaun Woodward and Peter Mandelson – to accuse Mrs May of putting the peace process at risk by working with the DUP. "London is no longer an honest broker," Mr Hain declared portentously.

In Mr Hain's view, the Conservatives have crippled their ability to be do business in Northern Ireland by allying with unionists. Mrs May has already said that her party make clear in their manifesto that Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom, so why is it a shock that the Tories prefer to talk to the DUP rather than Sinn Fein?

Tony Blair managed to work on the peace process as Prime Minister despite the fact that the SDLP – Labour's sister party – were active in Northern Ireland. His Government sent letters to more than 200 "on-the-run" IRA suspects after the Good Friday Agreement granting them immunity from criminal prosecution, yet Mr Hain and his colleagues decided not to express public concerns – like they do now – about how neutral this left London looking.

Moreover, the Democratic Unionist Party's decision will be more than happy to support Mrs May's administration because it ensures Jeremy Corbyn is shut out of power. "For as long as you allow yourselves to be led by an IRA cheerleader, you exclude yourselves from entering No 10," a party source told the Guardian. Party leader Arlene Foster survived an IRA bomb on her school bus and was only eight when they tried to kill her father, so she would not look kindly on his past coziness to its members.

Labour has previously been happy to do business with the DUP, but now finds itself frozen out due to Mr Corbyn. This should give the Left cause for thought, but his followers have decided it is much easier to pay the DUP back by demonising them for deciding to help the largest party get business done in Government.

The Corbynistas' decision to respond with name-calling, rather than by asking themselves tough questions about their leader, shows why they will remain too immature for power.

[In the Drunk Tank]

We already have a thread on the DUP-Tory discussions so I've merged the two rather than have a new thread just for one article

[JTM45]

Yep, as i thought, the Right-wingers who clung to the BS ''Terrorist Sympatizer'' thing like a life-jacket on The Titanic have no real justification of the Tories being that desperate to get into bed with a neo-fascist hate Party who supported terrorists and unappologetically employ Armed Robber thugs.

I obviously missed the small-print that explained why the Tories shouldn't have to be held accountable for their behaviour and standards ofdecency like Labour and Corbyn constantly are (even if that means misconstruing/misreprersenting facts).

[bots]

Originally Posted by JTM45

Yep, as i thought, the Right-wingers who clung to the BS ''Terrorist Sympatizer'' thing like a life-jacket on The Titanic have no real justification of the Tories being that desperate to get into bed with a neo-fascist hate Party who supported terrorists and unappologetically employ Armed Robber thugs.

I obviously missed the small-print that explained why the Tories shouldn't have to be held accountable for their behaviour and standards ofdecency like Labour and Corbyn constantly are (even if that means misconstruing/misreprersenting facts).

Thats just complete rubbish. These are democratically elected MP's that have been representing their constituencies for many years at Westminster. The only point that anyone has said anything against them is now, when they are supporting a party labour don't agree with.

As democratically elected MP's they are as entitled as anyone to vote for whatever they wish. That is democracy

[JTM45]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

As democratically elected MP's they are as entitled as anyone to vote for whatever they wish. That is democracy

I'm sure in the 'Big Book of Democracy' it doesn't just say ''MP's can vote for whatever they wish''.

''Please Sir..............can i vote for Marshmallow Elephants ?''.........''No ?''.........''but the democracy expert on TIBB said i could vote for whatever i wish''.

I'm sure next time there's a big political question doing the rounds people will be knocking your door down.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Thats just complete rubbish. These are democratically elected MP's that have been representing their constituencies for many years at Westminster. The only point that anyone has said anything against them is now, when they are supporting a party labour don't agree with.

As democratically elected MP's they are as entitled as anyone to vote for whatever they wish. That is democracy

I seem to Remember several on here stating that Sinn Fein were a legitimate political party now when they were called terrorists. That only works one way apparently.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I seem to Remember several on here stating that Sinn Fein were a legitimate political party now when they were called terrorists. That only works one way apparently.

Yep. There are IRA murderers in Sinn Fein to this day, as in the past. Murderers who were released from prison by the Labour Gov. in a shady deal as part of the Good Friday Agreement. There were Loyalist murderers released too, but they were certainly not welcomed into the DUP. That's why the present Gov. can do business with them, and never with Sinn Fein - not even a Labour Gov. could get away with that, although Labour did try to get the DUP on side on several occasions in the past. lol

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Thats just complete rubbish. These are democratically elected MP's that have been representing their constituencies for many years at Westminster. The only point that anyone has said anything against them is now, when they are supporting a party labour don't agree with.

