Poppy Watch

[OakleafCounty]

Anyway, if enough people really cared about this lack of an "Irish dimension or sensitivities" they'd vote with their feet.

What's the alternative? Anyway only Sainsbury's have coffee bags.

Thats exactly the point my friend was making...we don't care we have become more British than Finchley.

Is that you Ruairí O'Braidagh?

I'd say there's more people in the Republic watching X-Factor and Emmerdale than the north. What about all the yank tv programmes. Is embracing American culture a problem too?

And what if I buy my meat from a unionist family butchers? Am I embracing Bristishness less than if you buy it in Sainsburies?

[Applesisapples]

Anyway, if enough people really cared about this lack of an "Irish dimension or sensitivities" they'd vote with their feet.

What's the alternative? Anyway only Sainsbury's have coffee bags.

Thats exactly the point my friend was making...we don't care we have become more British than Finchley.

Is that you Ruairí O'Braidagh?

I'd say there's more people in the Republic watching X-Factor and Emmerdale than the north. What about all the yank tv programmes. Is embracing American culture a problem too?

And what if I buy my meat from a unionist family butchers? Am I embracing Bristishness less than if you buy it in Sainsburies?

The answer to all your questions is yes we all, myself included are guilty (except I don't watch reality TV), the point is the peace process much beloved of the Shinners has delivered a stronger link with Britain and put unity out of site. The TV programmes etc are just a sympthom of underlying apathy.

[Applesisapples]

What I mean is that rather than deliver us a road to unity the peace process has put it a long ways off, if it will ever happen. There is no denying that we are in a far better place than we were before the cease fires. However rather than unionism embracing an Irish dimension or compromising on symbolism and flags etc... they have become more entrenched and secure in the knowledge that the Union is safe and they hold a veto. Nationalist on the otherhand have embraced this whole notion of Northern Ireland as a UK region, we seem to have embraced our "Britishness" and are tolerant of British companies now treating NI branches as they do "mainland" branches. We no longer object to the flying of the Union flag and other really British point of sale used by these retailers (I'm not taliking about tea bags and that wasn't me any way). These are things that are small but are evident of a shift that I don't think SF anticipated. The acceptance of Derry as UK City of culture is another example of nationalists tacitly accepting that NI is an integral part of the UK. Does it matter? I would say from where I stand probably not to most nationalists ( more accurately catholics). In fairness to SF they have not embraced the mother of parliaments with the gusto of the SDLP, but surely only a matter of time. All the compromises seem to be coming from nationalists. The change is maybe some what intangible but there non the less.

[Rossfan]

Just for the record I didn't buy/wear one of those things nor did I attend any remembrance ceremony/service nor did I observe any silence etc.
Shame on those Irish people who did.
I wonder when will they apologise to the McAnespie family, the families of the 14 Bloody Sunday victims, New Lodge massacre, Ballymurphy massacre etc etc. Not to mention the relatives of the million Iraquis killed in Bush's immoral "war" for cheap oil or all the poor Afghans or..... and on and on the list goes....
I also wonder when will Robinson and Nesbitt follow their Queen's example and also reciprocate Kenny/Gilmore by laying a wreath at the Garden of Remembrance in honour of our National heroes who fought back against 750 years of foreign imposed terror.

Truly, we are the most wretched, the most oppressed, the most hard-done by people on the face of God's green earth.

Speak for yourself you plaidhc.
I'm not oppressed - apart from having to pay for Anglo Irish/Fitzpatrick/Fingleton/Quinn/Ronan/Dunne and all the other snuts- but that doesnt alter the fact that for 750 - 800 years soldiers of the English/British rulers imposed terror on the majority of the Irish people.
And if I want to remember all the Irish who died in wars our Government has a special commemoration day sometime  every July so I can take part  in or watch that .
Anyway the Irish who died fighting in the Brit army were all volunteers ( unliike the Scots/English/Welsh conscripts) so why should I feel sorry for them.

[red hander]

British? The first invaders during that period would have been French speaking Normans, surely. And why draw a line at that point? Why not go back a bit further and include the Vikings, who terrorised and colonised for a few centuries before that. Doesn't fit the convenient narrative, though, does it?

