It’s odd the things people don’t like talking about. As often as not they’re important things, central to an issue; only the more central they are, the more people resent them being raised.
A good example was today, when I was on Radio Ulster/Raidio Uladh’s TalkBack programme. Long tall Joe Lindsay was my jousting partner, with William Crawley in the umpire’s chair; and while the debate was lively, the temperature spiked noticeably when someone rang in and wanted to know why Derry City games weren’t televised.
William asked me to respond, so I suggested that the reason maybe was that Derry City are in the League of Ireland, the south’s league, rather than the Irish League, the north’s league. (Yes I know , Victoria – more Gilbert and Sullivan material there). But it was when I went on to comment that Derry City’s position in the League of Ireland linked to the spectre of sectarianism which has haunted the IFA for many years, that feelings spiked.
William didn’t howl but he pointed out that it was only ten minutes into the discussion and I’d mentioned the s-word. I can’t remember how Joe responded but George from the Shankill, who phones in to TalkBack with amazing frequency came on the line to reprimand me for having suggested the iFA was sectarian, when I didn’t know who’d won the three major trophies in the last soccer season governed by the IFA. Get the idea? Since you don’t know the answer to my pub-quiz question, you don’t know what you’re talking about and you’re introducing sectarianism into the discussion and you don’t even go to Irish League games.
There was more of the same on Twitter this afternoon – stout Ulstermen calling me for as many names as their limited vocabularies allowed, with old, sectarian and bigot high on the list.
Personally I’ve always followed Oscar Wilde’s contention that there is only one thing worse than being talked about and that’s not being talked about. However, it’s impressive the number of people who, when you raise a matter such as sectarianism, immediately label you sectarian and bigoted for so doing. It’s probably Heaney’s famous “Whatever you say, say nothing” in action. Don’t be raising such an unsightly topic, that’s got nothing to do with Football in this Country.
Ah sure, God be with the old days, when taigs kept their traps shut and opened them only to cheer on our wee team.
Jude, a typical response from unionism it has to be said. Fingers in ears and shout blah blah blah in order to avoid dealing with their past and present transgressions. You will recall that our erstwhile President suffered a similar, “baby out with the bath water” response when she endeavoured to highlight unionists irrational hatred of Catholics and the nurturing of said irrational hatred from an early age. She foolishly mentioned that Austrian megalomaniac and lo and behold Godwin’s law was immediately invoked. Much faux-outrage ensued.
Old, sectarian, and bigot – but nobody mentioned handsome!
How could you suggest there was bigotry in N Ireland football?
Its not like somebody playing for the old Belfast Celtic (Jimmy Jones, a Lurgan Protestant, by the way) was shot while playing against those paragons of virtue and sportsmanship, Linfield, at Windsor Park. Fortunately Jimmy recovered.
Or does that not count as they mistakenly shot a Prod?
You’re right and wrong, Sherdy. I AM frighteningly handsome; but J Jones wasn’t shot – he was kicked and punched and left with two (I think) broken legs. Only the actions of the Celtic goalie in protecting him saved his life. I’ve interviewed both men.
“You’re right and wrong, Sherdy. I AM frighteningly handsome; but J Jones wasn’t shot – he was kicked and punched and left with two (I think) broken legs. Only the actions of the Celtic goalie in protecting him saved his life. I’ve interviewed both men.:
Correct. The only incidents of shots being fired at local football matches were by Belfast Celtic fans against Glentoran in 1912 and by the Provisional IRA who murdered a policeman at a Crusaders match around 1980.
Funny that, I mind RUC terrorists firing lethal rounds at a certain section of football fans in Windsor park in the nineties.
“Funny that, I mind RUC terrorists firing lethal rounds at a certain section of football fans in Windsor park in the nineties.:
That was plastic bullets fired at rioting fans. But we could add that to the list if you wish to include plastic bullets as well as live rounds. It was about 1991.
And similarly I think there were plastic bullets fired at rioting Celtic/Cliftonville fans in the mid-80s.
‘That was plastic bullets fired at rioting fans. But we could add that to the list if you wish to include plastic bullets as well as live rounds.’
Yip. And while you are at it why don’t we include unionist terrorists throwing genades at fans in Windsor park too.
“Yip. And while you are at it why don’t we include unionist terrorists throwing genades at fans in Windsor park too.”
That was the time Reds fans cheered because they thought it was a nationalist attack on the police.
Yes. Add that. And also the PIRA bomb at Windsor Park in 1985.
“That was plastic bullets fired at rioting fans. But we could add that to the list if you wish to include plastic bullets as well as live rounds. It was about 1991”
Oh Plastic Bullets? Oh that makes it OK then, plastic bullets have never killed anyone…..
‘That was the time Reds fans cheered because they thought it was a nationalist attack on the police.’
I’d have cheered too, especially so if it was the same RUC terrorists that were firing indiscriminately into nationalists crowds at a football match.
I bet there’s RUC terrorists wishing the taser was around when they were in their pomp? My oh my what fun they would have had trying their best to kill taigs with a ‘safer’ although still lethal weapon.
“I’d have cheered too, ”
Shame on you.
‘Shame on you.’
That’s a compliment, coming from you.
“Or does that not count as they mistakenly shot a Prod?”
A “Rotten Prod” Sherdy! That lundy Jones should’ve known better and had it coming, much like those Rotten Prods put out of the shipyards along with the taigs….
“paragons of virtue and sportsmanship, Linfield”
Ahh, indeed. Even Roy Keane devotes a page of his 2002 book (hardcover) to the virtues of Linfield football club and how they treated Catholics and their very first Black player who had to leave due to the racist abuse he received from his own supporters, not to mention the Manager who signed him had to go too, all because he signed a Black player…..don’t tell George from the Shankill I told you that though Sherdy, poor Georges heart cant take this info on top of Judes radio comments all in one day……
“Ahh, indeed. Even Roy Keane devotes a page of his 2002 book (hardcover) to the virtues of Linfield football club and how they treated Catholics and their very first Black player who had to leave due to the racist abuse he received from his own supporters, not to mention the Manager who signed him had to go too, all because he signed a Black player…..don’t tell George from the Shankill I told you that though Sherdy, poor Georges heart cant take this info on top of Judes radio comments all in one day……”
The only problem with that story is that it’s untrue.
No black player at Linfield was ever abused by his own supporters and the manager didn’t leave because he signed him. In fact he stayed on for many years afterwards.
“The only problem with that story is that it’s untrue.
No black player at Linfield was ever abused by his own supporters and the manager didn’t leave because he signed him. In fact he stayed on for many years afterwards”
ok MT, I’ll take your neutral, unbiased word any day over a star footballer such a Roy Keanes….
“ok MT, I’ll take your neutral, unbiased word any day over a star footballer such a Roy Keanes….”
Unlike Roy Keane, from Cork and then England, I’ve been following football in Northern Ireland for over 35 years and I can assure you the alleged claims in his ghostwritten autobiography are untrue.
Attended a meeting once with chaps from the IFA, lovely guys, not a sectarian bone in their bodies, good football men as the saying goes, they wanted SF and the SDLP to help encourage support in Nationalist areas ( suggesting that they are aware of an issue with support )I don’t know how the SDLP reacted but when our delegation asked a number of questions around flags and anthems the answers were so silly that you would almost think that they hadnt even considered that to really encourage support in Nationalist areas they may have to lose the Union Flag and also stop playing the English soccer teams anthem. I’m willing to cheer them on but I don’t have the feeling that it’s my team or that it represents me. When they are playing I might watch it or I might watch a nature documentary on another channel, basically I don’t care for them and don’t feel the connection the way I do for the Rugby team or the ROI soccer team. I’ve no bother supporting the likes of Carl Frampton or supporting the young lads such as Johnny Evans when he lines out for MUFC or whoever he now plays for. I like to see anyone from this island do well but I’m about ending an abnormal situation and I can’t square support for that with supporting something that looks to legitimise or normalise these occupied six counties as a country in its own right. Also views such as the one I expressed are not examples of bringing sectarianism into sport that unfortunately happened when someone insisted on a line being drawn through this country to form a sectarian state(s), the responsibility for the introduction of sectarianism and it’s consequences lies with those people and it’s not my job to compromise my principles to make anyone feel better.Having said all that I certainly don’t begrudge them their relative success and really don’t think enough was made of the successful way all our fans behaved in France. It’s interesting, is it not ? that 100 years after the Somme, when Irish men from North South East and West all died together and differences foisted by others upon us just disappeared because we all ended up the same way, that this year as Irish people North South East and West lay on beaches or partied in the streets all our differences again just faded away for a few weeks…..perhaps we should be left on our own to work it out.
Well we do live in a sectarian state Jude, and no matter how hard the media try to cover it up, that is all it will ever be.
