So. The GAA club Oisin Glenariffe are to get their £180,000 of council funding after all. It was a tight vote – 19 to 18 – but like Glasgow Celtic stumbling into the European Champions’ League, the most important thing was that the council voted as it did and the matter was concluded in a positive way.
The DUP were and are opposed to funding, because, they argue, having on the club gates the names of two IRA men killed in the 1920s would provide a chill factor and make it difficult for unionists to use the hall on a cross-community basis. The DUP remains opposed to the decision, arguing that it would ‘re-traumatize’ victims of IRA violence as or if they passed through the gates.
Which, if true, means that unionists are more sensitive souls than nationalists/republicans. Every day dozens of nationalists/republicans make the trek to Stormont Parliament Buildings, passing as they do so the strongly assertive statue of Edward Carson. This is the man who, just ten years before the killing of the two IRA men, was first to sign the Ulster Covenant, vowing to use all means necessary (aka physical force) to resist Home Rule. If nationalists/republicans visit Belfast City Hall they will be confronted by the seated statue of Queen Victoria, known to many nationalists/republicans as the Famine Queen. The myth that she donated just £5 to the relief of the starving Irish is just that – a myth. In fact she gave £2,000 – although at the time she did receive £385,000 a year from the British government, owned vast tracts of land and had a private fortune of around £5 million. Did someone mention chill factor?
And you could go on – the King’s Hall, the Queen’s Bridge, Royal Avenue, Prince Andrew Way. And of course the issue was discussed yesterday in the BBC (that’s the British Broadcasting Corporation) building in Bedford Street. And on the radio station, which as far as I know does not aim to cover Donegal, Monaghan or Cavan, known as Radio Ulster.
I’d guess that I’m not the only nationalist/republican who is aware of the strong grip, in terminology and symbolism, that unionism has on Belfast. But we accept that others see the world and Ireland in different terms from ourselves. Martin McGuinness doesn’t let Carson’s statue block his way from entering Stormont, and nationalists/republicans are more amused than annoyed by the heavy seated figure in front of City Hall.
Likewise the Oisin Glenariffe gates. Charlie McAllister and Pat McVeigh were two IRA men who, like many others, were killed by the British forces during what some call the War of Independence and others the Tan War. Unionists of course saw such men as rebels and terrorists, nationalists/republicans saw them as heroes who died fighting for their country’s independence. Until we learn to accept that history here is viewed in different ways and that people are entitled to show respect for men and women others might see as enemies, we’re really going nowhere, bricked-in by our past.
Meantime, to those UUP councillors who had the courage to vote in favour of retention of the club’s gates I say: well done. We need more like you.
“Meantime, to those UUP councillors who had the courage to vote in favour of retention of the club’s gates I say: well done. We need more like you.”
Same here.
Perhaps unionism is turning a corner and reconciliation over demonisation is the way forward.
Who was it wrote, and in what magazine in 1934 that Carson was the leader of the first Fascist
movement in Europe? Did anyone, at the time dispute the assertion?
What daily newspaper, published in Dublin, regretted, on Carson’s death, that he had been born 40 years too early, because he might have been a “Mussolini, or even a Hitler”??
Mighta been?
Seems to me he WAS a Contender!
Well said Jude.
Thank you, moser…
Now that the world is about tp be re-made completely and absolutely after Brexit… and there’ll be a brand new start and a brand new day which may or may not turn out to be either a success or a disaster…..It’ll be a radical change either way…. Maybe it’s time to think in terms of an Irish “Ground Zero” .All references to the past will be consigned to the dustbin, starting …say in the year 2030, for argument’s sake. From that time on instead of streets , parks and buildings being named after dead people of every stripe , everything will get a brand new number instead.Instead of Gerry Adams Avenue or Victoria Street we’ll have” Avenue Number 27″ or “Park 43”. Then and only then , the delicate sensitivities of the various Norneverlanders will be salved and there’ll be nothing left to cry about.
That’s how a lot of streets are named in N America, Paddy – Fifth Avenue and all that…
Yep , Jude that why I thought it might take all the nonsense out of the equation. Everybody loses and everybody wins as well.You can’t start a row about a number , eh?
Dont know about that Paddy 1690 has been known to cause a stir 🙂
All the Unionist named streets and so on were named during the period of Unionist domination without consideration for how the Nationalist community might feel.
These gates are similarly named for one part of our community.
‘If it was good enough for themmuns’ is a poor argument.
Let’s not pretend that there is any attempt at cross community outreach here by the GAA.
On the other hand if this is the continuation of war by other means,it is preferable to what we had before.
Maybe one day we will find some admirable figures in our history who were not involved in violence. There must be one or two surely?
If everything was cross community gio, the orange order would not exist.
jessica
I agree.
The GAA is what it is, that is fine.
But it is clearly not serious about any outreach to Unionists if it is putting the names of IRA men on its gates.
So that is ok, but no need to try and feed people shit and tell them it is sugar.
Same goes for the OO, the IFA etc, to save you the bother of a long whataboutery post!
Whether you or anyone else likes it or not, there are going to be more and more commemorations of IRA volunteers.
Ireland will never be a unionist country.
You can either fit in or just don’t. Eventually no one will care. Outreach has limitations.
jessica
An honest answer.
No need to expect any outreach from either side.
Victory before peace!
Honest and factual gio.
I don’t see it as and attack or seeking a victory, nor do I consider it unreasonable to be allowed to honour our dead just as the british army and unionism does for its volunteers.
I do consider the attempts at demonization of republicans as an attack and an attempt to subdue republicanism
I just don’t see it ever happening and if anything it suggest to be that unionism is the problem that Ireland needs to be rid off
Think you’ve been listening to the DUP to much Jessica.
You’re beginning to sound like them.
Well, there is some who would say if you cant beat em join em
if you don’t want to make peace then lets just fight it out and get it over with
The peace has already been made Jessica.
Quite frankly neither the Union or Ireland is worth another single drop of blood.
The peace process was started, it will only be concluded when the people of this island are given a democratic voice to decide our own destiny.
Ireland is worth it to me Scott.
“Let’s not pretend that there is any attempt at cross community outreach here by the GAA”
I think your confusing the GAA with the Orange Order, Gio…..
Ryan
Not confusing. Conflating possibly.
Are you trying to argue that this is a good example of GAA cross community policy?
seen gates there this morning on the west circular rd in w/belfast.( paisley park )written across the top and not a word about it and it wasnt a hundred years ago he was here.
whatever will they say when the time comes for proper change.
Ah, the late “Prince” (died April this year)…the tiny and perverse musical imp’s old recording label, billy….”Paisley Park Records”…
paddy
Yes it is as likely that Prince named his mansion after Big Ian as it is that the Paisley Park on the West Circular Rd was named after him.
Perhaps ‘Raspberry Beret’ was in fact about Peter’s brief foray into military manoeuvres.
Gio, that post made me laugh.
moser
Thanks
It is genuinely satisfying to give someone a laugh!
Yes …that’s what we’re really here to do gio…tear the arse out of absurdity!
One has to wonder if these same Unionists get the same chill factor if they travel to Washington DC.
“One has to wonder if these same Unionists get the same chill factor if they travel to Washington DC.”
Unlikely, Ulster Presbyterians were a large part of Washington’s army.
“One Hessian officer said, “Call this war by whatever name you may, only call it not an American rebellion; it is nothing more or less than a Scotch Irish Presbyterian rebellion.” “
The Ulster Scotch tradition runs deep in the east coast of America.
George Washington said..
“If I’m defeated elsewhere, I will make my last stand in the hills of my native Virginia with my Ulster-Scotch brethren”
“Forget Windsor Park, what about as Jude says, the statue of Carson who formed the UVF who killed around the same time. If the names of IRA men from that era are not acceptable, how can that status remain in Stormont? Surely it should be removed.”
Why are you drawing false equivalences?
“Why are you drawing false equivalences”
It isn’t a false equivalence, why should there by a statue of a UVF man in front of Stormont?
“It isn’t a false equivalence,”
Yes it is.
“why should there by a statue of a UVF man in front of Stormont?”
Carson wasn’t a UVF man. But the statue is there because he was the leader of unionism at the time NI was established.
Carson was the first UVF man.
They are his creation.
The statue should be pulled down just like saddams
The UVF was formed in 1966 to combat what it saw as a rise in Irish nationalism centred on the 50th anniversary of the 1916 Easter Rising. It adopted the name and symbols of the original UVF, the movement founded in 1912 by Sir Edward Carson to fight against Home Rule.22 Jun 2011
Who are the UVF? – BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11313364
“The UVF was formed in 1966 to combat what it saw as a rise in Irish nationalism centred on the 50th anniversary of the 1916 Easter Rising. It adopted the name and symbols of the original UVF, the movement founded in 1912 by Sir Edward Carson to fight against Home Rule.”
Yes I know.
What next. The Pope is Catholic?
No. Just that you said Carson wasn’t top dog of the UVF. Thought I’d return the correction compliment
“No. Just that you said Carson wasn’t top dog of the UVF. Thought I’d return the correction compliment”
You’ve lost me. What has a quotation about the 1966 UVF got to do with anything I or anyone else said about Carson? He died in 1935.
“You’ve lost me. What has a quotation about the 1966 UVF got to do with anything I or anyone else said about Carson? He died in 1935.”
“terrorism”
the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
The original UVF was created by Carson to threaten violence and use intimidation to pursue political aims.
Carson by your logic was a terrorist yet he has a statue outside Stormont.
This is not acceptable.
It is blatant glorification of ulster unionist terrorism.
““terrorism”
the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. The original UVF was created by Carson to threaten violence and use intimidation to pursue political aims. Carson by your logic was a terrorist yet he has a statue outside Stormont.
This is not acceptable. It is blatant glorification of ulster unionist terrorism.”
That doesn’t answer the question about why Jude quoted an explanation of the 1966 UVF in a discussion about Carson.
But to address your point I have never articulated any logic by which someone who never engaged in terrorism could be described as a terrorist.
So MT, are you accepting that Carson was a terrorist leader since he created the original UVF who were by definition a terrorist organisation and that therefore the statue of Carson is glorification of ulster unionist terrorism?
The 1966 UVF were also created by the UUP and had close links with them through Billy Spence. They maintained similar ethos to the original UVF though were more bloodthirsty and started the killing of innocent civilians which led to the conflict.
I guess the reason is you have claimed the UVF to be legitimate and it suggests despite your vile attitude to republicans, you are therefore by your own definition a supporter of UVF terrorism at one stage or another. Whether it is 1912, 1966 or 2016 it really doesn’t matter.
“So MT, are you accepting that Carson was a terrorist leader since he created the original UVF who were by definition a terrorist organisation and that therefore the statue of Carson is glorification of ulster unionist terrorism?”
Why would I “accept” that someone who was neither involved in nor supported terrorism was a “terrorist leader”? What a silly.question.
“The 1966 UVF were also created by the UUP and had close links with them through Billy Spence.”
