THE REAL HERO OF GRANGEGORMAN MILITARY CEMETERY by Tom Cooper

screen-shot-2016-09-24-at-10-04-15

The imposition of a suspended jail sentence on a man who interrupted a 1916 commemoration service held in Grangegorman military cemetery for members of the British army must surely rank as an outrageous attack on free speech and a slur on those who died for Irish freedom. Protester Brian Murphy, occupying the moral and ethical high ground in Grangegorman military cemetery, was an invited guest, and in the course of lawful, peaceful protest at the honouring of dead British soldiers, was physically tackled by the Canadian ambassador to Ireland Mr Kevin Vickers. Robust physical action of the type witnessed is unacceptable from any quarter, in particular from those in positions of importance like ambassador Vickers and must not be supported or encouraged. Given the nature of the commemoration and the sensitivities involved, Mr Vickers displayed poor judgement in choosing to attend such a potentially controversial ceremony. He also displayed equally poor judgement in trying to supplant the role of the Garda. His interference in what was an innocuous domestic incident was undiplomatic and perhaps illegal and surely renders his continuation as Ambassador to Ireland untenable. Only the Garda can detain people not foreign ambassadors with or without diplomatic immunity. Mr Vickers should be recalled and replaced by the Canadian government.

This event was to commemorate British soldiers killed in Ireland during the Easter Rising in 1916 and it is difficult to fathom why less than a century after the executions of the leaders of the Easter Rising had taken place the government was commemorating their executioners in an offensive and inappropriate ceremony.  It is appalling but not surprising that the government would mark the centenary of the Easter Rising by commemorating those who died lighting the flame of freedom in 1916 alongside those who fought to extinguish that flame. Not for the first time this state diluted its commemoration of those who won us our freedom by sharing their moment of glory with those who had debased them.  Brian Murphy, that lone courageous protester in Grangegorman military cemetery whose grandfather fought in Bolands Mills in the 1916 Rising, saved Ireland’s dignity, pride and her honour as our government reduced our history to a bland equation where there is no context, no morality and no sense of right and wrong.  He showed us how to hold on to our collective sense of dignity, decency and respect for those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our Independence. I salute him.

Sadly, this embarrassing commemoration in Grangegorman is but one of a number of commemorations that brings shame on Ireland by the slavish obsequious antics of those whom General Tom Barry once described as ‘sychophants and lickspittles’. Leading the revisionist pack is the Trust which runs Glasnevin cemetery who have erected a Memorial Wall to all the dead of the Easter Rising including the British soldiers killed at Mount Street Bridge.  Despite a widely held view that this Necrology Wall and other commemorative events memorialising British soldiers killed while crushing the Easter Rising is both provocative and offensive, nonetheless, the Irish State continues to venerate those who ruthlessly suppressed the Rising. This is carrying political ecumenism a step too far.  It appears that decades of revisionism and propaganda with the specific purpose of incrementally deconstructing the narrative of Irish Independence is bearing fruit.

 

 

24 Responses to THE REAL HERO OF GRANGEGORMAN MILITARY CEMETERY by Tom Cooper

  1. Antaine de Brún September 24, 2016 at 9:59 am #

    A few words from Abel Meeropol’s poem, Strange Fruit, a protest about racism in America…

    Southern trees bear strange fruit,/Blood on the leaves and blood at the root…Here is a strange and bitter crop.

  2. MT September 24, 2016 at 10:42 am #

    “He also displayed equally poor judgement in trying to supplant the role of the Garda. His interference in what was an innocuous domestic incident was undiplomatic and perhaps illegal and surely renders his continuation as Ambassador to Ireland untenable. Only the Garda can detain people not foreign ambassadors with or without diplomatic immunity. Mr Vickers should be recalled and replaced by the Canadian government.”

    He didn’t detain anyone.

    “This event was to commemorate British soldiers killed in Ireland during the Easter Rising in 1916 and it is difficult to fathom why less than a century after the executions of the leaders of the Easter Rising had taken place the government was commemorating their executioners in an offensive and inappropriate ceremony.”

    It wasn’t commemorating the executioners. As you just said it was commemorating those soldiers who were killed during the rebellion.

    “It is appalling but not surprising that the government would mark the centenary of the Easter Rising by commemorating those who died lighting the flame of freedom in 1916 alongside those who fought to extinguish that flame. Not for the first time this state diluted its commemoration of those who won us our freedom by sharing their moment of glory with those who had debased them.”

    The 1916 rebels.didn’t win ‘freedom’ for anyone. And it was an anti-democratic illegitimate act resulting in needless.deaths. It should be deplored not celebrated.

    :Brian Murphy, that lone courageous protester in Grangegorman military cemetery whose grandfather fought in Bolands Mills in the 1916 Rising, saved Ireland’s dignity, pride and her honour as our government reduced our history to a bland equation where there is no context, no morality and no sense of right and wrong. He showed us how to hold on to our collective sense of dignity, decency and respect for those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our Independence. I salute him.”