But within an already sectarian state, there is a minority element within the soccer world who take sectarianism to another level.
I am in no doubt there is much great work going on to eradicate it, especially from the stands as sectarian chants take bums off seats and that means lost revenue.
But there is no way in hell I would dare set foot in any rangers or northern Ireland supporters club.
So to say sectarianism has nothing to do with football, is not entirely accurate.
Don’t stop telling it as it is Jude. Some of us live in the real world.
you were right about the low numbers attending games..
years ago they used to have spot the ball competition i think it was in the saturday nights telegraph you marked a wee x were you thought the ball was in the photo at that time.
they changed the name of it in the local bar..spot the spectator.
I like it, billy…
I suspect the reason why you “can’t remember” how Joe responded is because he – a Cliftonville supporter – totally shot you down, but that doesn’t fit unto yiur narrative now, does it? You really are a sad man.
I don’t normally allow people who only abuse to show on posts, David, but I’ll make an exception in your case. When I say I can’t remember what Joe responded, I meant I can’t remember what Joe responded. What his being a Cliftonville fan has to do with it, I don’t know. And how that would link to Joe having ‘totally shot me down’ I know less. Maybe he did – I don’t always win arguments or even have the right side of arguments. Do you? On t’other hand, maybe you meant ‘totally shout you down’? Anyway, welcome to the site, David; but no more unadorned name-calling of me or anyone else.
“You really are a sad man”
Says the one who has come onto this blog just to give abuse….
We don’t have the IFA down here, Esteemed Blogmeister, to embellish our dull existences.
Well – correction ! – we do, only IFA south of the Black Sow’s Dyke stands for the:
– Irish Farmers Association.
And on reading the blog’s headline one assumed the s-word referred to was:
-spalpeen.
That’s a trigger word which tends to morph our agricultural community into the aggro-cultural community. And with complete justification too.
Which is not to say we have been entirely without our own tensions associated with contending sports associations.
Take this very week, for instance, and as good an example as one is liable to get. Last night, there was a friendly game played in the Aviva Stadium between ROI and, erm, Oman.
‘Friendly’ in this context is a friendly way of saying meaningless, non-essential, beside the point, even, crowd-repellent.
This is on account of the fact that Oman is currently ranked in the world soccer, oops, football pecking order in the low hundreds, somewhere between Christmas Island and Papua New Guinea itself. This unassuming position is on account of the fact that hunting the humpy back whale and peregrine falconry each have a bigger following than the ‘bootyful’ game in Oman.
This led to the spectre of a (gulp) near empty Aviva Stadium , featuring less than ten thousand bums on seats. At any time this would have been horrific enough for the financially literate FAI to contemplate but the timing of the game really elevated it into Hammer Movie territory.
Sandwiched as it would be between two full houses in Croke Park, the bogball semi-final between Kerry and Dublin and the stickfighting final between Kilkenny and Tipperary. Both of which games were sell outs before a backpacker could say ‘John Delaney’s pay packet’.
With Oman supplying the sand in the sandwich the friendly game of footie in the Aviva was doomed to become the meatless match between two doorstep-sized slices of homemade bread in Croker. With an aggregate attendance score-line:
-166,000 : 10,000.
The GAH getting uppity , to the power of 16 in the Commemorative Year of 2016!
The nuclear option was clearly the only option under the dire circumstances. Cometh the hour, cometh the manoeuvre:
-R. Keane.
No, not that one: d’other one.
-R.Keane.
An intergalactic signal was immediately sent to LA Galaxy containing the message:
-Planet Aviva calling, Planet Aviva calling: Come home, Robbie, Robbie come home. Your Association, oops your Country needs you !
Robbie Keane (for it was he !) duly answered in the affirmative, indicating in a Tiocrfaidh a LA moment : he would leave the Galaxy for the occasion causing not only an immediate rebranding of the ‘friendly’ game but a spike, a surge, an urge even for thousands (hitherto indifferent) more fanatical fans to sit on their fannies and to do their patriotic duty:
-One Man v Oman.
Be there, show you care ! Be there to wave the green, white and yellow and bellow your appreciation for the Fellow who is Making his Farewell Appearance in the Green of the Free Southern Stateen !
Thus, we have had – mirabilie dictu! – in the first half of this week, R. Keane being namechecked in the DOBlin media with more frequency than the combined teams of Dublin and Kerry; and ditto in the second half of this week than the combined teams of Tipperary and Kilkenny.
At one stage, two weeks ago, it was feared in the most energetic department of the F.A.I. (the Doctor Spock Spin Doctorate Dept )that the number of Thumbs Down (i.e., protesters outside the Aviva) would out-number the Bums Sitting Down inside the Stadium.
Protesting about the, erm, abuse of human rights in Oman, where the (gulp) dagger is part of the national dress. And where insulting the Sultan can result in tortures unknown to our local Ultans.
We’re talking here, folks, and not for the first time neither, about (gasp) The Triumph of F.A.I. lure.
But then, it might not amount to a hill of hindrance if (a) the ROI team is the trophy hobby of Denis O’Brien and (b) the Liffeyside media is securely stuffed in his back pocket.
-Mock execution, beating, brow-beating, hooding, solitary confinement, subjection to extremes of temperature and to constant noise, abuse and humiliation.
No, we are not talking about the incessant, o.t. t. tributes to R. Keane (the Comeback Kid who came back to Wave Farewell) , even though it is understood that Bono thoughfully flashed an intergalactic message on the Mega Screen in the Aviva all the way from Planet Gannet. Rather is one detailing a menu of a la carte tortures on offer in the Oman penitentiary system.
In terms of namecheck, the latest count is:
-R.Keane j(LA Galaxy) , 166,000; Bubbles O’Dwyer (Tipperary), single figures.
Lovely hurling, Michael Lowry (Tipperary) , the Matchstick Man who made all this possible.
PS The s-word comes to mind; only trouble, Bubbles, is that one cannot identify if it is s for spalpeen or s for stone-thrower.
–
I use to think George from the Shankill was after Stephen Nolan’s job but I guess William has to watch his back now too. Does George even have a job? Yes, I know, foolish question. But the number of times George phones in to these talk shows really is startling. I mean I get a tiny bit paranoid when I comment more than once on this Blog. I always assumed it was quite hard to get on live radio, I have never attempted to do so myself, so why does George get on so often? its the same with ex RUC man “Alex from Lisburn”. Both stout Unionists, you’ll notice, which I’m sure is no accident.
George is your typical Loyalist/Unionist, he gets very heated when uncomfortable facts are put before him and his usual retort is casting up some act that Republicans have done. For example: If loyalists fly flags then the retort is “what about Republicans”. Classic Whatabouttery. If Whatabouttery was an Olympic Sport Jim Wilson would get a Gold.
Since the Northern Ireland team reached the Euros there was this surge in propaganda in trying to portray the team as cross community. There was even down right lies spoken, from the likes of Michael O’Neill and others. For example, O’Neill said “Both communities are now behind the team”. The Belfast Telegraph was in overdrive in their print of NI supporters and how the team was “healing divisions” and how it was “attracting support from everyone”. I guess the crowds of ROI shirt wearing fans in Belfast would have something to say about that….
Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against the NI team itself but I don’t support it anymore than Gregory Campbell supports the ROI team. But I do take issue when people are saying that me and others like me don’t support our own team (ROI) in the effort to fool the general public for political reasons. The reason why they do this is because they want to translate support for the NI Team to mean support for the NI State and hence the UK.
There are people, like George from the Shankill, who don’t want to face any criticism, whether its personally or against something they support/admire. They would rather pretend there was no issue or, in Judes case, attack people who are telling the truth. Just like the Civil Rights Movement was attacked in the 1960’s, both verbally and physically, because the spotlight was being shone on the truth. Unionism is renowned for this sort of knee jerk reaction, especially when they are backed into a corner with the facts…
Ryan if you want to hear from a true idiot from Talkback or the Nolan show you should listen to the regular caller ‘John from Tyrone ‘ now he makes Willie Frazer look almost sane.
“Ryan if you want to hear from a true idiot from Talkback or the Nolan show you should listen to the regular caller ‘John from Tyrone ‘ now he makes Willie Frazer look almost sane”
I think I know who your talking about Ciaran but I may be wrong. Is John the same guy who phoned up when Ireland won the 6 nations in Rugby and said the team was sectarian? He said the team was sectarian because of the anthem “Ireland’s Call”. When Nolan asked him what he was talking about, John replied that the lyrics of “Ireland’s Call” said there was 4 provinces in Ireland, hence it was therefore “sectarian” lol. When Nolan asks John was he supporting the Irish Rugby team in the Scotland game, John replies that he would never support Ireland and that he will be watching the Ireland vs Zimbabwe Cricket game instead where he would be supporting Zimbabwe lol. The conversation is on LAD’s youtube channel.
