With the marching season having stretched into October the consensus on the ‘Summer’ parading has generally been positive i.e. there was no major rioting.
Possibly the most publicised incident of the season that was in it – was the appearance of Danny Kinahan (an ostensibly moderate Ulster Unionist MP) posing in front of a bonfire with a tricolour on the top whilst raising money for charity. For many, this is of course standard fare in Northern Ireland – Unionists who want to get elected (and re-elected) – well they have to do that sort of thing don’t they? Their electorate demand it. And as it turns out Danny’s UUP seat will be under threat as a result of the boundary commission proposals which would see the inclusion of quite a few voters (allegedly) very partial to the burning of Irish flags – and Danny could then see his seat pass to the (allegedly) more hardline DUP.
Nowadays, however, such behaviour is deemed a ‘hate crime’, but you would never have guessed it as politicians from all the Unionist parties and at all levels get involved in what Danny refers to as “having fun – and this is Protestant culture – let’s recognise each other’s cultures and get on with it.” No concern it seems from Unionists politicians for the legal niceties as they associate themselves freely with illegal sectarian activities.
The bould Danny tweeted his sectarian fund raising photo and presumably was not concerned to collect any readies for meningitis from Nationalists – and then, when challenged, offered one of the weakest apologies imaginable stating ‘I should have had the flag taken down before the photograph ‘.
A couple of days after his sectarian tweet, Danny was the toast of Westminster as he jovially exchanged words with the departing Prime Minister and made his way onto the British evening News when humorously quipping about whether Dave might fancy trying a stint as English football manager or as a Top Gear presenter where vacancies had recently arisen.
Oh how they all laughed and Danny’s twitter account was all a-twitter again.
But we do have to wonder whether any of the mirthful MPs were aware of Danny’s previous photo offering – given that Danny left it there for about a month before deleting it? We must presume not – as the same parliament which (rightly) took exception to any hint of antisemitism by its members would surely be also outraged at one of its own aligning himself with this much more serious (and illegal) anti-Irish activity – albeit across the Irish sea?
For most Nationalists in the North of Ireland the British parliament is not an institution which they wish to engage with or to dispatch one of their own to – but it is surely not too much to expect that those who are elected by the (Unionist) Northern Ireland electorate should maintain a reasonable standard of behaviour – and if MPs are to be censored for their anti-Semitic and racial associations in Britain, then should they not also be censored for their sectarian activities in Ireland?
This specific issue was brought to the attention of a Labour MP with an interest in Irish affairs who challenged Danny (unsuccessfully) to clarify his apology and was then also brought to the attention of the Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland – who declined to become involved. The matter has also been raised with a Scottish Nationalist Party MP who has challenged his fellow MP, Mr Kinahan on his behaviour.
But perhaps the rest of the British Parliament doesn’t realise what passes for acceptable behaviour by its members in the North of Ireland? But you never know, the ‘honourable members’ (as they enjoy calling themselves) might just avail of an opportunity to put their own House in order by making it clear to their less honourable (Unionist) colleagues that their sectarian behaviour in the North of Ireland is totally unacceptable?
Perhaps…
But when a petition which was worded:.”Parliament condemns MPs who engage in sectarian behaviour” is rejected (by the official Parliamentary petition body) because they argue that “Parliament is not responsible” for the sectarian behaviour of its own MPs – then most Nationalists in the North of Ireland might reasonably observe – no change there.
Naturally one condemns Danny for appearing to endorse the burning of the Southern Tricolour. But one wonders at a mentality that rightly condemns this yet thinks it’s OK for other MPs to take part, for example, in terrorist glorification parades and events.
MT – what do you expect in a society where the deputy first minister stands to eulogise the man who shot the father of the first minister in the head?
And where the first minister eulogises those who slaughtered innocent people in the deputy first minister`s home town.
Give Recruitment Sunday a rest, MT. It’s over until next November.
The ‘Southern Tricolour’ you need to crawl out from under your sectarian rock
“The ‘Southern Tricolour’ you need to crawl out from under your sectarian rock:
Thanks for that constructive and incisive contribution, but I’m not under a sectarian rock therefore it’s not possible for me to crawl out from under one.
The ”Southern” Tricolour?? As opposed to what…..?
“The ”Southern” Tricolour?? As opposed to what…..?”
As opposed to any other flag.
Not a “southern tricolour” as you so contemptuously and so pathetically call it. This honourable flag has an all-Ireland basis as it incorporates the two major Irish traditions, namely the Catholic and Protestant identities in the green and orange parts united by the white of peace and understanding. This national symbol of inclusivity came from the fruitful mind of one of the great Irish patriots, namely Thomas Francis Meagher, in the 1840’s, Meagher was one of the founder members of the Young Irelanders which had within it’s ranks members of all traditions e.g. William Smith O’Brien, an aristocratic member of the Church of Ireland. Contrast this with how the British union jack is used in the north of Ireland-a symbol characterized by religious and ethnic intolerance of one community’s identity by another for hundreds of years. This intolerance has now been extended to immigrants and other groups.
“Not a “southern tricolour” as you so contemptuously and so pathetically call it. This honourable flag has an all-Ireland basis as it incorporates the two major Irish traditions, namely the Catholic and Protestant identities in the green and orange parts united by the white of peace and understanding. This national symbol of inclusivity came from the fruitful mind of one of the great Irish patriots, namely Thomas Francis Meagher, in the 1840’s, Meagher was one of the founder members of the Young Irelanders which had within it’s ranks members of all traditions e.g. William Smith O’Brien, an aristocratic member of the Church of Ireland. Contrast this with how the British union jack is used in the north of Ireland-a symbol characterized by religious and ethnic intolerance of one community’s identity by another for hundreds of years. This intolerance has now been extended to immigrants and other groups.”
That’s fantastic but it’s the flag of Southern Ireland.
No such country as “Southern Ireland”.
“No such country as “Southern Ireland”.”
I’m sure you’re quite aware of which country I’m referring to. No need to play dumb.
“I’m sure you’re quite aware of which country I’m referring to. No need to play dumb.”
If I referred to the butchers apron MT, many people would know what flag I would be talking about, but it wouldn’t make my choice of words any less likely to cause offense to others.
I know how much you like to “accurate” and “right”.
No such place as “Southern Ireland”
“I know how much you like to “accurate” and “right”.
No such place as “Southern Ireland””
Zzzzz
No such place as ‘the six counties’ or ‘the north’ either, then, but that doesn’t mean people don’t understand what is being referred to.
Jog on.
Of course there’s such a place as the 6 counties and the north. That’s just idiotic.
Not quite as idiotic as “Southern Ireland” though I’ll give you that.
It is also the flag of thousands of Irish citizens who live north of the border and in that sense is extraterritorial.
“It is also the flag of thousands of Irish citizens who live north of the border and in that sense is extraterritorial.”
‘Irish citizens’ = citizens of Southern Ireland.
“Irish citizens = Southern Ireland”
Wrong.
“Wrong”
It’s not wrong. You’re wrong for saying it’s wrong.
The ignorance among contributors to this site never fails to amaze.
Sorry MT it’s once again YOU who likes to revel in you’re own ignorance.
Irish citizens does not equal citizens of “Southern Ireland”
I know how much you love to be “accurate”
“Sorry MT it’s once again YOU who likes to revel in you’re own ignorance.:
I’ve never previously revelled in my own ignorance so it’s not possible for me to do so again.
“Irish citizens does not equal citizens of “Southern Ireland””
Yes it does. You can’t be a citizen of an island: only of a state.
Incredible ignorance.
Wrong once again MT.
As there’s no such country as “Southern Ireland” the statement “Irish citizens = citizens of Southern Ireland” is completely incorrect.
This is really simple stuff we’re dealing with here.
I guess you’re just not as “accurate” as you like to think you are.
“Wrong once again MT.
As there’s no such country as “Southern Ireland” the statement “Irish citizens = citizens of Southern Ireland” is completely incorrect.
