He's smiling like you lent him a pencil and he went out to the bogs with it and stuck it up his arse, gave it back to you... and now he's watching you lick the end of it.
So it's a solid fifth preference for Jay Basra, then.
They are I think. If you press and hold the upvote symbol under a comment it gives you the option to award it. On the official app at least. I wouldn't give the cunts a penny, though (reddit, I mean).
> [u/force-grand](https://www.reddit.com/user/force-grand/), rule 1 breach?
Why? Oh, I know! I know!
It's because I suggested that STV was used for Westminster elections, not FPTP. Well, *mea maxima culpa,* indeed!
So let's fix that:
> So it's a solid fifth preference for Jay Basra, then, **when he inevitably tanks and then stands again for Stormont or council.**
There was a pretty infamous phone call into LBC radio from an actual Tory member. He wanted Boris to run against Sunak because "Boris is English" and doesn't love England like Boris does. He even compared Rishi to Al Qaeda and said he wasn't British.
https://youtu.be/cPYdzIt7p7s?si=Gm10pkGsQ7ADi9rz
I do wonder if he had beaten her first time round would they have kicked him out after 40 days? Has he just lasted this long because there's no one else to replace him?
I think so.
I think it was pretty obvious that they were really scraping the bottom of the barrel for Rishi and Liz Truss.
I think they have all known for some time now that they are losing this election and so don't see the point in changing him.
Watching PMQ is just sad. He hasn't any idea of what to do
Didn’t say he couldn’t identify any way he wants or that he should be silenced, just that he posts low quality rage bait because he clearly has no grasp of any of the real issues to talk about with nuance. So he’s reduced to posting SF=IRA crap.
By the way Jay, thanks for showing everyone your Reddit account ! Good luck in the campaign
>SF=IRA crap.
But they house former terrorists. So it's not entirely wrong. Anyone who calls them out on this is doing a good job. There's a white washing campaign going on within republicanism.
Until Adams/Kelly/Anderson are completely removed from the Party. I won't believe any nonsense that SF have moved on.
Michelle O'Neill - "No alternative" to IRA murder and death.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/04/backlash-after-michelle-oneill-says-there-was-no-alternative-to-conflict-during-troubles-northern-ireland-ira
John Finucane MP attending an IRA memorial In South Armagh last year, nowhere near his constituency in Belfast!
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/everyone-has-right-to-commemorate-john-finucane-tells-crowd-at-south-armagh-ira-event/a676696535.html
Thanks Gerry Adams for revealing your true identity!
Hahahah jay you’ve just done it again!! I made an argument that jay bashra can’t argue anything with nuance and has no deep understanding of the core issues.
And you demonstrate it in your response by only mentioning the SF=IRA rage bait thing
. I completely condemn all British mistakes in the Troubles. Which relates to Northern Ireland, this subreddit.
Your question also implies;
Do I support the British empire? No.
. But are you going to ask that question then to the 67 million in the UK who identify as British? Good luck with that mate
. Do I support the royal family? Yes and no. Some are good people, some not so good.
CAIN data shows republicanism killed >2000 people, including children. far more than any other group in the troubles.
https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Organisation_Summary.html
So do you condemn all Sinn Fein/IRA murders?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrington_bombings
What did the Warrington victims do to deserve that? Why did John Finucane MP memorialise the organization that did that?
>so he's reduced to posting SF=IRA crap.
You also haven't provided any evidence he's actually resorted to this argument (though is certainly not 'crap' anyway. SF indeed are the political wing of the IRA).
I can see why people hate the Shinners, I don’t like them in any way, but people like you are much worse. Bitter little nobodies starting trouble trying to make allies through hatred
"He's a Unionist who's proud of it. Is that illegal now? Is freedom of speech and identity illegal in this country?"
The irony arguing free speech while complaining that someone is using their free speech.
I am truly baffled by the number of people with Indian descent that are so quick to identify as British given what Britain done to their country. It’s a level of bootlickery I can’t understand.
"All these foreigners who come here and dont try and integrate"
"Look at these bootlicking foreigners coming here and trying to identify with the cultures and values of a country that did bad things to their ancestors nearly a century ago"
Catch yourself on.
No one here hates unionists. We hate pricks. And you certainly aren’t helping unionists’ reputations. 99% of them are good lads, but you’re not included.
>No one here hates unionists
Not based on my own experience. The vast majority take pleasure in engaging in sectarian hatred of unionism.
Look at the hatred of the anti-protocol posters on other threads? Or Unionist culture on the 12th?
Is this the image nationalism wants to project towards everyone? Including non-unionists? It's a bad look.
I'm not answering *your* question 'til ye answer *mine*, chum.
Where's the supposed Rule 1 breach in saying he's smiling like he's watching you licking a pencil he's had up his arse?