No it wasn’t.
“They maintained similar ethos to the original UVF though were more bloodthirsty and started the killing of innocent civilians which led to the conflict.”
No they didn’t.
“I guess the reason is you have claimed the UVF to be legitimate and it suggests despite your vile attitude to republicans, you are therefore by your own definition a supporter of UVF terrorism at one stage or another. Whether it is 1912, 1966 or 2016 it really doesn’t matter.”
This is an example of the personal abuse against me that Jude lets pass, yet threatens to censor general comments that I have made.
“One has to wonder if these same Unionists get the same chill factor if they travel to Washington DC”
Eh?
The worrying though isn’t that the DUP objected, that is what they do. It is the nationalist reaction which is the main issue. It is becoming more and more common to accept Unionism and Unionist symbolism as the status quo. Sure what the club (or a majority of them anyway) have done is shameful in the extreme, but it also reflects wider society.
If anyone with the knowledge etc. wants to set up one of those crowd funding sites to raise the 18,000 to give them so they don’t have to take the DUP soup, I will happily contribute….
I got that wrong and thanks to a reader, have now revised- it’s £180,000, not £18,000
Me too!
Until we learn to accept that history here is viewed in different ways and that people are entitled to show respect for men and women others might see as enemies, we’re really going nowhere, bricked-in by our past.
Which is all very well but do you practice what you preach?
“Until we learn to accept that history here is viewed in different ways and that people are entitled to show respect for men and women others might see as enemies, we’re really going nowhere, bricked-in by our past.”
On the contrary, until we stop honouring anti-democratic men of violence, we run the risk of encouraging such men of violence today.
Like Craig who got a whole area named after him? McAllister and McVeigh were murdered asserting the democratic assertion of the people, the terrorists were rewarded by getting a region of Ireland handed to them for misgovernment.
“Like Craig who got a whole area named after him?”
No.
“McAllister and McVeigh were murdered asserting the democratic assertion of the people, the terrorists were rewarded by getting a region of Ireland handed to them for misgovernment.”
On the contrary, they were seeking to subvert the democratic assertion of the people, even after a truce had been agreed.
To the victor the spoils!
It was probably the right decision to remove the gates, however Unionists need to understand that the War of Independence was a legitimate war. I can understand why they would have a problem with the Raymond McCreesh playpark.
And the difference between Charlie McAllister Pat McVeigh and Ray McCreesh is……?
There is no difference Paul, the reason they have a problem with the Raymond McCreesh playpark is the exact same as the problem they have with the names on the gate.
At least they didn’t back down over the play park. That is what we need to see more off.
It will come as no surprise if I admit to not having the first clue who Charlie McAllister and Pat McVeigh were, never mind the fact that their names appeared on the gates of a GAA club.
As for the DUP, well, they’re the DUP, and having seen of Mr. Trimble in the own version of the Ides of March, commonly known as the The Ides of St. Andrew’s, and having gone into government with Sinn Fein, they have to make a fife and drum of their loyalty in some way or other.
(Cynical? Moi?)
In the same way, and in accepting all island harmonisation in Health, Tourism and the Economy, the DUP are happy to take the train to Dublin Connelly, walk to the site of Nelson’s Pillar – oops, The Spire, peruse the retail outlets on Sackville – oops, O’Connell Street, cross O’Connell Bridge, and catch the train again at Dublin Pearse.
I wonder if that a long enough list of names for them.
Having said all that, though, the fact that this memorial relates to events beyond living memory makes things a lot easier.
I worked for a firm in the late 70’s ,early 80’s whose delivery sheets included a drop at the UVF hospital. A publically funded health facility was named in honour of the UVF!
“It was probably the right decision to remove the gates, however Unionists need to understand that the War of Independence was a legitimate war. I can understand why they would have a problem with the Raymond McCreesh playpark.”
But the gates don’t memorialise the war of independence (which I agree was probably just). They honour men who continued to engage in violence after the truce. Indeed they were on a murder mission when they were killed.
No – they were on their way home from defending their area from an incursion from terrorists.
“No – they were on their way home from defending their area from an incursion from terrorists.”
They were ‘on active service’.
“Charlie McAllister & Paddy McVeigh, from Glenariffe, Co. Antrim were part of one such IRA unit in the Glens and were in preparation for an attack on a B-Specials patrol which would regularly pass through the area. Their orders were to carry out reconnaissance on the Glen Road and report on patrol movements in readiness for an ambush on their return journey.”
Let us not forget that on the rare occasion you may feel the need to visit Lisburn you are faced with a massive statue celebrating that official loyalist paramilitary organisation the UDR.
The UDA wasn’t a paramilitary organisation. It was a regiment of the Army.
“The UDA wasn’t a paramilitary organisation. It was a regiment of the Army.”
You are right MT, every statue or memorial glorifying the British army should be removed out of Ireland, not just UVF and UDA statues.
Nationalist is being too soft as usual, all of these insulting artefacts need to go.
“The UDA wasn’t a paramilitary organisation. It was a regiment of the Army.”
Slip of the tongue there, MT.
Oops. Well spotted.
I think it unlikely that any Protestant/Unionist victims of I.R.A. terrorism are/were likely to be re-traumatised by passing through these gates for the simple reason that Glenariffe is virtually an 100% Catholic/Nationalist district, so very few, if any, members of the former community are likely to be passing through, or near, the gates. You can have another debate re whether it is a good thing for sporting clubs, grounds, etc to be named after paramilitary or political figures, particularly in an era where these clubs are granted money from all taxpayers. But if it is a problem, it would appear to be one which is virtually confined to the G.A.A.. Windsor Park is a complete red herring as that ground was named years before the British royal family adopted the name, otherwise it would have been called Saxe-Coburg-Gothe Park.
Forget Windsor Park, what about as Jude says, the statue of Carson who formed the UVF who killed around the same time.
If the names of IRA men from that era are not acceptable, how can that status remain in Stormont? Surely it should be removed.
Forget Windsor Park, what about as Jude says, “the statue of Carson who formed the UVF who killed around the same time. If the names of IRA men from that era are not acceptable, how can that status remain in Stormont? Surely it should be removed.”
Carson’s UVF was a legitimate force and didn’t kill anyone.
“Carson’s UVF was a legitimate force and didn’t kill anyone”
Really MT? it was legitimate to threaten treason against the British Crown?….Yes, I’m sure all those guns Carson imported was just for fancy dress….
“Really MT?”
Yes.
“it was legitimate to threaten treason against the British Crown?”
Yes.
“….Yes, I’m sure all those guns Carson imported was just for fancy dress….”
Eh?
Then why was the Larne gun running to arm the UVF considered smuggling?
“Then why was the Larne gun running to arm the UVF considered smuggling?”
Eh? Because it was smuggling, I guess. Strange question.
If the UVF were legal like you say, was it legal to be smuggling weapons?
“If the UVF were legal like you say, was it legal to be smuggling weapons?”
Of course not. There was ban on arms importation. Your ignorance is shocking.
“Of course not. There was ban on arms importation. Your ignorance is shocking.”
They were hardly legitimate then, even by your warped sense of reasoning.
But even if you still believe they were, save it. I don’t really care what you have to say any more MT.
We are simply as incompatible as it is possible for human beings to be.
“They were hardly legitimate then, even by your warped sense of reasoning.”
That may be your reasoning, which is fair enough, but by the same reason neither were the Irish Volunteers or the IRA legitimate.
“But even if you still believe they were, save it. I don’t really care what you have to say any more MT.
We are simply as incompatible as it is possible for human beings to be.”
I’m glad you think so. I’m proud to be incompatible with a pro-terror cultural zealot.
Interesting use of language here by Carson at Finaghy on 12th July 1920. He told his audience, “we in Ulster will tolerate no SF … We tell you this – that if, having offered you help, you are yourselves unable to protect us from the machinations of Sinn Fein, and you won’t take our help, well then, we will tell you that we will take the matter into our own hands. We will reorganise.” Carson went on further and referred to Ulster as “the real battlefield of Ireland.”
Was this the “reorganisation” of the UVF who previously brought guns into Ireland, “illegally” acquired by Fred Crawford, with the full assistance of Carson in 1914, who were involved in widespread sectarian violence, expelling Catholics from employment, attacking, injuring and murdering Catholics in East and West Belfast during the Belfast Troubles of 1920-22?
According to Alan Parkinson, the revitalisation of UVF was “the Spark” that caused these troubles – a legitimate force acting in an illegitimate manner, perhaps? Interestingly the same UVF members recruited into the Ulster Special Constabulary to continue their indiscriminate and barbaric activities against Catholics … You were saying, MT?
“… You were saying, MT?”
I was referring to the UVF 1913-14. I don’t consider the revived UVF of 1920 to be legitimate or worthy of commemoration.
“If the names of IRA men from that era are not acceptable, how can that status remain in Stormont? Surely it should be removed”
I seem to remember Mike Nesbitt saying something about Carsons statue Jessica. He didn’t say it should be removed but he said he would support a statue of a Nationalist figure at Stormont.
Personally I would rather Queen Vicky’s statue outside Belfast City Hall was removed and replaced with something that better reflects the City’s population. Carsons Statue is out of the way but Vicky’s statue is right in the middle of Belfast City Centre.
He probably saw this coming.
I would rather it was taken down altogether. It is clearly giving the wrong message to unionism who still think they rule the roost and don’t have to compromise on anything.
Just like the statue of saddam coming down, perhaps the visual image of carson coming down will be the message unionism needs to start taking reconciliation seriously.
I also agree about queen victoria. Unionism has no tolerance of our history, our heroes, our culture, why should we tolerate this symbol of british misrule in Ireland contaminating our city?
We should not. Ireland does not belong to Britain and never will.
The DUP barbarians are at the gates!
I think a closer comparison would be the home of ‘Ulster’ rugby at Ravenhill, which apparently has a British army war memorial at its entrance, and I don’t think there has ever been a question that this British artifice should disqualify Ravenhill from any cross-community funds!
So if memorials to British soldiers are acceptable, then the same should apply to Irish soldiers.
Wish I’d known that before going on Talkback t’other day.
“The DUP barbarians are at the gates!
I think a closer comparison would be the home of ‘Ulster’ rugby at Ravenhill, which apparently has a British army war memorial at its entrance, and I don’t think there has ever been a question that this British artifice should disqualify Ravenhill from any cross-community funds!
So if memorials to British soldiers are acceptable, then the same should apply to Irish soldiers.”
Stop trying to equate a war memorial with an IRA memorial.
One man’s soldier is another man’s terrorist!
British soldiers kill, but think they are doing their duty.
IRA used to kill, but thought they were doing their duty.
Your viewpoint is as reasonable as mine.
“Stop trying to equate a war memorial with an IRA memorial”
I agree with you on this one MT, you cant equate the two. The British Army fought for Imperialism, killing millions of innocent people in the process. The IRA fought for the Freedom of the Irish Nation and were Heroes.
