Last night on Nolan Live I took part in a debate about poppies on soccer shirts . The discussion was short in length (fourteen minutes approx.) and short in common sense. I came away once more convinced that broadcasting, and particularly television, is rarely successful in producing insights. Here are five question which came up but were never really clarified.
- Is the poppy a political emblem? No and Yes. As UKIP’s Bob Stoker pointed out, the poppy is worn in lots of countries, and not viewed as a political symbol. Certainly during my time in Canada there wasn’t the slightest political edge to it. And the Yes? Here, the poppy is an emblem weighted with political baggage. Unionists will wear it, and there will be some nationalists and republicans who will do so as well. But while the unionist numbers would find Windsor Park much too small to hold their numbers, the poppy-wearing nationalists/republicans could probably fit in a voting booth.
- Is the poppy worn to respect and support those who fought in the First and Second World Wars? Yes. It’s also worn to include all conflicts in which the British Armed Forces were engaged up to the present day. That’d mean supporting them in their actions in Kenya, where British troops in the 1950s inflicted vile torture and death on scores of Kenyans, in South Africa during the Boer war when the British invented the concentration camp, in which some 14,000 black Africans and 29,000 Boer women and children died, and so many other actions, in Ireland and elsewhere.
- Is a soccer jersey a good place to disply a poppy? Most definitely No. While the impression is given that this is a long-established custom, in fact it started in 2010. Nowadays all Premier League clubs have the poppy on their shirts. The large majority of Premier League players come from countries other than England. They have no reason to feel loyalty or identification with the British armed forces. Yet virtually all of them take the line of least resistance and wear the poppy. In short, they devalue the poppy as an emblem for those who genuinely value it.
- Is James McClean a nut-case? Most definitely No. McClean has been on the receiving end of media and personal abuse, even death threats, for refusing to wear a shirt with the poppy on it. He has explained that were the poppy simply honouring those who died in the First and Second World Wars, he’d have no difficulty wearing it. But because it is worn to honour British armed forces in all conflicts, including Bloody Sunday, when fourteen of his fellow-townsmen were shot and killed by the British army, he cannot.
- Is the FIFA ban on political, religious and commercial symbols on soccer shirts reasonable? Most definitely Yes. The fact is that many countries have little love for one another. International soccer is intended to be a sport, in which rivalry and even enmity can be diverted into sporting challenges. If the poppy is accepted, then so should all political, religious and commercial badges be permitted. Say in a game between the Ukraine and Russia. Or Pakistan and India. Or the N Ireland team and the Republic of Ireland. The possible emblems and/or slogans could and probably would be antagonistic and offensive. The fact that FIFA permitted arm-bands depicting the poppy to be worn in 2011, or that the Republic of Ireland have worn or may wear commemorative 1916 designs on their shirt doesn’t mean that the game between England and Scotland therefore should feature the poppy. We all learnt it as children and it makes perfect sense: two wrongs don’t make a right.
Postscript: If there was one absurd notion which a number of people, including Bob Stoker, seemed wedded to it last night, it was that the poppy is not a political emblem. Total and utter poppycock.
Maybe it wasn’t completely the fault of the brief time given to the poppy-wearing controversy. More the limited ability of so many to accept the facts surrounding the blood-stained emblem.
“Is the poppy worn to respect and support those who fought in the First and Second World Wars? Yes. It’s also worn to include all conflicts in which the British Armed Forces were engaged up to the present day. That’d mean supporting them in their actions in Kenya, where British troops in the 1950s inflicted vile torture and death on scores of Kenyans, in South Africa during the Boer war when the British invented the concentration camp, in which some 14,000 black Africans and 29,000 Boer women and children died, and so many other actions, in Ireland and elsewhere.”
1. It doesn’t mean supporting the British armed forces in Kenya or anywhere else. Remembering servicemen who died isn’t the same as supporting individual wars or even war in general.
2. And the Boer War took place between 1899 and 1902, so the poppy doesn’t remember those who died in it. And even if it did it wouldn’t be a symbol of support for concentration camps.
3. The British didn’t invent the concentration camp. The first such camps were established by the Spanish in Cuba in 1895. Although some argue they were first used in the US Civil War.
According to the RBLs own website the poppy appeal is used to support all servicemen/women.
Past and present.
“According to the RBLs own website the poppy appeal is used to support all servicemen/women.
Past and present.:
You’re conflating the remembrance aspect of the poppy (being discussed) and the use the fund is put to.
On the fund, clearly it’s not used to “support all servicemen/women past and present’. First, the vast majority of past servicemen and women are long dead. And second it only supports those eligible through need, such as injury or trauma.
The RBL disagrees with you.
Maybe take it up with them.
You’ll have to do better than simply making and repeating unsupported assertions.
What does it not agree with and where does it state this disagreement?
All info available on the RBL website.
I’m sure you can look it up and then come back and admit that the poppy appeal remembers and supports service people past and present.
“All info available on the RBL website.
I’m sure you can look it up and then come back and admit that the poppy appeal remembers and supports service people past and present.”
I’ve never said that the appeal doesn’t remember or support service people past and present so I’m not sure how you can construe anything on the RBL web site as disagreeing with me.
Of course you didn’t MT…….of course you didn’t.
Still revelling in your own ignorance I see.
“Is James McClean a nut-case? Most definitely No. McClean has been on the receiving end of media and personal abuse, even death threats, for refusing to wear a shirt with the poppy on it. He has explained that were the poppy simply honouring those who died in the First and Second World Wars, he’d have no difficulty wearing it. But because it is worn to honour British armed forces in all conflicts, including Bloody Sunday, when fourteen of his fellow-townsmen were shot and killed by the British army, he cannot.”
It’s not worn to honour “British armed forces in all conflicts including Bloody Sunday”. It’s worn to remember those servicemen who died in conflicts.
No soldiers died on Bloody Sunday so the poppy has no relevance to it.
It is offensive to suggest that the millions who wear a poppy are supporting or honouring Bloody Sunday or any other unjust or illegal actions. In fact, it comes across as an excuse or a gauche attempt by those opposed to the poppy to rationalise their visceral dislike of it.
In recent times thousands if not millions opposed the Iraq War but that doesn’t stop them wearing a poppy to remember those soldiers killed in it in addition to the far far greater numbers killed in the world wars, which remain naturally the primary focus.