This is really simple stuff we’re dealing with here.
I guess you’re just not as “accurate” as you like to think you are.”
Whatever.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzz
The GFA stipulates that all residents north of the border are as fully entitled to Irish citizenship as British and thus the tricolour by implication is not restricted to south of the border and effectively covers all of Ireland.
“The GFA stipulates that all residents north of the border are as fully entitled to Irish citizenship as British and thus the tricolour by implication is not restricted to south of the border and effectively covers all of Ireland.”
It doesn’t. It’s the Southern flag. The fact that people.in NI are entitled to Southern citizenship as they always have been doesn’t alter the jurisdiction of the Southern state represented by the flag.
““The GFA stipulates that all residents north of the border are as fully entitled to Irish citizenship as British and thus the tricolour by implication is not restricted to south of the border and effectively covers all of Ireland.””
So the tricolour covers Carrickfergus and Ballymoney?
You heard it here first folks…
“So the tricolour covers Carrickfergus and Ballymoney?”
To all but a sectarian bigot, it does yes AG.
“To all but a sectarian bigot, it does yes AG.”
That’s untrue. The flag represents Southern Ireland.
“To all but a sectarian bigot, it does yes AG.
That’s untrue. The flag represents Southern Ireland.”
I am well aware it is the flag adopted by the republic MT.
But it is also the flag of the Irish people, and Carrickfergus and Ballymoney will always be part of Ireland. Therefore the people there are perfectly entitled to feel represented by the Irish tri colour every bit as much the people of west Belfast are entitled to be represented by the flag of the united kingdom.
In fact, the only reason to suggest they would not be, is to maintain the unionist line that the republic of Ireland is a foreign country and for a unionist to come to this site to make such a claim, the reason is purely to cause the offence that they know if will cause.
I know you, AG and other self proclaimed unionists on this site like to present yourselves as the voice of reason and to be bringing decency and fairness to this den of iniquity, but the reality is you are, just as all unionists who follow this line of thinking are, simply sectarian bigots who wish to maintain the sectarian division on this island.
“But it is also the flag of the Irish people”
Says who? Which Irish people?
“, and Carrickfergus and Ballymoney will always be part of Ireland. Therefore the people there are perfectly entitled to feel represented by the Irish tri colour every bit as much the people of west Belfast are entitled to be represented by the flag of the united kingdom.”
People can ‘feel represented’ by whatever flag they like. It doesn’t change the fact that the Southern Tricolour represents Southern Ireland.
There is no such thing as the Southern Tricolour MT, you are simply being disrespectful.
The Irish tricolour was the flag of the Irish nation before partition and I sincerely hope will remain the flag of the Irish nation long after partition is no more..
I am aware you have no interest in reconciliation or respecting Irish nationalism here, but surely you realise that your line of thinking is about to become a minority in northern Ireland.
How do you think these continuous insults will work out for you in the long term?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Ireland
The national flag of Ireland (Irish: bratach na hÉireann) – frequently referred to as the Irish tricolour (trídhathach na hÉireann) is a vertical tricolour of green (at the hoist), white, and orange.
Presented as a gift in 1848 to Thomas Francis Meagher from a small group of French women sympathetic to the Irish cause, it was not until the Easter Rising of 1916, when it was raised above the General Post Office in Dublin, that the tricolour came to be regarded as the national flag.
The flag was adopted in 1916 by the Easter Rising rebels and subsequently by the Irish Republic during the Irish War of Independence (1919-1921). Its use was continued by the Irish Free State (1922-1937) and it was later given constitutional status under the 1937 Constitution of Ireland. The tricolour is used by nationalists on both sides of the border as the national flag of the whole island of Ireland since 1916. Thus it is flown by many nationalists in Northern Ireland as well as by the Gaelic Athletic Association.
“There is no such thing as the Southern Tricolour MT, you are simply being disrespectful.”
Of course there is. And I’m not being disrespectful. On the contrary, it’s disrespectful to suggest that the Southern flag is the flag of all Ireland.
“The Irish tricolour was the flag of the Irish nation before partition and I sincerely hope will remain the flag of the Irish nation long after partition is no more.”
It had no status before ”partition’. Only in the minds of unrepresentative extremists was it the flag of the Irish ‘nation’.
“I am aware you have no interest in reconciliation or respecting Irish nationalism here, but surely you realise that your line of thinking is about to become a minority in northern Ireland.”
On the contrary, it is you – trying to insist that the Southern flag is that of all Ireland – who is showing a lack of interest in reconciliation.
“How do you think these continuous insults will work out for you in the long term?”
What continuous insults? It seems to me that the insults on this blog are invariably made by extreme nationalists and directed at perceived unionists
Why is it disrespectful to suggest that the Irish tricolour is the flag of the island of Ireland, and that the union jack is the flag of the UK including all of great britain and northern Ireland?
What is it you want, a return to the attempt to drive all Irish Catholics out of these 6 counties and to make it an exclusively unionist protestant state?
Do you not accept that the GFA allows us to choose between Irish or british identities or even both, and is backed up by both the UK AND Irish governments who are co guarantors of these rights?
Does unionism have any understanding of the meaning of compromise, equality and tolerance?
Do you not understand that continued intolerance and disrespect shown by unionism towards sections of the community who hold alternative views to their own is only going to result in a hardening of attitudes and as in my own case, has already led to a reciprocation of the bigotry and intolerance shown which in a post conflict society is not the example any of us should be promoting.
Why do you find it so hard to accept that we are a divided community, that the only way to ensure we do not return to conflict is to show tolerance, respect and compromise towards one another’s points of view?
“Why is it disrespectful to suggest that the Irish tricolour is the flag of the island of Ireland, and that the union jack is the flag of the UK including all of great britain and northern Ireland?”
First, it can’t be both. Second, to assert that the Southern flag is the flag of all Ireland is to assert Southern irredentism, disrespecting the agreed political arrangements on the island and NI’s place within the UK.
“Do you not accept that the GFA allows us to choose between Irish or british identities or even both, and is backed up by both the UK AND Irish governments who are co guarantors of these rights?’
First, I don’t think in binary terms where there is a choice between British and Irish identities. Second, we can choose whatever identity we want, we always could, we always will, and the GFA makes no difference to that. Third, our identities have no bearing on the Southern flag.
“Do you not understand that continued intolerance and disrespect shown by unionism towards sections of the community who hold alternative views to their own is only going to result in a hardening of attitudes”
Of course. But it seems that you don’t understand that the reverse is also true.
“Why do you find it so hard to accept that we are a divided community, that the only way to ensure we do not return to conflict is to show tolerance, respect and compromise towards one another’s points of view?”
I don’t find it hard to accept that we are a divided ommunity.
“First, it can’t be both. Second, to assert that the Southern flag is the flag of all Ireland is to assert Southern irredentism, disrespecting the agreed political arrangements on the island and NI’s place within the UK.”
I disagree MT, and it would accurately reflect the terms of the GFA in terms of respect for identities here.
There is only one official Irish anthem, yet the Rugby team stood for 2 anthems yesterday in Dublin as a sign of respect towards the views and identity of unionists in Northern Ireland.
In what way would similarly respecting the views and identity of nationalists in Northern Ireland be disrespecting the agreed political arrangements on the island and NI’s place within the UK?
It would not in any way impact on jurisdictional control which is what appears to be your concern.
“First, I don’t think in binary terms where there is a choice between British and Irish identities. Second, we can choose whatever identity we want, we always could, we always will, and the GFA makes no difference to that. Third, our identities have no bearing on the Southern flag.”
MT, someone born in northern Ireland to northern Irish parents cannot claim a US identity and would not be considered an American no matter how hard you believe it.
They will always be Irish for northern Ireland will always be part of Ireland, ALWAYS. They can if they choose be british for as long as northern Ireland remains within the UK, but highly unlikely after we leave.