“I agree with you on this one MT, you cant equate the two. The British Army fought for Imperialism, killing millions of innocent people in the process.”
I’ll ask again for your evidence that the British Army “killed millions of innocent people”.
One man’s soldier is another man’s terrorist!
British soldiers kill, but think they are doing their duty.
IRA used to kill, but thought they were doing their duty.
Your viewpoint is as reasonable as mine is.
“One man’s soldier is another man’s terrorist!”
I prefer to be objective.
“British soldiers kill, but think they are doing their duty. IRA used to kill, but thought they were doing their duty.”
But the IRA had no right to exist and no legitimate duty to perform.
“Your viewpoint is as reasonable as mine is.”
Clearly it is much more reasonable than yours as you appear to be trying to legitimise unjust violence and murder.
“Stop trying to equate a war memorial with an IRA memorial.”
An IRA memorial is a war memorial and it has a more rightful place in Ireland than any British war memorial
“An IRA memorial is a war memorial and it has a more rightful place in Ireland than any British war memorial.”
The gates of the GAA club in Glenariffe aren’t a war memorial and don’t have a more rightful place I’m Ireland than British war memorials.
British war memorials have no rightful place in Ireland and in time will all be removed.
“British war memorials have no rightful place in Ireland and in time will all be removed.”
You call them “British war memorials”, but of course they are also Irish war memorials. And of course they do have a rightful place and won’t be removed.
Your racism and sectarian bigotry is appalling, now revealing itself in a desire for a Taliban-style cultural purge.
Shame on you.
Whatever you think MT
“Whatever you think MT”
It’s what you think that is concerning. Thank goodness extremists like yourself are only a small minority.
I can see why it concerns you.
It is what unionism deserves and while you remain so obtuse and intransigent, I sincerely hope is what it will get
“British war memorials have no rightful place in Ireland and in time will all be removed.”
Honestly Jessica, one minute you’re on here hysterical with frustration at there not being a united Ireland and then the next you’re advocating policies which would prolong partition.
If you want to bake a cake you gather the correct ingredients and follow the steps.
Otherwise, no cake.
If you want to lose weight you follow a sensible regime of less junk and more exercise.
If you want a united Ireland then you do what is necessary and pragmatic. Removing all army memorials from the island is to reunification what battered sausages and éclairs are to a diet.
Honestly, you’re amongst the most disrespectful commentators that I’ve ever come across and you quite frankly have done more to make the idea of a united Ireland repellent to me than most.
It’s baffling.
A united Ireland is a good idea but you’re so full of revenge and hatred that I honestly now fear what would happen people like myself who could actually be sold a pragmatic vision of reunification.
You mentioned last week that you’d allow Orangemen to have a Boyne festival, what’s the chances that it would be mined or flanked by machine guns so that you can finally balance your revenge account?
In all the times that I’ve drank and dallied in West Belfast and Derry I’ve never come across such extremism, I can only hope that you’re an outlier.
If making a stand against what is clearly wrong, prolongs partition, then so be it.
Irish unity is less important than the total removal of British rule from Ireland.
If you were being honest, you would be admitting that the idea of an Ireland independent from Britain, that is strong and able to stand on our own two feet, to choose whether or not to support our neighbours across the water on international issues and that is a fully sovereign state is what you find repellent.
And I never once claimed anyone should be allowed to have a Boyne festival. You are attempting to make it sound like a united Ireland would somehow be authoritarian towards protestants. Another common scare tactic used among so called moderate unionists, as I say, these are the worst kind. The kind that started the conflict in the first place though suffered the least.
To clarify, I would be fully supportive of a Boyne festival, it was an honest suggestion to see how people would feel about it. To attempt to start a civil conversation of what we would like a united Ireland to look like.
It is that honesty about what a united Ireland would truly look like, that protestants would have absolutely nothing to fear from it, that is what scares people like you the most.
You need republicans to be mirror images of willie frazer.
You need to be able to claim I am full of revenge and hatred, you need to turn honest and sincere suggestions such as the Boyne festival which had very little positive comment from unionist readers and now you have made it more to your liking by adding the imaginary fear factor suggesting you would be flanked by machine guns.
I know your type well AG, and I would prefer to share this land with an honest loyalist flegger any day of the week.
“If you were being honest, you would be admitting that the idea of an Ireland independent from Britain, that is strong and able to stand on our own two feet, to choose whether or not to support our neighbours across the water on international issues ”
I have stated repeatedly that I think an independent Ireland, a united Ireland would do very well.
I even wrote a step by step plan for united Ireland, the caveat being that it’s free from nationalist cater-walling.
“And I never once claimed anyone should be allowed to have a Boyne festival. ”
Jessica, you wrote this, last week:
“I am going to start with 12th of July.
I imagine a weeklong festival at an the Boyne site each year, where farmers can bring cattle much like the Balmoral show. There would be elements of the festival atmosphere demonstrated in Derry, with Ulster Scots dancing and traditional celebrations. Live music each night to suit young and old. A pipe band competition and other such events. It would culminate on the 11th night with the largest bonfire in Ireland followed by a fireworks display when it is lit.
This would be a family affair with no drink. The event would start with an Orange march from a protestant church after a service to the site where they would officially open and kick start the event.”
http://www.judecollins.com/2016/08/a-vision-of-a-new-ireland-by-jessica-mcgrann/
“It is that honesty about what a united Ireland would truly look like, that protestants would have absolutely nothing to fear from it, that is what scares people like you the most.”
Protestants have an unwholesome love affair with their army dead, you said you’d remove all memorials from the land. THAT is scary.
“You need republicans to be mirror images of willie frazer.”
No, I need republicans to be like Wolfe Tone or someone rational. (Not that he was necessarily rational, but I like the United Irishmen all the same).
“I know your type well AG, and I would prefer to share this land with an honest loyalist flegger any day of the week.”
Yes you would, because yer average flegger is much easier to outwit and can’t call you out on your hypocrisies like I can.
If you mean respect for their fallen comrades, it is not only a protestant thing but an Irish thing and possibly even a human thing.
My own preference would be for tolerance and mutual respect where the dead of all wars can be respected by the communities they came from and respected by all including the naming of the Raymond McCreesh playpark.
While the leadership elected to represent unionism choose to attack and demonise the republican fallen, as we see where the even the names on gates of 2 local men who died in a war of independence 100 years ago are objected to, simply because they were fighting the British, then that mutual respect does not exist and you will reap what you sow.
What I said was in that case I would remove all British war memorials and make the most Irish part of Ireland. That is one alternative to Irish unity.
“because yer average flegger is much easier to outwit and can’t call you out on your hypocrisies like I can.”
This is exactly why you are the most dangerous type of unionist there is AG.
You think you are calling me out on hypocrisies, but I choose to speak my mind honestly and apologise when I get it wrong which I do from time to time, as do we all, even MT the all knowing one.
It is that same brutal honesty that I can respect in return, not weasel words from those who see it as a battle of wits and are prepared to disrespect their own to suit their own convoluted agenda usually revolved around their own ego. That I have no respect for whatsoever.
As they say, long runs the fox AG.
Here we go again with the false equivalence so often trotted out to defend IRA glorification.
Prince Andrew Way or Queen Victoria’s statue are not equivalent to IRA memorials.
Maybe you don’t wanna accept britain fought a war with the Irish people for hundreds of years but then again you’re a typical unionist in denial.
“Maybe you don’t wanna accept britain fought a war with the Irish people for hundreds of years but then again you’re a typical unionist in denial.”
Eh? A war for hundreds of years?
And I’m not in denial. Maybe you are.
It’s to do with the War of Independence not ‘The Troubles’.
“It’s to do with the War of Independence not ‘The Troubles’.”
It’s not. The men were killed “on active service” *after* the war of independence had ended.
Tell that to the queen of England who has no problem with the equivalence when she paid honour to the IRA in Dublin.
If only unionism could follow her example.
I have a lot of respect for her after that. Something I never thought I would ever say.
MT, Victoria presided over the loss of millions of Irish people through genocide and ethnic cleansing.
“MT, Victoria presided over the loss of millions of Irish people through genocide and ethnic cleansing.”
You’re exaggerating, but regardless of that, so what? The current Queen presided over the Hillsborough tragedy. By your logic that means she’s to blame for the 96 deaths.
You’re exaggerating, but regardless of that, so what? The current Queen presided over the Hillsborough tragedy. By your logic that means she’s to blame for the 96 deaths.
Eh, no it doesn’t.
If the current queen could have put her hand in her purse and prevented the deaths of those at Hillsborough, I believe she would but there was nothing she could have done after the match started.
Queen Vic did have the option to send food over in ships but deliberately and consciously chose not to as she didn’t give a damn and instead sent a token gesture and never cast another thought about it.
This statue needs to be removed from Belfast and stuck in Stormont museum as a show piece and nothing more.
“Eh, no it doesn’t.”
Why do you think it doesn’t?
“MT, Victoria presided over the loss of millions of Irish people through genocide and ethnic cleansing.”
If you read only Tim Pat Coogan, then possibly.
If you read professional pieces by porifessional, non-biased historians then you’d know that this is a load of cobblers.
The thought that the British would seek to depopulate their military recruiting ground and bankrupt 30 000 estates is quite frankly mind-boggling.
You DO read about the number of ‘British’ estates that went under as a consequence of the famine as opposed to just concentrating on one side of the story for the sake of balance, don’t you?
“If you read professional pieces by porifessional, non-biased historians then you’d know that this is a load of cobblers.”
So England taking land and property off the Irish people, ravaging our national resources, leaving our people second class citizens in our own land had no bearing on the extend of the human cost of the potato blight in Ireland? The slavery of leading to that period, the selfish rule which allowed so many starve in a country which had access to food if its people were not deliberately kept in poverty?
Your attempts to excuse the criminal British response to so many peoples fate is simply disgusting AG.
Just how low would you go to defend Britain’s deplorable past?
Given that that’s not what I said then the answer is clearly no.
But asking a different question and summary to what I implied is just one of your debating tactics, so, I shouldn’t be surprised.
Not so long ago since The Unionist Times threw a wobbly, Esteemed Blogmeister, about a sporting topic of this texture.
Brian O’Connor, a true son of De Re-bel County and chief correspondent of the Sport of Kings for the organ of record, was the wobbly thrower on that occasion. As he is indeed is most such occasions.
Took grave issue so he did with the Dungiven Hurling Club in County Londonderry for having the temerity to accord naming rights to one Kevin Lynch, whom he described with all the moral authority of a miffed Queen Mum as a ‘terrorist’.
With rolled brolly in hand and trilby askew the scribe on equine affairs momentarily lost his equanimity as he set about raining blows of vexed disapproval from the Royal Box.
Something about hurling rather than hurdling that galls this lapsed Gael.
Could be because the word ‘steeplechase’ is derived from the first such horse race to be run, between the steeples of the churches in the towns of Buttevant and Doneraile in 1752. No doubt said churches were hardly of the RC persuasion, being located on the highest available moral ground (subject to planning permission) in each of those North Cork parishes.
