Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Over a period of 40 years, there were hundreds of murders and bombings in the North of Ireland instigated by Republican (pro Irish) and Unionist (pro UK) supporters. The victims were often murdered brutally as suspected informants of the British spy agencies. Weapons and money were funneled to the Republicans from ties to the USA, where almost 90% of the population claim Irish roots.

This mixture of violence, informants/agents, money, low prospects and British soldiers patrolling the streets was a period of time referred to as The Troubles. The Troubles ended for the most part in 1998 with something called The Good Friday Agreement which gave Northern Ireland a special self-governed status and removed borders between the North and South. Two referendums were passed with majorities of 71% and 94% in support of the agreement.

Despite the end of armed violence in Northern Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement can only be seen as a failure because it does not allow The Conservative Party to make a Brexit deal that severs Ireland in two again with a hard border to lock out the Euroweenies in the South. A majority in Northern Ireland rejected any form of Brexit but English voters carried it by 52-48 so it must be respected at all costs.

A return to The Troubles seems very likely.

Which means it's popcorn time! Pick a side and gather round the TV for 40 years. One the one hand we have the British with their legendary spy apparatus and an experienced army and on the other we have a rag-tag Irish militia without government backing (except unofficially the Americans) but no scruples about bombing civilians. Who's going to be the winner?

[Romeo Rovagnati]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

I'm on the South Ireland side because Northern Ireland is a Protestant Country.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

It's not very nice of you to be thinking about Mr Paisley in that way.

[Thomas Taylor]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

On the subject of Northern Ireland it would be a nice change to see it go back to the good old days.At least innocent British soldiers were not being prosecuted for so called war crimes, it was not illegal to call a catlicker a taig and thereby exclude him from work and to crown it all off there was interment (hopefully this will extend to all non True Christians like mooselims and joos).
It is a pity that Dr Ian, although not a True Christian, will not be able to see the outcome.


Another thing the British will be able to do is copy their hero President Donald Trump. At last they will be able to re-instate a Hard Border between the North and the South.


Another upside will be the ability of those proud Ulstermen of the Orange Order, especially the Temperance Lodges, to march their traditional routes through Papist areas rubbing the noses of the Papes in the fact that they beat back the Papist King James in 1690.


In the words of the late, great Ian Palsey "Ulster Still Says No to Papist Rule from Rome. No Surrender."


There are just so many pluses to the whole Brexit thing that I cannot wait to see the outcome.


YIC
TT

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

Over a period of 40 years, there were hundreds of murders and bombings in the North of Ireland instigated by Republican (pro Irish) racist thugs and criminals. The victims were often murdered brutally as suspected informants of the British spy agencies for no better reason than they were British, rather than Irish. Weapons and money were funneled to the Republicans from ties to the Catholic community in the USA, whose presence as immigrants the USA had already been warned of in the late 19th centurywhere almost 90% of the population claim Irish roots.

This mixture of violence, informants/agents, money, created untold difficulties for the entrepreneurial and prosperous British people and contributed to the low prospects of the broadly uneducated and superstitious Irish immigrants in this part of the United Kingdom.

British soldiers stationed in their own country was a period of time referred to as The Troubles by the racist, communist criminals of Sinn Fein/IRA.

The Troubles ended for the most part in 1998 when the British Government was forced by the Catholic European Union to desert its citizens with something called The Good Friday Agreement which gave Northern Ireland a special self-governed status betrayed them and removed all security from the border between the British Ulster and [b]the southern Leftists[/s]. Two referendums were passed with majorities of 71% and 94% in support of the agreement but the figures are deceptive, as the Irish were allowed to vote – imagine what would happen if All Russians were allowed to vote on whether the border between Alaska and Russia was to be abandoned!

Despite the end of armed violence in Northern Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement can only be seen as a compromise between those racist thugs and criminals who serve Rome and the Kremlin because it does not allow The Conservative Party, the only party to have any respect for its own people wishes to leave the traitorous EU that is working against British interests and has been doing so since the Protestant Reformation, to make a Brexit deal that severs Ireland in two again with a hard border to lock out the Euroweenies in the South. [Again, because the Irish in Ulster could vote, a so-called majority in Northern Ireland rejected any form of Brexitby 52-48 but English voters carried it so it must be respected at all costs and the result is therefore worthless

I have corrected the “Fake News”

Even if your name is "O'Toole" (and what could be more Irish?) you really must not believe the lies of the minions of the vicar of Rome, led by the Marxist Communists of so-called “Sinn Fein/IRA” Both sided with Hitler in WW2.

If the Irish want a border, let them have it. Sinn Fein/IRA will then have to attack their own!

[Nobar King]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

It seems to me that they should all be on the north side.

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

Popcorn time indeed Brother Toole, but my take on it might be a bit different. Let's face it, the Irish cathylicks are of the worst kind - taking to strong drink and belligerent while at the same time the most vociferous backers of the Vatican. Italian cathylicks on the other hand, are content to just enjoy their sin, sodomy and fornication, and occasionally design some nice looking cars that are mechanical nightmares.

The British meanwhile are still pretend cathylicks with their state sponsored CoE - that now hypocritically "tolerates" protestants. In the grand scheme of things, would you rather side with Wahabis / Sunnis (Saudi Arabia) or Shias (crazed Iranian Ayatollahs) when it comes to mooselimbs?