“Do you not understand that continued intolerance and disrespect shown by unionism towards sections of the community who hold alternative views to their own is only going to result in a hardening of attitudes. Of course. But it seems that you don’t understand that the reverse is also true.”
And this is where we have the problem and why I have given up all hope of unionism changing before it becomes a minority.
I guess the important and difficult thing for all Irish nationalists on this island to do, is to try not to allow the unionist intransigence to spread and become as belligerent as it is, but equally to be determined that our identities be respected and when in the majority to ensure that true equality is guaranteed and unionist objections become no more than an irrelevant whinge in the background.
“I disagree MT, and it would accurately reflect the terms of the GFA in terms of respect for identities here.”
What would accurately reflect the terms of the GFA in terms of respect for identity here? The GFA recognises two separate jurisdictions in Ireland. Each has its own flag.
“There is only one official Irish anthem, yet the Rugby team stood for 2 anthems yesterday in Dublin as a sign of respect towards the views and identity of unionists in Northern Ireland.”
There are two Irish national anthems: the Soldier’s Song and God Save the Queen. Sadly Southern chauvinism doesn’t tolerate the latter, so a separate all-Ireland sporting anthem is appropriate on its own. It is disrespectful of the IRFU to continue to play the Southern anthem alongside it.
“In what way would similarly respecting the views and identity of nationalists in Northern Ireland be disrespecting the agreed political arrangements on the island and NI’s place within the UK?”
I’m unaware how the IRFU’s arrangements don’t respect the views an identity if nationalists in NI. It is unionists who aren’t respected by the arrangements.
“It would not in any way impact on jurisdictional control which is what appears to be your concern.”
What wouldn’t impact on ‘jurisdictional control’?
“MT, someone born in northern Ireland to northern Irish parents cannot claim a US identity”
Of course he or she could. He or she could ‘claim’ whatever identity he or she wished.
“and would not be considered an American no matter how hard you believe it.”
Almost certainly not. People would probably think the person in question was daft.
“They will always be Irish for northern Ireland will always be part of Ireland, ALWAYS. They can if they choose be british for as long as northern Ireland remains within the UK, but highly unlikely after we leave.”
Obviously he or she is Irish and obviously he or she can choose to identify as British. Nobody has said otherwise.
“And this is where we have the problem and why I have given up all hope of unionism changing before it becomes a minority.”
What problem and what are you saying is the reason for it?
“I guess the important and difficult thing for all Irish nationalists on this island to do, is to try not to allow the unionist intransigence to spread and become as belligerent as it is, but equally to be determined that our identities be respected and when in the majority to ensure that true equality is guaranteed and unionist objections become no more than an irrelevant whinge in the background.”
The only intransigence and belligerence being communicated in this conversation is by you.
“What would accurately reflect the terms of the GFA in terms of respect for identity here? The GFA recognises two separate jurisdictions in Ireland. Each has its own flag.”
I see, you are correct that the GFA recognises two separate jurisdictions in Ireland, there wouldn’t have been the issues over partition otherwise, but you are choosing to ignore that it also recognises two separate and equal identities in Northern Ireland, that of Irish and British.
“MT, someone born in northern Ireland to northern Irish parents cannot claim a US identity”
Of course he or she could. He or she could ‘claim’ whatever identity he or she wished.
“and would not be considered an American no matter how hard you believe it.”
Almost certainly not. People would probably think the person in question was daft.”
So what you are saying, is while someone born and raised in northern Ireland may hold an affinity to the island of Ireland because they were born on it, and look to the Irish tricolour as their flag and to Ireland as their country having their family history and connections going back far beyond partition.
But doing so is as absurd to you as someone picking any country or identity on the planet and basically we are all daft as a brush for doing so.
Does that sound about right?
“I see, you are correct that the GFA recognises two separate jurisdictions in Ireland, there wouldn’t have been the issues over partition otherwise, but you are choosing to ignore that it also recognises two separate and equal identities in Northern Ireland, that of Irish and British.”
That doesn’t make the Southern flag an all-Ireland one.
“So what you are saying, is while someone born and raised in northern Ireland may hold an affinity to the island of Ireland because they were born on it, and look to the Irish tricolour as their flag and to Ireland as their country having their family history and connections going back far beyond partition.”
This long sentence doesn’t appear.to make grammatical sense.
“But doing so is as absurd to you as someone picking any country or identity on the planet and basically we are all daft as a brush for doing so.”
Eh?
“Does that sound about right?”
No.
jessica
I have seen a lot of comment from Am G for quite a while now,both here and over on slugger.
He is clearly an open and thoughtful individual and he does not deserve your attacks.
If you think he is a sectarian bigot you are hopelessly lost in your own hatred.
You are making any kind of reasonable debate almost impossible on this site.
My comments were not made out of hatred gio, but in response to comments both he and MT made on this site which would have been clear to those that made them that it would cause offense.
I believe I have explained the reasoning behind my own comments.
No surprise that you once again rush to the defence of your fellow unionists.
I did wonder how long it would be before Am G would be tarred with the bigot brush too.
We should take hearts though, chaps, we’re moderate bigots.
Or should that be bigoted moderates; I do keep getting my nouns confused with my adjectives; and my bigots confused with my Unionists.
Thanks, Gio, for your comments.
And I trust that this reply will not result in you having to endure further criticism.
Jessica
In your view is there any room in Ireland for a political outlook called ‘Unionism’.
Or would you prefer that people’s freedom was restricted in that regard?
There is room in Ireland for any political outlook Peter.
Can I ask what you think Unionism has done or even is doing to reconcile itself with rest of the island, north or south or what it could do to fit in Ireland.
I have never denied your right to be british, I have never claimed the union flag did not represent you or your views.
I want what is best for all of the Irish people and I want discussions on that to be all inclusive and not to rule out anything, not unification, not all of Ireland going back into a union with britain, not anything important to any part of our people including unionism.
I can accept your political outlook is different to mine and respect it while you have the majority.
But if you cannot accept my political outlook while you have the majority, then do you think yours should be respected when you are in the minority?
Can I also ask you in return, where do northern nationalists who see the tricolour as our national flag fit in with your northern ireland as it is today?
Do you support the claims here that it does not represent us?
Do you think that such remarks could be considered offensive, or do you even care?
You claim to be a Christian.
Yet, you fail to see how this stance is anti Christian. How it meets the criteria of bigotry and maintains sectarian division.
While unionism refuses to compromise and respect views other than its own, I am afraid I will hold on to my views that it remains bigoted and sectarian.
Jessica
I think I should begin my reply with this:
“You claim to be a Christian.”
I do; however, there are many reasons why that claim might be invalid (my Christianity is not predicated on the idea that I am perfect and others are not) – but being guilty of making sectarianism comments on this website is not one of those reasons.
Beyond that,
“Can I also ask you in return, where do northern nationalists who see the tricolour as our national flag fit in with your northern ireland as it is today?”
Factually, the Tricolour is not the flag of Northern Ireland, just as the Union flag in not the flag of the Republic of Ireland. But I fear that even making that factual will result in comments that I am intolerant. Nationalists fit in NI as equal citizens of NI – you have all the entitlements that I have.
If people want the think of the Tricolour as their flag, that’s fine – that feeling, however, doesn’t change the fact of the matter.
When in Dublin, I recognise the Tricolour as the flag of the Republic and respect the Soldier’s Song as the Anthem. That is basic good manners.
“Do you support the claims here that it does not represent us?”
If you claim the Tricolour represents you, I’m fine with that.
“Do you think that such remarks could be considered offensive, or do you even care?”
I can see how you might be offended. The fact that I comment here would suggest some degree of “care”.
“Yet, you fail to see how this stance is anti Christian.”
In what way is making a secular, factual and political statement, “anti Christian”?
Christianity does not require me to change or dilute the political status of a nation.
Peter, I have never claimed that the Tricolour is the flag of Northern Ireland, I said it is the flag of Ireland.