“In recent times thousands if not millions opposed the Iraq War but that doesn’t stop them wearing a poppy to remember those soldiers killed in it in addition to the far far greater numbers killed in the world wars, which remain naturally the primary focus.”
You can blame the ‘murder machine’ for those gullible enough to wear the poppy. Added to that there is no doubt lots more folk wouldn’t wear the thing if the media,politicians and sycophantic celebrities weren’t setting the trend. Advertising coupled with propaganda can make fools out of the public.
The main problem as I see it, Jude, is that Nolan is an intellectual Pygmy. He doesn’t possess the hinterland with which to tease out the most salient points in a discussion. He’s a ‘red top’ interviewer and while that may suit some programmes, he seems totally out of his depth when dealing with protracted issues, like poppy wearing.
The mere fact that he didn’t produce a dictionary definition of the word “political”, just makes the viewer lose confidence in him and his researchers.
I am actually a poppy buying Nationailst, Jude but not a wearer. I put it in the drawer, but wish to give a few pounds to those young, impressionable lads sent out to do others bidding. I am completely and utterly against specific support for the British armed forces. I just feel sorry for the young lads who find themselves in appalling and god forsaken parts of the world.
I favour the white poppy myself. Would it not be so much more human/Christian to support all of the wounded/fallen, regardless of nationality.
“Postscript: If there was one absurd notion which a number of people, including Bob Stoker, seemed wedded to it last night, it was that the poppy is not a political emblem. Total and utter poppycock.”
It might be political to you and others like you, and maybe also for some who wear it or misuse it, but for the vast majority of people who wear it, they do not do so as a ‘political’ act but simply as an act of remembrance.
Your arguments are most convincing, and you pack a lot into a fairly short paragraph. I too believe it is monstrous to insist that the English players should be exempt from an admirable international rule. My only objection to your piece, in places, is to its prevailing tone, which is sometimes very sweeping and belligerent.
Though it is true that the infantile and racist nationalism of the British right is to blame for bringing poppy wearing into such an ambivalent position, evoking feelings ranging between reverence and brutal flaunting of militaristic fanatasies, will the spread of nationalism and racism not be actually fed by ignoring the reverent use of the symbol by many others, in Britain and Ireland? Live and let live is exactly what the bigots who are challenging the FIFA rule refuse to do.
I have never worn a poppy, I think, for more than 50 years, but for my parents, it was indeed recognised as a blood stained emblem, in honour of those, like the young soldiers with my two grandfathers, who lost their lives in France between 1915-1917. I agree with your argument, but can we usefully combat aggression and ignorance with verbal hostility?
How would you feel about wearing a poppy, MT, if your near relatives had been murdered in the most recent ‘insurgency’ in Ireland by the paid gunmen of the British Army. They have no moral or legal right to be in this country and no right to force their comfort fund collections on us. If you find this hard to understand I will try to simplify it for you. By the way, any further evidence of Adams’ membership of Óglaigh na hÉireann?
“How would you feel about wearing a poppy, MT, if your near relatives had been murdered in the most recent ‘insurgency’ in Ireland by the paid gunmen of the British Army.”
I don’t know. But I do know that I wouldn’t pretend that the poppy honoured Bloody Sunday or was a symbol of support for war either in general or for particular conflicts or actions.
“They have no moral or legal right to be in this country and no right to force their comfort fund collections on us. If you find this hard to understand I will try to simplify it for you. By the way, any further evidence of Adams’ membership of Óglaigh na hÉireann?”
The Army does have the moral and legal right to be in the UK. The Army doesn’t force any collections o anyone.
Buy a poppy, MT, and you publicly are prepared to show your support for the English Army. Can we agree on that? The fact that English kings and queens saw fit to steal other people’s countries to fill their war chests for their ongoing wars against almost all the European countries is no basis for a United Kingdom. Their overseas colonies have got rid of them and if we had the military might we would too. When was the last battle fought on English soil? That should tell you a lot. But I can see if grandad died in the defence of little Catholic Belgium in 1916 why his descendants would want to buy or wear a poppy. These people are long dead. You know that most poppy wearers in the six counties wear them to show the croppies their proper place in their wee country. We’re not British so what has this show of support got to do with us?
“Buy a poppy, MT, and you publicly are prepared to show your support for the English Army. Can we agree on that?”
First, there is no ‘English Army’ and, second, I’ve already explained that the poppy isn’t about ‘supporting’ anything.
The Royal British Legion disagree with you.
“The Royal British Legion disagree with you.:
No it doesn’t
Yes it does.
” The British Legion disagree with you.:
No it doesn’t”
Nonsense. The political British political establishment, past and present, along with the strictly ‘ceremonial’ Royal cabal are front and centre on Remembrance Day in London. I would assume Remembrance Day is the big day for the British legion and yet on that day all shades of politicians are allowed to take over and be at the head of the ceremonies? But we are told it’s not ‘political’? Yeah right Lol, British doublespeak at its finest.
I often do work at the Ulster University at Jordanstown where there seems to be a majority of Catholic students, you could see dozens of GAA tops from all over Ireland (loads of them from my native Tyrone) but very few Ulster Rugby or Norn Iron tops, however 90%of the cleaning and security staff seem to be from a Protestant background who seem to wear these poppies as a response to all the GAA tops.
Cleaning and security staff have wore poppies in Jordanstown long before students would regularly wear GAA tops.
It’s not in response to them wearing GAA shirts.
On the third Sunday in Sept, as I have for more than five decades, I watched the Jack’s not beat Mayo, then again on the first Saturday in October I watched as they did. I had, of course, previously, and gladly, watched Tipperary take the real all Ireland, the Liam McCarthy Cup back to Thurles, I even watched the ladies final but, in none of these games did I see, on any geansai, even in the year that’s in it, an Easter Lilly.
The Unionists can keep their commitment to the germans, even though there was a paucity of them leaving the six Ulster counties to fight for their kaiser in 1939, and after, but, in their oft quoted spirit of equality, is it not time the same respect they demand was not afforded the symbol commentating those who fought for this country?
The ‘Easter lily’ unfortunately isn’t a symbol only to remember those who fought legitimately for Ireland, but also includes those involved in illegitimate breakaway groupings and illegal gangs.