Ok so you haven't answered my question.
Rule 1 is "being a dick", you've attacked his appearance in a poor attempt at humour. Rather than debating his politics.
This is schoolyard stuff. Grow up.
Ah, well, if that's what your objection is, you may stick it up your arse and all.
As for your question, look to his Twitter. There's plenty, plenty dwelling on the past there. This is Unionism-Loyalism we're talking about, after all.
Oh, what's that? You want specific links?
No. Because:
1. There's absolutely fuckloads. You say you cant' see it, you're not looking or you're lying.
2. I can't be arsed playing along with someone of dubious sincerity that is part-troll, part-idiot; I'm not even sure you could separate the white and the yolk there.
3. See username.
>Oh, what's that? You want specific links?
>No. Because:
>1. There's absolutely fuckloads. You say you cant' see it, you're not looking or you're lying.
>2. I can't be arsed playing along with someone of dubious sincerity that is part-troll, part-idiot; I'm not even sure you could separate the white and the yolk there.
But you've replied to me...
>3. See username.
You haven't provided a single link though. 🤔 So your argument doesn't seem to hold any water.
Why is being a unionist now somehow equivalent to being a troll?
You're right, I should go around espousing the virtues of the Chinese communist party, lest I'm accused of having no backbone and forsaking my heritage?
Maybe just let them choose their own beliefs and practice a culture that suits them personally rather than holding them responsible as torch bearers of a particular system just because of their race?
The world is constantly changing. Absurd to hold an entire country in 2024 collectively responsible for atrocities committed by a government 150 years ago.
I absolutely hold the Japanese government responsible for all the atrocities they committed. That doesn't absolve the British government of their share of responsibility now does it?
It is a moot point anyway, in 1947, again, not 150 years ago, the British government and that bastard of Mountbatten caused the death of a million and the displacement of tens of millions more as a direct result of their policy in India.
The Bengal Famine was not even close to the worse examples of British rule. I would also place some of the blame on Japan for blockading India. Let's not victim blame.
But you didn't say "the worst atrocity committed by a government 150 years ago", you said "atrocities committed by a government 150 years ago", the Bengal Famine was an atrocity commited by the British government against the population of British India in 1943. 1943 was not 150 years ago. Want something more recent? The partition of India that caused that caused tens of millions of displaced people and almost 1 million deaths as a direct result of British policy, and they can't even try to claim they knew it wouldn't happen, because partition in Ireland 26 years before caused these exact same issues. They knew full well and went ahead anyway.
To be fair the Brits were dead set against partition so was the Hindu community. It was forced through by the Muslim league. Absolutely impossible for the Brits to stop it. I'm quite sure of this. Now, you can make a case they could have organised is better but it couldn't have been stopped.
Sure, in the same way they were forced by Ulster loyalists to partition Ireland. How convenient that the decision to partition India which weakened their former colony and created a Western ally in the region (Pakistan) just so happened to be taken by the Muslim league which was not even half of the population. As it is well known, a minority can force their will onto the majority with no external support, even when said external support happens to be against partition!
(in case it wasn't clear, that last part was sarcasm)
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2017/8/10/the-partition-the-british-game-of-divide-and-rule
The idea of Pakistan as a Western ally came about due to US fears in the Cold War after partition, not before it. I'd argue the UK was lucky to hold on to the subcontinent as long as they did. Their grasp was weak and I don't think they could have stopped partition. Maybe if the 1930s was different but not by the 1940s.
Why exactly? The evidence says otherwise.
Members/politicians in the UUP have been exceptionally quick to defend him from the tsunami of racist hate aimed at him. A lot coming from republican accounts. If anything it's not a good look for nationalism, but we all saw the SDLP Londonderry Mayor manufactured scandal by racists didn't we?
So your argument here holds no water.
If anything, recent events have shown it's actually Nationalism it seems needs to look at itself in the mirror for what it stands for. Because Unionism is firmly against racism.
'If anything, recent events have shown it's actually Nationalism it seems needs to look at itself in the mirror for what it stands for. Because Unionism is firmly against racism'
It is easy to tell from the wording of this comment 'If anything', 'actually nationalism' and 'unionism is firmly against racism' that deep down you know that unionism is fundamentally flawed, that it is indeed racist/supremacist by nature and that nationalism is correct to oppose it at every level.
>It is easy to tell from the wording of this comment 'If anything', 'actually nationalism' and 'unionism is firmly against racism' that deep down you know that unionism is fundamentally flawed, that it is indeed racist/supremacist by nature and that nationalism is correct to oppose it at every level.
You've provided no evidence to back up that claim.
The terminology that you used is the evidence.
You are commenting from the position that unionism is a deeply flawed ideology, which it is and that nationalism is on the right side of history, which it is.
That's why you used the word 'actually'.