German born George 11 was perched on the throne of England at that time. Perhaps, B. O Connor has a hankering after a return to those happy days which gave birth to ‘National’ Hunting rather than after the unhappy nights when his namesake Brian was being handicapped by death on the Meadow of the Bulls in 1014?
As that legendary horse whisperer, R. Rogers, Esquire, could attest, a horse is honest and faithful right up to the end. Nevertheless, an unknown number of these wonderful one, two, three, four legged friends were slaughtered during a domestic squabble which had naught to do with them, and which has gone down in hysteria as The Great Donkey Derby, 14-18.
All in the name of the English born George V, descendant of the German-born George 11.
Some give the figure as being comparable to the number of vinyl records shifted by R. Rogers, Esquire, i.e., in the millions.
To assume that Brian O’Connor, moral authoritarian, might have much therefore to muse upon in his amusing Monday column is to verge on the presumptive. Not while the latest kerfuffle involving a ghastly GAA club is there to, erm, nag about.
In a spirit of good will hunting therefore The Perkin would like to assist the Monday Club columnist in his next outpouring of outrage; to give, as it were, the gee-gee man a gee up.
For starters, it was pre-ordained than any club in the (green) Glens of Antrim was guaranteed to cause a chill factor. Said glens having been first shaped in the, erm, Ice Age.
MONDAY CLUB SNUB
Scarce any need to consult one’s horoscope
To divine which trope from Glenariffe’s slope
Savin’ yer honour
Sir Brian O’Connor
But Oisin’s couldn’t kick snow offa a rope.
“And you could go on – the King’s Hall, the Queen’s Bridge, Royal Avenue, Prince Andrew Way. And of course the issue was discussed yesterday in the BBC (that’s the British Broadcasting Corporation) building in Bedford Street. And on the radio station, which as far as I know does not aim to cover Donegal, Monaghan or Cavan, known as Radio Ulster.”
Let’s compare like for like:
1/ The vast, vast majority of Irish people in Belfast (Belfast being 95% Irish, if not more up until partition when fashions changed) were, like other places around the Empire seemingly happy enough with such street names.
The vast majority of Glenariff might have been happy enough with these two men BUT the IRA was a very specific and controversial group. The British Army has had perhaps hundreds of thousands of Irishmen of all religions in its ranks.
So I don’t see how you can compare.
The only way you can compare them is if you assume that all nationalists back then thought as modern day nationalists do, which they clearly didn’t (same with unionism, though you mightn’t see it at first).
2/ BBC – The BBC have a world service too. If they didn’t have a station in Belfast we’d be crying ‘discrimination’.
3/ Radio Ulster. Northumbria University. Strathclyde University. University of Middlesex. You get BBC Alba in Shetland, Shetland was never part of Alba and never spoke Gaelic.
Well, my great grandfather was one of those Irishmen who fought in the british army AG.
He did so because some fool told him that it was the right thing to do and it would result in home rule for Ireland.
He went to fight in the first world war and was killed in France.
My grandmother received medals.
When Britain did the dirt, I can tell you at least in my own family at that time, there was extreme animosity towards the british. My grandmother was ashamed and threw his medals in the bin, they were never seen again and my family never spoke about my grandfather again. It was a taboo subject for generations.
That is what British rule in Ireland has done for us.
Britain is not welcome in Ireland. They have ruined many many lives and there is nothing else for it, they must leave. There is no future with British rule in Ireland. It is simply not going to happen – ever.
I could not care less if there was no BBC station in Belfast. In fact I will be happy to see the back if them.
Once gain Jessica, you don’t address my points, you just air a harsh, bitter memory. What’s the point in doing so?
“Meantime, to those UUP councillors who had the courage to vote in favour of retention of the club’s gates I say: well done. We need more like you”
Indeed, that was a very positive move by those UUP councillors. I forget where it was but the UUP also voted in favour of a Sinn Fein Deputy Mayor (Not the Mayor but it’s a start) in a Unionist dominated council. Of course the DUP opposed this move and have since tried to use this as a stick to beat the UUP. You can be certain they will use this vote by the UUP to grant funding as another stick to beat them with. Expect it all to be cast up when Election time comes around again, which says a lot about DUP mentality. I just hope the UUP don’t lose votes over this because traditionally that is what happens when any Unionist political party tries to go moderate or tries to reciprocate Nationalist outreach.
As Jude rightly points out, there’s a massive amount in hypocrisy in all of this. Belfast, which is now a Republican majority city, is adorned with Unionist symbolism, such as Belfast City Hall, countless street names, bridges, etc. It really is unhealthy how much Unionist symbolism there is, its bordering on an obsession with “Britishness”. So it really is ridiculous for Unionists to complain about two gates which have the names of 2 IRA men who died almost 100 years ago. Republican Commentator Chris Donnelly tweeted a photo of a shared community centre in, I think, Antrim. At the Entrance was a British War Memorial….
Unionists such as our MT think by saying “There’s no equivalence” that that settles the matter. Lol of course such mediocre thinking is amusing and is expected from the likes of MT but it has zero impact. Unionists in the 1960’s came out with similar stupidity, like “We’re the majority, we decide” or “Its our country, we run it like we want, don’t like it? Then f**k off down South” in reference to the Civil Rights Protests. But that logic got them no where, the Unionist state collapsed in 1972, Catholics got their civil rights and many wrongs (not all) were set right. Now we have a power sharing Assembly. If Unionists in the 1960’s could see what “Ulster” is like in 2016 they would be stunned.
The best way forward is equality for both communities, which involves equality in symbolism/Flags. There’s no point hanging on to the politics of the past, even Sinn Fein realized and accepted that but the likes of the DUP still haven’t.
”
‘As Jude rightly points out, there’s a massive amount in hypocrisy in all of this. Belfast, which is now a Republican majority city, is adorned with Unionist symbolism, such as Belfast City Hall, countless street names, bridges, etc. It really is unhealthy how much Unionist symbolism there is, its bordering on an obsession with “Britishness”. So it really is ridiculous for Unionists to complain about two gates which have the names of 2 IRA men who died almost 100 years ago. Republican Commentator Chris Donnelly tweeted a photo of a shared community centre in, I think, Antrim. At the Entrance was a British War Memorial….”
My God Ryan we’ve been through this 100 times or so:
These street names and bridges and wot-not were named over a century ago in accordance with the fashion at the time.
It would have been very, very odd of a British industrial city NOT to have these names.
Since they were named we have seen the Home Rule issue, partition, The Troubles, world wars and a civil war down south.
Each of these events has left their own bitter taste which has brought us to where we are NOW.
NOW we are pushing ‘shared space’ and ‘sensitivity’ and ‘respect’ etc. So, with that logic then there is no more room for naming things after controversial figures but that is of very recently.
This argument in no way supports an post-colonial ‘rid all trace’ policy to names and institutions that we have inherited, we’re supposed to be a civilised society, not a place of foamy mouthed Bolsheviks intent on revenge and removing all trace of those who are no longer in vogue.
Royal Avenue is not ‘Rhodesia.
IF Royal Avenue, Kings hall etc were named as such in the past 10-20 years then you’d have a point, but they weren’t.
There are still Jacobite street names to be found all over Scotland, did they just toe the Hannoverian/Windsor line like you suggest? No.
Indeed, they still have an entire district named after Mary Queen of scots from her pre-battle declaration ‘Crossmyloof’. http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/lifestyle/13263103.Crossmyloof___what_s_in_a_name_/
To follow Irish nationalist logic, as soon as the area became non-Catholic it should automatically be renamed to something more acceptable.
This is nationalist ‘echo-chamberism’ at its very worst and does not stand up to analysis or scrutiny from anyone semi-impartial or an outside observer.
If new things are to be built then name them after neutral and acceptable figures, that’s fair enough.
To go about renaming things because the political tide has turned will start a culture of ‘revenge-naming’ and it will spiral out of control and set a petty precedent for future generations and there’s no reason for it ever to stop.
It’ll become yet another zero-sum game and we’ll waste all our time and energy on such pettiness rather than trying to fix things like the ruddy transport system (my bugbear of the month).
Well AG, if the place is like this to have been reflective of the majority community, is it not right that when the majority community is replaced, then the place needs to change to be more reflective of the new majority community.
Makes sense to me. I want the place to be more reflective of the type of Ireland I want to live in.
That needs to happen regardless of unification. In fact, I would say if unification doesn’t happen then the north will end up more steeped in irishness than the south.
We are certainly more proud of irishness in the north than they are.
“Well AG, if the place is like this to have been reflective of the majority community, is it not right that when the majority community is replaced, then the place needs to change to be more reflective of the new majority community.”
No.
Treating street names and place names like political furniture and changing/re-branding it to suit the political mood of the time is childish and will lead to MORE petty politics.
Dundee is now SNP territory.
To my knowledge there has been no defenestration of street names there even though your average Dundee-ite cares as much for the house of Windsor as you do.
But they’re not petty..
You’re just all about revenge, revenge dressed up as equality.
I sometimes wish nationalists were as bluntly honest as the DUP/TUV dunderheads, it would make for uglier living but at least we’d know where we stand better.
“We are certainly more proud of irishness in the north than they are.”
And because of your ‘pride’ in southern Irishness we have lost most of our unique northern styles of dancing, fiddling, Gaelic and hurling.
http://www.booksireland.org.uk/store/all-departments/5793-2
In the same way that some unionists want a ‘more British than British’ version of ‘Britishness’ some nationalists wish to see their own heritage and culture replaced by some type of ‘Paddywhackery’.
I do of course apportion a great deal of the blame to various unionists too, they can never see the consequences of their actions (that Marine in Larne being a great example).
The North should be a tapestry of Scottish, Ulster and Irish culture (with Anglo stitching) alas people like you and various Orange Order types wish to strip the tapestry of threads that displease them.
I feel that this is a cultural tragedy.
http://amgobsmacked.blogspot.hr/2014/04/ulster-scots-and-irish-nots.html
What are you saying, your opinion is more important than mine?
Whatever way things were or would have been had unionism not demanded partition, had nit discriminated the undemocratic rule it was given, had nit attempted to drive Catholics out and start a conflict between Ireland and Britain.
What ever way things might have been, they never will be now. Too much under the bridge,
The same with the people of the 1916 rising. They too saw too much brutishness in Ireland then and made a bold move in sacrificing themselves in rebellion, they restored at least for a generation, Irelands soul, are pride in our past, our patriotism which has survived centuries of colonial oppression.
Save your breath AG, it will never die. The conflict unionism started has served only to reignite the passions of independence and patriotism in Ireland, even if it is mainly in the north. Ireland is one country and going forward, I am more interested in reconciliation with southern Ireland than anything ulster scotch.
