Get ready to wave them flegs - Lily Windsor's coming

[AQMP]

Page 14 of the Irish News today says that Tyrone and Derry didn't get an invite, while the Antrim representative couldn't go due to work commitments.

Antrim representative??...work committments??  Don't think so

[AQMP]

On cool reflection by far the most odious sight during the Queen's visit has to be that of red nose gansta Bertie Ahern pontificating here there and everywhere

[Nally Stand]

Page 14 of the Irish News today says that Tyrone and Derry didn't get an invite, while the Antrim representative couldn't go due to work commitments.

In other words Tyrone and Derry made it clear that an invitation would not be accepted.

[deiseach]

Maybe Derry's invitation went to a non-existent county

[Evil Genius]

Incidentally, EG, Her Majesty started her speech today by speaking in Irish. Now when a northern politician does that it usually gets greeted by hisses and jeers from your crowd. What do youse think of the Irish language now that HM thinks it's okay to speak it?

When HM spoke last night, imo it was entirely appropriate, for four reasons:
(a ) It is the Official Language of the State which was receiving her;
(b ) Most, if not all, of the audience will have understood what she was saying;
(c ) She could have predicted that her audience will have appreciated the gesture;
(d ) The Irish Language is not a divisive, Party-political subject in the ROI.

None of those factors obtains in NI - quite the contrary, in fact. Consequently when SF insist on using Irish in Stormont etc, rather than being a means of commuication, which Language should surely be, in their mouths it becomes a barrier  to communication.

And if I were a devotee of Irish (and I greatly respect those who study and speak it for genuine reasons), I expect I would be dismayed to see my Language hijacked, exploited and (apparently) often spoken badly by the Shinners, for purely petty, partisan and political reasons.

And what do you think of HM honouring the fallen who fought for Irish independence?  Hmm?

The Garden of Remembrance clearly means a lot to the people of the Republic. And if their President wanted on their behalf to receive the Queen there, it would have been churlish for Her Majesty to refuse (imo).
Of course, I hold no brief for the Rebels of 1916 etc (far from it), and neither does HM, I'm sure. But in the end, that was all before even her time (and she's 85!), and in any case, if the Republic can accept the playing of GSTQ in that place, then we Brits should accept our Monarch laying a wreath there.

Of course, the Sky might still  fall in before the end of her visit, but having got as far as Day 3, I'm cautiously optimistic that we'll all be OK...

And if it's okay for Her Majesty to associate with the GAA then surely it must now be okay for your crowd to do the same?

You clearly don't see the irony in the fact that the Queen can visit Croke Park, but the GAA's Ulster Counties can't (Down excepted)!

This trip must really be f***ing with your heads, musn't it?

I have only one head, and it's in on the top  my neck, exactly where it was at the beginning of the week.

P.S. Like the use of "your crowd" etc. Classy.

Perhaps

[Oraisteach]

This joke has been told in many forms on this forum by Ziggy and Hardy and others, but it still makes me laugh.
So why did the queen wear a fox hat to Croke Park?  The morning of the visit, QEII told Prince Phillip that they would be visiting Croke Park that day.
"Where the fcuk's zat?" he asked.
"Oh, thank you, dear.  I think I shall."