Life did not evolve initially in Ireland, as far as I understand (of course saying it evolved at all is probably an insult to the PUL community). So people have always come  to Ireland. These people generally made their home here, the Normans become more Irish than the Irish themselves. The British, a section of them, do not make their home here but continue to describe themselves as British and seek to have British rule. So the narrative is fine.

So you think the average Ulster Prod commutes here from England? Of course they've made this place their home. Many do describe themselves as Irish and many more would do so, were it not for the fact that the definition of Irish over the years has become synonymous with a narrow Gaelic, Catholic nationalism. That they identify themselves as and with the British is not surprising given their history. That doesn't mean they don't belong here. They've been here long enough to be classed as natives, unless you plan on telling white Americans, Australians and Canadians that they don't belong in their respective countries either.

By whom? They never at any time wished to be classed so themselves. They discriminated against the natives, stole their land, murdered them, legislated against their religion and language in an attempt to destroy both and treated them as third class citizens in  their own country, all the time standing apart, which they still do to this day, looking down upon the indigenous people. Maybe they'd feel more comfortable in the cloud cuckoo land your brain resides in 

[winsamsoon]

What I mean is that rather than deliver us a road to unity the peace process has put it a long ways off, if it will ever happen. There is no denying that we are in a far better place than we were before the cease fires. However rather than unionism embracing an Irish dimension or compromising on symbolism and flags etc... they have become more entrenched and secure in the knowledge that the Union is safe and they hold a veto. Nationalist on the otherhand have embraced this whole notion of Northern Ireland as a UK region, we seem to have embraced our "Britishness" and are tolerant of British companies now treating NI branches as they do "mainland" branches. We no longer object to the flying of the Union flag and other really British point of sale used by these retailers (I'm not taliking about tea bags and that wasn't me any way). These are things that are small but are evident of a shift that I don't think SF anticipated. The acceptance of Derry as UK City of culture is another example of nationalists tacitly accepting that NI is an integral part of the UK. Does it matter? I would say from where I stand probably not to most nationalists ( more accurately catholics). In fairness to SF they have not embraced the mother of parliaments with the gusto of the SDLP, but surely only a matter of time. All the compromises seem to be coming from nationalists. The change is maybe some what intangible but there non the less.

A few points just, Unionism is dependent on the union so they are never going to give up on issues of flags etc there is no compromise on these issues for them. yet they are changing whether they like it or nopt(city hall for example)They believe its a british state and these symbols etc are symbolic of Britain so they stay. This has always been the case and always will. whilst i acknowledge what your saying in your post i would say that SF are completly aware of this shift but are willing to accept it and if you like be the bigger person in the strategical political battle.  So in essence its a mean to an end and there is a bigger picture.To the international world its Nationalism that comes across as the group willing to compromise. Take for example the HAAS talks at present i am sure there are a lot of issues the Nationalists are willing to compromise on but unionists are standing firm. Nationalists acknowledge that a shared future must include all sections of the community, their culture has already been eroded over the years in many ways and thus they are gaining the basic rights that would exist in a normal society inclusive of all. Unionism is however the spoilt brat in the debate, making the transition from a society where they controlled all and had the upper hand over the fenians to now realising they can no longer bully. They still though cannot religuish the union as it makes up their core ideological principles they also cannot accept change and are not pragmatic. Theres a bit of old Maggie Thatcher in them. Sf has taken it a wider scale and the International community now looking in know what is going on, the issues of last summer are in a sick way positive for nationalists as they highlight just how the Unionists aren't willing to compromise. But when the eyes of the world are on them and pressure on Britain there are changes they will be forced to accept. So i would say SF are very mush so aware of the shift but to a certain axtent it is tactical. Regarding the embracing of the Parliament i can't see that happening anytime soon as thwere are no real gains from it.

[armaghniac]

Taigs, I command you to stop coming forward.

[Maguire01]

What I mean is that rather than deliver us a road to unity the peace process has put it a long ways off, if it will ever happen. There is no denying that we are in a far better place than we were before the cease fires. However rather than unionism embracing an Irish dimension or compromising on symbolism and flags etc... they have become more entrenched and secure in the knowledge that the Union is safe and they hold a veto.

