Comments by "Taint ABird" (@taintabird23) on "William C. Fox" channel.

  1. Cuirfidh mé cumarsáid i mBéarla chun do chuid sochair. Tá tú i ndéanamh arís. Rinne mé argóint chliste bunaithe ar fhíorais stairiúla. Is é an rud a rinne tú go léir ná doirtéireacht neamhchinnteach a dhoirteadh le hiarracht ar cheartú éigin a éileamh ar mhaithe le tuismitheoir. Nuair a bhíonn do chuid bloic brúiteora ag teacht ar dheiseanna toisc nach bhfuil Béarla agat, ní rogha í í nuair a thréigean tú do theanga dhúchasach. Sin é mar a oibríonn impiriúchas! Iarr ar na hAlban agus na Breatnais. Níor vótáladh formhór na ndaoine in Éirinn le haghaidh an deighilte, rinne mionlach. Ní raibh grá an daonlathais ar ais ansin ag na Breataine. Tá sé an-sásta fanacht go bhfuil cúisí ort a chur in iúl i dtíortha áirithe sula n-éilíonn tú an ról. Déanaimid ár ndlíthe féin. How's your Irish, by the way?
    1
  2. In a poll released yesterday, Irish support for the EU is running at 92%. A year ago it was only 88%. Brexit must be making the Irish [people more pro-European. Ireland does about 50% of its agri-product trade with the UK. Overall, only 13.5% of Irish exports go to the UK; over 40% goes to the rest of the EU.
    1
  3. ​ @ragnardanneskajold1880  What, are you 12?'.
    1
  4.  @ragnardanneskajold1880  Why would I be a Marxist??
    1
  5.  @shanemolloy4731  That would be condensation.
    1
  6. No he didn't, you moron. The Irish people and all political parties wished to be neutral. De Valera proceeded to assist the Allies secretly to ensure they would never invade, and suppressed the IRA and German intelligence to ensure Ireland could never be used to attack Britain.. Read a history book!
    1
  7. They are a sovereign nation.
    1
  8. The Good Friday Agreement makes Northern Ireland very special.
    1
  9. Yeah. Except the Irish are on to this mendacious 'Ireland v EU' argument. The Irish are not taking the bait. There will be no soft border for goods as it undermines the entire EU. Watch, and see.
    1
  10. The only people who can change the status of the Constitutional arrangement of Northern Ireland are the people of Northern Ireland.
    1
  11. Actually, the remaining 6 counties did opt out. At the time though everybody - including the British - assumed that they would eventually have to opt in and the border would disappear. This is why the Irish Civil War was not fought over the border, for example.
    1
  12. I think that bit of land is called the 'Monaghan Salient'.
    1
  13. Who knew! I only became aware of it about six months ago.
    1
  14. He wouldn't care. The UK expected the Irish to leave with them.
    1
  15. Scott, its the UK that is breaking the relationships - it has made a decision to leave but still expects to be tail that wags the EU dog. Ain't gonna happen. As far as can be discerned right now, the Common Travel Area is not an issue. The EU has no concerns about it. The problem is the movement of goods and the need to harden the border. That will cause animosity in NI and in time will reopen old wounds that were closed by the Good Friday Agreement because the border was open.
    1
  16. The assertion that technology renders a customs union unnecessary to avoid a hard border in Ireland does not survive scrutiny. This is plainly demonstrated by the House of Commons’ Northern Ireland affairs committee, which reported in March that it “had no visibility of any technical solutions, anywhere in the world, beyond the aspirational, that would remove the need for physical infrastructure at the border”. This committee is chaired by a Brexit supporter in the DUP.
    1
  17. Ireland has never been neutral. It is non-aligned and has an independent foreign policy.
    1
  18. You are not far from the truth.
    1
  19. Ireland is already a net contributor.
    1
  20. That's your opinion Shane. As far as I am concerned, any self appointed patriot who invites a foreign power to invade my country is a Quizling and requires the harshest penalty available. In this case, it was the gallows. The two IRA men executed by Dev had shot dead two unarmed Special Branch detectives who were protecting the state from the IRA's misguided assistance from Nazi Germany. This horrified public opinion in the Southern State, and there was little sympathy for them. Dev's execution was commuted simply because Asquith stopped the executions as it was influencing public opinion negatively. It was completely random. They didn't care that he was American by birth, this was later used to explain it by his supporters and by his detractors to infer he wasn't a real Irishman.
