Mc Creesh Park Newry.Will it no longer exist after tonight?

Started by T Fearon, March 02, 2015, 06:47:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Main Street

Quote from: foxcommander on March 03, 2015, 02:52:55 PM
Going by the unionists logic anything named after the royal family would have to be removed. State sponsored acts of terror would fall under the same category surely.
There is a widespread belief that the flipside of  republican tradition only contains the various loyalist paramilitary groups. But the flipside of republican tradition is the entire anti-republican tradition, and that active anti-republican tradition is/or was, loyalism, institutions & instruments of administration in NI as well as the British state & army. Unionists don't use logic when they attempt to selectively criminalise republican tradition, but if you were to follow their thinking on this matter, then by definition, all equivalent loyalist and british paraphernalia should be removed.

Maguire01

Quote from: Ulick on March 04, 2015, 02:35:34 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 03, 2015, 10:51:34 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 03, 2015, 08:20:47 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on March 03, 2015, 05:57:16 PM
If it's not right in Lisburn, it's not right in Newry. The hypocrisy is ridiculous.

The Shinners are ahead you Maguire, it is not right in the city centre, but is OK as an expression of the "local community".
That's dancing on the head of a pin. And I was responding to Ulick, who drew the parallel in the first place.

Sorry did I miss the SF legislation proposing to ban all such memorials? Guess I must have if you've mounted the high horse.
You referred to "contrived controversy". If one is contrived, then so is the other - i'm not sure that either are, and I wouldn't support either. There may be minor differences in detail, but the substance of the two scenarios are pretty similar - public places being used by either side to 'commemorate' their side, other side gets offended.

Not sure why the "high horse" comment has been made.

foxcommander

Quote from: Maguire01 on March 04, 2015, 06:27:30 PM
Not sure why the "high horse" comment has been made.

Maybe it's because you never get off it?
Every second of the day there's a Democrat telling a lie

general_lee

Quote from: thewobbler on March 03, 2015, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on March 03, 2015, 12:32:27 AM
The problem with Irish is it's left too late to start teaching it. If it were taught in primary school from the age of about 5 the language would be in much better shape. Starting to learn a language after the age of ten is a hundred times harder, so it's no wonder most people pack it in at the first opportunity.

This isn't the problem.

The problem with Irish is that there is not one single human being on earth who speaks Irish, who doesn't also speak English equally well or better.

Therefore doing anything - website, road sign, leaflet, minutes - in both languages is an unnecessary duplication, and a thorough waste of money.

By all means our Gaielegors are entitled to enjoy their cupla focal. But for the 99.9991% of us who will always read a sign in English first, stop wasting our effing money on this duplication.
Really? I seem to recall Stephen Nolan doing a 'fact finding' mission for a BBC NI documentary along with Hector about a year or so ago; where a farmer from Connemara was barely, if at all able to converse in English, but was fluent in Irish.

Describing the Irish Language as a waste of money is a bit OTT. I realise it might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it is a valuable part of the cultural heritage of this part of the world. Granted some of the duplication (in government literature especially) is unnecessary and perhaps wasteful, I would be strongly in favour of road/street signage featuring The English/Irish and then literal translation. I don't see how providing such information can be seen as wasting effing money.

seafoid

Quote from: general_lee on March 04, 2015, 07:38:03 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on March 03, 2015, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on March 03, 2015, 12:32:27 AM
The problem with Irish is it's left too late to start teaching it. If it were taught in primary school from the age of about 5 the language would be in much better shape. Starting to learn a language after the age of ten is a hundred times harder, so it's no wonder most people pack it in at the first opportunity.

This isn't the problem.

The problem with Irish is that there is not one single human being on earth who speaks Irish, who doesn't also speak English equally well or better.

Therefore doing anything - website, road sign, leaflet, minutes - in both languages is an unnecessary duplication, and a thorough waste of money.