As democratically elected MP's they are as entitled as anyone to vote for whatever they wish. That is democracy

Not so actually.
I have regularly on here even called the DUP poodles as to the Cons,they do normally vote with them.

Which makes this forming any deal with them worse, a deal taking a fair while to work out,so what are the DUP demanding for a more secured voting pattern.
More to the point,will we really get the whole details,small print too of whatever deal it is finally.

The Cons could have taken their chance,without DUP votes the opposition parties could not defeat the Cons in parliament anyway.
So they could govern for a time as a minority govt.

10 more votes from the DUP will not enhance that majority that much.
We should and must be told what exactly and all the DUP are demanding and what the Cons are giving them.

My objection to this 'joining up' more securely is that no government should be doing so with any clearly known sectarian parties which the DUP are.
That is the issue for me and I would not trust the DUP in any way at all.
Neither Sinn Féinn too,another sectarian party.

It speaks volumes that this Party,the Cons who were just in full coalition with the Lib Dems under 3 years ago,are now even more apart from agreements with a party like that.
They now have to crawl to a more extreme party,a sectarian party and one that although democratically elected to Westminster so can vote how it wishes, should not have any secured deal made with them for votes.

That is my and I am sure many others objections to any 'firm arrangement' between any UK government and the DUP.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Not so actually.
I have regularly on here even called the DUP poodles as to the Cons,they do normally vote with them.

Which makes this forming any deal with them worse, a deal taking a fair while to work out,so what are the DUP demanding for a more secured voting pattern.
More to the point,will we really get the whole details,small print too of whatever deal it is finally.

The Cons could have taken their chance,without DUP votes the opposition parties could not defeat the Cons in parliament anyway.
So they could govern for a time as a minority govt.

10 more votes from the DUP will not enhance that majority that much.
We should and must be told what exactly and all the DUP are demanding and what the Cons are giving them.

My objection to this 'joining up' more securely is that no government should be doing so with any clearly known sectarian parties which the DUP are.
That is the issue for me and I would not trust the DUP in any way at all.
Neither Sinn Féinn too,another sectarian party.

It speaks volumes that this Party,the Cons who were just in full coalition with the Lib Dems under 3 years ago,are now even more apart from agreements with a party like that.
They now have to crawl to a more extreme party,a sectarian party and one that although democratically elected to Westminster so can vote how it wishes, should not have any secured deal made with them for votes.

That is my and I am sure many others objections to any 'firm arrangement' between any UK government and the DUP.

The DUP will have no say in English legislation - they will not be part of government. Corbynites are totally transparent in their dishonesty and hysteria regarding the alliance as it stands in the way of them getting their mits on the power. No more complicated than that.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

The DUP will have no say in English legislation - they will not be part of government. Corbynites are totally transparent in their dishonesty and hysteria regarding the alliance as it stands in the way of them getting their mits on the power. No more complicated than that.

Let me ask Brillo... ... ... why do you think it's taking so long for the DUP and the Tories to reach a deal?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Thats just complete rubbish. These are democratically elected MP's that have been representing their constituencies for many years at Westminster. The only point that anyone has said anything against them is now, when they are supporting a party labour don't agree with.

As democratically elected MP's they are as entitled as anyone to vote for whatever they wish. That is democracy

They may be elected MPs but can you not see the hypocrisy of accusing Corbyn of being a terrorist sympathizer and the DUP being allowed in positions of power with their undeniable connections to violent extremists?

[bots]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

They may be elected MPs but can you not see the hypocrisy of accusing Corbyn of being a terrorist sympathizer and the DUP being allowed in positions of power with their undeniable connections to violent extremists?

Its not hypocrisy at all, the things are not comparable in any way shape or form, and its ludicrous to suggest that they are

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

They may be elected MPs but can you not see the hypocrisy of accusing Corbyn of being a terrorist sympathizer and the DUP being allowed in positions of power with their undeniable connections to violent extremists?

If you really believe what you say then shouldn't your concerns lie with how any and all organisations who have ever had any links to any kind of terrorism are ever allowed to form a political party. It has to be all or nothing.

We all know if Labour forming an alliance with Sinn Fein was the only option to win power both him and his Corbynites would have had no issues with that.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

They may be elected MPs but can you not see the hypocrisy of accusing Corbyn of being a terrorist sympathizer and the DUP being allowed in positions of power with their undeniable connections to violent extremists?

Their connections to extremists are in no way comparable at all. If you were well educated on these issues you would know that. It's not that long ago that we were engaged in a discussion on Martin McGuiness and you were defending him all over the show.
If you are worried about the DUP having extremist connections, then why on earth do you idolise Corbyn? THAT is just undiluted hypocrisy.