    1
  21. @ Shane Gallagher - Sorry that the Irish government didn't assist in 1969, but handing guns over to the IRA, which didn't recognise the right of the Republic of Ireland to exist was hardly the answer. Especially as a the IRA campaign which developed after Bloody Sunday failed to deliver on its goal. The solution to the problems in NI were and remain political, not military. I know all about the refugees who came south - I live near some of them and their descendants. Pearse and Plunkett may have had the notion of inviting Germany to invade Ireland - at one point Sinn Féin under Arthur Griffith were monarchists too, and wished to invited the Kaiser to be King - but in WW2 the Irish people wanted to be neutral. This was the consensus as the southern state was a divided regarding the relationship with the British. As usual the IRA thought they knew better. The 1916 Rising was undemocratic, make no mistake, but then there was already a democratic deficit in Ireland at the time. This was not the case when WW2 came round, not one party - not even Fine Gael who comprised old Southern Unionists and old Home Rulers alongside the pro-Treaty nationalists - supported joining the British without an attack first by Germany. It never came. There were cross-party demonstrations in Dublin in the summer of 1940 in support of neutrality even when a German or British invasion seemed inevitable. Neutrality was only an issue during General Elections during WW2 insofar as people were concerned about maintaining it. In that context, Sean Russell, Stephen Hayes and their ilk were treacherous in their illogical attempts to invite the most evil regime in modern history to invade Ireland to drive out a less evil imperial power from one corner of the island. Nationalists suffered appallingly under Unionist apartheid, but all would have suffered a great deal more under the Nazis.
    1
  22. It is obvious that your idea is a non-runner from the first sentence. Under the Good Friday Agreement there can be no change in the constitutional status of Northern Ireland without the support of the majority of the people of NI. They call the shots. Nationalists would never support your idea, which serves the English and will result in a hard border., which they are against. People aren't stupid, you know. Unionists would never support any dilution of the Constitutional status quo.
    1
  23. Unionists aren't like other people Roger, their nightmare is not being poor, its betrayal by London and any diminishing of the Union with the UK. They will not trade their constitutional status for pieces of silver. They know their bible.
    1
  24. I respectfully disagree - it IS political if its in reference to Northern Ireland. Everything is political there. Take the Nationalists for example - few of them consider the Queen to be their head of state, they are entitled to their Irish citizenship under internationally recognised treaty and will remain EU citizens through this. They have had their desires for a united Ireland quelled by the status quo of an invisible border with the Republic. All the while the Union is secure in a manner that suits the Unionists. Why would Nationalists accept a hard border? What is in it for them? What would be their motivation to support this? And Nationalists are nearly a majority in Northern Ireland now too Unionists are only concerned with securing the link with Britain. We know this because a large minority of them voted to remain because they weren't convinced by the economic argument to leave, but quickly changed to Brexit supporters when they realised Brexit might be a threat to the strength of the NI union with the UK . There can be no change in the status of NI with out the say-so of the people of NI. I would imagine that 90% of Nationalists would vote against any change in the status of NI, and the vast majority of Unionists would do so too: Nationalists because of the hard border they didn't vote for, and unionists because they above all else wish to see no constitutional change in the status of NI. We all know what the people of NI voted for in a referendum in 1998. Is that null and void now because it is incompatible with English aspirations?