I also said that a great many people in Northern Ireland view the flag of Ireland as representing them, not least because Northern Ireland is part of the island of Ireland and does not have any flag acceptable to all of the people here.
Where I consider unionist views to be intolerant is where you simply refuse to show any official consideration whatsoever for the views of nationalists in relation to flags and identity which matter to us.
It is simply your way or the highway and it is really up to you as to how that fits in with your Christian values.
What I would suggest is, consider how you would feel in the coming years when the shoe is on the other foot, should we behave in the same way.
I didn’t claim it was the flag of NI either. You asked me about northern nationalists, I replied.
I further recognised that many people in ‘The North’ regard the Tricolour as their own. Indeed I went further, saying I was fine with that.
Regarding Christianity, I can assure you that the flying of any flag has nothing to do with my Christianity – Tricolour, Union Flag, ‘Ulster’ flag or other. Christianity is preeminent over all other national loyalities – * all*. Quite specifically, I consider the phrase, ‘For God and Ulster’ to be blasphemous.
Trying to conflate my Christianity and political outlook is the wrong debate to be picking here.
Regarding shoes and the other foot, if (and when, for there will be) there is a United Ireland, I will respect the flag, anthem and government of that new state, without fostering sedition.
“I further recognised that many people in ‘The North’ regard the Tricolour as their own.”
Peter, I think I will change my views once again, and stop considering all unionists to be unwilling to compromise or to be tolerant of different views.
I accept we will all struggle to come to terms with the changes that will be taking place over the coming years and we should try to find more that we can agree on than divides us.
I would not wish for anything that you hold dear to be taken away from you and would always prefer to find a way to respect one another’s differences.
Just imagine the different reaction of the media if it was a photograph of a member of the SDLP standing beside a bonfire with a Union flag on it ready to be burnt. ?!?!
It would still be in the papers after all these months !
Its Very likely that he/she would be expelled from the party!
Was Danny Sanctioned at all by his party ?
If a member of any mainstream party in britain had done the same, they’d probably be sacked. Certainly disciplined!
If Unionists insist it’s best to stay in the U.K then why is the behaviour of their politicians more like Trump than that which is the norm in the Labour or Tory party or Lib Dems or SNP etc etc
I’ve deliberately used the SDLP as an example rather than S.F because Danny is a member of what most people see as the more moderate Unionist party & therefore a contrast with the more moderate nationalist SDLP is more appropriate.
Why are moderate unionists like UUP members more at ease with these types of idiotic sectarian displays than the moderate nationalist party ??
“Why are moderate unionists like UUP members more at ease with these types of idiotic sectarian displays than the moderate nationalist party ??”
I have wondered that myself Antonio.
I had hoped that the UUP would take a strategic near death plunge and distance itself from the many unsavoury elements of British nationalism and hard line unionism but unfortunately this is not the case.
‘Terrorist glorification parades and events’ – will you give over about the poppy day events?
“But one wonders at a mentality that rightly condemns this yet thinks it’s OK for other MPs to take part, for example, in terrorist glorification parades and events”
MT, the IRA/INLA were not terrorist. If they were then why would there be numerous streets in France, Italy, USA, Australia, Cuba, Iran, etc named after IRA members? Why would the Indian Parliament stand up for a minutes silence on the death of Bobby Sands? Why would the Russian/Chinese governments raise concerns over IRA prisoners treatment? Millions of Americans, American senators, etc were supportive of Irish Republicans and so were some British politicians. Nelson Mandela, in prison himself, even called Bobby Sands a “Hero” when he died.
Why would numerous great people express their admiration for IRA volunteers? Hollywood Actor Michael Fassbender said Bobby Sands was “fascinating”. Hollywood Actor Mickey Rourke (Sinn City, the Wrestler, etc) donated his entire fees from one film to pay for an IRA man’s legal fees to stay in the USA. Hollywood Legend Gene Kelly was highly supportive of Irish Unity/Republicanism. I could go on.
I’m sure most people on this blog will agree with me that your very out of touch MT and dedicated to ancient, close minded, Unionist principles that really do belong in the year 1690. Its time to move on MT….
I really do think its time Unionists started to show tolerance to Republican events and respect them. Republicans are always going to be living here, we’re not going away, in fact we’re growing in number. There will always be Republican parades, events, celebrations, etc and the only way forward is for Unionism to respect and tolerate these events. We’re not burning Union flags or deliberately marching through/by Unionist areas. We are celebrating our heritage and ours heroes with dignity.
“MT, the IRA/INLA were not terrorist.”
Yes they were.
“If they were then why would there be numerous streets in France, Italy, USA, Australia, Cuba, Iran, etc named after IRA members? Why would the Indian Parliament stand up for a minutes silence on the death of Bobby Sands? Why would the Russian/Chinese governments raise concerns over IRA prisoners treatment? Millions of Americans, American senators, etc were supportive of Irish Republicans and so were some British politicians. Nelson Mandela, in prison himself, even called Bobby Sands a “Hero” when he died. Why would numerous great people express their admiration for IRA volunteers? Hollywood Actor Michael Fassbender said Bobby Sands was “fascinating”. Hollywood Actor Mickey Rourke (Sinn City, the Wrestler, etc) donated his entire fees from one film to pay for an IRA man’s legal fees to stay in the USA. Hollywood Legend Gene Kelly was highly supportive of Irish Unity/Republicanism. I could go on.”
The test for whether an organisation is terrorist isn’t the absence of people supporting or sympathising with them: it’s whether or not their modus operandi was terrorism. IRA/INLA fit any definition of terrorism.
As for your question, there are many reasons: ignorance, naivety, romanticism, or simply they might be terrorist supporters.
“I’m sure most people on this blog will agree with me that your very out of touch MT and dedicated to ancient, close minded, Unionist principles that really do belong in the year 1690. Its time to move on MT….”
I’m neither out of touch nor dedicated to ancient closed-minded principles. I’m not harking back to 1169, 1800, 1916, 1969 or whatever historical grievance you think justifies modern-day murder. I’m not living in an extreme nationalist comfort zone raging at the rest of Ireland for not being nationalist enough or having the audacity not to hate Britain.
“I really do think its time Unionists started to show tolerance to Republican events and respect them. Republicans are always going to be living here, we’re not going away, in fact we’re growing in number. There will always be Republican parades, events, celebrations, etc and the only way forward is for Unionism to respect and tolerate these events. We’re not burning Union flags or deliberately marching through/by Unionist areas. We are celebrating our heritage and ours heroes with dignity”
On the contrary it’s long time society took a stand and stopped tolerating pro-terror events, nationalist and loyalist. It’s 22 years since the ceasefires yet we are still plagued by these people trying retrospectively to justify their crimes. Time to outlaw them.
“MT, the IRA/INLA were not terrorist”
Yes they were Ryan, they were an organisation that was proscribed (in many of the countries you listed).
They also blew people up, shot pensioners in the face, attacked a NATO base, attacked a cenotaph and many other things but you can somehow offset this with a Bobby Sands themed burger bar in Tehran?
Get out of yer small box Ryan.
An entire organisation dedicated to intimidation and killing and you think it’s offset by one individual who caught the public imagination.
I too have respect for Sands, it does NOT raise the IRA’s moral credit one iota.
It’s like saying that the DUP are cool because an American university gave Paisley a doctorate.
“I’m sure most people on this blog will agree with me that your very out of touch MT and dedicated to ancient, close minded, Unionist principles that really do belong in the year 1690”
Yes unionism needs a lecture from someone who has such a flimsy definition of terrorism.
“I really do think its time Unionists started to show tolerance to Republican events and respect them. ”
Knock yerselves out, I hold the IRA and UVF and UDA on an equally low footing, if fools are allowed to fly UDA banners then republicans should be allowed to do the same (though personally I’d ban the lot).