If it were the former, then I’d agree that it ought to be accorded equal status.
The fact that the ‘lily’ isn’t a mainstream symbol in Ireland, but is worn only by those who designate themselves as ‘republican’ (ie supporters of the PIRA and other recent illegal groupings) tells its own story.
MT, you must have avoided the Capital this year, many, many persons, from all over our country were there wearing the symbol of thise who fought for our frredom.
On the ‘The ‘Easter lily’ unfortunately isn’t a symbol only to remember those who fought legitimately for Ireland, but also includes those involved in illegitimate breakaway groupings and illegal gangs.’ I take it, when wearing that red flower to commemorate Brit. dead, it also commemorates the UDR whose record within ‘illegal gangs’ as well of course as the same involvement by the mainstream Brit. army, is what ensures Irish people maintain a distaste for the same.
“MT, you must have avoided the Capital this year, many, many persons, from all over our country were there wearing the symbol of thise who fought for our frredom.”
No doubt more people than usual wore it because of the centenary commemoration, but this year was exceptional because of that and still the numbers weren’t huge relative to the overall population. And we’ll see next Easter whether anyone other than republicans sport the emblem.
“On the ‘The ‘Easter lily’ unfortunately isn’t a symbol only to remember those who fought legitimately for Ireland, but also includes those involved in illegitimate breakaway groupings and illegal gangs.’ I take it, when wearing that red flower to commemorate Brit. dead, it also commemorates the UDR whose record within ‘illegal gangs’ as well of course as the same involvement by the mainstream Brit. army, is what ensures Irish people maintain a distaste for the same.”
It remembers all servicemen and women who died in conflict, presumably also those members of the UDR who were murdered. That’s not the same as supporting illegal acts by members of the UDR or of any other regiment in NI or in any other regiment, place or time.
Fair enough MT, we shall not agree on this however, the point I made above regarding equality of both symbols remains.
For my part I have no respect for anyone who donned the uniform of the oppressors, be they British in Ireland or American in Vietnam, or both in Iraq and Lybia but, I have spent my professional career promoting equality, I should appreciate the same being afforded what I respect.
“Fair enough MT, we shall not agree on this however, the point I made above regarding equality of both symbols remains.”
It doesn’t hold, though, because the two symbols aren’t equivalent
“For my part I have no respect for anyone who donned the uniform of the oppressors, be they British in Ireland or American in Vietnam, or both in Iraq and Lybia but, I have spent my professional career promoting equality, I should appreciate the same being afforded what I respect.”
There can be no equality of status between illegal terrorist organisations of whatever hue and the recognised legitimate and lawful armed forces of democratic and legitimate states, regardless of unlawful actions that the latter may have committed . And thus no equality of status for a symbol promoting equivalence between the two.
“If it were the former, then I’d agree that it ought to be accorded equal status”
Of course the Lily and Poppy aren’t equal MT, the Easter Lily is much more honourable. We don’t need anyone (that includes you MT) to agree for it to be given “equal status”.
The Easter Lily represents those who fought against British occupation in Ireland, for freedom. The Poppy represents those who fought mostly for British Imperialism across the globe, which is often disguised as “freedom”. I fail to see how inventing Concentration camps and raping Mau Mau people was fighting for “freedom”…..
I see you’ve wrote a lot of comments which consisted of your usual self righteous and hypocritical nonsense MT but I honestly would rather spend my time watching an episode of The Chase than reply. Goodnight.
“Of course the Lily and Poppy aren’t equal MT, the Easter Lily is much more honourable. We don’t need anyone (that includes you MT) to agree for it to be given “equal status”.”
Nonsense. The only people who promote the ‘Easter lily’ are pro-terror nationalists. The vast majority of Irish people don’t wear it or consider it equivalent to the poppy, and nor is it by any objective test.
“The Easter Lily represents those who fought against British occupation in Ireland, for freedom. The Poppy represents those who fought mostly for British Imperialism across the globe, which is often disguised as “freedom”. I fail to see how inventing Concentration camps and raping Mau Mau people was fighting for “freedom”…..”
There was no “British occupation in Ireland” and the poppy has nothing to do with the invention of concenation camps or rapes.
“I see you’ve wrote a lot of comments which consisted of your usual self righteous and hypocritical nonsense MT but I honestly would rather spend my time watching an episode of The Chase than reply. Goodnight.”
Why, then, did you immediately reply to another of my comments?
But it begs the question: should the Easter Lily be worn by those who object to the “blood drenched” red poppy? Would you wear an Easter Lily even though it honours, say, a guy who blew up a chip shop?
Yeah because MT says it doesn’t mean that you support anything.
“Yeah because MT says it doesn’t mean that you support anything.”
It does mean, however, that you consider the armed forces to be legitimate, and similarly anyone wearing a ‘lily’ is attempting to legitimise variously the anti-Free State IRA, post-civil war IRA and other more recent nationalist terror gangs and death squads. Hence why it has never become a mainstream symbol.
Does wearing the poppy legitimize British security force agencies co-operating with loyalist terrorist gangs to murder innocent Catholics? Yet the British establishment have not come clean on this despite the mounting evidence showing this squalid reality. The poppy has become hijacked by those who support British militaristic misadventures abroad when it should be seen as a universal symbol respected by all.
“Does wearing the poppy legitimize British security force agencies co-operating with loyalist terrorist gangs to murder innocent Catholics?”
Of course not. What a ridiculous question.
There’s a lot of disingenuous thinking going on in this poppy debate.The “poppy” was supposed to be a crepe( or maybe plastic, now) representation of the flower growing on the battlefields of Flanders…a rememberance of loss during “the war to end all wars”. It was a senseless war in every way and anyone who cares to dig into its origin story will come away appalled at how a generation of men were manipulated by governments into throwing away their lives for nothing. Now if it was simply to remember those poor lost men, the poppy would be a grand and fine gesture with a notion of that plagued , specific battlefield.
Unfortunately , since then, the “remembrance” part of the story has been grafted onto every other conflict that the British army has been involved in since those times…and before…….remembering all the while that the time-frame also includes the period where Ireland was divided by the force of those same British arms.