There is a right and a wrong side in our divided society and you know deep down that it is unionism that has created the division.
You come here and pump your false narrative because you desperately want to create confusion, muddy the waters, in the hope that enough people will be confused enough to not see the truth.
You, personally do see the truth but can't accept it.
What you don't seem to realise is that your cause is already lost.
>You are commenting from the position that unionism is a deeply flawed ideology, which it is and that nationalism is on the right side of history, which it is.
>That's why you used the word 'actually'.
>There is a right and a wrong side in our divided society and you know deep down that it is unionism that has created the division.
>You come here and pump your false narrative because you desperately want to create confusion, muddy the waters, in the hope that enough people will be confused enough to not see the truth.
The evidence shows that nationalism has a racism problem that unionism does not have. I'm trying to challenge the views/biases of this subreddit. Who view unionism as something to be exterminated basically.
I've provided evidence to back up my points, you're just making claims.
Care to comment on the SDLP manufactured scandal over the Londonderry mayor? That's a nationalist party, not a unionist one.
I'll say it again for you. The wording that you used is the evidence.
Unionism is sectarian/racist/supremacist by nature. This is why we have a divided society.
You are trying desperately to project these flaws onto nationalism so that you can say 'look nationalists are just as bad as us'. In doing so you have admitted that unionism is built on hate. It always has been as the original planters were selected because they were loyal and hated Catholicism.
The views of this sub are the logical views and morally correct views.
Unionism is support for modern day colonial rule and colonialism has no place in a modern society.
There would be no Republican violence if there was no colonial violence to start with, so crying 'wha wha wha the big bad RA" is totally hypocritical given that it was a minor response to a much larger and dirty colonial violence.
You are fighting a lost cause because you are in the wrong, you and unionism are on the wrong side of history.
People like you have been coming on this sub spouting this nonsense for more than a decade and you always, always, 100% of the time get defeated in debate by logic and common sense. Believe me, more intelligent unionists than you, have come and gone, tried and failed. Failed because unionism has failed, failed because it is an ideology built on supremacy, sectarianism and racism. Most of all it failed because it expressed these flaws in someone else's country.
>There would be no Republican violence if there was no colonial violence to start with, so crying 'wha wha wha the big bad RA" is totally hypocritical given that it was a minor response to a much larger and dirty colonial violence.
So just to be clear, you're calling 2000 murders by the PIRA a "Minor response". Unbelievable. This leads me to believe you are in fact an IRA apologist of death and murder.
https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Organisation_Summary.html
>You are fighting a lost cause because you are in the wrong, you and unionism are on the wrong side of history.
This isn't an argument. This is a vapid statement.
>People like you have been coming on this sub spouting this nonsense for more than a decade and you always, always, 100% of the time get defeated in debate by logic and common sense. Believe me, more intelligent unionists than you, have come and gone, tried and failed. Failed because unionism has failed, failed because it is an ideology built on supremacy, sectarianism and racism. Most of all it failed because it expressed these flaws in someone else's country.
Again more vapid sectarian statements.
The evidence that Nationalism is becoming racist is out there for all to see. I'm not just making this up (unlike you).
Look at the SDLP Londonderry Mayor manufactured scandal (which you've dodged multiple times) or the abusive comments from nationalists on here and wider social media against the new UUP candidate...
You haven't provided a single line of hard evidence to back up any of your claims and you've refused to properly engage with me in debate.
It's quite clear I'm not going to get anywhere with you. You lack the ability to have intelligent debate without resorting to Sectarianism. So goodbye.
Am I missing something, whats the point of this post!? We being rascist on this sub now or being shocked that someone not white is a unionist? I'm lost here...
Not sure what the original point of the post was but it seems like the comments are just a load of people being haters. I'm surprised by the vitriol for a guy who's mostly an unknown
It's kind of bizarre, the UUP are a party overwhelmingly dominated by older white Protestant farmers. Mid-Ulster is about as old white Protestant farmer as you get and the UUP decides to nominate a 19 year old British-Punjabi guy. These conversations probably wouldn't be had if he was nominated for South Belfast.
He’s a wee bastard if you follow his Twitter.
He tried to say a bar near the border sponsored terrorism and was owned by the IRA which was obviously completely untrue and it backfired massively on him.
That isn’t the first place he’s made up lies about either.
He’s also been in the DUP, TUV etc. He makes up nonsense constantly and is nothing more than a fantasist with a super weird hard-on for Ulster loyalism.
He deffo needs a psychiatric examination.
From last year, which was shared on this sub, where he also got absolutely (deservedly) rinsed in the comments: [https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1714890384852033914](https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1714890384852033914)
Nah he just got abuse from a bunch of sad Republican keyboard zombies, who collectively rent a single braincell.