I don’t see it as revenge or retribution. Unionists are simply not my people, you are alien to me after generations of making it so, telling us we are not part of Ireland, that it is a foreign land. You will reap what you have sowed
Ok Jessica so far on this post alone you said you want the following
Removal of British war memorials.
Removal of street/place name with even a tinge of Britishness.
You have also called us Unionist alien and not your people.
Sounds to me like what you want is ethnic/cultural cleansing of the Ulster Scot people and the things they identify with.
And you wonder why Unionism has a siege mentality. It’s because of people like you.
So let me get this straight Scott.
Unionism which has actually attempted to impose ethnic cleansing, resulting in thousands of catholic families being burned out of their homes or having to feel to field hospitals, which actually murdered Catholics to deny them getting equality and civil rights which started the conflict in the first place and has yet to even acknowledge its part in such.
You as a unionist are accusing me of wanting ethnic cleansing because I want to remove British rule from Ireland.
Well, let me respond to that charge.
No matter how much reaching out to unionism or pandering to unionist intransigence we do, it will never be enough. Unionism does not even understand the concept of compromise, it is simply weakness and surrender. That is very much an alien concept to me, it is frustrating beyond belief. You are most certainly not my people in any way, you are a product of colonial misrule with an overinflated sense of ego and unwarranted self esteem as a result of decades of getting your own way on just about everything. Oh, I understand perfectly well why unionism has a siege, not an inch, never never never mentality. It is because it has been tolerated politically for too long.
Well, this may come as a shock to you, but the extended hand of friendship will not remain outstretched indefinitely. There is only so much rejection and insult we can tolerate before it becomes humiliating.
This is unfortunately the only language unionism understands.
I can preach all day that we should have an agreed Ireland, one resulting from debate and discussion between all interested parties, to find agreement in the spirit of friendship to compromise and do what is in the best interests of our people, especially those suffering from poverty and neglect and to build a new nation.
But no, Unionism is more interested in making excuses for its past behaviour and focussing more on pursuing an acceptable narrative of our past that will show justification for its behaviour in the 60s.
Lets instead respond in the same language of unionism, intransigence and intolerance. Let us remove such statues we find repulsive, let us change street names and most certainly remove the London out of Derry, a sure sign of unionist supremacy which only serves to encourage such intransigent behaviour.
In doing these things, it will demonstrate times have changed, that refusal to talk and find an agreed future will not offer the best result for unionism.
By doing this, unionism will eventually wake up and smell the coffee.
Your very response proves it is the very thing we need to do.
“Unionism which has actually attempted to impose ethnic cleansing, resulting in thousands of catholic families being burned out of their homes or having to feel to field hospitals, which actually murdered Catholics to deny them getting equality and civil rights which started the conflict in the first place and has yet to even acknowledge its part in such.”
When did “unionism” do this.
Ramble on about Unionism if you like Jessica but you, a Nationalist are the only one on here advocating the removal of a people’s culture from Ireland.
ISIS would be proud of you.
So first I am promoting ethnic cleansing and now I am advocating the removal of a people’s culture.
You are a laugh Scott.
The statue of queen victoria is not appropriate for any street in Ireland.
The statue of Carson who formed the UVF, is not appropriate for any shared space let alone the front of Stormont while it runs our devolved assembly.
An overwhelming majority of the people of Derry do not appreciate the name LondonDerry and it should be reverted to the Irish name which it was once referred to, Doire.
I don’t really care about the names of streets, but these changes should happen and they do not equate to the removal of any culture.
However, some elements of unionist culture are steeped in bigotry and should be simply removed now that you mention it.
Burning flags should be made a hate crime and the PSNI forced to take action.
Burning tyres possibly already is a crime, and the PSNI forced to take action.
It isn’t nice when you feel your culture is being denied does it Scott.
The only way unionism will see their contempt for the Irish language and their one sided narratives are wrong is by taking these small steps.
But please don’t try to tell me it is ethnic cleansing or advocating the removal of your culture.
What was it the chief constable said, dry your eyes.
“What are you saying, your opinion is more important than mine?”
No, I think you know that I’m not too but alas it’s tactic of yours to make me look like the aggressor and make yourself look like the victim and garner the sympathy of the reader.
“Whatever way things were or would have been had unionism not demanded partition, had nit discriminated the undemocratic rule it was given, had nit attempted to drive Catholics out and start a conflict between Ireland and Britain.”
So, my deduction that you’re ‘revenge’ orientated is correct then?
“What ever way things might have been, they never will be now. Too much under the bridge,”
More anger, more revenge.
“The same with the people of the 1916 rising. They too saw too much brutishness in Ireland then and made a bold move in sacrificing themselves in rebellion, they restored at least for a generation, Irelands soul, are pride in our past, our patriotism which has survived centuries of colonial oppression. ”
I have the utmost respect for the Easter rebels, I was living in Dublin in the run up to the centenary and never once found it intimidating. I only regret not buying some of the reproduction newspapers at the time.
“Save your breath AG, it will never die. The conflict unionism started has served only to reignite the passions of independence and patriotism in Ireland, even if it is mainly in the north. Ireland is one country and going forward, I am more interested in reconciliation with southern Ireland than anything ulster scotch.”
And how is this relevant to my post? Answer “it’s not”, this sounds like yet another attempt at point evasion by inserting gable-end-sloganeering.
And given that nearly everyone in Ulster is Ulster-Scots to some extent this is a bizarre thing to say, ‘Ulster Scot’ doesn’t mean Protestant or unionist.
“I don’t see it as revenge or retribution. Unionists are simply not my people, you are alien to me after generations of making it so, telling us we are not part of Ireland, that it is a foreign land. You will reap what you have sowed”
So, because hardline nutters spout nonsense you then fell free to reciprocate?
Well, that says it all.
You are really just the mirror image of a DUPer or TUVer.
There is no-one here plays to the gallery or is more manipulative than yourself AG.
You like to come across as a Lundy, a voice of reason among unionist extremism but in reality the only difference is, you have the foresight to know that change is already underway and that the battle for hearts and minds will determine heavily on what future unionism will have in Ireland if any.
Unionism sets out to frustrate, to make it seem like a united and independent Ireland is within reach if only we only say or do the right thing to garner sufficient unionist support but it still today refuses to give an inch. But those who succumb to even try will fail against the most intransigent and bigoted mind-set on the planet and instead will simply create division among their own group.
If unionism refuses to be reasonable then it should be left behind at the first opportunity and allowed to gradually fade into irrelevance in Ireland.
How is that asking for revenge?
And my comments were relevant to your post. It says more about you that would ask a question and answer it for me to make your own points. No playing to the gallery there then?
I know perfectly well there are hard-line nutters who spout nonsense, they do not concern me in the slightest.
It is the so called moderates who fail to offer any real effort at reconciliation that are the problem. Those who would criticise such people in one breath but then use the intransigence their failures and silence encourages for their own ends.
And never mind the DUP or TUV, I am not the mirror image of any unionist.
I am simply an Irish person who wants what is best for my country, an end to partition.
A unionist is an Irish person who wants what is best for England and its monarchy and what is in the best interests of Ireland is irrelevant to them.
Ireland has more in common with Scotland and England today than it does with unionism in the north here.
I want Ireland to have a stronger and better relationship with Britain, you know well I have said so many times.
Unionism is about supremacy and bigotry, Britishness is simply the conduit to facilitate this, it has very little in common with modern Britain.
Fantastic and insightful analysis as always Jude
Thank you, Cara…
MT……yes they are! Prince Andrew and Queen Victoria are people who you would look up to. However to my section of our divided community they are a total anathema, the enemy, part of the British establishment who reeked such terror on The Irish people for centuries. Here’s the thing though, I know you get it. You’re just like allot of other so called loyalists, you play the game of demonising everything Irish, our patriotism, our national aspirations our flag and yes OUR heroes! Britain came to Ireland, used every conceivable method to annihilate its people, planted its own people in their place, murdered, divested and slaughtered the indigenous population. Its history and consequences continue to this day.
Oh and don’t come back with some inane argument MT, you don’t have one!
“MT……yes they are! Prince Andrew and Queen Victoria are people who you would look up to. However to my section of our divided community they are a total anathema, the enemy, part of the British establishment who reeked such terror on The Irish people for centuries.”
If you say so, but it’s rather an immature attitude. Nevertheless it still doesn’t make them equivalent.
“Here’s the thing though, I know you get it. You’re just like allot of other so called loyalists, you play the game of demonising everything Irish, our patriotism, our national aspirations our flag and yes OUR heroes!”
I’m not a loyalist. And I don’t play any game of demonising anything, Irish or otherwise. I am Irish so why would I demonise myself?
“Britain came to Ireland, used every conceivable method to annihilate its people, planted its own people in their place, murdered, divested and slaughtered the indigenous population. Its history and consequences continue to this day.
Oh and don’t come back with some inane argument MT, you don’t have one!”
I think you need to move on and make peace with yourself and your neighbours. Live in the present.
Its best just to laugh at MT’s bitterness and stupidity Gearoid. Indeed your correct, MT knows rightly that Unionist symbolism is far more toxic than IRA symbolism, the amount of wrongs that Unionism has committed on this island in the past 50 years, never mind going back centuries, was far worse than anything the IRA ever done wrong. Indeed the IRA wouldn’t even exist if it wasn’t for Unionism and the Westminster Government.
The like of MT see that the future is no Unionist utopia, hence why he resorts to typing the comments he does, it’s his way off letting off steam. Just leave him to it, just be glad he’s a Unionist and not a Nationalist. The last thing we would want is people like MT giving us a bad name.
At least he doesn’t support terrorists Ryan does it not make you feel at all guilty supporting a movement that killed you’re unionist neighbours?
Whereas you expect us to accept being ruled by a foreign nation who’s forces killed members of both communities but in particular your nationalist neighbours.
The nationalist and republican community signed upto the GFA so Jessica i do.
The GFA has an opt out clause, it is time we used it and left the UK
“Indeed your correct, MT knows rightly that Unionist symbolism is far more toxic than IRA symbolism, the amount of wrongs that Unionism has committed on this island in the past 50 years, never mind going back centuries, was far worse than anything the IRA ever done wrong.”
Unionism. Going back centuries. Right…
“Its best just to laugh at MT’s bitterness and stupidity Gearoid.”
I don’t have any bitterness. You’re the one who supports terror. And I’m not stupid. I’m not the one who thinks British people will need a visa to go on holiday to Spain or that brexit means the end of the GFA.
“Indeed your correct, MT knows rightly that Unionist symbolism is far more toxic than IRA symbolism”
I don’t “know” such a thing. It’s untrue.
“, the amount of wrongs that Unionism has committed on this island in the past 50 years, never mind going back centuries, was far worse than anything the IRA ever done wrong.”
No it isn’t. It would be very difficult to do something worse than murder 2000 people.
The term “paramilitary” was never used in Ireland until the early 70’s when it was used to describe the UDA. Lazy journalists then began to use it to describe Republicans but in truth the only organisation which could be accurately described as “paramilitary” was the RUC.