“I too have respect for Sands”
How can you have respect for a man so consumed with hate that he joined a terror gang, attempted to bomb a furniture shop, and then attempted to portray himself as a victim, seeking to legitimise his murderous organisation?
I know people who worked around him during his final days. It takes a great deal of strength to do what he did (starving).
I have respect for David Ervine too though he did bad things as well.
To respect a person is not (as Ryan thinks) to respect the cause or the organisation.
“Get out of yer small box Ryan.”
Says the man on his high horse. Dear oh dear.
A Shetland pony is a high horse judging by the low moral bar set on here sometimes…
UVF or UDA for example??
“UVF or UDA for example??”
Yes, any terror grouping, obviously.
MT,
That is an interesting subject for another visitor blog perhaps?
But the the issue here is whether parliament is interested or aware or inclined to keep its House in order?
“But the the issue here is whether parliament is interested or aware or inclined to keep its House in order?”
That’s your issue and it may be valid. But my issue is to observe the distorted values among some in our society who think standing beside a soon-to-be-burned flag is worse than glorifying murder gangs.
MT, please give Recruitment Sunday a rest. You’ll get another chance next year.
“But my issue is to observe the distorted values among some in our society who think standing beside a soon-to-be-burned flag is worse than glorifying murder gangs.”
That’s only your opinion MT, not fact.
“That’s only your opinion MT, not fact.”
It’s fact that this site hosted endless blogs condemning bonfires and not one condemning terror parades.
MT, it’s not that long ago that you were arguing in favour of commemorating British servicemen. Many of whom died committing war crimes.
Are you not being a little selective?
“MT, it’s not that long ago that you were arguing in favour of commemorating British servicemen. Many of whom died committing war crimes.
Are you not being a little selective?”
If some died committing war crimes that is no reason not to remember the rest, nearly 2 million of them.
Get a sense of.proportion .
re. “But my issue is to observe the distorted values among some in our society who think standing beside a soon-to-be-burned flag is worse than glorifying murder gangs.”
Then why don’t you ask Jude to allow you to do a blog on it?
Excellent suggestion.
He seems to comment on here every day & 90% of it is whataboutery.
Britain is not a secular country, it has discriminatory laws regarding it`s head of state. It has more in common with Iran than with the USA or the south. Or do Bishops from the Church of England not really sit in the house of lords?
Nor may any Catholic aspire to being head of state!
There is no restriction on any other religion –
blatant British discrimination against Catholics!
Government policy since the time of Elizabeth I!
“Nor may any Catholic aspire to being head of state!
There is no restriction on any other religion –
blatant British discrimination against Catholics!
Government policy since the time of Elizabeth I!”
Exactly, the Act of Settlement 1701 I believe its called, is still in force. David Cameron refused to repeal it despite many British newspapers calling it disgraceful, which of course it is. But I think its the last of the penal laws or certainly the last of the Anti-Catholic laws of that era. I believe the SDLP proposed it be scrapped and the Unionists from here were first to oppose it. Of course they said they weren’t being Anti-Catholic by opposing its scrapping. A bit like saying I don’t want a Black man to be Head of State but I’m not racist lol
Another thing, can it be said that Church and State really is separate in Britain? because if the Head of State is automatically head of the Church of England…..that’s hardly separate….
I think you’ll find, Ryan, that there are sufficient Republicans and Atheists in Britain who would welcome, and who will lobby for a separation of Church and State in a British Republic, once the current monarch dies.
At the very least, I expect significant constitutional change in the foreseeable future.
Just wondering, can a practicing Presbyterian be head of state?
https://www.channel4.com/news/british-royal-family-other-religions-same-sex-marriage
Ah, I see. Very clear, thankyou.
You’re welcome.
“Nor may any Catholic aspire to being head of state!
There is no restriction on any other religion –
blatant British discrimination against Catholics!”
https://www.channel4.com/news/british-royal-family-other-religions-same-sex-marriage
Please read this and square it away with what you wrote Sherdy.
“then most Nationalists in the North of Ireland might reasonably observe – no change there”
Is it any surprise given this is the same Parliament that still refuses to scrap the Act of Settlement 1701? Yes, there’s a Law still in enforce that came from the era when the Penal Laws were enacted….
Westminster has always been Anti-Irish and Anti-Catholic.
““So the tricolour covers Carrickfergus and Ballymoney?”
To all but a sectarian bigot, it does yes AG.”
I see.
So you get to reject Britishness (fair enough) but the people of these towns have no right to reject a flag that has unpleasant associations for them?
The tricolour is not the official flag of these areas yet if they adhere to that they’re ‘sectarian and bigoted’?
I supported the reduction of union flag flying on city hall because having it up 365 is simply goading (and not the done thing in the rest of the UK) yet you aren’t even prepared to concede that the flag of nationalism is not suitable for people who don’t share your political view?
You’ve a cheek to criticise mainstream unionism, you’re equally blinkered and stubborn.
Northern unionists (and ‘northern Irish nationalists’) want nothing to do with that flag, now, go back over all your posts over the years and al your claims about respect, equality and the arrogance/stubbornness/intransigence of unionism and tell me how you’re not a hypocrite?
You’d just as quickly lord it over northern non-nationalists as the unionists did to you, two sides of the same coin.
“So you get to reject Britishness (fair enough) but the people of these towns have no right to reject a flag that has unpleasant associations for them?”
I did not reject the britishness of any of the people in any part of northern Ireland, whereas you have rejected the irishness of the people of these towns.
I am saying the people in any part of Northern Ireland are entitled to hold the Irish identity equally as much as they are the british identity,
“The tricolour is not the official flag of these areas yet if they adhere to that they’re ‘sectarian and bigoted’?”
Adherence to any flag will not make someone ‘sectarian and bigoted’. It is the refusal by unionism to accept and respect that there are people who hold different views on their identity including the flag they adhere to here, that IS very much ‘sectarian and bigoted’ however.
“I supported the reduction of union flag flying on city hall because having it up 365 is simply goading (and not the done thing in the rest of the UK) yet you aren’t even prepared to concede that the flag of nationalism is not suitable for people who don’t share your political view?”
I have no problem accepting this AG, hence both political views must be considered equal. We should not impose either one on the other, not for 1 day never mind 365.
“You’d just as quickly lord it over northern non-nationalists as the unionists did to you, two sides of the same coin.”
I would readily accept this AG.
I have had my fill with unionism, and I accept that makes me no better or at least some of my comments any less ‘sectarian and bigoted’.
Perhaps it is something unionism should consider as not all of us have the capacity for tolerance that Sinn Fein has.
“I did not reject the britishness of any of the people in any part of northern Ireland, whereas you have rejected the irishness of the people of these towns.”
Not true, once again you’ve produced a straw man argument. Tricolour does not = ‘Irishness’, it’s arrogant in the extreme to say that it does.
I’m Irish but the tricolour is not my flag.
“I am saying the people in any part of Northern Ireland are entitled to hold the Irish identity equally as much as they are the british identity,”
Great, I never suggested otherwise.
““The tricolour is not the official flag of these areas yet if they adhere to that they’re ‘sectarian and bigoted’?”
“Adherence to any flag will not make someone ‘sectarian and bigoted’. It is the refusal by unionism to accept and respect that there are people who hold different views on their identity including the flag they adhere to here, that IS very much ‘sectarian and bigoted’ however.”
But that’s NOT what I was getting at, was it? You said only sectarian bigots in Ballymoney and Carrick would reject the tricolour, that’s NOT addressed by this paragraph.
Another straw man.
“You’d just as quickly lord it over northern non-nationalists as the unionists did to you, two sides of the same coin.”
I would readily accept this AG.
I have had my fill with unionism, and I accept that makes me no better or at least some of my comments any less ‘sectarian and bigoted’.
Thank you. That’s what we’ve all been getting at.
“Perhaps it is something unionism should consider as not all of us have the capacity for tolerance that Sinn Fein has.”
