There is no difference. Yours, a black woman.

"Night Creature" Daniel Arthur (Portuguese, contemporary)

If those same signatories had signed a letter demanding that the OO should get to walk down Garvaghy Rd you would have pissed your pants with excitement and not fucked up about it for a year.

Mate, I tried not to use an AI grammar or spell checker😉 As Sun Tzu said, "He who occupies the field first and awaits the enemy is at ease; he who comes later to the scene and rushes into the fight is weary." You can quote Sun Tzu all you like, but dressing a one-sided rant up with a famous quote doesn’t automatically make it more believable. What you have managed to do here is  write an essay about Drumcree without once seriously acknowledging why the Garvaghy Road became an issue in the first place. People who lived on the Garvaghy Road remember what happened, but you and others have completely dismissed them, please save us the inevitable, yes but " but Sinn Féin" ...................... They remember being hemmed into their own community while a march they didn’t want was forced through. They remember the violence surrounding Drumcree, the riots, intimidation, and years of tension. That history doesn’t disappear because you’ve decided 2026 should be remembered as the year the Orange Order became the victim. You also might want to spare us the lecture about unionism’s newfound devotion to the “rule of law”. Plenty of us are old enough to remember when decisions unionism and loyalism didn’t like were met with protests, roadblocks and absolute mayhem in the streets. We remember Drumcree in the 90s. We remember the violence when Orange marches were restricted. We remember what happened when loyalism decided the law was unacceptable. So this sudden conversion to absolute rule of law shite to every legal decision is a bit hard to swallow, especially as its newly found and given that we haven't seen it before, makes it a bit harder to believeAs for your claim that unionism has shown nothing but “restraint, responsibility and reasonableness”, are you for real? have you actually been online this past week? Some of the language directed at Garvaghy residents, nationalists and the First Minister has been poisonous. People have been called mobs, Nazis, supremacists and worse. There have been calls for loyalists to mobilise in Portadown. Yet somehow none of that makes it into your view on whats occured . Funny that. And this idea that thousands of nationalists turned up because Sinn Féin ordered them to is probably the biggest misunderstanding in your whole post.Maybe, just maybe, people are just feckin fed up, exhausted with the tirade of online gaslighting from people like your good self, trying to sanitise this whole thing and doing nothing but putting yourself at the forefront for clicks and applause from your merry men of online bigots. Fed up being told that equality means accepting something simply because the Orange Order calls it tradition. Fed up being lectured about respect by people who seem to think respect only travels in one direction. Fed up hearing that saying “no” to a parade through your own community amounts to hatred of Protestants.I'm a nationalist. I don't hate Protestants. I don't hate unionists. I don't hate the Orange tradition.But neither do I believe an Orange sash gives somebody a greater right to a road than the people who actually live on it.That's the bit you still don't seem to understand.And if your argument for the Union is now basically “look what these pesky nationalists will do to you in a united Ireland”, perhaps you should ask yourself why equality feels so threatening. Nobody is asking unionists to disappear. Nobody is asking Protestants to abandon their identity. Nobody is stopping the Orange Order existing. A community said they didn't want this parade coming through their area. Twenty-eight years later, you're still struggling with the fact that they are entitled to have a voice.Maybe the mask that slipped wasn't nationalism's at all, it was people like you and your community who were seriously unprepared for what equality actually looked like.  Another very valid point here Moore, what were unionist politicians doing for the last 30 years? Your grievance really should be with them, they were aware that they would have to finally share this place, thats not because of demographics, thats because nationalism would inevitably be able to challenge decisions and finally be able to stand up and say, NO, so what preparation did they make in your community?, preparing for an inevitable change, they have done absolutely nothing, not sure if that's arrogance or simply just plain bad leadership, but your argument should be with them because they have ultimately failed you.

We need more Gemma's videos. 👌👏😂😎

When northern nationalists were crying out for help and protection, we didn't need occasional commentary, we needed actual support - yet were abandoned. Lambs to the slaughter Mary. Your casual dismissal of this issue is contemptible yet unsurprising.

"Sorry to hear about your death. See below for link to Ticketmaster. COME SEE ME I'M FUCKING CLASS" 😳

The Orange State is gone and political unionists need to take heed. In a comprehensive Lucid Talk poll a staggering 70% of UNIONISTS either "disagree or strongly disagree with (the Orange Order) marching where they are not wanted". Amazing! We are moving forward. No going back!