There’s a special place in hell for those who fight wars of attrition over statues and symbols. They get to spend eternity boring each other to death
I thought death was a prerequisite to ending up in hell Diominic ?
Pedant
“There’s a special place in hell for those who fight wars of attrition over statues and symbols. They get to spend eternity boring each other to death”
Once again, I don’t quite follow where you are coming from Dominic.
You want 90% of the schools in Ireland to be run by the catholic church who incidentally started plenty of wars during the crusades where they slaughtered millions to death and for whom the use of statues and symbols is central to most churches.
You cant have it both ways.
At the same time as the u crusades God created Francis of Asissi who had a free run throughout the Muslim world world and is one of the greatest saints of the Church. You don’t do discernment, do you?
I just don’t understand where you are coming from.
You were critical over my suggestion that it was wrong for the catholic church to own 90% of the school estate on this island north and south.
You then pass judgement on people who fight wars of attrition over statues and symbols and condemn them to hell for boring you apparently.
Now we are on to Francis of Asissi who was a noble gentry who also started a war which caused many deaths before turning to god while in prison, just as many political prisoners in Ireland have done also.
I am a catholic but I am Irish first, there are members of my family who are catholic first above all else including nation.
I am not trying to start an argument with you, but trying to point out that we perhaps should be more careful throwing stones when we live in glass houses.
What was it that greatest of all Catholics Jesus said, let he who is without sin….
Jesus wasn’t a Catholic, he was a Jew.
Exactly Dominic
Dominic, sorry for the misspelling of your name.
Suppose there’s a wider point on what the GAA is in the 21st century and who Irish culture belongs to.
The GAA was formed out of the Gaelic league who’s first president was Douglas Hyde (a Protestant). The Gaelics Leagues mission was to help promote a interest in the Irish language and Gaelic culture and the GAA was formed to promote Gaelic sport.
It was initially a apolitical organisation, however it proved a recruiting ground for Irish Republican leaders, with Pearse, Collins and De Valera all being members of the League. It morphed from a cultural organisation and became a cultural/political organisation advocating Republicanism. Many of its early leaders were unhappy with this and Douglas Hyde resigned over it.
While it was undoubtedly a nationalist organisation throughout most of the 20th century, is that what it still wants to be today? I hear a lot about the GAA wanting to attract people from the Unionist community and spreading Irish culture to all, but that will be difficult if it is more than simply and sport/cultural organisation and has a political agenda.
It also asks the question of who Irish culture belongs to. Many commentators on here say Irish culture is for all but how can it be if GAA grounds are named after IRA men or there facilties are used for hunger strike commerations?
So I guess my two questions are
1.) Is the GAA a political was well as sport/cultural organisation? No problem if it is BTW but they should be clear about it.
2.) If Irish cultural organisations, such as the GAA are advocating Nationalism then is Gaelic cultural the property of only people of a Nationalist political persuasion?
To me the GAA represents Irishness in its broadest sense. When a young Protestant hurler was subject to sectarian abuse the President came up to Fermanagh to support him and show solidarity. The Association was appalled at the way SF used Casement for a political event and withdrew ticket allocation from the party for all Ireland finals. The GAA is doing its best in my view to be inclusive of everyone. Unionism should recognise this and endeavour to be more helpful.
“To me the GAA represents Irishness in its broadest sense.”
Are you joking? Don’t you mean narrowest sense? An exclusive, politically nationalist and culturally Catholic organisation by definition can’t represent the broadest possible Irishness.
“When a young Protestant hurler was subject to sectarian abuse the President came up to Fermanagh to support him and show solidarity.”
Was that the same president who came up to Dungiven to open the clubhouse of a club named in honour of a convicted INLA terrorist?
“The Association was appalled at the way SF used Casement for a political event and withdrew ticket allocation from the party for all Ireland finals.”
Yet tolerates numerous pro-terror events at GAA clubs and children’s tournaments named after terrorists.
“The GAA is doing its best in my view to be inclusive of everyone. Unionism should recognise this and endeavour to be more helpful.”
Allowing its member clubs to honour terrorists isn’t a very good strategy if it’s trying to be inclusive. Nor is naming perceived British sports or insisting on playing the Southern anthem and flying the Southern flag in Northern Ireland.
Are you saying Republicans should be excluded, how would that represent Irishness in its broadest sense? BTW I’ve often worn my West Ham hat to county games during winter if that’s what your vague reference to British sports is about
“Are you saying Republicans should be excluded, ”
Of course not.
“how would that represent Irishness in its broadest sense?”
It wouldn’t.
“BTW I’ve often worn my West Ham hat to county games during winter if that’s what your vague reference to British sports is about ”
Eh?
I was referring to the quasi-racist ban on perceived British sports being played on GAA property.
You talk utter nonsense since the only comments you made were the sort of comments made by children giving back answers just to be smart alecs.
“The Association was appalled at the way SF used Casement for a political event and withdrew ticket allocation from the party for all Ireland finals.”
I didn’t know that. Quite heartening. Cheers!
I agree that the GAA is doing much to make itself more inclusive Dominic. But perhaps you can see my point that if it’s all about cultural and sport why name its grounds after political figures and hold political rallies on its grounds.
We are getting mixed messages from the GAA on what it is about, whether it’s sports/culture or politics?
Its a broad church and people make of it what they wish but no one should exclude themselves because they don’t like other peoples interpretations. It would have helped to change perceptions if our culture minister had attended the Ulster final. Who knows what the GAA could look like in the future with a little courage and from Unionism.
“Its a broad church and people make of it what they wish but no one should exclude themselves because they don’t like other peoples interpretations. It would have helped to change perceptions if our culture minister had attended the Ulster final. Who knows what the GAA could look like in the future with a little courage and from Unionism.:
The onus is on the excluders not the excluded.
Time for the GAA to ditch the political baggage. (If it wants to attract unionists. If not, then admit to being an exclusive nationalist organisation.)
There are those who choose to be excluded for their own political reasons. Sit there and nurse your grievances as much as you like, take Jessica with you. You make fine bedfellows.
“There are those who choose to be excluded for their own political reasons.”
Blaming the excludes for “excluding themselves” is poor. The GAA chooses itself to be a nationalist organisation and thus put up barriers to unionist participation.
“Sit there and nurse your grievances as much as you like, take Jessica with you. You make fine bedfellows.”
I don’t have any grievances.
“The GAA chooses itself to be a nationalist organisation and thus put up barriers to unionist participation. ”
What are these barriers MT?
The GAA is an Irish Traditional body its whole ethos is to keep “Gaelic Games at the core of Irish identity and culture”. It is also deeply entrained into the Irish people all over the world.
No Irish person regardless their religion or personal or political preferences is excluded.
If the GAA decided to support partition to appease unionism then that would destroy it.
It is unionism that needs to change, not the GAA
“What are these barriers MT?”
Are you being serious? The nationalist ethos and practices.
“The GAA is an Irish Traditional body its whole ethos is to keep “Gaelic Games at the core of Irish identity and culture”. It is also deeply entrained into the Irish people all over the world.”
And is also nationalist, even to the point of tolerating pro-terror clubs.
“No Irish person regardless their religion or personal or political preferences is excluded.”
No Irish nationalist is excluded. Though an anti-terror nationalist might not feel too welcome in the Kevin Lynch club.
“If the GAA decided to support partition to appease unionism then that would destroy it.”
The GAA should neither support “partition” nor oppose it. It should be politically neutral if it wants to be inclusive of all Irish people.
“It is unionism that needs to change, not the GAA.””
If the GAA wants to be inclusive it needs to change. If it doesn’t then fair enough.
You seen to equate Irish nationalism with terrorism and support for terrorism.
So what it really boils down to MT and perhaps you can confirm, either the nationalist ethos or unionist ethos, that one must go.
This is what I am genuinely starting to believe.
“You seen to equate Irish nationalism with terrorism and support for terrorism.”
Eh? No I don’t. On the contrary I do the opposite. It’s the pro-terror people here who seem to think terror.memorials etc represent nationalism, not me.
“So what it really boils down to MT and perhaps you can confirm, either the nationalist ethos or unionist ethos, that one must go.This is what I am genuinely starting to believe.”
I’m afraid I don’t understand what your are asking.
You are very free with terrorism word MT.
Memorials to British forces including the RUC could be seen to be every bit as much terror memorials to nationalism as IRA memorials are to unionism according to you and your ilk.
RUC Special branch with British intelligence terrorised our community, they murdered in cold blood authorising and participating in bombing and killing such as with the Glennane gang.
The very conflict was started over Unionisms choice to use terrorism against a peaceful civil rights campaign.
It is really quite simple. You are saying the opinion of unionism, its own narrative should be the only one acceptable, that Nationalism should accept all wrongs, that the conflict was a nationalist terror campaign, that we should turn our backs on all Irish men and women who died fighting in a conflict brought to their door and embrace the union. That we should accept all symbols of unionism as if it has done no wrong, accept all british war memorials but reject any attempt to commemorate any Irish who fought against the british forces.
And to that, all I can say is no, I will instead harden my resolve to remove all such anti Irish opinion from my country. I will reject the union more vehemently, and find distasteful all elements of unionist culture that equate with you and people like you MT.
“Memorials to British forces including the RUC could be seen to be every bit as much terror memorials to nationalism as IRA memorials are to unionism according to you and your ilk.”
Maybe in the mind of a fool or a myopic bigot, but not in the mind of anyone reasonable.
“RUC Special branch with British intelligence terrorised our community, they murdered in cold blood authorising and participating in bombing and killing such as with the Glennane gang.”
Even if that were true, there are no memorials to RUC Special Branch.
“It is really quite simple. You are saying the opinion of unionism, its own narrative should be the only one acceptable, that Nationalism should accept all wrongs, that the conflict was a nationalist terror campaign, that we should turn our backs on all Irish men and women who died fighting in a conflict brought to their door and embrace the union. That we should accept all symbols of unionism as if it has done no wrong, accept all british war ”
No I’m not. But it’s clear that the only way you can respond to being confronted with reason and an alternative world view is to misrepresent that view to allow you to feel able to maintain your own bigoted and immoral position .
M – if you’re going to continue abusing people – ‘a fool or a myopic bigot’ I’m going to stop putting up your comments. I could replace them with asterisks but that would be too time-consuming, so I’ll just ditch the comment. Please don’t make it necessary – I want discussion to be as varied and civilized as possible.
“M – if you’re going to continue abusing people – ‘a fool or a myopic bigot’ I’m going to stop putting up your comments. I could replace them with asterisks but that would be too time-consuming, so I’ll just ditch the comment. Please don’t make it necessary – I want discussion to be as varied and civilized as possible.”
But I’m not abusing anyone, Jude. The comments to which you refer was a hypothetical and general one.
It’s concerning that you are proposing to censor such comments but have been content to allow actual personal abuse against me to proceed.