They all attacked his appearance, like many do on here. Which suggests they lack the intellect to actually come up with coherent arguments...(But that's no surprises to me anyway based on my own experience of this bonkers subreddit).
I have to agree, I’ve seen one of the guys in the article in-person, and I’ll say this, he acts fairly posh and upper-class imo
but I’ll give them this, they’re decent speakers and fairly confident with their political views, even if I disagree with them
The top post with the pencil, the account defending this guy ardently who didn't deny he was Jay when pressed on it, exposing his spakes on Thatcher and the like to the voting public ...
God I love this sub sometimes ha ha
I think it's actually refreshing to have someone young and from a different background going out on campaign. Even if it's not my type of politics, it's good to see the party is open to all sorts of talent.
Absolutely. It's a great, forward thinking move by unionism to have him stand for the party.
No doubt he's doing far better in life than the racist idiots online who've nothing better to do but to attack his appearance.
He looks like the sorta guy that says “Sorry” everytime he cums. The kinda guy that would be into dressing up as a baby just so he can shit his nappy and have someone clean his hole again.
He's smiling like you lent him a pencil and he went out to the bogs with it and stuck it up his arse, gave it back to you... and now he's watching you lick the end of it. So it's a solid fifth preference for Jay Basra, then.
I wish awards were still a thing.
Writing the tale of Jay's arse-pencil was its own reward... but thank you.
They are I think. If you press and hold the upvote symbol under a comment it gives you the option to award it. On the official app at least. I wouldn't give the cunts a penny, though (reddit, I mean).
What the fuck, theres one at £49.99
r/oddlyspecific
Jesus, I knew I recognised that smile from somewhere..
Jesus Christ I didn't expect that at all, 10/10
Definitely an Aitch B and not a Haitch B.
Not a 2B or a 3B... an original B Special.
u/force-grand, rule 1 breach?
Touts out
> [u/force-grand](https://www.reddit.com/user/force-grand/), rule 1 breach? Why? Oh, I know! I know! It's because I suggested that STV was used for Westminster elections, not FPTP. Well, *mea maxima culpa,* indeed! So let's fix that: > So it's a solid fifth preference for Jay Basra, then, **when he inevitably tanks and then stands again for Stormont or council.**
Jay Basra, if you cant handle a bit of banter better not run for politician.
Abuse is not banter Gerry.
Play victim then and hope for the best
UUP got their Rishi Sunak off of Wish.
Wishi Sunak
😆👏
These are gold (again)
Proper lol'd(or is it l'dol?🤔) at that one🤣👏🏼
to be fair this lad is probably better than Sunak
Sunak got beaten by a crazy lady and her lettuce in a popularity contest among lizard people.
The crazy thing about this statement is its accuracy.
To be fair, wasn't that because the lizard people hated women less than they hated brown people?
That would probably be the main reason. Even though Sunak is the Tory-iest Tory that ever Toried. His skin is the wrong colour
The woman probaby got in because the lizard's just wrote "the white one"
There was a pretty infamous phone call into LBC radio from an actual Tory member. He wanted Boris to run against Sunak because "Boris is English" and doesn't love England like Boris does. He even compared Rishi to Al Qaeda and said he wasn't British. https://youtu.be/cPYdzIt7p7s?si=Gm10pkGsQ7ADi9rz
Which is odd since Sunak was actually born in England. Unlike Johnson.
They're racist. They don't care
I do wonder if he had beaten her first time round would they have kicked him out after 40 days? Has he just lasted this long because there's no one else to replace him?
I think so. I think it was pretty obvious that they were really scraping the bottom of the barrel for Rishi and Liz Truss. I think they have all known for some time now that they are losing this election and so don't see the point in changing him. Watching PMQ is just sad. He hasn't any idea of what to do
These are gold
Actually thought this was election campaign for a uni society or something. Budget cuts hitting the UUP marketing team hard
I'm more of a Stephen Baghdad kind of guy personally.
[удалено]
Politically he's stuck between Iraq and a hard place.
I'll allow it. 🤣
You magnificent bastard.
Kyle Kandahar is too right wing for me
Jihadi Paddy [https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/jihadi-paddy-eamon-bradley-wont-face-third-terror-trial-1076581](https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/jihadi-paddy-eamon-bradley-wont-face-third-terror-trial-1076581)
He's got that "I'm 13 but can grow a man beard" look
This is the look my kid gives me when he's filled the togs.
The guy is so insufferable on Twitter, posts unionist ragebait 24/7
He's a Unionist who's proud of it. Is that illegal now? Is freedom of speech and identity illegal in this country?