    He didn’t. On the contrary the dignity and generosity of the Government was held. In high regard and international sympathy was with the ambassador.

    “Sadly, this embarrassing commemoration in Grangegorman is but one of a number of commemorations that brings shame on Ireland by the slavish obsequious antics of those whom General Tom Barry once described as ‘sychophants and lickspittles’. Leading the revisionist pack is the Trust which runs Glasnevin cemetery who have erected a Memorial Wall to all the dead of the Easter Rising including the British soldiers killed at Mount Street Bridge. Despite a widely held view that this Necrology Wall and other commemorative events memorialising British soldiers killed while crushing the Easter Rising is both provocative and offensive, nonetheless, the Irish State continues to venerate those who ruthlessly suppressed the Rising. This is carrying political ecumenism a step too far. It appears that decades of revisionism and propaganda with the specific purpose of incrementally deconstructing the narrative of Irish Independence is bearing fruit.”

    No bad thing to have a memorial to all those killed as a result of the immoral actions of an anti-democratic gang. These people have been sanitised for too long. After a hundred years surely.time for a more honest and objective commemoration.

    • Mark Mitchell September 25, 2016 at 8:21 pm #

      You’re not irish and you never will be since you wish to coat-tail while sucking from England’s teat and I’m damn proud of those rebels because unionists really need to cut the slave mentality and grow a pair.

      • MT September 26, 2016 at 10:23 am #

        “You’re not irish and you never will be since you wish to coat-tail while sucking from England’s teat and I’m damn proud of those rebels because unionists really need to cut the slave mentality and grow a pair.”

        Jude, why do you publish these gratuitous insults? This post contributes absolutely nothing to your blog.

        Why do you occasionally chastise me for comments that take a great deal of interpretation to be classified as insults, yet ignore direct insults such as this?

        • Jude Collins September 26, 2016 at 1:35 pm #

          Well MT, I looked at this and while the language is coarse/rude, it’s making a point – in fact several points.He’s pointing to unionist dependence on England, his pride in ‘those rebels’, and criticising/condemning unionists for adopting an inferior role vis-a-vis Britain. If I pulled you up on comments, MT, it wasn’t because it took ‘a great deal of interpretation to be classified as insult’. And as you’ll see I haven’t ignored this. It’s not a polite post – and I’d appeal to all to eliminate or cut back on coarseness – but it does put forward a point of view which you may not agree with but he’s got a right to hold. As you do yours – although I agree, you don’t tend to resort to coarse language. Mark – less coarseness, please. Otherwise I may get to the point where I consider the time spent posting and monitoring comments wasted time, and close down this part of the blogsite.

          • MT September 26, 2016 at 3:26 pm #

            “Well MT, I looked at this and while the language is coarse/rude, it’s making a point – in fact several points.He’s pointing to unionist dependence on England, his pride in ‘those rebels’, and criticising/condemning unionists for adopting an inferior role vis-a-vis Britain. If I pulled you up on comments, MT, it wasn’t because it took ‘a great deal of interpretation to be classified as insult’. And as you’ll see I haven’t ignored this. It’s not a polite post – and I’d appeal to all to eliminate or cut back on coarseness – but it does put forward a point of view which you may not agree with but he’s got a right to hold. As you do yours – although I agree, you don’t tend to resort to coarse language. Mark – less coarseness, please. Otherwise I may get to the point where I consider the time spent posting and monitoring comments wasted time, and close down this part of the blogsite.”

            No. It’s not just coarse language and it’s not making points about unionists. It’s direct personal abuse.

            He attacks *my* personal identity, with a denial that I am Irish. He says that *I* ‘wish to coat-tail while sucking from England’s teat’.

            These are personal comments that would not be tolerated in a workplace. I suggest that is a useful test for you to apply.

          • Jude Collins September 26, 2016 at 4:40 pm #

            Sorry, MT – don’t agree. As I’ve said, the language is coarse and I’d prefer it wasn’t. But he’s giving his judgement that you’re not Irish (he may be wrong, but he’s still entitled to have a view). And all that stuff about coat-tails and teats and sucking – while perhaps distasteful is delivering a judgment about your position and dependence on England. As to what operates in a workplace: if I were a manager/boss, I’d fire the lot of you for sitting around all day gabbing…

          • MT September 26, 2016 at 10:13 pm #

            It was personal abuse, Jude.

          • Jude Collins September 27, 2016 at 7:43 am #

            Well, MT, you can think that if you wish. I’m the person who makes the decisions here. I’ve explained to you why I see the comment as permissible. Sin é.

          • MT September 27, 2016 at 8:17 am #

            “Well, MT, you can think that if you wish. I’m the person who makes the decisions here. I’ve explained to you why I see the comment as permissible. Sin é.”

            One wonders if the comment was directed at an Irishman of colour – telling a black person born and bred in Ireland that he wasn’t Irish – would the comment be tolerated.

            I don’t think it would.