We here in America can help out by funding a cable channel by selling arms to both sides, encourage the building of border walls, and the deportation of undesirables on both sides - and of course encourage everyone to become Landover Baptist True Christians™. What I'm trying to say is - let Jesus sort it all out.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

Popcorn time indeed Brother Toole,

We here in America can help out by funding a cable channel by selling arms to both sides, encourage the building of border walls, and the deportation of undesirables on both sides - and of course encourage everyone to become Landover Baptist True Christians™. What I'm trying to say is - let Jesus sort it all out.

Could we make the coming war into a tourist attraction? Maybe charter planes to go over there and sell bleacher seats to watch the shooting?

[Jim C. Lombardo]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

I'm on the side of , always, no matter the issue. No questions asked.

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

Could we make the coming war into a tourist attraction? Maybe charter planes to go over there and sell bleacher seats to watch the shooting?

We're thinking along the same lines there Mayor, and I've long been a proponent of outsourcing the "Holy Land" in the Middle East to the Disney Company as a tourist attraction.

In this case however I think it would be dangerous and we're better off watching it in Hi-Def from the safety and comfort of our living rooms. It's going to get bad enough watching ads from the likes of Sally Struthers whining about the poor waifs affected by the struggles, let alone an endless gaggle of Hellywood types like Angelina Jolie virtue signaling by adopting homeless orphans, and the inevitable insufferable parade of recording artists hawking concerts to raise money for the refugees.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

We're thinking along the same lines there Mayor, and I've long been a proponent of outsourcing the "Holy Land" in the Middle East to the Disney Company as a tourist attraction.

In this case however I think it would be dangerous and we're better off watching it in Hi-Def from the safety and comfort of our living rooms.

You make a good point, Brother Bryan. Profits from a reality TV show might be even better than tickets to see it live. We could trump up a romance between a Northern and Southerner. Maybe some Freehold kids could learn accents and be phony orphans. Better Freehold gets the donations than Sally Fields.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

It looks as though, after a mere 200 years, the Irish Question could be settled quite soon. In a bold move, the Irishmen in the south have elected the IRA to run the country.

The British are more than ready to sit back and enjoy the fun.

[Alvin Moss]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

It looks as though, after a mere 200 years, the Irish Question could be settled quite soon. In a bold move, the Irishmen in the south have elected the IRA to run the country.

The British are more than ready to sit back and enjoy the fun.

This is unsettling news, Sister. It brings to mind a topic usually avoided here in America. Many Scottish Christians were recruited some time back to go to Ireland and take up farming and other pursuits due to the lack of industry among the natives there, who were (and still are) mired in the morass of Roman Catholicism. The Irish are a race of alcoholics and debauched sinners who are unqualified to run any country, especially their own. Part of the plan was to eliminate the natives completely to avoid any further complications.


Things went well for a while. The Irish were driven west of the Shannon River, many were sent on to their reward, which was Hell and beautiful farms sprang up where there were only weeds before. The Scots prospered and the Irish were fewer and fewer. The Scots came to think of themselves as Irish. Then the plan went awry.


Word came that America was there with even more land and more opportunity and so the Scots left Ireland in droves to come to the New World and massacre Indians instead. My own ancestors, godly men, were among them. They did a fine job in America and the natives have been driven to the far deserts and other places that no one wants and most of them are gone on now anyway.


However, the job in Ireland was never finished. The weaker strain of Scots, left behind in Ireland and expected to finish the work of their betters, failed and the Irish began to multiply again. Many even came to America where they became the first gangs of criminals in America and opened the way for organized crime until the Italians could get here. Now, they contend with the Mexicans, each tribe trying to prove they can drink more whiskey than the other. It is a stain on our escutcheon, one that we Scot-Irish (it's a new term to denote someone from Ireland who is not a drunk) sometimes talk wistfully about correcting. But we never did and look what has happened now. It's a disgrace.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

Thank you for the very detailed history lesson, Brother. What you say here has made me wonder whether there is not, after all, a solution to The Irish Question (which can be summed up as "Why oh why oh why?").

The weaker strain of Scots, left behind in Ireland and expected to finish the work of their betters, failed and the Irish began to multiply again.

As things stand at the moment, there are about 800,000 former Scots-but-now-Irish, i.e. non-Catholics, in Northern Ireland. Although they were weak, they must have been strengthened over the years by street-fighting against the enemy. It occurs to me that if they were all to move to the least densely-populated US state, Ireland could be abandoned to its fate.


If the move works out well, so much the better for the Godly USA. If not ... well, the President already has plans to dispose of Alaska.

[Alvin Moss]

Re: Northern Ireland: who's side are you on?

Thank you for the very detailed history lesson, Brother. What you say here has made me wonder whether there is not, after all, a solution to The Irish Question (which can be summed up as "Why oh why oh why?").


As things stand at the moment, there are about 800,000 former Scots-but-now-Irish, i.e. non-Catholics, in Northern Ireland. Although they were weak, they must have been strengthened over the years by street-fighting against the enemy. It occurs to me that if they were all to move to the least densely-populated US state, Ireland could be abandoned to its fate.


If the move works out well, so much the better for the Godly USA. If not ... well, the President already has plans to dispose of Alaska.

If they are skilled at battle, maybe they could do something about the heathens in the big cities. Let them come, I say. They can start with Los Angeles, California and after the wicked there are purged, they can go on to San Francisco, Portland, Seattle and other cesspools of sin on the West Coast. It is customary among these Scots to appropriate the holdings of the natives they smite or drive off. They can all become Californians. That would please God and it would be a profitable experience for everyone.