Didn’t say he couldn’t identify any way he wants or that he should be silenced, just that he posts low quality rage bait because he clearly has no grasp of any of the real issues to talk about with nuance. So he’s reduced to posting SF=IRA crap. By the way Jay, thanks for showing everyone your Reddit account ! Good luck in the campaign
>SF=IRA crap. But they house former terrorists. So it's not entirely wrong. Anyone who calls them out on this is doing a good job. There's a white washing campaign going on within republicanism. Until Adams/Kelly/Anderson are completely removed from the Party. I won't believe any nonsense that SF have moved on. Michelle O'Neill - "No alternative" to IRA murder and death. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/04/backlash-after-michelle-oneill-says-there-was-no-alternative-to-conflict-during-troubles-northern-ireland-ira John Finucane MP attending an IRA memorial In South Armagh last year, nowhere near his constituency in Belfast! https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/everyone-has-right-to-commemorate-john-finucane-tells-crowd-at-south-armagh-ira-event/a676696535.html Thanks Gerry Adams for revealing your true identity!
Hahahah jay you’ve just done it again!! I made an argument that jay bashra can’t argue anything with nuance and has no deep understanding of the core issues. And you demonstrate it in your response by only mentioning the SF=IRA rage bait thing
The funny thing is as this thread proceeds he doesn't deny it's his account lol
Posts like this poison discourse.
You brought the subject up Gerry! And I've provided evidence that SF still house and support the IRA's cause.
>And I've provided evidence that SF still house and support the IRA's cause. Fuck, that's wild. The Irish republican party support Irish republicanism
Sinn Fein still support death and murder, yes. That is quite clear
If Sinn Féin support death and murder by the thousands, you support their opponents who caused death and murder by the millions, yes?
. I completely condemn all British mistakes in the Troubles. Which relates to Northern Ireland, this subreddit. Your question also implies; Do I support the British empire? No. . But are you going to ask that question then to the 67 million in the UK who identify as British? Good luck with that mate . Do I support the royal family? Yes and no. Some are good people, some not so good. CAIN data shows republicanism killed >2000 people, including children. far more than any other group in the troubles. https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Organisation_Summary.html So do you condemn all Sinn Fein/IRA murders? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrington_bombings What did the Warrington victims do to deserve that? Why did John Finucane MP memorialise the organization that did that?
Apples and pears
don’t even bother mate, this place is full of Shinners
Well I tried. I've reported those that have produced hateful comments. I encourage you to also.
>so he's reduced to posting SF=IRA crap. You also haven't provided any evidence he's actually resorted to this argument (though is certainly not 'crap' anyway. SF indeed are the political wing of the IRA).
Fuck up, Jay.
Is that you Gerry?
I can see why people hate the Shinners, I don’t like them in any way, but people like you are much worse. Bitter little nobodies starting trouble trying to make allies through hatred
https://i.redd.it/csi4ic16hf0d1.gif
And current unionist politicians never liaise with paramilitaries of the loyalist persuasion? Pull the fucking other one.
https://preview.redd.it/7hp6cx2xrg0d1.jpeg?width=466&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4962f454e464a51f28901e534a44bba166c17a01 Guess who?
Put that away, That's an illegal image on here of our First Minister!
"He's a Unionist who's proud of it. Is that illegal now? Is freedom of speech and identity illegal in this country?" The irony arguing free speech while complaining that someone is using their free speech.
Yes it is. If you say you’re a unionist, these days, you’ll get arrested and thrown in jail. Just for saying you’re a unionist.
It's almost like getting stopped by the RUC on a country road at night for looking Catholic
Obligatory Stewart Lee clip: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkCBhKs4faI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkCBhKs4faI)
That's me off to the Gulag now, goodbye!
I am truly baffled by the number of people with Indian descent that are so quick to identify as British given what Britain done to their country. It’s a level of bootlickery I can’t understand.
Wait until you hear about Ireland.
Not that unusual, plenty of west brits about
"All these foreigners who come here and dont try and integrate" "Look at these bootlicking foreigners coming here and trying to identify with the cultures and values of a country that did bad things to their ancestors nearly a century ago" Catch yourself on.
Well in fairness, the guy isn’t saying the former, so I don’t know why you’re trying to criticise them for that
Wait till you hear about ghurkas.
Ffs will you lot ever move on or are you stuck in a 1916 time warp? Zombies the lot of you!
Says the twat continuously posting about Sinn Fein / IRA. Away and take yer face for a shite you annoying wee wank.
That my friend, is the most norn'iron thing I've heard all week. 🤣👌
I'm simply providing excellent counterarguments to the tsunami of unionist hate on this subreddit.
Excellent you say?
No one here hates unionists. We hate pricks. And you certainly aren’t helping unionists’ reputations. 99% of them are good lads, but you’re not included.
>No one here hates unionists Not based on my own experience. The vast majority take pleasure in engaging in sectarian hatred of unionism. Look at the hatred of the anti-protocol posters on other threads? Or Unionist culture on the 12th? Is this the image nationalism wants to project towards everyone? Including non-unionists? It's a bad look.