We can go backwards and forwards from the point in time of those Flanders poppies and we’ll find conflicts across the world involving British soldiers that have nothing to do with the “poppy” and what it supposedly represented. It cannot be asked to represent the conflict in Ireland where many men from both countries died during the Troubles,because the people were divided between those who supported the British army’s presence and those who opposed Britain having any right to be there in the first place . Buying and wearing a poppy in those circumstances means taking sides. There’s an immediate division right there. Had it simply represented the loss of life in the armageddon of the fatuous World War One , then it might be regarded much like the pink cancer ribbons and supported by everyone ,with a heart and a hand, but that is not the case .What we are being asked to support are the dubious British adventures and actions all across the world… and in our case, in Ireland, throughout the ages for the last 800 years. Many people find that distasteful even though they might still have sympathy for individual british men caught up in conflict , such as the “Guinea Pig Club” of damaged airmen which was recently in the news or even an admiration for the bravery of individual men.
It’s a fact though , that the poppy and remberance of the British involvement in all their various wars and conflicts were only supported by one section of our divided community and further afield in England , not by everyone at all.Every year , for many years the remembrance ceremonies were only attended by the unionist side of the community , whose fathers, sons and daughters supported the British actions , whether right or wrong . Nationalists stayed away completely . There are many who think the poppy simply represents the military force and there are also many who don’t think too deeply at all. .That is why no-one should be pressured in any way ,to wear a poppy. It means different strokes for different folks . To see this symbol in the lapel of everyone sitting on a sofa on television , in some cases possibly an enforced gesture by the television autority, actually cheapens the symbology of the gesture anyway. It cannot be separated from a political position , so it is in reality a “political” symbol .I really don’t think that point can really be argued.
“Unfortunately , since then, the “remembrance” part of the story has been grafted onto every other conflict that the British army has been involved in since those times…and before……”
It hasn’t. Only the Second World War and conflicts after 1945 have been ‘grafted on’.
“.remembering all the while that the time-frame also includes the period where Ireland was divided by the force of those same British arms.”
It doesn’t. ‘Partition’ was in 1921 and it wasn’t effected by British arms but by Act of Parliament.
“We can go backwards and forwards from the point in time of those Flanders poppies and we’ll find conflicts across the world involving British soldiers that have nothing to do with the “poppy” and what it supposedly represented. It cannot be asked to represent the conflict in Ireland where many men from both countries died during the Troubles,because the people were divided between those who supported the British army’s presence and those who opposed Britain having any right to be there in the first place . Buying and wearing a poppy in those circumstances means taking sides.”
It means remembering all servicemen who died in the First World War, Second World War and post-1945 conflicts. Nothing more and nothing less. Stop trying to turn it into something it isn’t. Stop trying to impose your narrow outlook on to others.
“What we are being asked to support are the dubious British adventures and actions all across the world… and in our case, in Ireland, throughout the ages for the last 800 years.”
You’re not. You’re not being asked to support any conflict. You’re being offered a way of remembering servicemen killed in the First World War, Second World War and post-1945 conflicts.
The amount of apparent misinformation and misunderstanding out there is incredible.
So YOU wear your Easter lily in remembrance of individual IRA members but this doesn’t mean you support the IRA. Whether or not you support the actions of the English army you can still wear your poppy with pride and stick it up the taigs to boot. And it is an English army with mercenaries from other areas.
MT, ‘and it wasn’t effected by British arms but by Act of Parliament.’
The Curragh mutiny was almost wholly responsible for the decision of the Brit. government to partition our ‘small nation’.
And the poppy of course commemorates these same bowsies.
“The Curragh mutiny was almost wholly responsible for the decision of the Brit. government to partition our ‘small nation’.”
No it wasn’t.
“And the poppy of course commemorates these same bowsies.”
It doesn’t. It remembers those who died in war because they died in war. It doesn’t imply support for anything else they did or didn’t do.
Do you not see the contradiction,MT, of supporting the fighters but not the fight. What about the brave volunteers of Óglaigh na hÉireann? Could you see yourself ever wearing a lily?
“Do you not see the contradiction,MT, of supporting the fighters but not the fight.”
There is no contradiction as millions demonstrate every year by wearing the poppy while also not agreeing with many of the conflicts in which they died. The ‘fighters’ don’t decide when to go to war but they pay the price on our behalf and that is why people think it’s important to remember them.
Of course it didn’t stop them supporting Lee Clegg and the 2 Scots Guards who murdered Peter McBride.
If it is not political then why is there such an uproar when a person in the public eye refuses to wear one?
It is there to support those who served in the British forces irrespective of the crimes committed no inconvenient questions asked.
“Of course it didn’t stop them supporting Lee Clegg and the 2 Scots Guards who murdered Peter McBride.”
What didn’t stop who from supporting the soldiers mentioned?
“If it is not political then why is there such an uproar when a person in the public eye refuses to wear one?”
Because of the apparent public pressure for people to conform and the apparent upset caused to many by the perception that people are being disrespectful of the war dead.
“It is there to support those who served in the British forces irrespective of the crimes committed no inconvenient questions asked.”
It remembers those who died and supports those with injuries and other needs incurred while serving. While it’s possible that some of those remembered or supported committed crimes there is no evidence of this and, in any case, seems rather mean to object to remembering the millions of war dead because of the actions of a small number. Rather it seems like fallacious rationalisation by those viscerally opposed to the British military.
MT …I’m afraid you’ve been living under a rock if you truly believe the things you’ve written…or you’ve no real insight as to how the” poppy” is being used in remembrance services and elsewhere and where the money from its sales goes.. Today I drove past a UVF/UFF/UDA (take your pick!) mural adorned with two large poppies depicting a trench with british soldiers and the legend “Lest We Forget”…..It’s plainly clear which paramilitary grouping has taken ownership of the little red wildflower.The message is plain …the poppy belongs to us.Like it’s “Our Wee Ulster” …it’s also very clear that …. “It’s Our Wee Poppy” too.
The symbolic flower comes from Flanders and WW 1, but on Remembrance Sunday , locally ,the Boer War and the Crimea , not to forget the South African campaign of 1899-1902 are also invoked nearby as the wreaths are laid. There’s a Russian cannon, captured from the Russians in the Crimea and nearby is a memorial dedicated to the memory of the officers, noncommissioned officers and men of the Princess Victoria’s Royal Irish Fusiliers who fell in the service of “their country”, during the South African Campaign 1899 – 1902.