They should be more secure. Recent events would indicate otherwise.

Nationalist on the otherhand have embraced this whole notion of Northern Ireland as a UK region, we seem to have embraced our "Britishness" and are tolerant of British companies now treating NI branches as they do "mainland" branches. We no longer object to the flying of the Union flag and other really British point of sale used by these retailers (I'm not taliking about tea bags and that wasn't me any way).

Has there been a change in strategy from British retailers in NI? When did this happen? Where are they flying the Union flag? (If I don't know these things, it's much harder to be offended by them.)

These are things that are small but are evident of a shift that I don't think SF anticipated. The acceptance of Derry as UK City of culture is another example of nationalists tacitly accepting that NI is an integral part of the UK. Does it matter? I would say from where I stand probably not to most nationalists ( more accurately catholics).

A case of 'money talks'.

In fairness to SF they have not embraced the mother of parliaments with the gusto of the SDLP, but surely only a matter of time. All the compromises seem to be coming from nationalists. The change is maybe some what intangible but there non the less.

Why is it "in fairness" to SF that they haven't taken seats in Westminster? They still run for elections to the British parliament. They still take their offices in London and their expenses. Earlier this year they even attended the Westminster Northern Ireland Affairs Committee.

[Myles Na G.]

Just for the record I didn't buy/wear one of those things nor did I attend any remembrance ceremony/service nor did I observe any silence etc.
Shame on those Irish people who did.
I wonder when will they apologise to the McAnespie family, the families of the 14 Bloody Sunday victims, New Lodge massacre, Ballymurphy massacre etc etc. Not to mention the relatives of the million Iraquis killed in Bush's immoral "war" for cheap oil or all the poor Afghans or..... and on and on the list goes....
I also wonder when will Robinson and Nesbitt follow their Queen's example and also reciprocate Kenny/Gilmore by laying a wreath at the Garden of Remembrance in honour of our National heroes who fought back against 750 years of foreign imposed terror.

Truly, we are the most wretched, the most oppressed, the most hard-done by people on the face of God's green earth.

This is a crude rehashing of the M.O.P.E. syndrome theory posited by Professor Liam Kennedy, who initially posited that Irish people are unable to see their oppression in the wider context of world affairs. Therefore the very fact that Rossfan mentioned the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts renders your basic paraphrasing of the M.O.P.E. argument completely childish and non-applicable.

Childish is someone who can 'posit', without a hint of parody,  the theory that he is oppressed because of something that happened 750 years ago.

I don't think he did that - he said that there was '750 years of foreign imposed terror'. This more or less references a sustained British approach to intervening, often violently, in Irish affairs. Surely even with the recent revelations about British Security Force terror squads, this can't be something new to you?

British? The first invaders during that period would have been French speaking Normans, surely. And why draw a line at that point? Why not go back a bit further and include the Vikings, who terrorised and colonised for a few centuries before that. Doesn't fit the convenient narrative, though, does it?

I do not need a lecture from you on the complexities of Irish history - I'm already well aware of it. However I would like to point out that the idea of a nation, and nationalism, was not in place during the Viking invasion of the island, but the sustained British colonisation of Ireland and the eventual arrival of British and Irish Nationalism is the main factor in modern identity-formation on these shores, and the subjugation most relevant to a debate about poppies.

Britain as a placename, or a formulation of it, was used first in the 4th Century by the way. And the 'French Speaking Normans' is not only completely incorrect but also using the same anachronism that you actually falsely accuse me of, you idiotic fool.

Completely incorrect,you think? So what language, in your opinion, did the Norman nobility speak at the time they arrived in Ireland? And idiotic fool is a tautology, btw. 

It isn't a tautology: I know this because you can be foolish and idiotic at the same time.

It is completely incorrect because Anglo-Norman (which isn't 'French', and wasn't even 'Old French') was the language of the educated 'nobility' (and therefore Strongbow), and everybody from Malin Head to Mizen Head knows that a large part of the invading forces were Welsh, anyway. You can look this up, if you wish

Your mistake and subsequent backtracking reveals a lot about your view of history/humanity, by the way - it seems the language of the commanders means more than that of the subalterns.