      • giordanobruno September 26, 2016 at 4:15 pm #

        Mark
        “You’re not irish and you never will be”
        It is not for you to say how others describe themselves.
        The United Irishmen who wanted to bring together’Protestant Catholic and Dissenter would have been shamed by your comments and I am surprised you got away with it.

        • Jude Collins September 26, 2016 at 4:36 pm #

          “It is not for you to say how others describe themselves.” No, but you can say whether you think they’re right or wrong. I’m not saying Mark is correct (or incorrect), but he has a right to his perspective.

          • giordanobruno September 26, 2016 at 5:22 pm #

            Jude
            You are being disingenuous. How could Mark possibly decide that MT is not Irish?
            By what criteria?

          • Jude Collins September 26, 2016 at 5:26 pm #

            Disingenuous – such a big word.I don’t THINK it’s abusive so….I can’t tell you what criteria he has and I can’t tell you – as I think I said – whether he’s right or wrong. But regardless, he’s entitled to have a view. He may be talking tripe or he may be spot-on, but either way he has a right to an opinion. It’s a free cou ….No, wait….

        • Wolfe tone September 26, 2016 at 8:41 pm #

          ‘The United Irishmen who wanted to bring together’Protestant Catholic and Dissenter would have been shamed by your comments and I am surprised you got away with it.’

          Are you speaking on behalf of the United Irishmen now? Dear oh dear what a lofty pedestal you have. Again Gio, it’s what you don’t say that truly resonates.

          • giordanobruno September 26, 2016 at 10:01 pm #

            wolfie
            I don’t think it a stretch to assume they would have allowed MT to call himself an Irishman if he chooses.
            It is our friend Mark who puts himself on a lofty pedestal,where he gets to declare who is or is not Irish.
            But once again if you actually disagree feel free to make an argument (for once).

          • Wolfe tone September 27, 2016 at 9:45 am #

            ‘But once again if you actually disagree feel free to make an argument (for once).’

            You make more than enough arguments; I’ll just make my point.

            A Union Jack waving cheerleader for British state terrorism, British royalism can indeed call themselves Irish. A regular critic of Irishmen who didn’t join the ranks of the British terrorist army can indeed call themselves Irish. A supporter of British terrorists killing Irish people can indeed call themselves Irish. However even a small child would be confused with such a situation. Perhaps we should call those so called Irish people transnationals? What medication should one take if one is afflicted with transnationalism? Soup? We should introduce this soup immediately to all schools. No wait, it’s already in the schools. It’s very watery mind you.

          • MT September 27, 2016 at 11:10 am #

            “A Union Jack waving cheerleader for British state terrorism, British royalism can indeed call themselves Irish. A regular critic of Irishmen who didn’t join the ranks of the British terrorist army can indeed call themselves Irish. A supporter of British terrorists killing Irish people can indeed call themselves Irish. However even a small child would be confused with such a situation. Perhaps we should call those so called Irish people transnationals? What medication should one take if one is afflicted with transnationalism? Soup? We should introduce this soup immediately to all schools. No wait, it’s already in the schools. It’s very watery mind you.”

            Not aware of anyone here who supports British terrorists killing anyone, Irish or otherwise. But there a plenty who support Irish terrorists killing Irish people. PIRA and other gangs murdered more Irish people than did the British Army. Are supporters of those murders not Irish either?

          • giordanobruno September 27, 2016 at 11:04 am #

            wolfie
            Yes I suppose all of those could call themselves Irish.
            Or you could just have said that anyone born on the island of Ireland could call themselves Irish.
            Of course it is what you do not say that is so revealing!

          • Wolfe tone September 27, 2016 at 11:59 am #

            ‘Or you could just have said that anyone born on the island of Ireland could call themselves Irish.’

            ‘Could’ call themselves Irish rather than that they are Irish? Should those who ‘could’, take some soup to help them decide?

          • giordanobruno September 28, 2016 at 7:28 pm #

            wolfie
            I take it you are accepting my point since you offer no actual argument.

    • Mark Mitchell September 25, 2016 at 8:26 pm #

      Irish people were never asked did they want rule from Westminster so take your faux outrage and shove it where the sun shines regarding the ‘anti-democratic’ crap you spout frequently since the 1918 elections prove why the ‘war of independence’ was necessary.

      • MT September 26, 2016 at 10:21 am #

        “Irish people were never asked did they want rule from Westminster so take your faux outrage and shove it where the sun shines regarding the ‘anti-democratic’ crap you spout frequently since the 1918 elections prove why the ‘war of independence’ was necessary.”

        Eh? They were ‘asked’ at every election and voted for home rule.

        The 1918 election was two-and-a-half years *after* the rebellion.

  3. giordanobruno September 26, 2016 at 6:41 pm #

    Jude
    I am pleased to expand your vocabulary
    You are correct it is not abusive since it is a comment on what you said rather than a comment on you.
    “You are not Irish and you never will be” on the other hand is just pure abuse.
    Perhaps you thing Mark has some kind of crystal ball that can tell him not only MT’s current status but his future status too?