Willie Frazer has attempted to get on the Nolan Show many times but the Nolan Team wont let him on air (for obvious reasons). Willie has stated this on his Facebook page.
The problem with your argument Ryan is that your so called facts are largely questionable at best.
Perhaps if you left West Belfast which is clearly your comfort blanket and lived elsewhere perhaps you would get a fairer perspective of the Unionist community.
I also wonder if you have expressed your feelings to your unionist Co workers?
“The problem with your argument Ryan is that your so called facts are largely questionable at best”
In your opinion Robert. Why don’t you point out where my facts are questionable so that I can explain further because your obviously having trouble understanding.
“Perhaps if you left West Belfast which is clearly your comfort blanket and lived elsewhere perhaps you would get a fairer perspective of the Unionist community”
Why would West Belfast be my “comfort blanket”? And how is that “clear”? I have lived in many locations Robert. Explain to me Robert what you mean by “fairer perspective”? Does that just mean you want me to have an opinion on Unionists that is to your liking and isn’t based on facts? That’s what it sounds like…
“I also wonder if you have expressed your feelings to your unionist Co workers?”
I have indeed, why wouldn’t I Robert? I’m not the sort of person that is intimidated from giving my opinion, if that is what your wondering. That’s a strange thing to say. But given the sectarian nature of our society, politics isn’t a conversation that is promoted in the work place here, for obvious reasons.
Ryan
For once we’re agreed, unionists are very prone to acting as you have just said and it is most frustrating.
I will say though that nationalists ‘ain’t all that’ either when it comes to accepting facts and logic, frequently I have nationalists adopting whataboutery, changing the discussion when I’ve cornered them or just flying hissy fits of hysteria.
Anyway, back to your point, it’s very valid and indeed a tad frustrating when one highlights the existence of ‘x’ and they wish to discuss ‘y’, although these days I just interpret it as a sign of winning the argument…
PS: sorry, I forgot to ask: Is it even possible to be “sectarian” or “bigoted” for pointing out sectarianism and bigotry?….I guess that’s a paradox….a Unionist paradox…..
I suppose it would depend on how you go about it.
Bigotry in my book is refusing to tolerate any other opinion on something other than your own.
Hence my firm belief that Irish unionism epitomises bigotry more than any other people on this planet. Any wonder the KKK took its lead from the orange order.
It is not bigotry to either hold this opinion or to declare you hold it.
It would be bigotry to say no-one is entitled to disagree with my opinion that unionism is inbred bigotry and hate, hence I can accept that unionists may well disagree with me as they are entitled to do so. Just as they would be entitled to disagree with me that mars is red.
To be sectarian on the other hand is to discriminate over religious or cultural differences. It is therefore also not sectarian to simply point out that some act of discrimination or mistreatment was sectarian.
Northern Ireland was created by dividing Ireland over religious and cultural differences so is in effect a sectarian state born out of unionist intolerance and bigotry.
So long as this division remains, sectarianism will remain ingrained into our society and is witnessed so frequently that it passes for normal behaviour, hence it is easier to shoot down the messenger pointing out the indiscretion than to tackle the sectarian behaviour which is easier to turn a blind eye to.
But then, if you are saying someone is sectarian simply because you don’t like them for their religious or cultural differences, then that could well be considered sectarian and indeed also bigotry as you are refusing to tolerate their religious or cultural differences.
I’m not sure what the relevance of the IFA is to Derry City playing in the southern league, other than the IFA gave dispensation for them to do so?
Would also welcome an explanation of the point being made about sectarianism, the IFA and Derry City.
“the temperature spiked noticeably when someone rang in and wanted to know why Derry City games weren’t televised.”
The irony is that, unlike the rest of the teams in Northern Ireland, Derry City’s games *are* sometimes televised, albeit by RTE. BBC and UTV don’t televise any local matches bar the Irish Cup final.
Completely correct MT
You do understand that Derry City left the IFA because of perceived/real sectarianism within the IFA don’t you?
“You do understand that Derry City left the IFA because of perceived/real sectarianism within the IFA don’t you?”
No. Because they didn’t. They left because they wanted to play in the Southern league following the refusal of the Irish League to readmit them in the years subsequent to their resignation in 1972. Nothing to do with the IFA. The IFA facilitated their move when they had the power to block it.
Yes they did.
The IFA refused to let them play their home games at the Brandywell and forced them to play 30miles away in the massively Unionist dominated town of Coleraine.
“The IFA refused to let them play their home games at the Brandywell and forced them to play 30miles away in the massively Unionist dominated town of Coleraine.”
No they didn’t.
Yes they did.
See I can do this too.
“No they didn’t.”
Yes they did.
Next you’ll be saying there was no sectarianism in the IFA MT….oh sorry, you already are saying that.
“Yes they did.”
It was a decision by the Irish League not the IFA.
“Next you’ll be saying there was no sectarianism in the IFA MT….oh sorry, you already are saying that.”
I haven’t said there was no sectarianism in the IFA or any other organisation.
To be honest I was more interested in the discussion around what could to done to improve the attendance/profile of Irish league football than the whole sectarian bit.
Was there sectarianism in the past? Well I think everyone including people on Talkback, agreed yes.
Is it still present today? I don’t go so I can’t be for sure but I hear little about it.
I liked your suggestions around what could be done to improve the spectacle of IFA games though Jude.
Summer football is a great idea and one that has been floating about for a few years. Beyond the not clashing with Premiership football, it would be far easier to get motivated to go to a game on a nice summers night rather than a dark and cold January night.
Saturday is also a bad day for sports. People play there own sports on a Saturday afternoon or many people do there work around there house or do those were messages needed to be done so they are free for a family day on Sunday.
Rugby is traditionally played on a Saturday afternoon but many years ago Ulster made Friday night there main game night and it’s a huge success. Unless it’s a big European cup game there’s a noticeable drop off in attendance if the match is on a Saturday afternoon.
I think the IFA should implement other changes in order to drive up attendance before searching for a TV deal. Walk before they run.
Summer football and weeknight/Sunday afternoon matches might bring the people out.
“William didn’t howl but he pointed out that it was only ten minutes into the discussion and I’d mentioned the s-word. I can’t remember how Joe responded but George from the Shankill, who phones in to TalkBack with amazing frequency came on the line…”
Honestly, isn’t this the real story here – that too many programmes manufacture stories on a regular basis, usually by heating up the obvious hot potatoes until they’re incandescent with an opinion, which simply must be broadcast.
It’s not journalism, it’s entertainment…
PF
A very good point. It is not that different from twitter really. A few words seized on without context leads to a speedy deterioration into a slanging match. The issues are never really explored.
If Jude was referring to historic problems of sectarianism in the IFA then that is a fair point and the issues with Derry City could have made an interesting discussion.
But listeners heard the word sectarianism from someone who openly admits he does not attend local matches and responded by pointing out how much things have changed, which is also a fair point and could have benefited from in depth discussion.
Like the infamous BB twitter incident it is unwise to make throwaway remarks like that without the room to develop them.
As you say, entertaining but not enlightening.
Gio – did you hear the broadcast? I said that the fact that Derry City played in the League of ireland linked in turn to another issue that has hung over the Irish League – the ‘spectre of sectarianism’. I really fail to see what was unwise about that – except you think it’s unwise to mention sectarianism when discussing the IFA. Historically it has always been a problem; whether it’s no longer a problem, I don’t know since as I say I don’t attend games. But I notice that while George from the Shankill and Joe were keen to claim that it doesn’t really exist any more, people commenting on Facebook tell a different story. You’ve raised an interesting point about the way certain words trigger a storm of denial/condemnation. Wouldn’t it be interesting if posters on this site could try to confine themselves to genuine discussion and respectful disagreement?
Jude
On your last point I agree. Respect would be good. I also agree with MT that calling someone a planter is surely intended as derogatory and I feel sure you get that!
Look at the constant generalisations made towards protestants/unionists here (take a bow Ryan, jessica, Joe et al) none of it respectful.
The commenters from the Unionist perspective actually show a great deal more restraint in their language (take a bow Scott, AmG, and I think MT too)
I did listen to the broadcast and I think I think my point stands. The topic was televising matches and you brought in sectarianism in a discussion you could not have had time to deal with it.
Your point was not unreasonable but neither was it unreasonable for callers to express their view that things are different now.
There was not enough room to explore those issues and perhaps you should have stayed on topic.