What you are still asking MT , by remembering these dead soldiers, is to remember and support incursions into other peoples’ countries w,hether we think it was a moral thing to do or otherwise . Many now believe….and likely believed then too, that, for example , Britain had no business to be in those foreign places in the first place, just as they believe they had no business being in Ireland. If you believe that the amount of misunderstanding and misinformation out there is incredible , I think that you’ll discover that it appears to cut right across the board. Many appear to believe that the remembrance(and the actual sales of the poppies) is to do completely with the British Legion and its support of any living soldiers from all the conflicts , including the recent conflict right here on our doorstep a mere twenty years ago , which was played out within a bloodily divided community. One side of that community supporting their every action and in turn being used by them on the side … That fact alone would make it a difficult sell to many .
“MT …I’m afraid you’ve been living under a rock if you truly believe the things you’ve written…or you’ve no real insight as to how the” poppy” is being used in remembrance services and elsewhere and where the money from its sales goes.. Today I drove past a UVF/UFF/UDA (take your pick!) mural adorned with two large poppies depicting a trench with british soldiers and the legend “Lest We Forget”…..It’s plainly clear which paramilitary grouping has taken ownership of the little red wildflower.The message is plain …the poppy belongs to us.Like it’s “Our Wee Ulster” …it’s also very clear that …. “It’s Our Wee Poppy” too.”
I’m glad to tell you that loyalist gangsters don’t define what the poppy represents. The appeal is organised by the Royal British Legion.
“The symbolic flower comes from Flanders and WW 1, but on Remembrance Sunday , locally ,the Boer War and the Crimea , not to forget the South African campaign of 1899-1902 are also invoked nearby as the wreaths are laid. There’s a Russian cannon, captured from the Russians in the Crimea and nearby is a memorial dedicated to the memory of the officers, noncommissioned officers and men of the Princess Victoria’s Royal Irish Fusiliers who fell in the service of “their country”, during the South African Campaign 1899 – 1902.”
I’m not sure to where you are referring but it remains the case that Remembrance is only in relation to WW1, WW2 and post-1946 conflicts.
“What you are still asking MT , by remembering these dead soldiers, is to remember and support incursions into other peoples’ countries w,hether we think it was a moral thing to do or otherwise.”
First, I’m not asking anyone to do anything. And second, as I’ve already explained to you, wearing a poppy doesn’t mean one is supporting any incursions.
, If you believe that the amount of misunderstanding and misinformation out there is incredible , I think that you’ll discover that it appears to cut right across the board. Many appear to believe that the remembrance(and the actual sales of the poppies) is to do completely with the British Legion and its support of any living soldiers from all the conflicts , including the recent conflict right here on our doorstep a mere twenty years ago , which was played out within a bloodily divided community. One side of that community supporting their every action and in turn being used by them on the side … That fact alone would make it a difficult sell to many .”
It may do, and it would still be unreasonable, but that’s a quite different reason than those articulated by Jude.
http://eamonnmallie.com/2013/11/why-i-wear-a-poppy-by-alex-kane/
As so often I find Alex Kane articulates things better than I ever could.
Jude, you should ask him to do a guest blog. It would make a nice change from the one sided nature and hyperbole language of this site. More the fool me I suppose for reading along.
I have a lot of time for Alex’s view on this and on many things , Scott. His references shadow some of my own, although I like to believe that there is as much bravery, in being anti -war in such colloquial circumstances … and possibly more bravery in resisting being herded like cattle to satisfy friends’ and fellows’ desires. Many went to war thinking more of adventure than of anything else; Many driven by nothing more than peer .pressure.The line …”neither of them wanted to dwell on the reasons which had driven them to volunteer in 1914 rather than wait to be conscripted”, I though their choice with hindsight , possibly embarrassed them or their sense of themselves, in some way, or at the very least ,brought them no joy to remember their younger more naive selves.That’s a lot different from being brave or a coward.,
“It would make a nice change from the one sided nature and hyperbole language of this site.”
Scott this site is one of the few places where a Nationalist/Republican viewpoint is the predominant one. Maybe you should ask that question of the mainstream media and in particular the BBC where a unionist mindset means that if you are not prepared to wear a poppy you will not be seen or heard.
“It would make a nice change from the one sided nature and hyperbole language of this site. More the fool me I suppose for reading along”
No one has you padlocked to this blog Scott……I’m sure you have no issue with one sidedness, the issue here for you is because its not the one sidedness you want. This is predominately a Nationalist blog. Of course you ignore the fact Jude allows you to express your viewpoint. If I were to go to any Unionist blog most will block and ban me as soon as they know I’m a Catholic or a “taig”, which has happened. And no, I didn’t get banned for any other reason except when I revealed I was not a protestant unionist.
Ah Ryan I’m afraid to speak about a subject you know absolutely nothing about, which is my opinion on one sidedness or perhaps a more accurate description would be propaganda on blog sites or any other media outlet.
Madness by the FA and the SFA..however controversial it was previously its much more so now. What is the IFA position? Are they the voice of reason now?
I love the courage of any man who can who boast here that he wears a Poppy but hasn’t the balls to append his name.
“Loyalty is a sentiment, not a law”
The poppy debate is now a regular feature in the media. Many veterans of the trenches, however, refused to wear poppies, arguing that the symbol had been hijacked in order to legitimize conflict in various parts of the world.
The media tends not to give as much attention to an issue, closer to home. Reprieve has published a report, ‘Belfast to Bahrain: The Torture Trail.’ (September 2016) It deals with the fact that NI-CO, a state-owned company based in Belfast, is deeply involved with Bahrain’s Interior Ministry. According to Human Rights Watch, the Ombudsman referred 138 cases to the Special Investigations Unit from July 2013 to June 2016.
NI-CO’s contract with Bahrain’s prisons started in March 2015. That same month, some prisoners in Bahrain staged a major protest in response to extremely poor conditions inside a prison. This demonstration was followed by a campaign of reprisals and torture (p.8)
Some communities in Bahrain hold almost nightly protests which frequently end with police firing tear gas. Children as young as 13 have been arrested and tortured following protests (p.10)
Sending PSNI officers abroad requires permission from the Northern Ireland Policing Board. NI-CO made an application, which claimed there were no serious human rights concerns, and described Bahrain as “largely peaceful”. (p.11)
Reprieve recommends that NI-CO take the following actions in respect of the above:
“Ceases all work in Bahrain’s security and justice sectors until the government ratifies the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and allows the UN special rapporteur on torture to visit Bahrain.” (p.15)
The poppy fascists made it political, especially here in the 6cos
And of course war is political so remembering and supporting those involved in war is, by extension, political.
