> I personally just see it as a bunch of disaffected thugs using it as an excuse to cause trouble.
Agreed - I find that whatever sentiment behind the protests has disappeared, and now it is simply thugs disguising their actions as "protesting." Protesting about something you feel passionate about is grand, and is something everybody is entitled to do (Student Fees/Miners/Civil Rights Marches etc). However blocking roads off, disrupting the life of Belfast City Centre (as we saw over the Christmas period), attacking and attempting to murder police officers and issuing death threats, that is not exercising your right to protest, that is criminal activity. I agree with "tprebs" (and not simply because I know him) - the PSNI need to be more firm with the protesters. People need to be held accountable for their actions. The comparison with the riots last in 2011 across England only strengthens this point.
I wholeheartely agree as well with regards to parents being held responsible for the actions of their children - children as young as 12 being arrested and charged with rioting is disgraceful. However it's unlikely to happen given that criminal responsibility is from 10+ years old (I think - correct me if I'm wrong).
> So do you think they're entitled to be aggrieved by this decision not to permanently fly the Union Jack?
Everybody is entitled to hold a grevience if they don't agree with something. However I would like to point out several things.
Firstly, under the Good Friday Agreement, the citizens of Northern Ireland are entitled to choose a nationality - to be either British or Irish. Furthermore, a recent census indicates that the societal split in Northern Ireland is approximately 48% Protestant, 46% Catholic and 6% Other. Approximately half the population do not consider themselves British. They do not believe that the Union Flag represents them. Did they protest? Did they riot because they were angry at this? No, they lobbied through their local politicians and a motion was put through the Belfast City Council to remove the flag from flying 365 days a year. They carried out a democratic process, and through an amended proposal put forward by the Alliance Party, the flag was only allowed to fly on designated days.
Secondly, this is not the first city council in Northern Ireland that has allocated the flying of the Union Flag on designated days. Lisburn City Council passed such a motion a few years back (with a majority Unionist council) - why? Because the politicians there realised that such an issue was moot. There are more important things to be worried about that the flying of the Union Flag 365 days a year, which incidently is not even protocol in Britain (Buckingham Palace does not fly the Union Flag 365 days a year - if the Queen doesn't do it, why would we?).
> Or would you agree it's just the symptoms of some other greater more deeply seated issues that NI is currently revisiting.
If by deep-seated issues you mean unemployment, education, social welfare then this is probably that. However, instead on confronting these issues, politicians in Northern Ireland debate about a flag. Instead of making decisions that can affect peoples lives in a positive way, Unionist politicians launch a smear campaign against the Alliance Party in the hope of retaking the East Belfast MP slot.
And you wonder why people hate politicians...
However I would not attempt to use these as justification for the riots - just because you are pissed off that you can't get a job, or because you don't like school, or because you don't like the Catholics/Protestants up the road doesn't mean you can go out and riot for the sake of it.
The blue paint is a great idea - can just see a line of smurfs signing on the dole! Brilliant.
An alternative was something my brother told me when he was over in the Middle East - he says rioting is controlled by the use of "skunk water" which is essentially raw sewage shot out of a high powered water cannon - we have the cannons and a sewer system... why not?