Gio – God, I’m back doing this again – I’ve said that ‘planter’ isn’t particularly admiring term but I don’t think it’s abusive.I have a vague memory of Louis MacNeice using the word in one of his poems – although I could be wrong. I think it’s a word that makes some unionists uneasy because it refers to a huge injustice several centuries back. As to the Talkback thing: are you seriously going to suggest that in a discussion as to whether or not Irish League football should be televised, the legacy of sectarianism in the League should not be mentioned? I think you know the right answer to that one, gio. You may not be prepared to admit it but I think you know it.
“As to the Talkback thing: are you seriously going to suggest that in a discussion as to whether or not Irish League football should be televised, the legacy of sectarianism in the League should not be mentioned?”
Why do you think it should be mentioned, Jude? Why do you think it is relevant?
Who am I disrespectful to gio?
I will give unionism in general respect when I feel it deserves it.
At the moment unionism is a ball and chain on the wellbeing of this country, not only economically but socially and politically..
They have divided a nation and started a conflict, caused many deaths for nothing and choose to blame everyone but themselves, refusing to even acknowledge their own past wrong doings in the interest of reconciliation.
And you, a self declared republican who supports unionisms refusal to talk about what is important to nationalism as it would only weaken their position.
You can have whatever opinion you like gio, but people died and many lives were ruined over such intolerance that you openly espoused on this site. And you think you are a voice of reason!?!!?
Well, contrary to your own self inflated opinion, the conflict was not a bunch of nutters killing one another over differences in ideology. It was a spiral of violence started by unionist politicians who felt superior and thought they could drive out enough Catholics to keep sectarian control over an orange statelet, that got out of control. The british army then came in trying to fix it through more violence but only aggravated the situation making it harder to end.
If we are talking insulting generalisations, MTs constant referring to the conflict as republican terror campaign is extremely offensive and totally untrue but I suppose that goes along with your own more unionistic view of things.
Take a bow yourself why don’t you.
Jude
I apologise for drawing you into discussion,but here is my point.
Do you think you had a good discussion about the history of sectarianism in the IFA?
It is a complex issue and 15 minutes on a phone-in was never going to produce anything but raised voices.
That is the point PF was making I think and I am agreeing with his point.
Possibly you like the idea of being on the media (which you then use your blog to scorn) ,but what do you think it achieves.?
For that matter what does making provocative statements on twitter actually achieve?
No need to reply, I know you are trying to cut down, but maybe at least consider my questions.
Funny enough, gio, I was thinking about that very subject. Maybe do a blog on it. How much radio phone-ins, for example, aim to throw light on a subject? How much has anything written on this blog shifted the thinking of anyone? Why do people read it/listen to radio? Entertainment? I suspect that’s it… But while of course I didn’t expect a thoughtful discussion of sectarianism in the Irish League, I’d have felt a fraud not mentioning what the BBC valiantly avoids when talking about the Twelfth, the IFA, the Titanic – sacred cows.
jessica
I gave you a mention because you along with some others have a tendency to make lazy generalizations about unionists for which no evidence is ever produced.
I honestly see less of that coming in the other direction from unionist commenters.
Look through a few threads and tell me I’m wrong.
Once again it is not that I support Unionism’s reluctance to talk about a United Ireland I just don’t see why they would ever want to as they see their (and our) best interests as remaining in the UK.
If they don’t want to consider it you should not just start labelling them as bigots, a term which you are very fond of.
If a Christian expressed no wish to discuss the possibility of becoming a Muslim would that make her a bigot?
“Once again it is not that I support Unionism’s reluctance to talk about a United Ireland I just don’t see why they would ever want to as they see their (and our) best interests as remaining in the UK.”
Perhaps because the only possible way of removing sectarianism is in an agreed Ireland, whether that be one Ireland or two, within the UK, the EU or whatever, these options have to be discussed and the people allowed to choose.
“I honestly see less of that coming in the other direction from unionist commenters.”
Do you honestly think the conflict was a one sided IRA terror campaign, or a cycle of violence started by unionism and descending into a spiral of retaliation and escalating into full blown conflict?
“If a Christian expressed no wish to discuss the possibility of becoming a Muslim would that make her a bigot?”
No, because it would not effect any one else but themselves.
What you are describing is allowing one section of a community to have a veto over even talking about or treating with respect the aspirations of another section and that is bigotry.
Your suggestion is not a lazy generalisation but not even an accurate comparison.
I have made no lazy generalisations without backing up my thinking on them. You should try doing the same.
“Perhaps because the only possible way of removing sectarianism is in an agreed Ireland, whether that be one Ireland or two, within the UK, the EU or whatever, these options have to be discussed and the people allowed to choose.”
1. How would it remove sectarianism?
2. How is it the only possible way to remove sectarianism?
3. We already have an agreed Ireland.
“How would it remove sectarianism? ”
Well I wrote a blog on it but Jude may have felt it a bit too hot to post or else he has forgotten it.
Sectarianism is a form of bigotry, discrimination, or hatred arising from attaching relations of inferiority and superiority to differences between subdivisions within a group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarianism
If we hold a referendum and finally vote for a set of options then we will finally have an agreed Ireland and the divisions will be eradicated.
I do not support the idea of continuous reattempts every 7 years, I only want one opportunity and we accept the result, end off.
“How is it the only possible way to remove sectarianism? ”
Because until that referendum takes place, we are living in an undemocratic state with a paralysed parliament which will never agree on anything and everything will be filtered through our sectarian divisions.
“We already have an agreed Ireland.”
So what is the flag of my country MT?
What is the anthem of my country MT?
Where does the Irish language fit into this agreed Ireland MT?
Are we ever going to have fiscal controls within this agreed Ireland or are we doomed to the scraps from England’s table to suit unionisms need to be ruled by England?
“If we hold a referendum and finally vote for a set of options then we will finally have an agreed Ireland and the divisions will be eradicated.”
You didn’t answer the question. You just repeated the assertion. So I’ll ask again: *how* would such a referendum remove sectarianism?
We had such a referendum 18 years ago. How.come it didn’t remove sectarianism yet another one would?
“Because until that referendum takes place, we are living in an undemocratic state with a paralysed parliament which will never agree on anything and everything will be filtered through our sectarian divisions.”
Even if we accept your premise, another referendum may decide on the status quo, so how by your argument would that be only way to remove sectarianism ?
“We already have an agreed Ireland.”
“So what is the flag of my country MT?
What is the anthem of my country MT?
Where does the Irish language fit into this agreed Ireland MT?”
You seem to be conflating “agreed Ireland” with “Ireland of my personal choice”.
“Are we ever going to have fiscal controls within this agreed Ireland or are we doomed to the scraps from England’s table to suit unionisms need to be ruled by England?”
That’s a matter for the people to decide through their elected representatives.
“*how* would such a referendum remove sectarianism? ”
It is not the referendum itself which would remove sectarianism, but the process of agreeing what is best for our future prospects fully supported by both states and in the best interests of all sections of our society, it is that debate which it would initiate that would end sectarianism.
Would you not agree?
“We had such a referendum 18 years ago. How.come it didn’t remove sectarianism yet another one would? ”
Without the inclusive debate that involves the people, businesses and both states it would not.
The GFA was a closed door agreement that no one understood then and still don’t. It was a fudge to end conflict, not a settlement.
“You seem to be conflating “agreed Ireland” with “Ireland of my personal choice”. ”
How do you come to that conclusion MT?
“That’s a matter for the people to decide through their elected representatives.”
The people don’t get any say through our elected representatives. That is the whole point of a referendum, to take that control away from them and give the public more say in our future that they have failed to deliver.
It is a pity I am unable to make you see this.
“It is not the referendum itself which would remove sectarianism, but the process of agreeing what is best for our future prospects fully supported by both states and in the best interests of all sections of our society, it is that debate which it would initiate that would end sectarianism.”
How would that remove sectarianism?
“Would you not agree?”
No.
“We had such a referendum 18 years ago. How.come it didn’t remove sectarianism yet another one would? ”
“Without the inclusive debate that involves the people, businesses and both states it would not.
The GFA was a closed door agreement that no one understood then and still don’t. It was a fudge to end conflict, not a settlement.”
But there was inclusive debate in 1998.
“You seem to be conflating “agreed Ireland” with “Ireland of my personal choice”. ”
“How do you come to that conclusion MT?”
Because of what you said. When I said there already was an agreed Ireland, you replied: “So what is the flag of my country MT? What is the anthem of my country MT? Where does the Irish language fit into this agreed Ireland MT?” The only conclusion I can draw from this is that you think an agreed Ireland must coincide with your personal wishes in respect of flags, anthems and language.
“That’s a matter for the people to decide through their elected representatives.”
“The people don’t get any say through our elected representatives.”
Yes they do.
“That is the whole point of a referendum, to take that control away from them and give the public more say in our future that they have failed to deliver.”
But we already had a referendum.
I think we will have to agree to disagree MT
“I think we will have to agree to disagree MT”
But I’m asking you a question.