Same as the colonial ‘authorities’ did with the English language. It belongs to one side and we’ll beat it into the rest.
DUST BELT STATES
Lie down there now like a nice little Croppy
Man up – or else – and wear that d. Poppy
We’ ve our own S. Nolan
Much given to own goalin
Free Southern Stateen papers, please copy.
Well said, Jude, despite the time limitations.
The poppy is evidently a political symbol. It is so by the very fact it stirs such debate and controversy, especially in the north of Ireland (for obvious reasons).
Besides, we’re repeatedly told by wearers, campaigners, British politicians and the British media that it remembers those who paid the ultimate sacrifice in defending Britain (or in defending British interests, if they were to be more accurate), lest we forget, and is directly associated with Armistice Day. Defending British interests is an inherently political act and the armistice itself was clearly a political event. I simply can’t fathom how some wearers can insist that the poppy isn’t a political symbol .
The most bizarre section of last night’s short debate was Stoker insisting the FAI’s 1916-commemorative jersey was political but that a jersey featuring a poppy wouldn’t be. His self-delusion was so strong that he genuinely seemed convinced that there was no contradiction whatsoever in his position.
For what it’s worth, I’d be interested in hearing FIFA’s position on the FAI’s 1916 jersey as I’m not sure how exactly the FAI got round the rule on jersey symbols on that occasion. As far as I know, the rule still applies to friendly fixtures. There does appear to be an inconsistent application on FIFA’s part then. Maybe FIFA just hadn’t been aware of the 1916 commemoration at the time?
An update on FIFA and the FAI’s 1916 jersey; the FIFA disciplinary committee is evaluating it and is “considering sanction”, according to The42.ie: http://www.the42.ie/ireland-1916-shirt-fifa-3060279-Nov2016/
“A Fifa spokesperson said “The disciplinary committee of Fifa is evaluating the matter” of Ireland’s shirt.
The spokesperson added that there is no specific date for a decision.
Ireland had the years 1916-2016 and other symbols on their jerseys for the 25 March friendly against Switzerland.
When contacted by The42, the Football Association of Ireland said it was unlikely they will be commenting.
England and Scotland have used the Ireland example in their negotiations with Fifa over whether they can wear poppies on black armbands when they play each other in a World Cup qualifier on November 11, which is Armistice Day and the traditional day for Britons to pay tribute to their war dead.
Fifa has rejected the poppy saying it is a political symbol.
Fifa sources said that Ireland did not need to ask permission for a friendly but there are different rules for World Cup matches and other official tournaments.”
That last line appears to suggest that the rule may not have applied to a friendly game, but why would FIFA be investigating it if that was the case?
Clarity as to what FIFA deems a political symbol (or not) would be interesting as you could argue that even having national flags on jerseys (as is a common feature under the crest along with the match-date) is political.
“That last line appears to suggest that the rule may not have applied to a friendly game, but why would FIFA be investigating it if that was the case?”
Friendly games and Competitive games are treated differently by FIFA, I cant see Ireland being sanctioned or if they do it will be light, maybe just a warning, that’s my opinion anyway. Ireland didn’t willingly defy FIFA rules, I don’t even think FIFA knew about the rule breaking till England disgracefully brought it up. But that game where Ireland wore the 1916 jersey was a friendly, it was against Switzerland and it wasn’t even noticeable anyway, a poppy is far more noticeable. That game happened before the Euros, it was a warm up friendly.
On the other hand, England and Scotlands behaviour over the past few days will have angered FIFA, especially when both have said they will willingly defy FIFA’s ruling and proceed to wearing the poppy in a competitive match. I don’t know what will happen but I’d bet my last pretty penny that FIFA will make examples of both of them and dock them World Cup Qualification points or possibly a large fine or both. The point of a heavy sanction in this case isn’t because England/Scotland are breaking the rules, its because they are doing it deliberately and disrespectfully beforehand. FIFA comes down hard on this type of rule breaking.
I don’t know what the NI team is planning on doing but they will put themselves in the same boat as England if they defy FIFA rules.
“Friendly games and Competitive games are treated differently by FIFA…”
Didn’t FIFA similarly disallow the FA from wearing poppy-embroidered jerseys in a friendly against Spain in 2011 though? Instead, the FA had their players wear arm-bands featuring the symbol in what was reported at the time as a compromise arrangement. More on it here: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/nov/09/england-poppies-armbands-fifa-compromise
The Equipment Regulations appear to apply across the board to all FIFA-sanctioned games: http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/51/54/30/equipmentregulations-inhalt-e_neutral.pdf#page=87
In saying that, I don’t imagine the FAI brazenly or knowingly set out to defy FIFA’s equipment rules, assuming they applied to Ireland’s friendly fixture against Switzerland. If the FAI had been informed the 1916 feature would have breached a rule before that game, I can’t imagine they’d have ploughed on with it regardless. Whether FIFA will bother too much about the matter retrospectively – especially as it wasn’t worn in competition – remains to be seen.
On the other hand, the self-entitled “FIFA won’t tell us Brits what to do!” attitude expressed by the FA, politicians in Westminster and the English media is profoundly arrogant. They appear to think they (and a particular political symbol they fetishise and revere) should expect to receive some sort of special treatment. Why should their preferred political symbol receive preferential treatment over all others?
FIFA have a set of rules. Whether you think some of them are stupid or not, if you wish to participate in FIFA competition, you have to abide by those rules or be prepared to face sanction. What form such sanction may take if the FA go ahead and defy FIFA, I’m not sure. It might well be a points deduction and a fine, like how FIFA punished Cameroon in 2004 for wearing a one-piece kit (http://www.fifa.com/about-fifa/news/y=2004/m=4/news=cameroon-disciplinary-matter-explanation-decision-92356.html), although Cameroon did have their deducted six points reinstated on appeal after all 52 members of CAF asked FIFA to pardon Cameroon in the spirit of fair play (http://m.espn.com/soccer/story?storyId=301298&wjb=). The fine stood, however.
