Jamie Bryson

🚨 🇬🇧 𝐂𝐔𝐋𝐓𝐔𝐑𝐄 𝐖𝐀𝐑- 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦: 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐭𝐲 𝐘𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐒𝐢𝐞𝐠𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐁𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐬. 📕 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐁𝐎𝐎𝐊 𝐑𝐄𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐒𝐄𝐃 👇 Culture War explores the thirty year siege of unionism, and the fightback which has begun. Part 1 of the book over eight chapters analyses the constitutionally corrosive impact of the Belfast Agreement, the Irish Sea border and nationalism’s relentless targeting of unionist/loyalist culture from Drumcree (which is the focus of an entire chapter as a case study on parading) to the more recent attack on the flying of Union flags and bonfires. It further devotes a chapter to illuminating the political agenda behind nationalism’s divisive Irish Language campaign. There is a detailed chapter contribution by Ulster University academic Dr Cillian McGrattan (writing in a personal capacity) who, using legacy as a case study, presents a clinical evidence-based exposure of the ‘greening’ of academia and how a small cohort of nationalists have managed to completely control academic output and skew it to suit nationalism’s political agenda. The book also looks at the structural bias within much of the professional class- in particular within media and the legal profession-and how this has been influenced by a strategic nationalist insurgency to ‘green’ important opinion-forming institutions. Importantly, Part 2 of the book in three chapters provides the tools for fighting back, explaining the basic outline of Human Rights law and Judicial Review, and how this can be used to defend and advance unionist/loyalist rights. Culture War is also now available in a number of local shops, and can be purchased in both paperback and hardback directly via Amazon which is the easiest place to order: amzn.eu/d/02HSqtXG

🚨 ‘𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐠𝐞𝐭’ 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐫’𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝. 𝐄𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐠𝐨! 👇 Unionism didn’t ‘reopen’ Drumcree. The issue was never settled. The Portadown District applied 52 Sundays a year for 28 years. The only difference this time is the law was used to win. And the reaction has been telling. The main response has been how bad unionism is for having the temerity to win using the law. Nationalism’s real message has been that the law, and post 1998 structures, are meant to operate to resolve all contentious issues in favour of nationalism, and as such there’s been an awful malfunction because the system actually resolved an issue in unionism’s favour. There are even some in unionism who say it was unwise to use the law to win. Think that through, should unionists now actually not even dare to make our case using the law, just incase we actually win and this triggers nationalist sensibilities? What does such a mindset say about just how beaten down unionism has been over the last 30 years? On what basis should unionism actually self-censor, and deprive ourselves of our own legal rights, in order to placate nationalists who have been clear their sole objective is to destroy the Union, and therefore short of that they can never in fact be appeased? Its utter madness. Listen to yourselves. If you embrace the ‘unionism must give, nationalism must get’ theory, then tell me, what happens when unionism has nothing left to give but the Union itself? All my adult life unionism has been expected to give; we have been expected to take a dive and accept defeat; we have been expected to accept that the law and post 1998 structures whilst ostensibly are for everyone, that really we must partake in a shared understanding that we shouldn’t utilise them in any circumstances where there is a risk we might win. I’m not sure about anyone else, but I got fed up with that long ago. I will certainly not be placating nationalists or self limiting our rights. We won using the law on Drumcree. And I for one intend to keep winning using the law. The days of unionism on its knees being grateful for merely being allowed to exist are over. And that’s just the way it is, and I would urge all unionists to join in collectively getting off our knees and fighting back.

I agree; the most common ground in reality is likely to be vote transferring and initiatives to promote the Union. But you are right; no one will ever convince me unionism should be involved in a process designed to dismantle the Union. I thought your article was excellent and highlighted the almost 30 year long battle between two competing unionist blocs. Drumcree has forced it all to a head, and for unionism to really confront the question with all the ugly and hard truths recent events have exposed.