    1
  25. Fair enough.
    1
  26. No it can't.
    1
  27. The only arrangement under the Belfast Agreement is for the status quo to remain or for a border poll. A border poll will have to be held in both the Republic and Northern Ireland on the same day to decide on unity. Recent polls suggest that whether that border poll is likely to happen in the near future or not will be determined by the nature of the final arrangement the UK has with the EU. There is no facility for an independent Northern Ireland as Unionists will to remain in the union and nationalists are either soft unionists or wish to see a united Ireland. There is no political will for an independent Northern Ireland. Once Brexit is finalised it is inescapable that there will be, at the very least, constitutional reform required in the UK. It may also be the case that Scotland will vote for independence, or that Northern Ireland will vote to unite with the Republic...but there is no evidence of a desire in Northern Ireland for independence.
    1
  28. How could Northern Ireland be independent? Protestants will not sit an govern NI alongside Catholics unless they are symbolically in charge. It is not a normal society, how could it be a normal country?
    1
  29. Only regarding the movement of people, not for the movement of goods.
    1
  30. Its only bonkers because you don't understand what is happening. Firstly, the UK had no plan or strategy for Brexit and never considered Ireland had skin in the game - perhaps because it so 'tiny'. Secondly, in the summer of 2016, while Brexiters were chest-beating and declaring their intent to have cake and eat it, the Irish went on a diplomatic offensive in Europe. Ireland got all the EU members to agree to put Ireland center stage as it had the most to lose from Brexit, economically, socially, and politically. In Ireland, Brexit is considered contrary Irish interests, an unfriendly act. So the idea that a 'tiny' country is influencing the future of the UK is to miss the point The 'tiny' country has 27 members standing behind it and the UK never had a coherent plan to begin with.
    1
  31. @ ElectricLabel ' I know no one likes to admit this, but while Ireland was officially neutral during WW2 there was actually a fair amount of unofficial collaboration with Nazi Germany. Most of the Merchant Navy losses in the North Atlantic supplying Britain from North America were attacked by U-Boats stationed in Irish territorial waters.' This sir, is bollox. Your 'fact' dates back to September 1939 when Churchill lied to the House of Commons when he announced the capture a uboat crew upon which had been found evidence that they had gone ashore in Ireland: Irish cigarettes, he claimed, had been found in their possession. From October 1939 a British submarine H33 and later H43 patrolled the Irish coastline from west Cork to Tory Island inside the Irish Three Mile Limit and was accompanied by a ‘trawler’ – a Q-Ship called the Tamura. They patrolled the Irish bays and the coastline in January and February 1940, going ashore and inspecting mooring facilities for evidence. H 43 was patrolling the Irish coast in June 1940. They founded nothing. Rev James Little MP, a NI Presbyterian clergyman, wrote to the Admiralty stating a parishioner on holiday in Donegal met U-boat crews on a bus near Bundoran. He stated that the Irish were harbouring U-boat crews and providing assistance. The Admiralty wrote back that rumours like this had been investigated before and proved to be baseless. They even noted in their files that the guy was rabid bigot. But still the 'story' persists. In 23/10/1940 Lord Strabolgi stated in a speech in the House of Lords that refuelling of uboats in Eire was ‘physically impossible because submarines did not use gasoline but heavy fuel oil...such supplies could only be carried in a surface ship which could not fail to be observed and reported’. Stabolgi demanded to know the UK Government. had allowed such false rumours to circulate. Lord Snell, replied saying that the Government had no evidence that enemy submarines were supplied from Irish territory.’ The idea that heavy fuel oil could be conveyed in large quantities to submarines, which are distinctive warships without anyone knowing about it is grotesque’, according to Lord Stragbolgi A minute from British Naval Intelligence from early December 1940 concluded that ‘no real evidence has been found that U-boats use bases in Eire. Allied propaganda about Irish neutrality involved four distortions: 1. That the country was full of Axis spies. 2. The German and Italian legations had huge staffs 3. The Irish were refuelling German submarines 4, the lights of Irish cities were supposedly used to guide the Luftwaffe to bomb UK cities. Although these rumours were authoritatively disproven during the war, as you demonstrate, at least one of them persists to this day. Try reading a history book. Any history book.
    1
  32. He didn't. Churchill had never consulted the Unionists who went apeshit when they found out about it. Churchill could never have delivered it.
    1