Gio, Jude
I most certainly am suggesting that some of our better known phone in shows are little better than a playground rant – or football match. From memory, by the way, the sectarian chanting cut both ways: if you weren’t an illegitimate member of the Fianna, you were an illegitimate member of the Orange Order, or, if things were particularly perky, we were all f-ing illegitimates, and the Pope, the IRA and the UVF all got a verse each!
But it was what it was, and things have changed a lot.
Anyway, that aside, the phone-ins are all heat and no light, but… that doesn’t mean that minds are not changed.
My view is simple – if you control the airwaves – and by that I mean, if you manage your message well and get it heard enough – you control the popular mindset – why? Because no one thinks much anymore.
That’s the saddest thing of all.
Oh, and BTW, was the ice-berg a Protestant or something?!
And after that tongue in cheek remark, a serious question:
Are there any sectarian Catholics/Nationalists/Republicans?
Everything in Northern Ireland is sectarian Peter.
Until there is a democratic expression by the people of Ireland, partition was imposed upon us creating two subdivisions within our people with opposing points of view.
Those that want partition and those that hate it but the fact it was imposed undemocratically means they simply cannot accept it.
Sectarianism by definition cannot be one sided.
It is because it is only pointed out when associated with acts of violence, but any act promoting one identity over the other so even raising the union flag or the tri colour in Ireland can be seen as sectarian.
It is unfortunate but the reality.
” partition was imposed upon us creating two subdivisions within our people with opposing points of view.”
You do realise ‘partition’ was the result not the cause of the ‘subdivisions’?
“You do realise ‘partition’ was the result not the cause of the ‘subdivisions’?”
Well, you have a point there MT, unionism does indeed predate partition.
But the sub divisions were not geographic and partition was not a democratic or fair way of dealing with them.
In fact it was a way of England avoiding dealing with the issues in Ireland to the expense of the Irish Catholics in the north and the same problems today are the same problems from then which have still not been adequately addressed.
Only this time Dublin is shirking the same responsibility every bit as much as London but this time at the expense of both sections of our communities.
“But the sub divisions were not geographic”
Really? So before 1921 unionists and nationalists were spread evenly all over Ireland and after 1921 there were mass population transfers to concentrate them respectively in NI and the Free State? Wow.
“and partition was not a democratic or fair way of dealing with them.”
It was the obvious way, and broadly reflected democratic wishes.
“In fact it was a way of England avoiding dealing with the issues in Ireland to the expense of the Irish Catholics in the north and the same problems today are the same problems from then which have still not been adequately addressed.”
So your solution would have been to “deal.with the issues” at the expense instead of the (numerically larger) Ulster Protestants in the north? So it was wrong for a minority of Irish Catholics in the north to be in a state they didn’t like but it would have been.OK for all the Ulster Protestants to be I’m a state they didn’t like? On what basis? .That you belong to the former group but not ilatter?
“Really? So before 1921 unionists and nationalists were spread evenly all over Ireland and after 1921 there were mass population transfers to concentrate them respectively in NI and the Free State? Wow.”
Not evenly, Ulster was 50% unionist with Cork and Dublin possibly having the most in the south but Ireland was always majority Irish catholic.
There was never any justification for a geographic unionist state, even England felt the same way. It was threats of violence that got their way.
“It was the obvious way, and broadly reflected democratic wishes.”
That is absolute rubbish. There is nothing democratic about Northern Ireland.
“So your solution would have been to “deal.with the issues” at the expense instead of the (numerically larger) Ulster Protestants in the north? So it was wrong for a minority of Irish Catholics in the north to be in a state they didn’t like but it would have been.OK for all the Ulster Protestants to be I’m a state they didn’t like? On what basis? .That you belong to the former group but not ilatter?”
Democracy should have been respected and had protestants accepted this, the republic would never have been such a catholic state which did it no favours at all.
Nationalists in northern Ireland may not wanted to be in a unionist state but when the alternative was conflict, we accepted it and have been subject to unionist bigotry ever since.
jessica
A polite and respectful good morning to you.
I am afraid I just don’t see why you have this difficulty with Unionists being Unionists.
When a referendum is called the debate will start in earnest. That is what we all agreed in the GFA.
At that time Unionists will not be slow to put their point of view.
They do not want to discuss it before they have to and that is their right.
I don’t see how that makes them bigots any more than Republicans espousing Republicanism.
That is politics. The status quo is in their favournow but eventually that will change.
I have no problem with unionists being unionists gio, but why should they have a veto on discussing a shared future and finding out what it is our people want? We are a post conflict society and they would sooner risk it all.
It is this very refusal to even discuss aspirations and points of view other than their own at a political level which is bigotry, pure and simple, just every bit as much as it would be if republicanism refused to consider the aspirations of their community.
There is no ambivalence here and it is factually accurate by definition.
And that is not politics. Politics is democracy as demonstrated by what happened in Britain over the Scottish independence referendum and the Brexit referendum.
What we have here is the denial of democratic expression and a political quagmire grounded in sectarian bigotry and topped with incompetence and that is why politics here is continuing to fail.
We can criticise people for not voting all we like, but there truly is nothing to vote for or aspire to any more.
“I have no problem with unionists being unionists gio, but why should they have a veto on discussing a shared future and finding out what it is our people want? We are a post conflict society and they would sooner risk it all.”
What are they risking?
We know what the people want. We have regular elections.
“It is this very refusal to even discuss aspirations and points of view other than their own at a political level which is bigotry, pure and simple, just every bit as much as it would be if republicanism refused to consider the aspirations of their community.”
What are you talking about? What discussions?
“There is no ambivalence here and it is factually accurate by definition.”
What is?
“And that is not politics. Politics is democracy as demonstrated by what happened in Britain over the Scottish independence referendum and the Brexit referendum.”
This doesn’t appear to make sense.
“What we have here is the denial of democratic expression and a political quagmire grounded in sectarian bigotry and topped with incompetence and that is why politics here is continuing to fail.”
Who is denied democratic expression?
Let me take you through it MT.
Ireland was one country, part of the UK since 1801 but with two groups of people. (I am not interested in plantation or ancient history, people born and raised in Ireland are Irish, period), but some (nationalists) wanted home rule to make our own decisions, others (unionists) wanted to be ruled from London.
London rule was favoured by the unionists as it was better for their pockets. 100% of all businesses in Ulster were protestant owned and the wealth was shared 40:1 with Catholics having £1 for every £40 a protestant had.
Needless to say, the vast majority of Ireland wanted home rule but unionists for obvious reasons feared they would be worse off as their wealth was based on discrimination which they feared would be addressed with home rule.
When England agreed to implement home rule, Carson setup a para military organisation and smuggled in weapons from Germany to train for civil war if it were to be implemented.
In 1916 it was perceived that England had made a deal with Carson not to include the north in the home rule and the leaders of the 1916 Rising chose to make a stand for an independent Ireland instead and raised the flag of the Irish Republic and declaring Irelands independence.
After sowing the seed, their executions grew it into a strong desire for an independent Ireland. No more could England rule in Ireland and this was expressed democratically in elections in which Sinn Fein stood on an impendence platform and created the first Dail.
The war of independence ended with the north remaining in unionist control but with 26 counties represented in the Dail and led to Northern Ireland being created even though over 30% of the population were catholic Irish and had voted with the majority.
A bit like Scotland voting remain in Brexit but unlike Northern Ireland, their majority was not allowed to be considered separately from the majority.
Partition and unionist rule led to widespread discrimination and eventually to an attempt to drive out Catholics and started a bloody conflict.
We now have relative peace but the problems were never addressed. With the demographic change, the problems in all Ireland in 1916 are now being mirrored in Northern Ireland in 2016.
“What are they risking?”
Ignoring these problems will not make them go away and will only risk further violence, it would foolish to ignore this.
“We know what the people want. We have regular elections.”
Yes, and they are based on sectarian politics down tribal voting lines, not over what is best for our people.
I and many others are sick of it and that is what the people want, an end to it.
“Who is denied democratic expression?”
Until the people get a chance to have their desires heard by both states and the best options put to them in a referendum, Northern Ireland will remain in groundhog day and refusing this will be a denial of democratic expression.
If you still need clarification, please be more specific.
“No it isn’t” is not really worth my time responding to.
It is not only Jude has better things to do.
“We now have relative peace but the problems were never addressed. With the demographic change, the problems in all Ireland in 1916 are now being mirrored in Northern Ireland in 2016.”
What problems are being mirrored?
“What are they risking?”
“Ignoring these problems will not make them go away and will only risk further violence, it would foolish to ignore this.”
What problems? Violence by whom?
“We know what the people want. We have regular elections.”
“Yes, and they are based on sectarian politics down tribal voting lines, not over what is best for our people.”