By all means our Gaielegors are entitled to enjoy their cupla focal. But for the 99.9991% of us who will always read a sign in English first, stop wasting our effing money on this duplication.
Really? I seem to recall Stephen Nolan doing a 'fact finding' mission for a BBC NI documentary along with Hector about a year or so ago; where a farmer from Connemara was barely, if at all able to converse in English, but was fluent in Irish.

Describing the Irish Language as a waste of money is a bit OTT. I realise it might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it is a valuable part of the cultural heritage of this part of the world. Granted some of the duplication (in government literature especially) is unnecessary and perhaps wasteful, I would be strongly in favour of road/street signage featuring The English/Irish and then literal translation. I don't see how providing such information can be seen as wasting effing money.
There were still Gaeltacht areas in northern Ireland in 1920 or whenever the statelet was founded.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1No3JGNGd8

The Unionists had no interest in supporting the language. 
It's as much a part of NI's heritage as linen or Jackie Fullerton reporting the hockey scores.


general_lee

Quote from: seafoid on March 04, 2015, 09:09:03 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 04, 2015, 07:38:03 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on March 03, 2015, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on March 03, 2015, 12:32:27 AM
The problem with Irish is it's left too late to start teaching it. If it were taught in primary school from the age of about 5 the language would be in much better shape. Starting to learn a language after the age of ten is a hundred times harder, so it's no wonder most people pack it in at the first opportunity.

This isn't the problem.

The problem with Irish is that there is not one single human being on earth who speaks Irish, who doesn't also speak English equally well or better.

Therefore doing anything - website, road sign, leaflet, minutes - in both languages is an unnecessary duplication, and a thorough waste of money.

By all means our Gaielegors are entitled to enjoy their cupla focal. But for the 99.9991% of us who will always read a sign in English first, stop wasting our effing money on this duplication.
Really? I seem to recall Stephen Nolan doing a 'fact finding' mission for a BBC NI documentary along with Hector about a year or so ago; where a farmer from Connemara was barely, if at all able to converse in English, but was fluent in Irish.

Describing the Irish Language as a waste of money is a bit OTT. I realise it might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it is a valuable part of the cultural heritage of this part of the world. Granted some of the duplication (in government literature especially) is unnecessary and perhaps wasteful, I would be strongly in favour of road/street signage featuring The English/Irish and then literal translation. I don't see how providing such information can be seen as wasting effing money.
There were still Gaeltacht areas in northern Ireland in 1920 or whenever the statelet was founded.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1No3JGNGd8

The Unionists had no interest in supporting the language. 
It's as much a part of NI's heritage as linen or Jackie Fullerton reporting the hockey scores.
Yes indeed, Sperrins, Rathlin Island and one or two other areas had native Gaeilge speakers as late as the 1970s. Regardless, the clichéd excuses for not promoting Irish get tiresome after a while

charlieTully


Milltown Row2

I thought my clubmate spoke very well last night, Pat Sheehan wasn't going to get worked up at all....
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

Eamonnca1

Quote from: thewobbler on March 03, 2015, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on March 03, 2015, 12:32:27 AM
The problem with Irish is it's left too late to start teaching it. If it were taught in primary school from the age of about 5 the language would be in much better shape. Starting to learn a language after the age of ten is a hundred times harder, so it's no wonder most people pack it in at the first opportunity.

This isn't the problem.

The problem with Irish is that there is not one single human being on earth who speaks Irish, who doesn't also speak English equally well or better.

Therefore doing anything - website, road sign, leaflet, minutes - in both languages is an unnecessary duplication, and a thorough waste of money.

By all means our Gaielegors are entitled to enjoy their cupla focal. But for the 99.9991% of us who will always read a sign in English first, stop wasting our effing money on this duplication.

Sorry but it is the problem. If more people were capable of speaking Irish and were using it in everyday speech, the need for bilingual government services would be self-evident and it would happen naturally as a result of demand. Right now it only happens as a result of activism that seems to be geared towards winding the unionists up and getting one over on them.