As to whether I could accept a Sinn Fein first minister, I can't be a democrat on Wednesday and not on Thursday.

So it seems he may accept that if a majority agrees to an all-ireland then he will go along with that too. This is despite the fact that the Unionist Party was elected democratcially for 50 years and nationalists/republicans refused to accept the democracy of the ballot box.

Democracy was out and a new word (to me) was put in its place and became the 'in word'. This word was CONSENSUS. Yet unionist make no mention of this choosing to talk about democracy instead. Is this their get out clause. The usual ''what can we do about it''

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/union....1130.jp

Yes its beyond belief that gangsters and murderers can sit in goverment. By that guide then Hitler should have been in goverment with Churchill and Bin Laden with Bush or Obama. But of course what republicans have going for them is the aul irish thing again. Ireland is one unit and we are all Irish. They are fighting to unite a country which was artifically divided, and I believe that successive British goverment have sympathy with that point of view. We I suggest are looked on as Vichy french or Quislings supporting a 'foreign' regime in our midst.

The only way round that argument that I can see is to develope Ulster (or whatever we care to call it) as a separate and distinct identity in its own right. This identity has thousands of years of history behind it. Maybe sounds crazy but the message should be sent out that Adams,McGuinness and republicans/nationalists are the ones who are the Quislings by supporting a foreign country...Eire.

ULSTER FOR THE ULLISH! should be the answer 'to ireland for the irish'