That’s a matter for the people to decide. It’s not for you to tell people how to vote.
“I and many others are sick of it and that is what the people want, an end to it.”
If the people want an end to it why do they keep voting for it?
“Who is denied democratic expression?”
“Until the people get a chance to have their desires heard by both states and the best options put to them in a referendum, Northern Ireland will remain in groundhog day and refusing this will be a denial of democratic expression.”
That doesn’t make sense since the ‘groundhog day’ is a result of democratic expression.
If you still need clarification, please be more specific.
“No it isn’t” is not really worth my time responding to.
It is not only Jude has better things to do.
I’m not sure what MT means by “local”. Dublin is more local to me than Derry. Dundalk is not local to me than Belfast. But I am cynical enough to have entertained the thought that MT may have “localized” the argument to avoid mentioning the massacre of innocents by RIC/ AUXILARIES in Croke park in 1920. And let’s not talk about the killing of GAA members such as Aidan McAnespie by a British sentry, the murder by loyalists near Clontibret of two GAA fans returning home from a match in Dublin. Or a 60 year old GAA man abducted while locking GAA grounds in Co. Derry. Killed because they were Catholics and, worse GAA supporters.
“I’m not sure what MT means by “local”. Dublin is more local to me than Derry. Dundalk is more local to me than Belfast. But I am cynical enough to have entertained the thought that MT may have “localized” the argument to avoid mentioning the massacre of innocents by RIC/ AUXILARIES in Croke park in 1920. And let’s not talk about the killing of GAA members such as Aidan McAnespie by a British sentry, the murder by loyalists near Clontibret of two GAA fans returning home from a match in Dublin. Or a 60 year old GAA man abducted while locking GAA grounds in Co. Derry. Killed because they were Catholics and, worse GAA supporters.”
The discussion is about association football in NI.
Well said Brian, I was thinking the same, and also thinking of raising these incidents with said MT, but I thought, ‘nah, I’ve tried that before’, I’ve found that nothing positive is achieved while jousting with MT and his ilk. He and other dyed in the wool planters will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the inevitable United Ireland. Either that or said United Ireland will happen after he is long gone. However, hail hail the truth tellers, keep going, keep telling the truth and you will eventually win through.
Jude, are these quasi-racist offensive personal comments OK by you? Bearing in mind your threat to censor me for making a general.comment.
You’ll have to be more precise, MT. Name and rank, etc. I might add that I have let some of your comments go when they at best nearly qualified for the straight-abuse tag.
Describing someone falsely as a ‘planter’, a word used pejoratively, and which assumes a racial characteristic, is quasi-racist.
No, I reject that, MT – sorry. “Planter” may not be a complimentary tag but it’s not abusive. Or racist. It refers to an event in history, the plantation of Ulster.
PS – Whether you are or are not descended from planters is a matter that can be supported or denied with evidence. It’s also a separate issue.
“PS – Whether you are or are not descended from planters is a matter that can be supported or denied with evidence. It’s also a separate issue.”
The only evidence would be evidence that I was “planted” here during the Plantation. I can assure you I wasn’t.
It’s not a separate issue: it’s heart of the issue. The assumption that someone presumed to be a unionist or Protestant has some kind of pure racial connection to those involved in the Plantation (who themselves were a minority of the Protestants who moved to Irelan).
“No, I reject that, MT – sorry. “Planter” may not be a complimentary tag but it’s not abusive. Or racist. It refers to an event in history, the plantation of Ulster.”
Jude, that event in history took place 350 years before I was born. I’m not a planter.
To say that I am means making a series of racial and biological assumptions. There is also a subtext that I am not welcome here or have some kind of sub-Irish status. It is not acceptable.
Well, you’re entitled to your opinion, MT. I have always afforded you space for your views, except on the very rare occasion when I think you’ve overstepped – and to your credit that hs been very rarely. As to you being a planter or not – that’s not abuse, that’s a question of your ancestry and, as you rightly point out, you weren’t around then. But we’re into disputing the authenticity of the claim, not whether it is abusive, which I don’t think it is. If you have one opinion – I’m not a planter – and someone else has another opinion – you are a planter – the only way to resolve it is with evidence from one side or the other. That’s not a matter that I’m concerned about. ‘A series of racial and biological assumptions’ – racial assumptions aren’t by definition racist. Anyway, enough, enough. You know and I know that ‘planter’ isn’t an abusive term. Uncomfortable maybe, abusive no.
“There is also a subtext that I am not welcome here or have some kind of sub-Irish status. ”
If you were born here then you are Irish MT, no one is questioning that but yourself.
What makes you think you are welcome here though.
Based on your refusal to debate but simply criticise everything you disagree with often in one line half assed responses, I would imagine to the majority of readers here and I mean this as it is unfortunate but you are most definitely not welcome.
I disagree, jessica. I don’t agree with most of MT’s posts but s/he is welcome to express them – Jude
Well at least one of your readers doesn’t share your opinion Jude, but it is your site and I can respect your decision
“If you were born here then you are Irish MT, no one is questioning that but yourself.”
But I’m not questioning it.
“Based on your refusal to debate but simply criticise everything you disagree with often in one line half assed responses, I would imagine to the majority of readers here and I mean this as it is unfortunate but you are most definitely not w”
I don’t refuse to debate. On the contrary I debate all the time.
“I don’t refuse to debate. On the contrary I debate all the time.”
No you dont
“As to you being a planter or not – that’s not abuse, that’s a question of your ancestry and, as you rightly point out, you weren’t around then.”
It is abuse because it is a derogatory term the subtext of which is to ascribe a certain status to me that has less value or authenticity than a “pure” (ie racially pure) Irish person.
Put it like this. If you called Protestant colleagues in the workplace “planters” and they complained, do you think the complaint would be dismissed or upheld? Would you advise anyone to try it?
“But we’re into disputing the authenticity of the claim, not whether it is abusive, which I don’t think it is. If you have one opinion – I’m not a planter – and someone else has another opinion – you are a planter – the only way to resolve it is with evidence from one side or the other.”
It’s clear that I’m not a planter. Unless you believe I am 400 years old or thereabouts.
” ‘A series of racial and biological assumptions’ – racial assumptions aren’t by definition racist.”
They are if they are used to ascribe a certain derogatory status to someone.
“Anyway, enough, enough. You know and I know that ‘planter’ isn’t an abusive term. Uncomfortable maybe, abusive no.”
Try walking into a BBC office next time you’re there and in a derogatory way call one of the Protestant members of staff a planter. See if the equality officer agrees with you that it’s not abusive.
Are you referring per chance to my comment MT?, What comments (plural) are you referring to. I see only one adjective in my contribution to which you might possibly be referring, that being the word ‘planter’. Are you not a planter? We’re your ancestors not ‘planted’ here in their thousands against the will of the indigenous people? Just saying MT, I know the truth hurts sometimes, but it’s still the truth!
“Are you not a planter?”
No.
“We’re your ancestors not ‘planted’ here in their thousands against the will of the indigenous people?”
I don’t know. Were yours?
“Just saying MT, I know the truth hurts sometimes, but it’s still the truth!”
What truth?
MT, if you are going to post comments rubbishing every opinion that differs from yours and demanding evidence without ever offering any evidence for your own version of the world in a blinkered unionist sectarian view point, then people are not going to take you seriously.
Whether you like it or not, Ireland is one country divided by our relationship with the British empire who treated the Irish people appallingly. Ignoring this and commenting as if everything is hunky dory is simply foolishness and many here will see you as that, simply a fool.
Your rose tinted opinion of everything British is in total denial of the truth and is formed over the resentment you feel about the wrongs committed in the name of republicanism during the conflict.
We can argue forever and a day about who did what terrible deed during the conflict, or even in the years leading up to it but you probably would prefer to focus on non unionist aggression.
I understand perfectly well it is difficult to move on, I feel the same way. But when I think of my young children, I want them to live in a peaceful Ireland, united and happy within itself. And if we have to endure another short bloody war to get it out of our system then lets just get it over with or let us move on.
It is time unionism faced up to its past and stopped pretending it is an innocent victim of an Irish conspiracy.
Whatever format Ireland will have in the future, it will have to be once democratically chosen by the people.
While the British state are denying access to all evidence of its own wrong doing under the guide of national security, you have some neck to come on here preaching about who did what.
Get over yourself. No one here **** what you think.
I think that’s untrue, jessica. People read what MT says so they must have some interest in what he thinks. Just as he reads what you say and must have some interest in what you think. Let’s discuss in a grown-up way, shall we? – Jude
I’ve always enjoyed reading MT’s comments. He or she has a unique style and is always consistent in there views, often cutting through a lot of the fluff to get to the point quickly.