That's what makes it a tautology, you twit.

idiot
ˈɪdɪət/
noun informal
1.
a stupid person.
synonyms:   fool, ass, halfwit, nincompoop, blockhead, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, cretin, imbecile, dullard, moron, simpleton, clod;

And who's backtracking? I ask you to put forward your opinion and you accuse me of backtracking on my own!

[stibhan]

Just for the record I didn't buy/wear one of those things nor did I attend any remembrance ceremony/service nor did I observe any silence etc.
Shame on those Irish people who did.
I wonder when will they apologise to the McAnespie family, the families of the 14 Bloody Sunday victims, New Lodge massacre, Ballymurphy massacre etc etc. Not to mention the relatives of the million Iraquis killed in Bush's immoral "war" for cheap oil or all the poor Afghans or..... and on and on the list goes....
I also wonder when will Robinson and Nesbitt follow their Queen's example and also reciprocate Kenny/Gilmore by laying a wreath at the Garden of Remembrance in honour of our National heroes who fought back against 750 years of foreign imposed terror.

Truly, we are the most wretched, the most oppressed, the most hard-done by people on the face of God's green earth.

This is a crude rehashing of the M.O.P.E. syndrome theory posited by Professor Liam Kennedy, who initially posited that Irish people are unable to see their oppression in the wider context of world affairs. Therefore the very fact that Rossfan mentioned the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts renders your basic paraphrasing of the M.O.P.E. argument completely childish and non-applicable.

Childish is someone who can 'posit', without a hint of parody,  the theory that he is oppressed because of something that happened 750 years ago.

I don't think he did that - he said that there was '750 years of foreign imposed terror'. This more or less references a sustained British approach to intervening, often violently, in Irish affairs. Surely even with the recent revelations about British Security Force terror squads, this can't be something new to you?

British? The first invaders during that period would have been French speaking Normans, surely. And why draw a line at that point? Why not go back a bit further and include the Vikings, who terrorised and colonised for a few centuries before that. Doesn't fit the convenient narrative, though, does it?

I do not need a lecture from you on the complexities of Irish history - I'm already well aware of it. However I would like to point out that the idea of a nation, and nationalism, was not in place during the Viking invasion of the island, but the sustained British colonisation of Ireland and the eventual arrival of British and Irish Nationalism is the main factor in modern identity-formation on these shores, and the subjugation most relevant to a debate about poppies.

Britain as a placename, or a formulation of it, was used first in the 4th Century by the way. And the 'French Speaking Normans' is not only completely incorrect but also using the same anachronism that you actually falsely accuse me of, you idiotic fool.

Completely incorrect,you think? So what language, in your opinion, did the Norman nobility speak at the time they arrived in Ireland? And idiotic fool is a tautology, btw. 

It isn't a tautology: I know this because you can be foolish and idiotic at the same time.

It is completely incorrect because Anglo-Norman (which isn't 'French', and wasn't even 'Old French') was the language of the educated 'nobility' (and therefore Strongbow), and everybody from Malin Head to Mizen Head knows that a large part of the invading forces were Welsh, anyway. You can look this up, if you wish

Your mistake and subsequent backtracking reveals a lot about your view of history/humanity, by the way - it seems the language of the commanders means more than that of the subalterns.

That's what makes it a tautology, you twit.

idiot
ˈɪdɪət/
noun informal
1.
a stupid person.
synonyms:   fool, ass, halfwit, nincompoop, blockhead, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, cretin, imbecile, dullard, moron, simpleton, clod;

And who's backtracking? I ask you to put forward your opinion and you accuse me of backtracking on my own!

A snynonym is a word that has similar meaning, not one that has the same meaning. You exhibit the qualities of a fool and an idiot simultaneously - I used both descriptions to leave the reader in no doubt.

You backtracked by nuancing your initial 'Norman invaders' description to 'Norman nobility'. That is not, in any way, the same thing, and certainly much different in terms of the consequences for language acquisition.

[Myles Na G.]