So MT, are you saying that anyone who felt terrorised by the British forces and sees such memorials as the glorification of British rule in Ireland and not only rewarding that terrorism but also an attempt of promoting unionist supremacy and its one sided narrative of the conflict, is either a fool or a myopic bigot?
“So MT, are you saying that anyone who felt terrorised by the British forces and sees such memorials as the glorification of British rule in Ireland and not only rewarding that terrorism but also an attempt of promoting unionist supremacy and its one sided narrative of the conflict, is either a fool or a myopic bigot?”
Anyone who thinks a war memorial is there to “promote unionist supremacy” is certainly a fool at best.
The GAA is unashamedly and unapologetically Irish and is open to Irishness in all its manifestations: sport, song, dance and language. It unites people of all political parties and national organisations including the PSNI who have suffered dissident republican attacks on its members. In the North there is still a rawness due to the recent conflict when GAA grounds were taken over by the British Army and members such as Aiden McAnnespie were murdered. With the conflict years receding there is hope for change but that hope is being hampered greatly by people holding on to myths and prejudices. This is compounded by a Unionist culture minister who has a one sided approach to his portfolio in lighting bonfires but refusing to show true leadership and attending an Ulster Final. There are no hard positions except people choose them and the those people have questions to answer as to their motivation. There should be something in the ministerial code of conduct against such partisan representation of culture in the assembly and the minister should be called to account for his behavior. In my view it shows a lack of leadership
In total agreement, Dominic.
Well said Dominic
“The GAA is unashamedly and unapologetically Irish”
You seem to be conflating ‘Irish’ and ‘Irish nationalist’. Broaden your horizons.
” and is open to Irishness in all its manifestations:”
All except British-Irishness and Protestant Irishness.
” It unites people of all political parties and national organisations”
Really? In what way does it unite with unionist political parties?
” With the conflict years receding there is hope for change but that hope is being hampered greatly by people holding on to myths and prejudices.”
Indeed. Time for the GAA to move on and open up.
“This is compounded by a Unionist culture minister who has a one sided approach to his portfolio in lighting bonfires but refusing to show true leadership and attending an Ulster Final.”
Agreed, but the GAA need to make.moves too. The onus is on them to change.
Dominic
” that hope is being hampered greatly by people holding on to myths and prejudices.”
Are you referring to the aforementioned gates with the names of IRA men on them?
I just can’t see how that tallies with uniting people of all political persuasions.
Maybe you can confirm/clarify something I’ve been told: that there’s a statue or monument of some kind at the entrance to Ravenhill?
“I just can’t see how that tallies with uniting people of all political persuasions.”
That is only possible through tolerance and acceptance gio.
Bigotry is not a valid political persuasion and when unionism is no longer relevant in Ireland, bigotry and intolerance will no longer be an obstacle to uniting the Irish people.
Jude
I’m not sure if that is addressed to me or not (maybe not as I am no longer worthy) but I have no idea about Ravenhill. Why not ask Ulster Rugby, I am sure they are on twitter.
I don’t see the relevance in a discussion about GAA club gates, unless..could it be?? Surely not whataboutery?
Yes, it was addressed to you, gio. But I can see you don’t know. Not like you.
I think your response proves you were correct when you suggest you are not worthy to have the question addressed to you.
“Surely not whataboutery?”
Searching for false equivalences in the name of whataboutery.
Jude
Now that we are best buddies again I took the trouble to look it up for you.
According to wikipedia:
“Ravenhill Stadium opened in 1923. It features an ornate arch at the entrance that was erected as a war memorial for those players killed in World War I and World War II.”
I don’t think there is an equivalence between a memorial to the dead in 2 world wars and a memorial to the dead in our internal conflicts.
However I would rather not see memorials that might be considered divisive displayed in sporting contexts where we want to see both communities feeling welcome.
Perhaps you agree?
Best buddies? Easy there, gio…I think there is an equivalence between soldiers killed in WWI/II and our ‘internal conflicts’ (no question of British involvement then – or if you wish, Mainland) : the equivalence is pretty obvious – Death the Leveller. I agree with you that these memorials shouldn’t be displayed not just in sporting contexts but generally. However, since Belfast and Derry are peppered with memorials to British soldiers, if we’re supposed to be living in shared space, it is outrageous that one half of the community is told they mustn’t do that, but of course we can. Not much equivalence there.
“I don’t think there is an equivalence between a memorial to the dead in 2 world wars and a memorial to the dead in our internal conflicts.”
No, you would think the our own internal dead would be given the more respect.
The conflict happened, it cannot be undone and republicans will not allow our dead to be demonised by unionist belligerence.
This blatant disrespect is absolutely sickening.
Jude
That is fine.
But let’s not waste breathe talking about outreach and openness to both communities when what we really mean is;
“if it’s good enough for themmuns it’s good enough for us”.
The GAA cannot say on the one hand they want to be open to Unionists but on the other hand we will celebrate those who fought against Unionism.
It makes no sense.
It would be more honest to say, “we are a Republican organisation,it is part of our ethos, we do not expect Unionists to darken our doorstep.”
Don’t agree, gio. Why would republicans not celebrate those who fought against unionism? Unionism lionizes those who fought or threatened to fight against nationalist/ republicanism – and as I keep saying, Belfast City Hall, Stormont, Belfast in general, Derry in general is littered with monuments, statues, plaques, you name it, all attesting to the heroic lives of British soldiers/leaders. Yet when republicans attempt to remember their dead, the roof comes in. Shared space should mean shared space – either no monuments/statues etc (patently impossible) or monuments/statues to those which each community holds dear. Quick example: what would unionist reaction be to a statue to Sir Roger Casement somewhere in the Glens of Antrim? I rest my case.
“Don’t agree, gio. Why would republicans not celebrate those who fought against unionism?”
Jude, the premise of your question – that the GAA is a republican organisation – means you are agreeing with gio!
“Shared space should mean shared space – either no monuments/statues etc (patently impossible) or monuments/statues to those which each community holds dear. Quick example: what would unionist reaction be to a statue to Sir Roger Casement somewhere in the Glens of Antrim? I rest my case.:
Surely that depends on who precisely it is that the community holds dear. If it is a terrorist or someone who engaged in unjust violence, then that’s a different matter than if it’s someone who was against unjust violence. Hence a kiddies’ playpark in honour of a Provo terrorist is unacceptable but a statue to Redmond or Devlin ought not to be.
“If it is a terrorist or someone who engaged in unjust violence”
So Irish civilians who took part in the conflict which was started by unionism, are terrorists and should be condemned as such by those in the communities that they came from, whereas the British and unionist combatants were simply engaging in justified violence and should be revered by all decent right thinking citizens, is that what you mean MT?
“So Irish civilians who took part in the conflict which was started by unionism, are terrorists and should be condemned as such by those in the communities that they came from, whereas the British and unionist combatants were simply engaging in justified violence and should be revered by all decent right thinking citizens, is that what you mean MT?”
If you’re referring to people who joined terrorist organisations and engaged in terrorism, yes of course they were terrorists and should have been (and were) condemned by their own communities. Any member of the security services who engaged in terrorism should also be condemned. It’s not rocket science.
Good point, why is there not a statue to Sir Roger Casement somewhere in the Glens of Antrim? It would not only be suitable mark of respect but would attract tourism to the area as people like to go where such heroic figures came from.
That is exactly what this place needs more off.
I agree that it is a waste of breathe to attempt outreach to unionism.
We can twist opinions however we choose, but do you really think the Irish community are going to accept the demonisation of our own people to suit the needs of unionism which still refuses to acknowledge its own role in starting the conflict here.
I think outreach has gone as far as it can without reciprocation and it is time unionism was left behind until it chooses to play a proactive role in reconciliation. Like it or not, that will entail accepting that republicans will be commemorated within their communities.
If unionism does not want to participate in that, then yes, it should be allowed to exclude itself. Unionism is british separatism in Ireland, do you really expect it to participate in Irish sports or to accept Irish republicanism?
Jude
As far as I can see you are agreeing with me.
The GAA has a Republican ethos and they prize that above any effort at outreach to Unionists, as this incident makes clear.
I think a better analogy would be say Ravenhill having a memorial to Carson at the gates. Would that be a good thing?
It is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things and I consider the McCreesh Park to be worse considering the relatively contemporary nature of his activities.
Are you suggesting there is something wrong with having a republican ethos gio?
Republican ethos = bad, unionist ethos = good, is that what you mean?
Ravenhill has an ornate arch at the entrance which is a war memorial for those players killed in World War I and World War II.
The GAA were not allowed to have the names of its players who died in the war of independence, a war more relevant to Irish history.
There would be an argument to be made against there being a statue of carson anywhere but in a museum if we really want to pursue the approach of intolerance.
It seems the more reasonable nationalism is towards unionism, the more intolerant unionism is in return.
“The GAA were not allowed to have the names of its players who died in the war of independence, a war more relevant to Irish history.”
What does this mean?
It means the Glenariffe GAA club sullied the memories of two past members of its community who were also players and all for money.
It was unfair for them to be put in that position, but that is what unionism wants to do. Divide communities and cause problems.
Lets hope that community can produce a more fitting memorial to make amends and right this wrong.
“It means the Glenariffe GAA club sullied the memories of two past members of its community who were also players and all for money. It was unfair for them to be put in that position, but that is what unionism wants to do. Divide communities and cause problems. Lets hope that community can produce a more fitting memorial to make amends and right this wrong.”
You’ve lost me. What’s this got to do with your comment about the war of independence?
jessica
Regarding Casement i don’t suppose any statues are likely.
Although his gayness ought not to be any issue, his liking for young men would be sure to cause a few problems.
jessica
“Are you suggesting there is something wrong with having a republican ethos gio?
Republican ethos = bad, unionist ethos = good, is that what you mean?”
No. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Republican ethos. But the point is I don’t see how an organisation can have a Republican ethos and also talk about outreach to Unionists
Have you noticed how often other commenters have to correct the views you attribute to them?
You make wild extrapolations about what you think we are saying then go off on a long diatribe against something that was never said. It is very tiring.
I suggest you try reading the comment a couple of times before replying.
Also (and I do this myself) write your initial response,read it back,delete it, and then start again. It helps to remove the more intemperate remarks.
That is why 9 out of 10 commenters agree that my comments are models of reason and good manners!
The other way of looking at it gio, is how often I have pointed out the wrongs you have expressed in your views that you have had to correct them.
As with this one.
You say on one hand that there is absolutely nothing wrong with having a Republican ethos.
Then you turn around and say that if an organisation has a Republican ethos you don’t see how it can also talk about outreach to Unionists.
So assuming you are sincere when you say there is nothing wrong with having a Republican ethos, am I to assume you therefore acknowledging what is my own opinion that it is unionism that has the issue with republicans reaching out to them and not that there is anything wrong with republicanism?
In which case is it really fair to expect republicans to change their core beliefs just to please unionism which has made no effort towards reconciliation.