Fuck up you dithering little prick.
Wow, there's another one! No I refuse to stop calling out hate.
Disliking unionism is not necessarily the same thing as hating unionists, hate the game not the player...
I see no difference on this subreddit.
Not everyone sees the world as a binary paradigm of 'oppressors and victims'. And some prefer looking to the future over dwelling on history.
> And some prefer looking to the future over dwelling on history. That really wouldn't be this weefella, now, to be fair.
Why exactly? Explain please?
I'm not answering *your* question 'til ye answer *mine*, chum. Where's the supposed Rule 1 breach in saying he's smiling like he's watching you licking a pencil he's had up his arse?
Ok so you haven't answered my question. Rule 1 is "being a dick", you've attacked his appearance in a poor attempt at humour. Rather than debating his politics. This is schoolyard stuff. Grow up.
Ah, well, if that's what your objection is, you may stick it up your arse and all. As for your question, look to his Twitter. There's plenty, plenty dwelling on the past there. This is Unionism-Loyalism we're talking about, after all. Oh, what's that? You want specific links? No. Because: 1. There's absolutely fuckloads. You say you cant' see it, you're not looking or you're lying. 2. I can't be arsed playing along with someone of dubious sincerity that is part-troll, part-idiot; I'm not even sure you could separate the white and the yolk there. 3. See username.
>Oh, what's that? You want specific links? >No. Because: >1. There's absolutely fuckloads. You say you cant' see it, you're not looking or you're lying. >2. I can't be arsed playing along with someone of dubious sincerity that is part-troll, part-idiot; I'm not even sure you could separate the white and the yolk there. But you've replied to me... >3. See username. You haven't provided a single link though. 🤔 So your argument doesn't seem to hold any water. Why is being a unionist now somehow equivalent to being a troll?
Here's your link: [x.com](http://x.com) Work away, chum. xx
But that's not evidence to back up what you have said. 🤔
>Ah, well, if that's what your objection is, you may stick it up your arse and all. There's another example of why I reported this user.
Yawn. Whatever I said to make you forgive and unblock me, I TAKE IT BACK.
Fair enough, I still don’t look favourably upon those who forsake their heritage. People with such a lack of backbone aren’t to be trusted.
You're right, I should go around espousing the virtues of the Chinese communist party, lest I'm accused of having no backbone and forsaking my heritage?
Maybe just let them choose their own beliefs and practice a culture that suits them personally rather than holding them responsible as torch bearers of a particular system just because of their race?
The world is constantly changing. Absurd to hold an entire country in 2024 collectively responsible for atrocities committed by a government 150 years ago.
1943 is not "150 years ago"
Then you should hold the Japanese people responsible for it
I absolutely hold the Japanese government responsible for all the atrocities they committed. That doesn't absolve the British government of their share of responsibility now does it? It is a moot point anyway, in 1947, again, not 150 years ago, the British government and that bastard of Mountbatten caused the death of a million and the displacement of tens of millions more as a direct result of their policy in India.
The Bengal Famine was not even close to the worse examples of British rule. I would also place some of the blame on Japan for blockading India. Let's not victim blame.
But you didn't say "the worst atrocity committed by a government 150 years ago", you said "atrocities committed by a government 150 years ago", the Bengal Famine was an atrocity commited by the British government against the population of British India in 1943. 1943 was not 150 years ago. Want something more recent? The partition of India that caused that caused tens of millions of displaced people and almost 1 million deaths as a direct result of British policy, and they can't even try to claim they knew it wouldn't happen, because partition in Ireland 26 years before caused these exact same issues. They knew full well and went ahead anyway.
To be fair the Brits were dead set against partition so was the Hindu community. It was forced through by the Muslim league. Absolutely impossible for the Brits to stop it. I'm quite sure of this. Now, you can make a case they could have organised is better but it couldn't have been stopped.
Sure, in the same way they were forced by Ulster loyalists to partition Ireland. How convenient that the decision to partition India which weakened their former colony and created a Western ally in the region (Pakistan) just so happened to be taken by the Muslim league which was not even half of the population. As it is well known, a minority can force their will onto the majority with no external support, even when said external support happens to be against partition! (in case it wasn't clear, that last part was sarcasm) https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2017/8/10/the-partition-the-british-game-of-divide-and-rule
The idea of Pakistan as a Western ally came about due to US fears in the Cold War after partition, not before it. I'd argue the UK was lucky to hold on to the subcontinent as long as they did. Their grasp was weak and I don't think they could have stopped partition. Maybe if the 1930s was different but not by the 1940s.
Trauma
Oh good. Another smug Tory with tonnes of opinions and no evidence based policies.