Just for the record I didn't buy/wear one of those things nor did I attend any remembrance ceremony/service nor did I observe any silence etc.
Shame on those Irish people who did.
I wonder when will they apologise to the McAnespie family, the families of the 14 Bloody Sunday victims, New Lodge massacre, Ballymurphy massacre etc etc. Not to mention the relatives of the million Iraquis killed in Bush's immoral "war" for cheap oil or all the poor Afghans or..... and on and on the list goes....
I also wonder when will Robinson and Nesbitt follow their Queen's example and also reciprocate Kenny/Gilmore by laying a wreath at the Garden of Remembrance in honour of our National heroes who fought back against 750 years of foreign imposed terror.

Truly, we are the most wretched, the most oppressed, the most hard-done by people on the face of God's green earth.

This is a crude rehashing of the M.O.P.E. syndrome theory posited by Professor Liam Kennedy, who initially posited that Irish people are unable to see their oppression in the wider context of world affairs. Therefore the very fact that Rossfan mentioned the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts renders your basic paraphrasing of the M.O.P.E. argument completely childish and non-applicable.

Childish is someone who can 'posit', without a hint of parody,  the theory that he is oppressed because of something that happened 750 years ago.

I don't think he did that - he said that there was '750 years of foreign imposed terror'. This more or less references a sustained British approach to intervening, often violently, in Irish affairs. Surely even with the recent revelations about British Security Force terror squads, this can't be something new to you?

British? The first invaders during that period would have been French speaking Normans, surely. And why draw a line at that point? Why not go back a bit further and include the Vikings, who terrorised and colonised for a few centuries before that. Doesn't fit the convenient narrative, though, does it?

I do not need a lecture from you on the complexities of Irish history - I'm already well aware of it. However I would like to point out that the idea of a nation, and nationalism, was not in place during the Viking invasion of the island, but the sustained British colonisation of Ireland and the eventual arrival of British and Irish Nationalism is the main factor in modern identity-formation on these shores, and the subjugation most relevant to a debate about poppies.

Britain as a placename, or a formulation of it, was used first in the 4th Century by the way. And the 'French Speaking Normans' is not only completely incorrect but also using the same anachronism that you actually falsely accuse me of, you idiotic fool.

Completely incorrect,you think? So what language, in your opinion, did the Norman nobility speak at the time they arrived in Ireland? And idiotic fool is a tautology, btw. 

It isn't a tautology: I know this because you can be foolish and idiotic at the same time.

It is completely incorrect because Anglo-Norman (which isn't 'French', and wasn't even 'Old French') was the language of the educated 'nobility' (and therefore Strongbow), and everybody from Malin Head to Mizen Head knows that a large part of the invading forces were Welsh, anyway. You can look this up, if you wish

Your mistake and subsequent backtracking reveals a lot about your view of history/humanity, by the way - it seems the language of the commanders means more than that of the subalterns.

That's what makes it a tautology, you twit.

idiot
ˈɪdɪət/
noun informal
1.
a stupid person.
synonyms:   fool, ass, halfwit, nincompoop, blockhead, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, cretin, imbecile, dullard, moron, simpleton, clod;

And who's backtracking? I ask you to put forward your opinion and you accuse me of backtracking on my own!

A snynonym is a word that has similar meaning, not one that has the same meaning. You exhibit the qualities of a fool and an idiot simultaneously - I used both descriptions to leave the reader in no doubt.

You backtracked by nuancing your initial 'Norman invaders' description to 'Norman nobility'. That is not, in any way, the same thing, and certainly much different in terms of the consequences for language acquisition.

Next you'll be telling me that 'nuancing' and 'backtracking' are synonyms. Put the shovel down and walk away slowly...

[stibhan]

I'm really bored of this, Myles, seeing as you fail to address any of the major points that I make and instead focus on a completely subjective argument about the difference between a fool and an idiot (without protesting at being called either).

If you want me I'll be laughing at the mascots observing Remembrance Day impeccably.