“1.Is the poppy a political emblem? No and Yes. As UKIP’s Bob Stoker pointed out”
Is this the same UKIP Bob Stoker that once said in an article that he didn’t mind UDA/UVF memorials or the UDA/UVF memorials using the poppy? The article was sometime last year and it was about the fact that the Housing Executive refused to remove a memorial to UDA killers in South Belfast which was on Housing Executive owned land. Of course the DUP was very silent on the matter, though one of their councillors at the time (Ruth Patterson) and the son of Edwin Poots went to pay their respects at a parade in South Belfast to two UDA men who committed the Sean Graham Bookies sectarian massacre…..very little (or nothing at all) is said about the fact the UDA/UVF decorate their memorials with poppies. There again I suppose they have a right to, given the UDA/UVF were taking orders from and ARE working for the British State….Dee Stitt is even getting a salary, no arrests or questioning yet for being a commander of an active terrorist group…..
” the British invented the concentration camp”
You wont hear that being taught in any British classroom, that’s for sure. Nor indeed the fact Winston Churchill (voted Best Briton of all Time) was one of the first politicians to order the use of chemical weapons against Kurdish people in Iraq…..one thing you can be absolutely sure of and that is that those that wear the poppy don’t want to hear the hard truths about the genocides and misdeeds the British Army got up to. They want to turn a blind eye to it or, when it comes to a lot of Unionists in the North, they actively support these misdeeds. Bloody Sunday is one example. Another was when the Mau Mau people won their case for compensation in London in, I think, 2014. That July many Unionist 11th night bonfires were adorned with Kenya flags in reference to this specific case.
“Yet virtually all of them take the line of least resistance and wear the poppy”
Most are intimidated into wearing them, they know the reaction if they don’t wear it, they know there is an expectation that they should wear it. That’s why its called “Poppy Fascism” because it is a form of fascism. Only the likes of James McClean has the minerals and the guts to say no. Speaking of James McClean, I didn’t know James had a younger brother who plays football called Patrick McClean. He is said to be of similar character to James, so James might not be alone when it comes to refusing the poppy in a few years. Already some Premier League clubs are looking into signing him.
“4.Is James McClean a nut-case? Most definitely No”
Martin O’Neill, the Republic of Ireland manager, has twice said James McClean “has a heart of a Lion”. He said this after the Georgia game and again after the Moldova game. I’m merely speculating but I cant help but feel O’Neill is thinking more of McCleans stance on the poppy and the vicious opposition that comes with it. Of course O’Neill will have spoke to McClean in regard to the poppy, saying to watch what he says when refusing to wear it but there’s no doubt many in the Republic camp admire James courage, it takes guts to be in the situation James McClean has landed in and that’s why I admire McClean and support him in whatever way I can and I know I’m not alone.
“The fact is that many countries have little love for one another”
Its common knowledge that the Brits have more enemies in the World than friends, especially in Europe. I always remember tory Michael Hasseltine (I think that’s how his 2nd name is spelt) saying on Question Time a few years ago that the USA is no friend of Britain and makes reference to money coming from the USA to the IRA despite Britain “begging them to stop”. The video is on youtube of him saying that.
“that the Republic of Ireland have worn or may wear commemorative 1916 designs on their shirt doesn’t mean that the game between England and Scotland therefore should feature the poppy”
According to reports, FIFA is planning to sanction ROI for their 1916 shirt display (they were alerted to it by England/Scotland) but that also means they are planning to sanction England and Scotland (possibly NI too) for wearing the poppy. Sanctions can come in the form of fines or even docking World Cup qualification points. I cant see FIFA docking ROI World Cup points because they wore the 1916 jersey during a friendly match in March against Switzerland before the Euros. Whereas England, Scotland and NI plan to defy FIFA rules during World Cup Qualification games and defy them deliberately too.
” including Bob Stoker, seemed wedded to it last night, it was that the poppy is not a political emblem”
Its a ridiculous argument, of course the poppy is political, I think the fact politicians are arguing over it alone shows that its political lol Bobs logic last night appears to be: “Its OK to wear the poppy on the pitch but no one else is allowed to wear any other emblem in sport, especially one that I don’t like”. Typical Unionist hypocrisy…..I’m starting to think Unionist hypocrisy is as inexhaustible as the Sun’s hydrogen, there just seems to be no end to it……
“” the British invented the concentration camp”
You wont hear that being taught in any British classroom, that’s for sure.”
And nor should we hear it, given that it’s not true
“And nor should we hear it, given that it’s not true”
It is true MT.
“It is true MT.”
No it isn’t, as I’ve already explained.
“It means remembering all servicemen who died in the First World War, Second World War and post-1945 conflicts. Nothing more and nothing less. Stop trying to turn it into something it isn’t. Stop trying to impose your narrow outlook on to others.”
MT, this is patent nonsense. The sellers of poppies use the funds raised to assist the living survivors of britains wars, many of whom were horribly wounded. Not just those who died.
My understanding of the origins of the poppy symbol is that at first it was an anti war message. In recent years it has been transformed into a nationalistic fetish by warmongers. Whatever the original intentions may have been, and any attempt to remind people of the futility and horror of war was worthwhile, it has now become a hostage to militarism.
“MT, this is patent nonsense. The sellers of poppies use the funds raised to assist the living survivors of britains wars, many of whom were horribly wounded. Not just those who died.”
You’re conflating the remembrance aspect with the fundraising aspect. We were discussing the former, as was the Nolan discussion.
“You’re conflating the remembrance aspect with the fundraising aspect. We were discussing the former, as was the Nolan discussion”
MT, just stop, seriously, I’m saying that for your own sake because its getting embarrassing.
MT, are you seriously disassociating the wearing of a poppy to remember dead servicemen from the funds raised by selling poppies to assist living ex soldiers?
Should we commerate pilots who died in action while bombing civilians in Dresden and Rouen? Is it ok to condemn only those pilots who survived?
“MT, are you seriously disassociating the wearing of a poppy to remember dead servicemen from the funds raised by selling poppies to assist living ex soldiers?”
No.
“Should we commerate pilots who died in action while bombing civilians in Dresden and Rouen? Is it ok to condemn only those pilots who survived?”