Well, I reckon most of unionism suspects this to be true hence why they’re still unionists, better the devil you know…
Sigh, you are getting as bad as MT AG, I did not say only sectarian bigots in Ballymoney and Carrick would reject the tricolour.
Any individual is perfectly entitled to reject any flag.
Ballymoney and Carrick are as much a part of Ireland as Dublin and Kerry and any individual living there is perfectly entitled to consider the Irish tricolour their flag and to represent them, IF THEY CHOOSE. It does not mean they are accountable to the jurisdiction of the republic or even supportive of a united Ireland.
Sectarianism and bigotry only comes into it if you try to deny the legitimacy for the people Ballymoney and Carrick to consider the irish tricolour as their flag and representing them. It does not mean it should be imposed upon them.
I know from experience that it does not work and only sullys the flag and upsets the good people it represents.
“I have had my fill with unionism, and I accept that makes me no better or at least some of my comments any less ‘sectarian and bigoted’.
Thank you. That’s what we’ve all been getting at.”
You should have just said, its not like I could deny it.
“I’m Irish but the tricolour is not my flag.”
I accept that AG, it is unfortunate but understandable so soon after conflict .
What could we do to make it more palatable?
Perhaps if we put as much of our energies into solutions as we do to highlighting the problems we might get somewhere.
” I did not say only sectarian bigots in Ballymoney and Carrick would reject the tricolour.”
vs
“To all but a sectarian bigot, it does yes AG.”
Please consolidate these points.
Ok AG, Ireland is one country divided into two jurisdictions, Northern Ireland which is 6 counties under british rule from London and Southern Ireland known as the Republic of Ireland which is self governed from Dublin. In Northern Ireland, the people have divided loyalties with some wishing to remain ruled from London and others who want Ireland to be self ruled and independent.
The Tricolour is the flag of Ireland represents the irish people on the island of ireland. That does not stop the british separatists who reject the irish flag as they prefer to be ruled from London.
You suggested that the tricolour did not cover Carrickfergus and Ballymoney, claiming we heard it here first that it did.
I responded that it did, that Carrickfergus and Ballymoney were as Irish as Dublin and Kerry and that only a sectarian bigot would suggest otherwise.
Then, in your typical shite talk fashion, you brought the argument down to your own level and claimed that I was suggesting that individuals in Carrickfergus and Ballymoney could not reject the tricolour was their flag.
I then had to clarify that they were perfectly entitled to reject the tricolour as being their flag.
Anyone anywhere here is entitled to do that as the GFA recognises joint identities of Irish and British here.
Nowhere in the changes to articles 2 and 3 does it claim the flag does not cover the whole island of Ireland.
Therefore, it is only those who would try to reject that the tricolour covers Carrickfergus and Ballymoney that I claimed would make them sectarian bigots.
“Ok AG, Ireland is one country divided into two jurisdictions”
Define country.
“The Tricolour is the flag of Ireland represents the irish people on the island of ireland.”
It’s not the flag of Ireland. It’s the flag of Southern Ireland.
“You suggested that the tricolour did not cover Carrickfergus and Ballymoney, claiming we heard it here first that it did. I responded that it did, that Carrickfergus and Ballymoney were as Irish as Dublin and Kerry and that only a sectarian bigot would suggest otherwise.”
They are indeed as Irish as Dublin and Kerry but they are in Northern not Southern Ireland and hence the Union Flag and not the Southern Tricolour is their flag.
“Anyone anywhere here is entitled to do that as the GFA recognises joint identities of Irish and British here.”
We have always been free to have whatever identity we wish. The GFA didn’t change anything.
“Nowhere in the changes to articles 2 and 3 does it claim the flag does not cover the whole island of Ireland.”
Article 3 makes clear the territorial extent of the constitution.
“Therefore, it is only those who would try to reject that the tricolour covers Carrickfergus and Ballymoney that I claimed would make them sectarian bigots.:”
Stating a fact doest not make one a sectarian bigot.
The tricolour is the flag of Ireland and of ths irish nation.
It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation.
Now you can claim otherwise until you are blue in the face MT, but it wont change these facts.
Article 2
It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.
Article 3
1.It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws enacted by the Parliament[2] that existed immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution.
2.Institutions with executive powers and functions that are shared between those jurisdictions may be established by their respective responsible authorities for stated purposes and may exercise powers and functions in respect of all or any part of the island.
“The tricolour is the flag of Ireland and of ths irish nation.”
It’s not. There is.no.agreed flag of Ireland. The Southern Tricolour is the flag of Southern Ireland and the Union Flag that of Northern Ireland.
“It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation.
Now you can claim otherwise until you are blue in the face MT, but it wont change these facts.”
The facts are as I’ve stated above.
“What could we do to make it more palatable?”
Put it in an old dusty room with the St Pat’s Cross and the Ulster flag (and someday the union flag) and remove it as a viable political option for the north.
“Put it in an old dusty room with the St Pat’s Cross and the Ulster flag (and someday the union flag) and remove it as a viable political option for the north.”
In other words nothing.
“Then you don’t have to.
But it does not give you the right to declare that on one in Carrickfergus or Ballymoney or any part of Ireland whatsoever, are not allowed to see the tricolour as their flag, just because they don’t?”
I didn’t declare that. Most people in Carrick and Ballymoney don’t want the tricolour as their flag.
If you disagree with this then feel free to say why.
Refer to my other post AG, it is possible I have misunderstood you.
Hopefully it will clarify
“““So the tricolour covers Carrickfergus and Ballymoney?”
To all but a sectarian bigot, it does yes AG.””
But what if you’re genuinely NOT a sectarian bigot?
For example, what if you’re agnostic or atheist and have no hatred of Catholics (or any other religion) but simply don’t see the tricolour as your flag?
If it has no legal status in Carrickfergus or Ballymoney (which it doesn’t, reeling off various southern acts and laws matters not one jot, it’s not the legal territory of the republic) and you simply have nothing to do with the flag and it’s not on your radar then how are you a sectarian bigot?
Are the offspring of the various immigrants to NI who don’t see the tricolour as their flag, are they sectarian bigots too?
I’m beginning to think that a sectarian bigot is just someone who disagrees with Jessica.
“But what if you’re genuinely NOT a sectarian bigot? For example, what if you’re agnostic or atheist and have no hatred of Catholics (or any other religion) but simply don’t see the tricolour as your flag?”
Then you don’t have to.
But it does not give you the right to declare that on one in Carrickfergus or Ballymoney or any part of Ireland whatsoever, are not allowed to see the tricolour as their flag, just because they don’t?
It is not that difficult to understand, it is called tolerance and respect and is exactly what I am claiming unionism is bereft off, hence your difficulty in coming to terms with this reasoning.
“But it does not give you the right to declare that on one in Carrickfergus or Ballymoney or any part of Ireland whatsoever, are not allowed to see the tricolour as their flag, just because they don’t?”
People can consider whatever flag they want as their flag. Nobody’s saying otherwise. If people in Carrick want to see the Southern flag as theirs good luck to them. But it doesn’t make it the flag of all Ireland any more than people in Donegal viewing the Union Flag as their flag makes it the flag of all the British Isles.
“People can consider whatever flag they want as their flag. Nobody’s saying otherwise. If people in Carrick want to see the Southern flag as theirs good luck to them. But it doesn’t make it the flag of all Ireland any more than people in Donegal viewing the Union Flag as their flag makes it the flag of all the British Isles.”
Well, that is very interesting MT.
So when Ireland was partitioned over unionisms opposition to Irish home rule within the UK, your view is that the many protestants, unionists and members of the orange order who held the british identity but lived in Donegal or any of the 26 counties, were no longer entitled in your opinion to view the union flag as theirs.
Seems harsh, but it leads to my next question.
When there is a referendum on this island, and should a majority be in favour of leaving the UK and agreeing a new and united Ireland.
Are you going to impose the same hard line of removing the british identity on all unionists who remain, and if so, do you plan to remain here and adopt the Irish identity or will you instead move to britain?