Naomi Long : I appealed to the Orange Order because as Christians, I hold out more hope of them acting for the greater good than those engaging in unlawful protest. Sorcha Eastwood : Our leadership have been saying & doing all the right things. Roll on next election Sorcha.😂

Sad new that the glorious Eva Marie Saint passed today at the age of 102.. one of the last links to the golden age of Hollywood.

Nolan: “Will you call for bonfires to be removed next year” ? Allister: “I don’t want to conflate two issues”

WOW! 👏🏼 Oasis’s Noel Gallagher Oscar-winning actor Susan Sarandon founder of The Smiths Johnny Marr legend of music Paul Weller And actors Siobhán McSweeney and Adrian Dunbar Have all put their names to a letter supporting the right of Garvaghy Road residents to live in peace free from intimidation. The celebrities have called for the Garvaghy Road community to be protected from any form of forced march. The full list of signatories includes some of the biggest names in music, film and the arts. Support for the Garvaghy Road community continues to grow across Ireland and around the world. The British Secretary of State needs to end this unwanted march now. 28 years of peace must be protected. No going back. Not now. Not ever.

Ok, so when Rome was burning you watched on. Glad you've clarified. Utter coward.

Paddy, I read it very differently, extraordinary way to describe a community increasingly insisting on equality. “Ascendant”, “triumphalist”, “arrogant”, “condescending” — perhaps the real difficulty is that nationalism is no longer prepared to behave like the deferential minority it once was expected to be. For generations, nationalists lived in a state where British identity, symbols and institutions dominated public life, while contentious Orange parades could become enormous political confrontations when nationalist residents said no. Now nationalists have political power, cultural confidence and an expectation that their identity carries exactly the same legitimacy as British and unionist identity. That’s not supremacy. That’s equality. And equality doesn’t require nationalists to forget discrimination, the Troubles or the experiences that shaped their communities simply because they’re no longer politically powerless. Having greater political influence today doesn’t retrospectively erase history. There is also a revealing contradiction here. When unionists confidently celebrate Britishness, the Union, the Orange tradition and their constitutional aspirations, we’re told that’s culture and identity. When nationalists confidently celebrate Irishness, the GAA, their language and their constitutional aspiration, suddenly it’s “ascendant”, “triumphalist” and “arrogant”. Both communities are entitled to their identity. Both are entitled to advocate peacefully for their preferred constitutional future. Neither possesses a right to dominate the other. And perhaps that’s the adjustment some people are struggling with, Nationalism isn’t demanding that unionism kneel. It’s increasingly refusing to kneel itself. If that feels like supremacy, perhaps what Bailey is actually noticing is what equality looks like when the people who once had less power finally expect to be treated as equals.

Apparently unionism and loyalism have suddenly become the eternal guardians of peaceful protest, restraint and the rule of law. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of NI knows how selective that version of history is. And this newfound horror at “mobs” gathering on streets is particularly difficult to take seriously from you. You were one of the prominent voices of the loyalist flag-protest FFS , a campaign built around people taking to the streets, demonstrations and road disruption. Some of those protests descended into serious disorder. And let’s talk about Drumcree. When loyalism didn’t get the outcome it wanted, NI didn’t simply witness dignified disagreement. We saw roadblocks, hijacked and burning vehicles, petrol bombs, attacks on police, widespread destruction and even gunfire. In 2000 alone, during protests surrounding Drumcree, RUC figures recorded 288 petrol-bomb incidents, 280 attacks on the security forces, 13 shooting incidents and 88 hijacked vehicles. Fifty-seven RUC officers and five soldiers were injured, while hundreds of vehicles and properties were damaged. People remember roads being brought to a standstill. They remember burning vehicles and barricades. They remember police coming under sustained attack. So spare everyone the fairy tale that loyalism has historically responded to decisions it dislikes with nothing but “great restraint and discipline.” There were occasions when loyalists didn’t merely stand on a road, they helped wreck the place when they didn’t get their way. And here’s the hypocrisy, that history does not make every unionist or loyalist responsible for those actions. You understood perfectly well that individuals were responsible for their own behaviour when protests involved your community. Yet today you take alleged offences by individuals and repeatedly smear an entire nationalist crowd as a “lawbreaking mob”. And now comes the remarkable transformation. After weeks of rhetoric about “Nazi-style” politics, “republican mobs”, “supremacists” and nationalist “hatred”, suddenly everything is about law, dignity, restraint and peaceful protest. It looks remarkably like an attempt to walk back the rhetoric now that the temperature has risen. The internet has receipts. The rhetoric didn’t disappear just because the strategy changed. If somebody commits an offence, investigate them and prosecute them on the evidence. Nobody gets a free pass. But collective guilt cannot suddenly become acceptable because the crowd is nationalist. And perhaps you might consider your own contribution to creating this atmosphere. From the outside, this increasingly looks less like leadership and more like someone who has spent weeks placing himself at the centre of a deeply sensitive dispute, escalating the language and enhancing his own profile in the process. You cannot spend weeks pouring rhetorical petrol on a fire and then arrive dressed as the fire marshal demanding everyone else explain the flames. And perhaps the most revealing words in the entire post are, “It’s time the State…faced them down.” There it is, old mentality that when one community refuses to yield, the State should simply “face them down.” History may be rather less flattering than the heroic role you have written for yourself You may imagine these weeks will record you as some fearless defender of loyalism who stood firm while everyone else surrendered. Others will remember something very different, armchair blogger who inserted himself into a decades-old dispute, relentlessly amplified the most inflammatory rhetoric, turned the temperature up, and then tried to distance himself from the resulting mess by suddenly discovering the language of restraint and the rule of law. That’s not fearless leadership, That’s a cautionary tale about what happens when you get in way over your head The rule of law didn’t suddenly become sacred when the people standing in the road stopped being loyalists.