One doesn’t condemn pilots. One condemns whoever made the decision to bomb civilian targets.
Was only following orders sir…..eh?
“One doesn’t condemn pilots. One condemns whoever made the decision to bomb civilian targets.”
You’ll have to unpack that for me, MT.
I wonder does MT apply that responsibility-relieving principle to all combatants in all conflicts, or only to those combatants whose side he’s on?
“I wonder does MT apply that responsibility-relieving principle to all combatants in all conflicts, or only to those combatants whose side he’s on?”
As with all my views, obviously I apply them consistently.
But you condemn, for example, IRA volunteers who, under orders from above, planted bombs in economic or military targets that led to the deaths of innocent civilians, or am I mistaken?
“But you condemn, for example, IRA volunteers who, under orders from above, planted bombs in economic or military targets that led to the deaths of innocent civilians, or am I mistaken?”
Yes of course I do, just as I would condemn any member of any other illegitimate illegal gang or grouping, not only for planting bombs, but for mere membership.
The implication of what you say is that you consider members of such gangs and groupings to be the moral equivalent of members of legitimate and lawful state armes forces. If so, what an appalling stance.
“Yes of course I do, just as I would condemn any member of any other illegitimate illegal gang or grouping, not only for planting bombs, but for mere membership. ”
I’ve read your replies, MT. It appears you can tolerate the bombing of civilians, depending on who does it and whether you deem it has some sort of ‘legitimacy’ about it.
Your attitude is duly noted.
“I’ve read your replies, MT. It appears you can tolerate the bombing of civilians, depending on who does it and whether you deem it has some sort of ‘legitimacy’ about it. Your attitude is duly noted.”
I’m not sure why you think that. Certainly I’ve neither said nor implied that I tolerate the bombing of civilians by anyone. On the contrary, unlike many here, I oppose it.
“I’m not sure why you think that. Certainly I’ve neither said nor implied that I tolerate the bombing of civilians by anyone. On the contrary, unlike many here, I oppose it.”
But you wouldn’t condemn the pilots that do that actual killing of civilians – just those who told them to do it?
By the way, could you give examples of the “many on here” who don’t oppose the bombing of civilians, as it has formed part of your argument. A name or two out of the “many” would do. Thanks.
“But you wouldn’t condemn the pilots that do that actual killing of civilians – just those who told them to do it?”
It should be the most obvious logical deductions that if I condemn those who ordered the bombing of civilians, then I don’t support the bombing of civilians. Do you have a difficulty with logic and reasoning?
“By the way, could you give examples of the “many on here” who don’t oppose the bombing of civilians, as it has formed part of your argument. A name or two out of the “many” would do. Thanks.”
Ryan, Jessica and Wolfe Tone are all PIRA supporters.
“It should be the most obvious logical deductions that if I condemn those who ordered the bombing of civilians, then I don’t support the bombing of civilians. Do you have a difficulty with logic and reasoning?”
Why don’t you condemn those who actually carry out such bombings seeing as you’d condemn others whose political aspirations you oppose if they, under orders, carried out bombings that led to the deaths of civilians? There’s a very clear double standard there. Why are you more lenient to the former exactly?
Out of interest, do you hold members of the SS responsible for their involvement in or direct commission of the Holocaust, or do you relieve them of responsibility because “they were following orders”?
“Ryan, Jessica and Wolfe Tone are all PIRA supporters.”
You would never accept that your support for the British state and its army equates to supporting the bombing or killing of innocent civilians (as I’m sure you’re aware, the British army, acting on behalf of the British state, has bombed and killed many times more civilians than any Irish organisation ever has) – in fact, you’ve been strongly rejecting such a notion in your latest comments – so why do you apply a different standard to others based on your perception (whether correct or not, I have no idea) of where their sympathies lie?
“Why don’t you condemn those who actually carry out such bombings seeing as you’d condemn others whose political aspirations you oppose if they, under orders, carried out bombings that led to the deaths of civilians? There’s a very clear double standard there. Why are you more lenient to the former exactly?”
For the same reason I gave when you previously put that same point. There’s no double standard.
The member of the terror gang has chosen to join am illegitimate and illegal gang in the knowledge that he will be asked to carry out unjust, criminal atrocities against civilians. A member of the armed forces has no reasonable expectation that he will be ordered to carry out criminal acts. When instructed to do so, there is indeed a moral dilemma, assuming he is aware of the criminal nature of the act, but I’m not sure how reasonable it is to expect relatively junior personnel to disobey orders from senior command.
“Out of interest, do you hold members of the SS responsible for their involvement in or direct commission of the Holocaust, or do you relieve them of responsibility because “they were following orders”?”
I think it was clear that membership of the SS, which I believe was voluntary, involved criminal actions.
“Ryan, Jessica and Wolfe Tone are all PIRA supporters.”
“You would never accept that your support for the British state and its army equates to supporting the bombing or killing of innocent civilians (as I’m sure you’re aware, the British army, acting on behalf of the British state, has bombed and killed many times more civilians than any Irish organisation ever has) – in fact, you’ve been strongly rejecting such a notion in your latest comments – so why do you apply a different standard to others based on your perception (whether correct or not, I have no idea) of where their sympathies lie?”
Because I’ve read their contributiona when they’ve expressed support for PIRA terror.operations and the PIRA campaign as a whole, which targeted civilians.
Symbols are not like words. Words operate to convey meaning through the application of syntactical rules to their repeated use within a (more or less defined) language community. With words, users have a choice – what is the best word to use to convey my meaning to an identified person or group? Symbols are much less amenable to discussion of that kind – they work visually, like pictures, to fire up or focus our emotions, sometimes out of shared pity, or remorse, but often in the service of a ‘national’ or ‘political ’cause’.
But history, and its accommodation of ’causes’, doesn’t stand still. A symbol, like the poppy, that was once a poignant reminder of and and widely worn as an act of pious remembrance, honouring the millions of men and women who died on the fields of Flanders and elsewhere, has, over three generations, become a political symbol for many, both for some British people who have adopted the poppy as a symbol or rallying point for a spurious ‘nationalism’, and for other groups further afield who have been the victims of British nationalism since 1914. Let’s be honest – there is not a shred of justification for making an exception to the FIFA rule forbidding teams from wearing political symbols.