On a second note, I have to commend Evil Genius for coming on here and comporting himself with poise and patience when it would be so much easier to rant and rave; true, he is a cannon of facts, stats and historical shrapnel, but his motivation appears genuine.  Given his prolific posting prowess, though, I do have to wonder if he is independently wealthy or is the PRO for the OWC.  I also find it difficult to respond to so many interconnected threads.  It's getting to be more like the Bayeux Tapestry here than a bulletin board. 
Still, EG's measured voice is both refreshing and reassuring, and much as I dislike it, I think his view of the political landscape is probably pretty accurate.
I had hoped that I'd see a UI in my lifetime, but that isn't going to happen.  I had hoped that a surging Irish economy would make partition redundant, but now that we're all part of the Commonpov of Nations, that seems less likely.  As I see it, the biggest threat to a UI in the foreseeable future is, for want of a better word, Nationalism.  If the much ballyhooed referendum were to occur (it isn't happening soon), I fear that many Nats would talk the good talk but not produce at the ballot box, familiarity breeding content.  In the South, it would be even worse.  My faith in my 26-county brethren runs even shallower, status quo still being a surprisingly popular rock band at the moment, as someone noted elsewhere.
But despite my apparent loss of political religion, I sway-irr aah do have fay-ith, and I see it in the little things (EG on here, e.g., consistent in his condemnation of evil).  I see it even in the very avatar that EG uses.  In the good old days, the Union Jack would have been the fleg of choice among Unionists, but increasingly that emblem is being supplanted by one that, paradoxically, promotes an Irish identity, albeit a northern one, and at the same time declares subtlely a separation, like pulling teat, so to speak (apologies to NYT).  Ulster unionists are staunch and true, but increasingly to themselves, their history, their culture, one that is increasingly divorced from Britain. 
It seems to me, unionism is grappling with self-definition, a dilemma I think MGHU implied, about 358 pages ago, when "he" (don't know gender—call me Chaz) described a NI friend of his describing herself as Irish, and then qualifying that definition seeing the presence of a lower case republican.  Unionists are Irish, no ifs ands or buts, but it will take time for them to wear that cloak comfortably.  The truth is, all the serious impediments to reunification have been lifted (increased secularism/revoking of constitutional claim) and fears should be further assuaged by the GFA.  It's just a matter of time, but sadly for me, a lot longer than I'd like.
Though I heap praise on EG, I do think his condemnation of the northern GAA for skipping the Freddy Mercury comeback tour is a little harsh, especially given his own gra for history. 
I should also say that I wouldn't have attended myself (of course, I wasn't invited), but that derives less from an antipathy towards Britain (I lived and worked there) and more out of distaste for the very institution of monarchy, a medieval/renaissance/Victorian vestige of empire, horribly and excessively out of place in the twenty-first century.
Further, who in God's name organized that Croke Park Bataan death march—it was clearly Jack Kevorkian meets Samuel Beckett.  Were they trying to kill the queen?  It's a good thing the northern crew said "no thanks." That poor old woman was walked and talked to death, and then in a moment worthy of absurdist theatre, she was led out into a huge but empty field and told to look at a TV about 75 yards away.  Apparently "cead mile failte" means "For sure her heart'll fail."
Anyway, back to EG.  Given all that the GAA has endured at the hands of her majesty's forces over the last 100 years (Aidan McAnespie, Crossmaglen, etc. etc. ) to expect a latter-day Damascene conversion would be the essence of hypocrisy on their part, a total sell-out, as likely as a stampede of Wullie-de-beest galloping across the border proclaiming, "Oh, take us back, take us back.  We'll be good."  The truth is, over the last couple of years the northern GAA has taken colossal steps to dissociate itself from its misrepresentation as "The IRA at play."  You can't seriously chastise Ulster GAA people for declining the invite when you saw Mickey Harte and a massive number of Tyrone gaels who attended and participated in the funeral of Ronan Kerr.  Times have changed.  That never would have happened a few years back, and is far, far more significant than a handful of county reps attending a state visit by a glorified tourist attraction.
Could gurgle on here like a clogged sink, so I'll say "cheerio."  It's funny, though, that I'm not particularly offended by EG's flapping flag but wince at the sight of "tyrones own" tricour, associated as it is with such right wing effluvia.     

[AZOffaly]

That's a great post. There's hope for this board yet.

FWIW I agree with you about Evil Genius. I don't think he's evil, or a genius, but he's articulate and while staunch in his views appears to be fair in his consideration. That's all you can ask of any man.

In fairness, I think there's a fair few that would oppose EG that are of the same ilk.