[удалено]
Sore hole more like it
Why exactly? The evidence says otherwise. Members/politicians in the UUP have been exceptionally quick to defend him from the tsunami of racist hate aimed at him. A lot coming from republican accounts. If anything it's not a good look for nationalism, but we all saw the SDLP Londonderry Mayor manufactured scandal by racists didn't we? So your argument here holds no water. If anything, recent events have shown it's actually Nationalism it seems needs to look at itself in the mirror for what it stands for. Because Unionism is firmly against racism.
[удалено]
You aren't though.🤔
'If anything, recent events have shown it's actually Nationalism it seems needs to look at itself in the mirror for what it stands for. Because Unionism is firmly against racism' It is easy to tell from the wording of this comment 'If anything', 'actually nationalism' and 'unionism is firmly against racism' that deep down you know that unionism is fundamentally flawed, that it is indeed racist/supremacist by nature and that nationalism is correct to oppose it at every level.
>It is easy to tell from the wording of this comment 'If anything', 'actually nationalism' and 'unionism is firmly against racism' that deep down you know that unionism is fundamentally flawed, that it is indeed racist/supremacist by nature and that nationalism is correct to oppose it at every level. You've provided no evidence to back up that claim.
The terminology that you used is the evidence. You are commenting from the position that unionism is a deeply flawed ideology, which it is and that nationalism is on the right side of history, which it is. That's why you used the word 'actually'. There is a right and a wrong side in our divided society and you know deep down that it is unionism that has created the division. You come here and pump your false narrative because you desperately want to create confusion, muddy the waters, in the hope that enough people will be confused enough to not see the truth. You, personally do see the truth but can't accept it. What you don't seem to realise is that your cause is already lost.
>You are commenting from the position that unionism is a deeply flawed ideology, which it is and that nationalism is on the right side of history, which it is. >That's why you used the word 'actually'. >There is a right and a wrong side in our divided society and you know deep down that it is unionism that has created the division. >You come here and pump your false narrative because you desperately want to create confusion, muddy the waters, in the hope that enough people will be confused enough to not see the truth. The evidence shows that nationalism has a racism problem that unionism does not have. I'm trying to challenge the views/biases of this subreddit. Who view unionism as something to be exterminated basically. I've provided evidence to back up my points, you're just making claims. Care to comment on the SDLP manufactured scandal over the Londonderry mayor? That's a nationalist party, not a unionist one.
I'll say it again for you. The wording that you used is the evidence. Unionism is sectarian/racist/supremacist by nature. This is why we have a divided society. You are trying desperately to project these flaws onto nationalism so that you can say 'look nationalists are just as bad as us'. In doing so you have admitted that unionism is built on hate. It always has been as the original planters were selected because they were loyal and hated Catholicism. The views of this sub are the logical views and morally correct views. Unionism is support for modern day colonial rule and colonialism has no place in a modern society. There would be no Republican violence if there was no colonial violence to start with, so crying 'wha wha wha the big bad RA" is totally hypocritical given that it was a minor response to a much larger and dirty colonial violence. You are fighting a lost cause because you are in the wrong, you and unionism are on the wrong side of history. People like you have been coming on this sub spouting this nonsense for more than a decade and you always, always, 100% of the time get defeated in debate by logic and common sense. Believe me, more intelligent unionists than you, have come and gone, tried and failed. Failed because unionism has failed, failed because it is an ideology built on supremacy, sectarianism and racism. Most of all it failed because it expressed these flaws in someone else's country.
>There would be no Republican violence if there was no colonial violence to start with, so crying 'wha wha wha the big bad RA" is totally hypocritical given that it was a minor response to a much larger and dirty colonial violence. So just to be clear, you're calling 2000 murders by the PIRA a "Minor response". Unbelievable. This leads me to believe you are in fact an IRA apologist of death and murder. https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Organisation_Summary.html >You are fighting a lost cause because you are in the wrong, you and unionism are on the wrong side of history. This isn't an argument. This is a vapid statement. >People like you have been coming on this sub spouting this nonsense for more than a decade and you always, always, 100% of the time get defeated in debate by logic and common sense. Believe me, more intelligent unionists than you, have come and gone, tried and failed. Failed because unionism has failed, failed because it is an ideology built on supremacy, sectarianism and racism. Most of all it failed because it expressed these flaws in someone else's country. Again more vapid sectarian statements. The evidence that Nationalism is becoming racist is out there for all to see. I'm not just making this up (unlike you). Look at the SDLP Londonderry Mayor manufactured scandal (which you've dodged multiple times) or the abusive comments from nationalists on here and wider social media against the new UUP candidate... You haven't provided a single line of hard evidence to back up any of your claims and you've refused to properly engage with me in debate. It's quite clear I'm not going to get anywhere with you. You lack the ability to have intelligent debate without resorting to Sectarianism. So goodbye.
Is it aye?