Excellent article by Carla Lockhart which directly confronts the ethos at the very heart of the post-1998 structures: unionism must give, and nationalism must get. No more. Unionists will not tolerate a two tier society.

Nationalist fury as it emerges Unionists have had jobs.

The footage has been released of the ABOD parade band bus. Gerard Rice exposed for the utter liar and sectarian bigot he is. Delicious.

There is a trend in media and commentariate which operates from the foundational basis that if unionism isn’t giving, then this is a “crocodile moment”. Ie, the ethos of the process is unionism must give and nationalism must give.

Very sad news. A phenomenal judge, a great person, always kind with his time, personally helpful & an intellectual giant. His Judgment in Allister is pinned to my wall. Thoughts with all Bernard’s family.

This is a superb article which highlights the dangerous precedent set by cowing to the lawless nationalist mob roryhanrahan.substack.com/p/…

I agree with @AlexKane221b to the extent that unionism has a pro agreement and anti agreement wing. That has to come to a head, and a realignment to coalesce both those wings into two blocs, and then find common ground between both. Recent events has helpfully forced the issue. Pro agreement unionism cannot just wish away anti agreement unionism or vice versa. The two viewpoints are genuinely held and cannot be reconciled and one is never going to give way to the other.

I make no comment on merits or otherwise of the policy under discussion, but this is demonstrative of the attitude which pervades much of academia. There is no room for reasonable people to disagree, but rather those who don’t share the same view are no longer “decent people” and, in this instance, are instantly regarded as opposing a “civilised society”. This extreme intolerance is a huge problem in academia, and it is why free thought is being stifled.

The Government adding more EU law to apply in Northern Ireland. A sobering reminder of another of the DUP’s big lies. They claimed to have “cut the pipeline of EU law”- yet here is cast iron proof of how it continues to flow gov.uk/government/news/joint…

A really sad loss to journalism, but a big gain for political unionism. Unsurprising David would leave the Newsletter. It’s literally falling apart and I’d imagine it’s very survival is on the line. The owner’s decision to appoint the new editor was a catastrophic one, bypassed only by the destructive anti-unionist approach whereby every unionist was culled instantly. The DUP press office and Twitter bubble cannot sustain a credible newspaper.

This is so legally illiterate it is unreal. He must have been sitting with a bag over his head following judgment of Scoffield J in Hynes (2) which utterly dismantled this proposition.

A very good try by this clearly misguided ‘advisor’ to the Policing Board. No doubt Mr Justice Scoffield’s judgment in Hynes (2) will have made sobering reading, given it takes a hatchet to this nonsensical proposition. It’s somewhat worrying that a so-called human rights advisor could, for whatever reason, get it so badly wrong. On his analysis, there is in fact no point having parading regulation at all, everyone do what they want, and rely on Article 11. Is it any wonder the High Court made short work of this rubbish?

Bomber Pat the Provo is utterly obsessed by me. I can absolutely assure you, I am not swinging the DUP by the tail: if I was, then Michelle O’Neill would have been turfed out of office long ago. SF should in fact be grateful they have such devoted partners in Government.

The reality now for the DUP is that they have just one key principle: maintaining the Executive and thus SF in Government at all costs. There is nothing they wouldn’t sacrifice to sustain it. Already they’ve sacrificed any objection to a border in the Irish Sea, now implementing it. They sacrificed the three-legged stool which was the foundation for unionist participation in power sharing, namely SF support for policing; SF support for the rule of law; and PIRA no longer existing. Every leg of that stool has collapsed. Just ask yourself; what wouldn’t the DUP sacrifice to maintain the Ministerial car? The Robinson Retreat is just one appeasement after another.

Someone needs to stage an intervention. This is extraordinary. Alliance are absolutely losing the plot.

This puts a much different slant on the breathless headlines.

The chief mobster is shameless. She led a sectarian supremacist mob to deny human rights to 35 Orangemen. On one view you have to admire the brass neck on them .