[Evil Genius]

EG, quick question - you mentioned that that you were uneasy about the visit to the Garden of Remembrance.

Initially, yes (though as much "unsure" as "uneasy").
In the event, however, I can see the value of it and so have no objection.

Would you be equally as uneasy if she was to visiti the quivalent memorials in other former parts of the Empire, both in and out of the Commonwealth?! I have no idea, but I imagine she's probably visited the Washington monument before.

Sometimes yes, but more often not.
What you've got to remember is that Irish Republican Freedom Fighters/Terrorists (delete as preferred) are a great deal more personal to someone like me than, say, American Republican Freedom Fighters/Terrorists.
And as well as the personal element, you also have to consider the context. With the American War of Independence, it was over 200 years ago, whereas the Irish equivalent was within living memory (just).
Or, with say Germany or Japan, the fact that our wars with them are rather more recent must be outweighed by the fact that both countries are now firm allies, with whom we have been living entirely peacefully for over half a century.

You can criticise the attitude of people or the GAA for "sham" attempts to reach out to Unionists, but that kind of opinion speaks volumes about how some Unionists still feel about the loss of the 26 counties. Shameful.

As I mentioned earlier, I am sure that the people who are doing cross-community work in NI for the GAA are entirely committed and sincere - in my experience, the people drawn to that sort of work invariably are.
But if you still cannot see how they were undermined by their bosses consciously determining to snub the Queen etc, and what that says about the priorities of those who lead the GAA in Ulster, then there probably isn't any more I can say on the subject.

P.S. If you can't see that last point, then I'd term it a "shame". However, if you wilfully refuse  to see it, then I'd call it "shameful". Take your pick.

[SLIGONIAN]

EG, quick question - you mentioned that that you were uneasy about the visit to the Garden of Remembrance.

Initially, yes (though as much "unsure" as "uneasy").
In the event, however, I can see the value of it and so have no objection.

Would you be equally as uneasy if she was to visiti the quivalent memorials in other former parts of the Empire, both in and out of the Commonwealth?! I have no idea, but I imagine she's probably visited the Washington monument before.

Sometimes yes, but more often not.
What you've got to remember is that Irish Republican Freedom Fighters/Terrorists (delete as preferred) are a great deal more personal to someone like me than, say, American Republican Freedom Fighters/Terrorists.
And as well as the personal element, you also have to consider the context. With the American War of Independence, it was over 200 years ago, whereas the Irish equivalent was within living memory (just).
Or, with say Germany or Japan, the fact that our wars with them are rather more recent must be outweighed by the fact that both countries are now firm allies, with whom we have been living entirely peacefully for over half a century.

You can criticise the attitude of people or the GAA for "sham" attempts to reach out to Unionists, but that kind of opinion speaks volumes about how some Unionists still feel about the loss of the 26 counties. Shameful.

As I mentioned earlier, I am sure that the people who are doing cross-community work in NI for the GAA are entirely committed and sincere - in my experience, the people drawn to that sort of work invariably are.
But if you still cannot see how they were undermined by their bosses consciously determining to snub the Queen etc, and what that says about the priorities of those who lead the GAA in Ulster, then there probably isn't any more I can say on the subject.

P.S. If you can't see that last point, then I'd term it a "shame". However, if you wilfully refuse  to see it, then I'd call it "shameful". Take your pick.

Imo the future leads to concessions, isnt it fair to say republicans have gone alot further than unionism in its reaching out? Even our silence publicly about this queens visit is another big concession imo. What exactly has unionism done to meet us halfway or a fifth of the way would be more accurate?

[deiseach]

FWIW I agree with you about Evil Genius. I don't think he's evil, or a genius, but he's articulate and while staunch in his views appears to be fair in his consideration. That's all you can ask of any man.

He's no nifan though! Seriously, you're right. He plays the ball and not the man.

[Nally Stand]

That's a great post. There's hope for this board yet.