If the Drumcree dispute was a football match, this guy is Lionel Messi.🔥

Any word from the "RULE OF LAW" crowd about this? All I can hear are crickets! Where have all your sanctimonious, fury filled voices went @JonBurrowsMLA @GRobinsonDUP @JimAllister?

Goid morning to everyone who doesn't say "rule of law" 150 times per day.

Where has @irelandresource appeared from !!!! His replies to the bigots and ignorant ranters are almost at genius level. Knowledge of history and politics seems off the charts. Nobody ever replies as they know there is no hope of a debating victory !! All should follow.

Ohh Jim, Jim, Jim Jim Jim, this is a fascinating new constitutional principle you’ve discovered, if a politician believes a law or legal framework is wrong and campaigns against it, they have no respect for the rule of law. Does that principle apply retrospectively to you? You spent years opposing the Northern Ireland Protocol, despite it being given legal effect by the sovereign UK Parliament, the parliment you tell us you adore, You didn’t simply say, “That’s the law, therefore I must respect it.” You challenged its legality and constitutionality all the way to the UK Supreme Court. When the Parades Commission, exercising powers given to it by law, made determinations you disagreed with, you didn’t tell unionists to quietly accept them either. In 2013 you called one determination a “farcical Parades Commission decision”, demanded that the Commission be abolished, and argued that the law should instead presume in favour of traditional Orange routes. And perhaps we should go further back. In 1985 you attended the first major meeting of the United Ulster Loyalist Front, established amid opposition to police rerouting of loyalist parades. The organisation had UDA involvement, including senior UDA figure John McMichael on its coordinating committee. Then in 1986 you helped organise the rally inaugurating the Ballymena battalion of Ulster Resistance. You marched at the head of hundreds of loyalists, contemporary accounts describe many wearing paramilitary, style uniforms and some wearing masks, before pledging your “personal support” for Ulster Resistance. You even complained that the RUC had tried to prevent the procession reaching the meeting and celebrated the colour party getting into town another way. So let’s dispense with the rewriting of history. When Jim Allister believed laws, institutions or government arrangements were wrong, he opposed them, protested against them, challenged them in court and campaigned to have them changed or abolished. And he was entitled to do so. Because the rule of law does not require citizens or politicians to believe every law is just. There is a fundamental difference between saying “this law is wrong and I will oppose it” and saying “the law does not apply to me.” If Michelle O’Neill is alleged to have committed an offence, investigate it and let the legal process determine that. But spare everyone the suggestion that simply opposing a law demonstrates contempt for the rule of law. Because by that newly invented standard, Jim, your own political history, from opposition to parade restrictions and the Anglo-Irish Agreement through Ulster Resistance, the Protocol and beyond, would make for some remarkably uncomfortable reading. Opposing laws and institutions you disagreed with was called political principle when you did it. It cannot suddenly become constitutional anarchy when Michelle O’Neill does it.