I think Jessica you need to be careful that you don’t descend into a “if you don’t agree with me, your irrelevant and go away” mentality.
Remember the words of the writer Evelyn Beatrice Hall.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
MT believes Ireland was always part of Britain and therefore unionism is indigenous to Ireland.
That the UK is one country and that the people of Ireland had no right to partition the UK along the Irish sea. In other words, Ireland was never a separate constituent part of the UK with the right to choose whether to not to leave and therefore when Ireland had a majority vote to leave, the fact that parts of ulster in isolation did not vote leave, that was justification for partition.
I disagree with that opinion and in fact the recent brexit vote proved the UK also does not support this view otherwise Scotland and Northern Ireland should have their differing opinions on remaining in the EU respected.
MT sees it that is was nationalism that partitioned Ireland by leaving the UK.
I don’t see the point in going down to the pantomime no it isn’t, yes it is, no it isn’t, yes it is.
Then there is the reverse parody which is lazy copy paste which makes no sense whatsoever.
Most of what MT writes unfortunately is simply word pollution.
“MT believes Ireland was always part of Britain and therefore unionism is indigenous to Ireland.”
There you go again, misrepresenting people.
I’ve never said that Ireland was always part of Britain. That doesn’t make sense.
That
“Then there is the reverse parody which is lazy copy paste which makes no sense whatsoever.”
If it makes no sense then it shows that the opinion being parodied makes no sense. That’s the point!
I think thiis Wikipedia entry regarding Derry City’s exit from the Irish League sets what happened in a wider (and more truthful?) context:
Derry City were forced to travel to the majority unionist town of Coleraine, which was over 30 miles away from home, in order to play their ‘home’ games at the Showgrounds. They had initially inquired as to the availability of a ground in Limavady but permission was refused, while the IFA insisted that they could not make use of Finn Park in Ballybofey as it was in the Republic of Ireland. With no other major ground in the local area available, Coleraine was a last resort. This unsustainable situation lasted until October 1972 when, faced with dwindling crowds (most Derry fans were unwilling to travel to Coleraine due to the political situation and the 40-minute journey) and dire finances, the club formally requested permission from the IFA to return to the Brandywell. Portadown F.C. also entered a proposal to return to playing at the Brandywell. Despite an assessment by the security forces which concluded that the Brandywell was no more dangerous than any other ground in the league and the resulting lifting of the imposed ban, City’s proposal fell by a single vote at the hands of their fellow Irish League teams who remained unwilling to travel there, in face of the fact that greyhound racing had returned to the Brandywell and dog-breeders were visiting from all over Northern Ireland. The IFA had decided that a vote would be held. Portadown, Bangor, Cliftonville, Ballymena United, and Derry City voted in favour of the motion while Crusaders, Ards, Glenavon, Glentoran, Distillery, and Linfield all voted against. Coleraine abstained and so with a minority of one vote just like Derry Celtic in 1913, Derry City were left stranded. The 40-minute journey to ‘home’ games reduced the Derry crowd considerably so gate receipts dropped dangerously low and so Derry could no longer sustain themselves. The Irish League and the IFA eventually got what they had been orchestrating on Friday 13 October 1972 when Derry withdrew from senior football. The directors hoped that the door would open soon again to the Irish League but it would not return until they were permitted to play in the Brandywell again. Derry, devastated by the outcome, withdrew from senior football the day following the refusal to allow a return of football to the stadium. It was the last straw for the club, who decided that continuing in senior football without a ground was not sustainable, and resigned from the league, being effectively forced out.
“I think thiis Wikipedia entry regarding Derry City’s exit from the Irish League sets what happened in a wider (and more truthful?) context:”
Beware Wikipedia. The quoted article wrongly ascribes the decision not to allow matches at the Brandywell to the IFA.
How do you know that, MT?
“How do you know that, MT?”
Because I understand how football is governed (the IFA has no say in who is and isn’t admitted to individual leagues). And because I’ve read and studied the history of Irish League football and Derry City.
Yes Jude, this part of what I was referring to earlier.
A friend of mines father and uncle were heavily involved in the running of Derry City and could tell some stories about how they were treated.
My own father faced sectarian abuse BY HIS OWN FANS and opposition whilst playing Irish league football so much so my mother swore that no son of hers would ever be involved. I’m a committed GAA man as a result.
My father was also very nearly signed by Linfield in the 60s/70s. They seen his address and assumed he was a Protestant but when they found out his true background they halted the deal.
Just because some people don’t want to face up to or excuse unionist sectarianism in the north doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
“A friend of mines father and uncle were heavily involved in the running of Derry City and could tell some stories about how they were treated.
My own father faced sectarian abuse BY HIS OWN FANS and opposition whilst playing Irish league football so much so my mother swore that no son of hers would ever be involved. I’m a committed GAA man as a result.”
Is the irony lost on you that you rejected a cross-community sport in favour of a partisan anti-unionist sport in the name of opposing sectarianism?
“A partisan anti-unionist sport’ – you don’t consider that abuse, presumably, MT?
“A partisan anti-unionist sport’ – you don’t consider that abuse, presumably, MT?”
Why would you consider it abuse? Abuse of whom?
I was under the impression ‘partisan’ was a derogatory term – no? As to who, well obviously anyone following or playing GAA sports. As to ‘anti-unionist’ – that suggests – though I accept isn’t necessarily explicit – that the people involved are opposed to unionists. I’d say most GAA supporters/players never bother even thinking about unionists
“I was under the impression ‘partisan’ was a derogatory term – no?”
I wasn’t so aware, no.
“As to who, well obviously anyone following or playing GAA sports.”
So not personal abuse against any individual.
Jude it’s ludicrous to say that describing the GAA as partisan and anti-unionist is abusive. It’s an entirely reasonable description. It’s an openly nationalist organisation for goodness sake.
OK, MT . So maybe visit your local GAA club and tell them that they’re partisan and anti-unionist. I’m sure they’ll not be offended by the neutral statement of fact…oops, opinion
“OK, MT . So maybe visit your local GAA club and tell them that they’re partisan and anti-unionist. I’m sure they’ll not be offended by the neutral statement of fact…oops, opinion”
Yes of course it is an opinion, and a reasonable one. It’s not ‘abusive’.
I’ve never encountered sectarianism on the pitch or from fans in 30+ yrs of involvement in the GAA. What religion my team mate or opponent is is of no relevance to me or others. If they do indeed even have a religion.
There’s nothing sectarian about the GAA as much as you would like to portray there is or indeed equivilate it to the likes of the OO.
Go down to Croke Park and its surrounds this Sunday and soak up the atmos. Talk to the GAA people there and ask if they give a shit what religion you are.
Whilst you’re there ask them about Jack Boothman tenure as GAA president or ask them about Peter Withnells goal in the 1991 All Ireland semi final. Just 2 of the many many players of reached great heights within the GAA and are not of the persuasion you may assume someone in the GAA might be.
Once again you try to deflect away from the topic of blatant sectarianism within the norths soccer leagues.
“I’ve never encountered sectarianism on the pitch or from fans in 30+ yrs of involvement in the GAA. What religion my team mate or opponent is is of no relevance to me or others. If they do indeed even have a religion.”
That’s hardly surprising given that it’s effectively a nationalist-only sport. If football were a unionist-only sport I’m sure it would similarly not experience any sectarian incidents.
“There’s nothing sectarian about the GAA as much as you would like to portray there is or indeed equivilate it to the likes of the OO.”
That all depends on one’s definition of sectarian. But by the same standard there’s nothing sectarian about football or the IFA either.
Go down to Croke Park and its surrounds this Sunday and soak up the atmos. Talk to the GAA people there and ask if they give a shit what religion you are.”
Go down to Windsor Park next October and soak up the atmos. Talk to the IFA people there and ask if they give a shit what religion you are.
“Whilst you’re there ask them about Jack Boothman tenure as GAA president or ask them about Peter Withnells goal in the 1991 All Ireland semi final. Just 2 of the many many players of reached great heights within the GAA and are not of the persuasion you may assume someone in the GAA might be.”
Whilst you’re there ask them about Hugh Hegan’s, Austin Donnelly’s and Joseph MacBride’s tenures as IFA President or ask them about [insert any one of literally scores of names of Catholic players] in [insert one of literally scores of Irish Cup semi-finals] or the many many many players of reached great heights within football and are not of the persuasion you may assume someone playing football might be.
There are and have been tena of thousands of Irish Catholics who play football under the IFA. Can you name more than a dozen Ulster Protestants who have played GAA?
“Once again you try to deflect away from the topic of blatent sectarianism within the norths soccer leagues.”
I’m not deflecting away from any topic. If the topic is about blatant sectarianism within the north’s soccer leagues maybe you could post something about it. I haven’t seen anything said about it other than assumptions about the motivation for not allowing the use of the Brandywell in 1972.