“So when Ireland was partitioned over unionisms opposition to Irish home rule within the UK, your view is that the many protestants, unionists and members of the orange order who held the british identity but lived in Donegal or any of the 26 counties, were no longer entitled in your opinion to view the union flag as theirs.”
That’s an odd interpretation of my comment, which actually said precesiely the opposite, namely: ‘People can consider whatever flag they want as their flag.’
“Are you going to impose the same hard line of removing the british identity on all unionists who remain, and if so, do you plan to remain here and adopt the Irish identity or will you instead move to britain?”
First I don’t have the power to.impose anything, hard line or otherwise, on anyone. Second, had I such power I would not attempt to impose a hard line on anyone. Third, I already have an Irish identity so I would have no.need to ‘adopt’ one.
My position in the event of a ‘united Ireland’ is exactly the same as it is today: people can identify as they wish; if some people were to choose to consider the Union Flag as their own, good luck to them , but it wouldn’t make the Union Flag the flag of all the British Isles.
“It is not that difficult to understand, it is called tolerance and respect and is exactly what I am claiming unionism is bereft off, hence your difficulty in coming to terms with this reasoning.”
If you’d just read what I do say and not what I don’t say then we could avoid these discussions.
You misinterpreted me. AGAIN.
“If you’d just read what I do say and not what I don’t say then we could avoid these discussions.
You misinterpreted me. AGAIN.”
It is quite possible that we are unintentionally misinterpreting one another AG.
We are looking at a lot of things from opposing views and backgrounds. It is also difficult on a blog post without seeing someone’s eyes, the tone of their voice and facial expressions to always follow them correctly.
“I have never denied your right to be british, I have never claimed the union flag did not represent you or your views.”
You quite clearly told us that our flag is the tricolour and that if we don’t accept this then we’re sectarian bigots.
If the tricolour is our flag then how can the union flag (and whatever northern Ireland flag we think of) also be our flag(s)?
“Can I also ask you in return, where do northern nationalists who see the tricolour as our national flag fit in with your northern ireland as it is today?”
http://amgobsmacked.blogspot.hr/2013/11/three-flags-real-compromise.html
“Do you support the claims here that it does not represent us?”
Who said it doesn’t represent nationalists?
I’d disagree with them (obviously you’re not misinterpreting my comments that it doesn’t represent Carrick and Ballymoney, you can’t be, you’re too smart for such a misinterpretation)
“Do you think that such remarks could be considered offensive, or do you even care?”
Which claims?
“You quite clearly told us that our flag is the tricolour and that if we don’t accept this then we’re sectarian bigots.
If the tricolour is our flag then how can the union flag (and whatever northern Ireland flag we think of) also be our flag(s)?”
I have never told you or anyone to accept your flag is the tricolour.
I have said that to myself and many others, the tricolour is our flag and it is just as important to our identity as the union flag is to yours.
While unionism is in control, we have no choice but to accept our identity is of less importance officially and that unionism will continue with its attempts to deny any validity of our Irish identity.
The answer however is the exact same as the reason the GFA accepts the validity of the Irish, British or Both identities here. It was political compromise as part of a peace settlement.
It simply seems to me that it is where tolerance and compromise is required that unionism falls down.
You do understand that the definition of bigotry is ‘intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself’.
“http://amgobsmacked.blogspot.hr/2013/11/three-flags-real-compromise.html
“Do you support the claims here that it does not represent us?”
Since you have asked, I will give you my views on this blog post.
First of all, your opening line could only be considered as insulting.
“Highlighting the hypocrisy, double standards and short sightedness of the idiots who influence Northern Ireland’s idiot class.”
You then follow immediately to talk of compromise and provide a meaning.
“an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.”
Can you see how someone who has no prior knowledge of your opinions might find it disingenuous to introduce compromise off the back of an insult?
In regards to the feelings of nationalist and republican commentators on Sluggerotoole, you claim
“I now (belatedly) accept their grievances about not feeling represented in their own city or land given that they have little or no affection for the Union Flag.”
and that
“Equality, equality, equality “are the buzzwords of choice to galvanise arguments for addressing the matter.
Sounds good, but as with all aspects of unionism, there is a veto slipped in, just in case.
“As long as ‘equality’ isn’t something that can be surgically altered to fit a particular agenda.”
Apparently none of the nationalist and republican commentators on Sluggerotoole have mentioned the importance of the tricolour to their identity.
But lets see where it goes.
“I also agree that we want the communities to have more respect for each other.”
Wonderful, it starts off so promising, but then.
“Which is why I can’t agree to the idea of flying the Tricolour and the Union Flag side by side”
It is too divisive.
Optimists may view it as progress, as a sign of two communities finally coming to terms with each other.
I view it as potentially toxic.
It says to me (and I’m a wishy washy middle of the road liberal) “CHOOSE!”.
So much for compromise.
Basically, what you are saying here, is that while nationalists have no choice but to tolerate the union flag, it is simply not conceivable to expect a unionist to tolerate the tricolour.
So rather than to expect unionists to compromise on this, and since flags are so utterly divisive, potentially toxic in your words, why not introduce a third flag into the mix.
Now to many, this could be seen as introducing more bullets to a game of russian roulette, but because unionism is so completely intransigent and unwilling to compromise on acknowledging and legitimacy to the Irish identity in northern Ireland, this is preferable to what unionism would see as losing the game entirely which is how they see any acceptance of Irish legitimacy in the north.
You even bring the image of a gun into the mix, just to make the point of how powerful your feelings are on this matter.
And then acknowledgement of the intransigence of unionism towards compromise.
“Also, it goes without saying that many unionists will view it as another ‘victory’ for Republicanism.”
You then go on to propose that while unionism could not accept the tricolour flying alongside the union flag, it would somehow become suddenly more palatable with the presence of a new northern Ireland flag.
“Which is why (predictably) I still stand by my proposal for flying three flags instead of one or two;
1/ The Tricolour (for nationalists and republicans)
2/ The Union Flag (for ‘bothered’ unionists and ‘British nationalists’)
3/ A new Northern Ireland flag (for everyone who falls somewhere in between the two aforementioned poles)”
Since unionism is unable to sit at a table where legitimacy of the irishness is mentioned, I would be amazed if there would be any buy in from unionism on this whatsoever but it would be interesting to see the reaction of the mainstream unionist parties towards legitimizing the tricolour remotely even in a three flag scenario.
My conclusion is that this article is simply a safe fudge to mask over the reality that unionism is incapable of compromise or to tolerate any views that the tricolour factually does represent many people in northern Ireland.
““http://amgobsmacked.blogspot.hr/2013/11/three-flags-real-compromise.html
“Do you support the claims here that it does not represent us?”
Since you have asked, I will give you my views on this blog post.
First of all, your opening line could only be considered as insulting.
“Highlighting the hypocrisy, double standards and short sightedness of the idiots who influence Northern Ireland’s idiot class.””
I consider people of nationalistic and narrow mindsets to be idiots. They are obsessed with their own point of view and see evil and malignant intent in places where there is none.
They misconstrue what is being said/
They constantly say “so are you saying….*INSERTS SOMETHING THAT THE PROVOCATEUR IS OBVIOUSLY NOT SAYING*
Yes, idiots.
“You then follow immediately to talk of compromise and provide a meaning.
“an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.”
Can you see how someone who has no prior knowledge of your opinions might find it disingenuous to introduce compromise off the back of an insult?”
I think that those who don’t WANT a compromise will clutch at such a straw and mark themselves as someone who doesn’t want a compromise.
“In regards to the feelings of nationalist and republican commentators on Sluggerotoole, you claim
“I now (belatedly) accept their grievances about not feeling represented in their own city or land given that they have little or no affection for the Union Flag.”
and that
“Equality, equality, equality “are the buzzwords of choice to galvanise arguments for addressing the matter.