The truth is, the whole basis of unionisms attempts to demonise republicans is actually to frustrate this reaching out to them, not only from republicans but from the Irish government, the catholic church and just about any group they have a dislike off.
Unionism is more comfortable with confrontation than reconciliation. It is easier to condemn and criticise than to actually have to build bridges, make peace and compromise when you simply don’t want to.
Isn’t that really the nub of it gio?
‘Although his gayness ought not to be any issue, his liking for young men would be sure to cause a few problems.’
Gio, it shouldn’t bother you as you have been a constant supporter of folk into that sort of thing eg British members of the royal family.
I would like to see a memorial to roger casement in antrim.
It is our loss if we allow detractors such as gio to deter us so easily by highlighting such bigotry.
wolfie
I am tempted to get on my high horse and ask Jude to remove your suggestion that I in some way support paedophile activity.
But maybe you can produce some evidence to back it up..?
jessica
I don’t mind you challenging my views,but I would prefer if you stick to what I have said and not what you think I mean.
I neither expect nor want Republicans to change their core beliefs and I have never said anything like that.
But I think any organisation that wants to reach out to the other community here needs to consider how they can do that or else just say they are not interested in reaching out.
Also regarding Casement, can you clarify what you mean when you say :
“It is our loss if we allow detractors such as gio to deter us so easily by highlighting such bigotry.”.
In terms of reaching out, I think any reasonable person would acknowledge that republicans in particular Sinn Fein have done almost all reaching out to date and it is time unionism made some effort in that regard or as you say, simply admit what many now believe, they are not interested in reaching out.
As for casement, regardless of what you think you mean, a lot of your comments are unjustifiably hurtful as in this case.
Sir Roger Casement was a good man who gave his life for Ireland and is rightfully respected by those if us who hold such things dear. I think most reasonable people would acknowledge he deserves respect and while there may well be those who would insult his memory as you suggest, they are not worth speaking about and certainly should not prevent such a mark of respect from being erected.
I may be wrong, but the frequency with which you point out such derogatory opinion suggests an element of gloating. Apologies if you refute this but it is my impression of you based on your comments none the less.
jessica
I am not aware of the frequency I have pointed out derogatory opinions.
We have to look at people warts and all. I agree that Casement did some good work in Peru and of course he is respected by many for his role in the Rising.
But any suggestion of a liking for young men is likely to be too controversial for any council considering monuments.
Just to be clear it is not his homosexuality I am referring to but the young age of the partners he paid for, which cannot be glossed over.
“which cannot be glossed over.”
That’s exactly what seems to be happening. A lot has been written about Casement recently in various media, and I haven’t seen any mentiom of the black diaries.
Controversial my arse.
Roger casement was no paedophile.
Sounds like an excuse for unionists to reject another Irish patriot.
Shame on anyone who would deny such a monument.
You would think we had more courage in 2016 to face down such prejudice.
“Roger Casement was no paedophile. ”
How do you know?
“How do you know?”
I believe in innocent until proven guilty and I am well aware of British propaganda.
I think it is a travesty that Roger Casement is not given a monument to his memory in Antrim.
“I believe in innocent until proven guilty and I am well aware of British propaganda.”
So you don’t know.
“So you don’t know.”
Not one bit more than I know you are not a paedophile MT.
“Not one bit more than I know you are not a paedophile MT.”
Hardly a reasonable comparison given that there are no diaries extant in my name documenting paedophiliic activity that have been tested forensically with the conclusion that they are genuine.
Whereas there are in relation to Casement.
In 2002, the verdict of the first ever fully independent forensic examination of the diaries by Dr Audrey Giles was: ‘The unequivocal and confident conclusion which the Giles Document Laboratory has reached is that each of the five documents collectively known as the Black Diaries is exclusively the work of Roger Casement’s hand, without any reason to suspect either forgery or interpolation by any other hand. The diaries are genuine throughout and in each instance. This investigation, based on impartial scientific analysis, should bring an end to more than 80 years of controversy. ‘
“Whereas there are in relation to Casement.”
Which his sister contested were doctored in places to look like he was referring to himself and not to events he simply witnessed in south America.
I doubt we will ever know for certain just as I do not know what dark secrets hide behind your moniker MT.
“Which his Easter contested were doctored in places to look like he was referring to himself and not to events he simply witnessed in south America”
Forensic tests have shown them not to have been doctored.
They proved it was his handwriting which was not contested and nothing more
Gio, practice what you preach. ‘Read what I said not what you think I mean’.
I didn’t say you supported paedophilia rather that you often demand respect and tolerance from us, for those who do e.g the royal family. btw there’s more proof of certain royalty being involved in paedophilia than there ever was for Casement but sure what odds; that’s not what you are digging at Gio isn’t that right?
It would be regrettable in my opinion WT, if republicans proved to be so weak and so shallow to allow such nasty propaganda to deny a courageous Irish patriot the recognition that he deserves.
“It would be regrettable in my opinion WT, if republicans proved to be so weak and so shallow to allow such nasty propaganda to deny a courageous Irish patriot the recognition that he deserves”
But it’s not propaganda.
wolfie
You said:
“a constant supporter of folk into that sort of thing”
Now that is not not very nice.
Also I am not a supporter of the Royal Family (other than asking for evidence of their crimes) as you should know and once again I ask politely, to see your evidence or a retraction.
I did not introduce Casement into the discussion and jessica pointedly asked why there is no statue for him in Antrim.
I gave her one reason to wit,that caution would likely prevent such a thing given the available evidence (doctored or not,we don’t know). It seems unlikely to me that any council these days would want such a controversial monument and especially in a very conservative area. Do you disagree?
There will be no one taking me anywhere Dominic.
More open and honest and generous engagement is needed. Is Unionism up for it?
“More open and honest and generous engagement is needed. Is Unionism up for it?:
I’ve no idea. You’d need to ask “Unionism”.
But the onus is on the GAA and there’s little sign of them ever being willing to ditch their political baggage.
“But the onus is on the GAA and there’s little sign of them ever being willing to ditch their political baggage.”
There is no onus on the GAA MT, it is all in your head.
The 2021 census will show a significant catholic majority or more importantly, unionist bigotry will have greatly reduced along with its older population by then.
Until we cross this Rubicon, there can be no reconciliation between us, unionism will remain unwilling to compromise and by that time, your numbers will reduce even further by large volumes of your community who will leave to live in Scotland or England.
And this will not be down to nationalist intimidation, but because you will have failed to accept the hand of friendship, failed to reconcile with the rest of this island and failed to do what is in your own communities best interests.
The self fuelled fear, mistrust and hatred will remain strong within your community, and this is why so many will leave these shores.
That is not what nationalism wants MT, but it is what people like you are going to make sure happens.
“There is no onus on the GAA MT, it is all in your head.”
Of course there is. If it wishes to be inclusive then the onus is on it to change to become so. If it doesn’t wish to be inclusive, then it can carry on as it is.
“The 2021 census will show a significant catholic majority or more importantly, unionist bigotry will have greatly reduced along with its older population by then.”
Even if that were true, how would it be relevant?
The GAA already is inclusive to anyone who respects Irish traditions regardless their background.
There is no need to demonise our own people in order to make it acceptable to those who have no respect for Irish traditions. Those people are irrelevant and dwindling in numbers year on year.
And yes that is very true MT. If you are not able to change, in 10 years time I doubt very much you will be still living here.
“The GAA already is inclusive to anyone who respects Irish traditions regardless their background.”
No it isn’t. It’s a nationalist (or according to Jude, republican) organisation and thus excludes the unionist tradition.
“There is no need to demonise our own people in order to make it acceptable to those who have no respect for Irish traditions.”
Nobody said there was.
Are you on some personal moral crusade divorced from political and historical realities that are the backdrop to our discussion here?
Why would ‘unionists’ want to ‘feel part of the GAA’? From what we can glean from the unionists on this forum is their hatred of all things Irish and their fondness for all things British. Their mischievous criticism of the GAA should be taken with a pinch of salt. Their lack of critique at the ‘outreaching’ by the British state at sporting events like the FA cup or even TV programmes, when British army terrorists are paraded around like heroes, speaks volumes.
The GAA must and is welcoming of Protestant,Catholic and dissenter. I don’t understand why it must be welcoming to someone who fundamentally opposed to the very ethos of the GAA, I.e a unionist. These poor unionists, hurt and offended, by the GAA will be looking to partition the organisation next, just so they ‘feel welcome’ lmfao.
These poor unionists want so much to reach out and fit in they refuse to budge, rather they want others to budge and be like them. They want others to tolerate and indeed partake in their ways and culture all for the sake of ‘reaching out’ of course. Reaching out to them means others must be dragged into their ways or else it’s not fair boo hoo.
“These poor unionists, hurt and offended, by the GAA will be looking to partition the organisation next, just so they ‘feel welcome’ lmfao.”
That is exactly what they are trying to so, just like they are doing to the north south relationship. Unfortunately WT, they have also already had some degree of success.
Well, I am.
I tried to join a fledgling GAA club at my Scottish university (the wheels came off the project unfortunately).
I took up Shinty prior to that (briefly).
In Shinty there was nothing political or nationalistic.
In the GAA there is.
To many nationalists the tricolour isn’t political, to non-nationalists it is.
Ditto the Soldier’s Song.
I think the unionist movement made a mistake by not getting involved in GAA but I think they’d actually be scared of having nothing to bitch about.
The thing is, Irishness and nationalism are not the same thing, but many can’t see the difference.
I’d say to OWC extremists that Norn Irishness and Britishness are not the same.
Again, to me extremists of either hue are pretty much two sides of the same coin.
There is nothing wrong in being Irish
This discussion has inspired me to consider taking up a new sport: Table tennis, I’m going to try it with blinkers on too in remembrance of all the contributors here
“This discussion has inspired me to consider taking up a new sport: Table tennis, I’m going to try it with blinkers on too in remembrance of all the contributors here”
I presume you’re referring to yourself, Dominic, as someone who doesn’t realise the GAA is nationalist. That’s blinkered for sure.
The GAA was established to in order to try and prevent Ireland being turned into a little England. Ireland was occupied by a foreign force that had plenty of experience over the centuries in reducing the oppressed population to adhere to its ways and culture. Indoctrinating the natives to partake in all things English, be it language,sport,music etc will ensure the occupiers presence for a long time.
Obviously, judging by the utterances by critics of the GAA, the occupier has ready and willing fifth columnists to continue their campaign of indoctrination upon the Irish people. And with that in mind the GAA should not steer from its course as the occupier hasn’t gone away you know.
I believe the ‘very liberal’ approach of Irish Nationalism has somewhat undermined us and therefore it’s allowed Britain to use it to their advantage.
‘I think the unionist movement made a mistake by not getting involved in GAA but I think they’d actually be scared of having nothing to bitch about.’
Yes indeed Am Ghobsmacht, that way they could’ve strived to create a wee British fifth column from within? And before long they’d be standing for sweaty Betty Windsor and her ilk. Job done.