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

What I mean is that rather than deliver us a road to unity the peace process has put it a long ways off, if it will ever happen. There is no denying that we are in a far better place than we were before the cease fires. However rather than unionism embracing an Irish dimension or compromising on symbolism and flags etc... they have become more entrenched and secure in the knowledge that the Union is safe and they hold a veto. Nationalist on the otherhand have embraced this whole notion of Northern Ireland as a UK region, we seem to have embraced our "Britishness" and are tolerant of British companies now treating NI branches as they do "mainland" branches. We no longer object to the flying of the Union flag and other really British point of sale used by these retailers (I'm not taliking about tea bags and that wasn't me any way). These are things that are small but are evident
of a shift that I don't think SF anticipated. The acceptance of Derry as UK City of culture is another example of nationalists tacitly accepting that NI is an integral part of the UK. Does it matter? I would say from where I stand probably not to most nationalists ( more accurately catholics). In fairness to SF they have not embraced the mother of parliaments with the gusto of the SDLP, but surely only a matter of time. All the compromises seem to be coming from nationalists. The change is maybe some what intangible but there non the less.

I totally agree with all of this. And I'm totally sick and tired of all the PC bullsh@t that we have to put up with nowadays. We have been led sleep walking into red/white and blue future. I wouldn't go down the dissident path but I think we need to wake up and smell the coffee.

[red hander]

What I mean is that rather than deliver us a road to unity the peace process has put it a long ways off, if it will ever happen. There is no denying that we are in a far better place than we were before the cease fires. However rather than unionism embracing an Irish dimension or compromising on symbolism and flags etc... they have become more entrenched and secure in the knowledge that the Union is safe and they hold a veto. Nationalist on the otherhand have embraced this whole notion of Northern Ireland as a UK region, we seem to have embraced our "Britishness" and are tolerant of British companies now treating NI branches as they do "mainland" branches. We no longer object to the flying of the Union flag and other really British point of sale used by these retailers (I'm not taliking about tea bags and that wasn't me any way). These are things that are small but are evident
of a shift that I don't think SF anticipated. The acceptance of Derry as UK City of culture is another example of nationalists tacitly accepting that NI is an integral part of the UK. Does it matter? I would say from where I stand probably not to most nationalists ( more accurately catholics). In fairness to SF they have not embraced the mother of parliaments with the gusto of the SDLP, but surely only a matter of time. All the compromises seem to be coming from nationalists. The change is maybe some what intangible but there non the less.

I totally agree with all of this. And I'm totally sick and tired of all the PC bullsh@t that we have to put up with nowadays. We have been led sleep walking into red/white and blue future. I wouldn't go down the dissident path but I think we need to wake up and smell the coffee.

+1. I hope I'm wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Shinners took their seats in Westminster, they've dumped most of their other principles. I don't agree with the methods of the dissidents, but I can understand their anger at what is being allowed to happen in this shithole failed statelet ... and don't get me started on that farce up in Stormont 

[give her dixie]

What I mean is that rather than deliver us a road to unity the peace process has put it a long ways off, if it will ever happen. There is no denying that we are in a far better place than we were before the cease fires. However rather than unionism embracing an Irish dimension or compromising on symbolism and flags etc... they have become more entrenched and secure in the knowledge that the Union is safe and they hold a veto. Nationalist on the otherhand have embraced this whole notion of Northern Ireland as a UK region, we seem to have embraced our "Britishness" and are tolerant of British companies now treating NI branches as they do "mainland" branches. We no longer object to the flying of the Union flag and other really British point of sale used by these retailers (I'm not taliking about tea bags and that wasn't me any way). These are things that are small but are evident of a shift that I don't think SF anticipated. The acceptance of Derry as UK City of culture is another example of nationalists tacitly accepting that NI is an integral part of the UK. Does it matter? I would say from where I stand probably not to most nationalists ( more accurately catholics). In fairness to SF they have not embraced the mother of parliaments with the gusto of the SDLP, but surely only a matter of time. All the compromises seem to be coming from nationalists. The change is maybe some what intangible but there non the less.

Would agree with you there all right. The re branding and acceptance of Derry city as Derrylondonderry and UK City of culture is a prime example. Don't bet against the Shinners taking their seats in Westminister as there is a pay rise on the cards for MP's.......