Sounds good, but as with all aspects of unionism, there is a veto slipped in, just in case.
“As long as ‘equality’ isn’t something that can be surgically altered to fit a particular agenda.””
If you consider equality a ‘unionist’ thing then you don’t understand equality
“Apparently none of the nationalist and republican commentators on Sluggerotoole have mentioned the importance of the tricolour to their identity.
But lets see where it goes.”
Well they did. Hence I ENDORSED the flying of the tricolour.
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
REPEAT: I ENDORSED THE FLYING OF THE TRICOLOUR
”
“I also agree that we want the communities to have more respect for each other.”
Wonderful, it starts off so promising, but then.
“Which is why I can’t agree to the idea of flying the Tricolour and the Union Flag side by side”
It is too divisive.
Optimists may view it as progress, as a sign of two communities finally coming to terms with each other.
I view it as potentially toxic.
It says to me (and I’m a wishy washy middle of the road liberal) “CHOOSE!”.
So much for compromise.”
And how is that incorrect.
“Basically, what you are saying here, is that while nationalists have no choice but to tolerate the union flag, it is simply not conceivable to expect a unionist to tolerate the tricolour.”
NOPE, I’m (CLEARLY) saying that our flag options are inadequate so lets bring in ALL three main groups as opposed to just ONE group like we have now.
“So rather than to expect unionists to compromise on this, and since flags are so utterly divisive, potentially toxic in your words, why not introduce a third flag into the mix.”
NOPE, I’m (CLEARLY) saying that our flag options are inadequate so lets bring in ALL three main groups as opposed to just ONE group like we have now.
“Now to many, this could be seen as introducing more bullets to a game of russian roulette, but because unionism is so completely intransigent and unwilling to compromise on acknowledging and legitimacy to the Irish identity in northern Ireland, this is preferable to what unionism would see as losing the game entirely which is how they see any acceptance of Irish legitimacy in the north.
You even bring the image of a gun into the mix, just to make the point of how powerful your feelings are on this matter.”
You just said how unwilling unionism is to compromise on the matter in a blog by a unionist who is willing to compromise on the matter.
Just saying.
“And then acknowledgement of the intransigence of unionism towards compromise.”
Most of my blogs are about unionist intransigence….
“Also, it goes without saying that many unionists will view it as another ‘victory’ for Republicanism.”
“You then go on to propose that while unionism could not accept the tricolour flying alongside the union flag, it would somehow become suddenly more palatable with the presence of a new northern Ireland flag.”
No. THEY WILL GO APESHIT. I’M SEEN AS A TRAITOR FOR SUGGESTING THIS. ARE YOU DELIBERATELY MISINTERPRETING ME? AGAIN?
”
“Which is why (predictably) I still stand by my proposal for flying three flags instead of one or two;
1/ The Tricolour (for nationalists and republicans)
2/ The Union Flag (for ‘bothered’ unionists and ‘British nationalists’)
3/ A new Northern Ireland flag (for everyone who falls somewhere in between the two aforementioned poles)”
Since unionism is unable to sit at a table where legitimacy of the irishness is mentioned, I would be amazed if there would be any buy in from unionism on this whatsoever but it would be interesting to see the reaction of the mainstream unionist parties towards legitimizing the tricolour remotely even in a three flag scenario.”
They’ll hate it because they are idiots.
“My conclusion is that this article is simply a safe fudge to mask over the reality that unionism is incapable of compromise or to tolerate any views that the tricolour factually does represent many people in northern Ireland.”
Nope.
It’s a criticism of unionism’s fleg position. How can you not see this?!!!!
“I consider people of nationalistic and narrow mindsets to be idiots. They are obsessed with their own point of view and see evil and malignant intent in places where there is none.”
That is an idiotic and narrow minded thing to say.
“They misconstrue what is being said/
They constantly say “so are you saying….*INSERTS SOMETHING THAT THE PROVOCATEUR IS OBVIOUSLY NOT SAYING*”
Yes, idiots.”
You do a lot of that yourself, it is done a lot to me here.
As I have said, understanding someone’s opinion, often depends on the point of view you see it from.
It can be difficult to understand someone, as the saying goes, until you have walked a mile in their shoes.
This is normal, especially in post conflict and polarised communities.
I think declaring everyone who fails to understand you as being idiots is not very helpful.
“I think that those who don’t WANT a compromise will clutch at such a straw and mark themselves as someone who doesn’t want a compromise.”
At times I get the feeling that you do not want to compromise, and I am sure you would feel the same towards me.
There are many reasons people may find it hard to compromise. It takes more courage to compromise than it does to refuse to compromise.
“If you consider equality a ‘unionist’ thing then you don’t understand equality”
Once again, that is not what I said. You claim to not like being misconstrued, yet continue to misconstrue me.
I said that it was good that you expressed that equality was the basis for agreement but that the inclusion of the following sentence .
“As long as ‘equality’ isn’t something that can be surgically altered to fit a particular agenda.””
This could be considered a veto, in case equality didn’t work out, you can claim as you do, that people who disagree with you have an agenda.
I pointed this out in another post also where you suggested that those who felt the ratio of those in the british forces was greater also had an agenda.
This need for a veto is a safety blanket that unionism seems to need.
I hope that makes sense.
“And how is that incorrect.”
Compromise is give and take until there is enough for all sides to come to an agreement.
That means accepting both flags or no flags. Failure to do so is failure to compromise.
A new separatist flag would be no different to the union flag and would still represent only the separatists.
Another common unionist tactic when it comes to compromise.
“NOPE, I’m (CLEARLY) saying that our flag options are inadequate so lets bring in ALL three main groups as opposed to just ONE group like we have now.”
There are only 2 groups, those who see Ireland as one country and those who support partition and 2 Irelands north and south.
Whatever divisions within each of those groups there may be doesn’t matter.
“You just said how unwilling unionism is to compromise on the matter in a blog by a unionist who is willing to compromise on the matter.”
Compromise is accepting the other persons point of view.
What you are suggesting is simply avoiding compromise, has no support and is a meaningless attempt to show willingness to compromise by someone who refuses to move an inch on acceptance of the tricolour.
“They’ll hate it because they are idiots.”
When I asked you what we could do to make the tricolour more palatable for you, your response could only be seen as nothing.
If that is your position, why are you surprised that the representatives of unionism are afraid to compromise on this?
Perhaps once again, resorting to calling people idiots, you should take a more open minded look at what is truly preventing compromise here.
“My conclusion is that this article is simply a safe fudge to mask over the reality that unionism is incapable of compromise or to tolerate any views that the tricolour factually does represent many people in northern Ireland. ”
Nope. It’s a criticism of unionism’s fleg position. How can you not see this?!!!!”
What I see is that unionisms fleg position is an accurate reflection of its overall position on sharing power with irish nationalists.
“There are only 2 groups, those who see Ireland as one country and those who support partition and 2 Irelands north and south.
Whatever divisions within each of those groups there may be doesn’t matter.”
For someone who labels other people bigots and sectarian it’s immensely rich to deny the existence of a group that clearly exists.
I understand that as a nationalist that you MUST cling to the binary aspect of the problem but by doing so you remove all nuances and all people who aren’t covered by the opposite poles represented by the tricolour/nationalism and Union Flag/unionism.
There are many, many people in between and you deny them a fair hearing in the same way British nationalists/hardline unionists would do to you.
Two sides of the same coin.
AG, i never said other groups didn’t exist. I am saying no matter how many groups you can come up with, it wont change the fact that the problem will always boil down to either London or Dublin rule.
And I would deny no-one a fair hearing, I have constantly said nothing should be off the table, not even all of Ireland re-joining the UK.
In fact the opposite, I have criticised unionists for not engaging in such dialog, which is over sectarian bigotry..
““If you consider equality a ‘unionist’ thing then you don’t understand equality”
Once again, that is not what I said.
”
Actually you’re right there, I re-read it, apologies.