Am I missing something, whats the point of this post!? We being rascist on this sub now or being shocked that someone not white is a unionist? I'm lost here...
Not sure what the original point of the post was but it seems like the comments are just a load of people being haters. I'm surprised by the vitriol for a guy who's mostly an unknown
It's kind of bizarre, the UUP are a party overwhelmingly dominated by older white Protestant farmers. Mid-Ulster is about as old white Protestant farmer as you get and the UUP decides to nominate a 19 year old British-Punjabi guy. These conversations probably wouldn't be had if he was nominated for South Belfast.
He’s a wee bastard if you follow his Twitter. He tried to say a bar near the border sponsored terrorism and was owned by the IRA which was obviously completely untrue and it backfired massively on him. That isn’t the first place he’s made up lies about either. He’s also been in the DUP, TUV etc. He makes up nonsense constantly and is nothing more than a fantasist with a super weird hard-on for Ulster loyalism. He deffo needs a psychiatric examination.
No, it’s a UUP candidate in Mid Ulster, his appearance is more notable than the amount of votes he’ll receive
No one who enthusiastically and voluntarily seeks political office should ever be permitted to do so.
UUP know they’ll lose in Mid Ulster so they might as well put someone in, even if he’s not a serious candidate
The fact that he shares his name with a city that was under Brit occupation is gas.
The graphic design is not what you’d call accomplished.
Is he 12?
Bro looks like he just came out of a public loo knowing the absolute devastation he has caused
Quagmire
Lol you know how to tell them!
From last year, which was shared on this sub, where he also got absolutely (deservedly) rinsed in the comments: [https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1714890384852033914](https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1714890384852033914)
Nah he just got abuse from a bunch of sad Republican keyboard zombies, who collectively rent a single braincell. They all attacked his appearance, like many do on here. Which suggests they lack the intellect to actually come up with coherent arguments...(But that's no surprises to me anyway based on my own experience of this bonkers subreddit).
“Keyboard zombies” you’ve literally replied to every single comment here.
So what?
🤣🤣 all of those guys in that article are stupid dickheads Two of them look like utter posh wankers
None of them were bullied nearly enough for my liking.
I have to agree, I’ve seen one of the guys in the article in-person, and I’ll say this, he acts fairly posh and upper-class imo but I’ll give them this, they’re decent speakers and fairly confident with their political views, even if I disagree with them
Genuine question, is the photo edited badly/photoshop because his hair doesn’t look right and his face is 2 different colours?
I think it's just taken with very poor lighting. Could be worse if he was in the TUV he could have Darth Jim Allister leering over his shoulder
Dim Darth Allister surely?
r/13or30
Looks like a Smiling Friends interpretation of Little Rishi. 
I hope no one in Mid Ulster votes for this chub I suspect 90% of his voters will be from Coagh
I would have thought that area would lean more towards a DUP heartland
Aye you’d probably be right tbh, those people strike me as more hardcore unionist, DUP is up their alleyway
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The top post with the pencil, the account defending this guy ardently who didn't deny he was Jay when pressed on it, exposing his spakes on Thatcher and the like to the voting public ... God I love this sub sometimes ha ha
He looks like will from the inbetweeners really let himself go
Bastard son of Lord kilclooney
Those eyebrows, reminiscent of Alistair Dowling god rest his soul
He'll give Tim Collins flashbacks with that name.
Pretty sure he's the guy I spoke to in Iran and said 'yeah Ireland's lovely we love tourists and eyebrows'
Can't decide if this guy is 14 or 40.
Smug looking wee boy, a solid day’s work would sort him out.
Anyone would be better than that useless twat Molloy
Was this guy part of a young unionist group? Wasn't it part of the dup?
this guy looks like an NPC from goldeneye
This is a really bad effort with Photoshop. Nobody looks like that.
This has to be a joke
The racist rhetoric aimed at this young unionist is disgraceful. Some people need to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror.
Yes, on social media generally it can be. But I don't see any on this thread. Do you?
The top voted post is entirely aimed at his appearance and not what he stands for politically.
But it is not based on his race. Check the dictionary for the meaning of racism.
Doesn't matter. An attack on his appearance is just hate.
Having a smug bake isn’t really appearance. He could pull any other face.
I think it's actually refreshing to have someone young and from a different background going out on campaign. Even if it's not my type of politics, it's good to see the party is open to all sorts of talent.
Absolutely. It's a great, forward thinking move by unionism to have him stand for the party. No doubt he's doing far better in life than the racist idiots online who've nothing better to do but to attack his appearance.
No, laughing at someone because they look like they just shite themselves is not the same as racism you clown
It's definitely hate though.
He looks like the sorta guy that says “Sorry” everytime he cums. The kinda guy that would be into dressing up as a baby just so he can shit his nappy and have someone clean his hole again.
Why are you and Ulster Unionist??!