Bollocks Michael virtually no unionist plays GAA whilst many catholics play Irish league football the only mass participant sport played by both sides.
The definition of whataboutery while still dodging sectarianism in Irish league soccer.
Every time on one of these posts MT you can’t help but hang yourself.
You live up to everything you argue you’re not.
Its quite amusing.
“Is the irony lost on you that you rejected a cross-community sport in favour of a partisan anti-unionist sport in the name of opposing sectarianism?”
It is unionism that is partisan and foreign to Ireland MT. Unionism is what creates sectarianism in Ireland. For it to be otherwise, it would need to eradicate the Irish out of Ireland. You are a British separatist living in Ireland that wants to uphold a sectarian division for bigoted reasons.
It is unionism that is anti gaa because it is an Irish culture and sporting organisation and therefore not unionist.
The GAA does not need to concern itself about unionism, it will eventually die out.
“It is unionism that is partisan and foreign to Ireland MT.”
Of course it’s partisan, but far from being foreign to Ireland it is indigenous to Ireland.
But you’re argument is fallacious. Pointing to something else that is partisan doesn’t mean that the original organisation isn’t also partisan.
“It is unionism that is anti gaa because it is an Irish culture and sporting organisation and therefore not unionist.”
If “unionism” is anti-GAA it’d because it’s nationalist. Your conflation of Irishness with Irish nationalism is disturbing.
“Of course it’s partisan, but far from being foreign to Ireland it is indigenous to Ireland.”
Ireland, with an earlier language, culture and heritage than England you think was originally British and its people supportive of the union with England?
That has to be your best one yet MT, keep taking the mushrooms.
Unionism is a sickness, a blight on this land.
You are infected and now displaying the symptom of delusion and are now imagining unionists are the original Irish and nationalism is a distortion of the indigenous Irish unionism.
Is there a doctor in the house!
“Ireland, with an earlier language, culture and heritage than England you think was originally British and its people supportive of the union with England? That has to be your best one yet MT, keep taking the mushrooms.”
What has this got to do with your claim that unionism is foreign to Ireland?
“Unionism is a sickness, a blight on this land. You are infected and now displaying the symptom of delusion”
Jude is this acceptable discourse?
“and are now imagining unionists are the original Irish and nationalism is a distortion of the indigenous Irish unionism.”
I never said either of those things. Jessica you should take time to ask yourself why you constantly resort to distorting and misrepresenting what other people say. Is it a (possibly unconsciois) way of diverting from the weakness of your own arguments?
“Unionism is a sickness, a blight on this land. You are infected and now displaying the symptom of delusion” “Jude is this acceptable discourse? ”
Of course it is MT, Jude can hardly allow his blog to be plastered with your unfounded assertions that the conflict was a one sided IRA terror campaign despite it having started before the IRA did (talk about weakness in your own arguments), but then censor the more accurate opinion that it is unionism that is the problem here.
Unionism in Ireland has not only caused problems in Ireland, but for many London governments, it has committed treason over the insistence it is more important than democracy, it has introduced violence into the democratic effort to attain home rule, it has started the smuggling in of guns and creating Para militarism in Ireland within the last century, it has discriminated and abused the power it was given in Ireland and in opposition to civil rights began a terror campaign to drive out Catholics leading to the start of a bloody conflict.
Even now that has ended, unionism remains intransigent towards the Irish identity and nationalist aspirations, trying instead to whitewash its own wrong doings in an attempt to vilify republicans and put all blame in our direction.
Even to the extent of harming our economy by preventing the Maze project from going ahead which has such economic growth potential, over fear that it would go against their efforts at demonizing republicans and preventing any scrutiny of their past coming their way.
And what about the arrogance of the rogues and renegades gatekeeper, protecting the coffers despite being the same gatekeeper who oversaw the department which squandered 140 million on the renewable energy Heating incentive. I can live with the mistake, but the fact it was made by the person who made such sectarian comments over sharing access to finances.
Well, I think there is ample evidence of the self serving and sectarian nature of unionism, I would say calling it a sickness and a blight is a reasonable assessment based on the above and probably putting it mildly.
And don’t lie, you have told me many times that you see the UK as one country and it was nationalism that partitioned Ireland among other such nonsense I could not be bothered going over but I am sure many others are also aware off.
Your whole purpose here is to frustrate debate and nothing more. It is up to Jude whether he allows you to succeed.
“Of course it is MT, Jude can hardly allow his blog to be plastered with your unfounded assertions that the conflict was a one sided IRA terror campaign”
But I’ve never made such an assertion.
Ironically, you’re the one with the one-sided assessment of everything. You blame unionism for everything.
All I want is democracy and the opportunity for the people to debate what is best for our future and for the best options shortlisted to be put to the people in a referendum. If that fails, I will have no interest in a second referendum, I would readily accept that one could not be called again within another 50 years.
I want the opportunity for both communities here to reach an agreed settlement on our future which might be more acceptable to unionism than it thinks if it would give it a chance. At the moment, yes it is unionism that is preventing that from happening.
“All I want is democracy and the opportunity for the people to debate what is best for our future and for the best options shortlisted to be put to the people in a referendum. If that fails, I will have no interest in a second referendum, I would readily accept that one could not be called again within another 50 years.”
We’ve already had that 18;years ago, but because you didn’t like the outcome you want another one?
“I want the opportunity for both communities here to reach an agreed settlement on our future which might be more acceptable to unionism than it thinks if it would give it a chance. At the moment, yes it is unionism that is preventing that from happening.”
We have an agreed settlement.
You could be right, MT. Maybe they should have called it the Settlement..
“We’ve already had that 18;years ago, but because you didn’t like the outcome you want another one? ”
I think all of us deserve better than what we got, so yes.
“We have an agreed settlement.”
I disagree.
“The GAA does not need to concern itself about unionism, it will eventually die out.”
Sorry to here that; I always thought it a skilful sport, especially Hurling.
Very good peter. 🙂
Quick question(with answer)……In 1998,two games from the end of season,Cliftonville 4 points clear of linfield play glens at home.Reds kick off at 14-00 and linfield 15-00.Why?Sectarianism within the ifa.
“Quick question(with answer)……In 1998,two games from the end of season,Cliftonville 4 points clear of linfield play glens at home.Reds kick off at 14-00 and linfield 15-00.Why?Sectarianism within the ifa.”
Again, nothing to do with the IFA.
ifa made decision.Not the clubs.
“ifa made decision.Not the clubs”
Why would the IFA make a decision about the timing of an Irish League match?
No, I reject that, MT – sorry. “Planter” may not be a complimentary tag but it’s not abusive. Or racist. It refers to an event in history, the plantation of Ulster.
So if Planter is to be accepted in this blog then surely we can start using terms like woodkerne and barbarous irish natives?
You can try, Robert.
Double standards well that would be a new thing on this blog
I think it’s a word that makes some unionists uneasy because it refers to a huge injustice several centuries back.
What injustice I would say that we civilised a barbarous land created towns and industries whilst the barbarous woodkerne and their ilk were rightfully relegated to the bogs and the bad lands such is the righteous judgement handed out to the defeated. It must have caused great annoyance to your fore fathers Jude watching on as he planters made a success of the land hoping beyond hope that they would be driven off still respect must be shown to the woodkerne they have waited over 400 years for it to happen….
At least you are an honest unionist Robert. I will give you that
Your lucky if i had my way Jessica you would still be in Connaught
Why Connaught Robert and what do you mean still?
As an Irish republican I considerate most inappropriate to designate any modern Irish person a planter.It is a 17th century term. Was Wolfe Tone a planter? Or Henry Joy? Or Alice Milligan? (I may very welll be the descendant of a planter myself.) Let’s talk about the here, now and to come.
“As an Irish republican I considerate most inappropriate to designate any modern Irish person a planter.It is a 17th century term. Was Wolfe Tone a planter? Or Henry Joy? Or Alice Milligan? (I may very welll be the descendant of a planter myself.) Let’s talk about the here, now and to come.”
Well said. To condemn someone because of his or her perceived ancestry and ethnicity is racist.
Well said Brian.
The word planter is batted about my some nationalists/republicans on this blog simply as a insult.
They seem to want to suggest that me and any other Unionist somehow don’t belong here and are alien to this land.
Doesn’t cut any ice with me though, I was born, reared and will probably die here. My family has been here as long as anyone can remember and I’ve no idea when we first arrived from the lowlands of Scotland.
This little corner of Ireland is as much mine as anyone else who was born here. No ones going to make me feel a stranger in my own land.
Today’s match Linfield v Rangers.
https://mobile.twitter.com/snoop_RFC/status/772047375946973184/video/1