FWIW I agree with you about Evil Genius. I don't think he's evil, or a genius, but he's articulate and while staunch in his views appears to be fair in his consideration. That's all you can ask of any man.

In fairness, I think there's a fair few that would oppose EG that are of the same ilk.

GROUP HUG!!

[gallsman]

EG, quick question - you mentioned that that you were uneasy about the visit to the Garden of Remembrance.

Initially, yes (though as much "unsure" as "uneasy").
In the event, however, I can see the value of it and so have no objection.

Would you be equally as uneasy if she was to visiti the quivalent memorials in other former parts of the Empire, both in and out of the Commonwealth?! I have no idea, but I imagine she's probably visited the Washington monument before.

Sometimes yes, but more often not.
What you've got to remember is that Irish Republican Freedom Fighters/Terrorists (delete as preferred) are a great deal more personal to someone like me than, say, American Republican Freedom Fighters/Terrorists.
And as well as the personal element, you also have to consider the context. With the American War of Independence, it was over 200 years ago, whereas the Irish equivalent was within living memory (just).
Or, with say Germany or Japan, the fact that our wars with them are rather more recent must be outweighed by the fact that both countries are now firm allies, with whom we have been living entirely peacefully for over half a century.

You can criticise the attitude of people or the GAA for "sham" attempts to reach out to Unionists, but that kind of opinion speaks volumes about how some Unionists still feel about the loss of the 26 counties. Shameful.

As I mentioned earlier, I am sure that the people who are doing cross-community work in NI for the GAA are entirely committed and sincere - in my experience, the people drawn to that sort of work invariably are.
But if you still cannot see how they were undermined by their bosses consciously determining to snub the Queen etc, and what that says about the priorities of those who lead the GAA in Ulster, then there probably isn't any more I can say on the subject.

P.S. If you can't see that last point, then I'd term it a "shame". However, if you wilfully refuse  to see it, then I'd call it "shameful". Take your pick.

I didn't actually express an opinion one way or the other about the attendance of GAA representatives, I was too busy being shocked at the fact that you implied pining for the days where the 26 counties were firmly under the royal boot is quite a regular occurrence even in the fairly liberal strand of Unionism you yourself appear to follow.

[Evil Genius]

Can't do this multiple quote thing EG, but after a great post about the presence of Jackie McDonlad and his mates at Island Bridge (I think the media have decided this should be glossed over as it doesn't support the "aren't we all great mates" message of the visit), in several other posts you state (perhpas not verbatim) "I think Unionists will feel" "Unionists will view" etc and in other posts occasionally "we" and "us".  Then in response to Ziggy's question on how Unionists view the visit you say that you can't speak for all Unionists as ussuns aren't all the same which appears to be a dig at Ziggy who I don't think for one minute suggested in his question that "yous'uns" are all the same.
 
Now you can't have it both ways.

Let me try to make myself clear.
I do not speak for anyone but myself. Occasionally I will offer the opinion  (key term) that my views may be in accord with many, or sometimes even most, other Unionists. And once in a while, I will offer an opinion that I confidently believe will reflect Unionist thinking in general. (E.g, "Unionists know Gerry Adams to be lying through his teeth when he denies ever having been in the IRA").
In all cases, I try to use language which accurately reflects which of the above applies, but evidently I don't always succeed.
That's it, really.

P.S. I didn't intend to give the impression I was having a dig at Ziggy, aplogies if it appeared that way.

You are confident that you know how Unionists will view the decision of some counties not to send a representative to HQ yesterday and how they feel on other issues yet on some issues (when there is no obvious stick with which to beat the GAA?) it's "Hey we're not all the same (as yous'uns always view us)"  From reading all your posts of the last couple of days, I think this visit and its perceived "success" (so far) has thrown you a bit, until you found an alleged stick, with which to beat, yesterday.

That [bold] was not how I intended my posts to come across.
Generally, I have been encouraged by the Visit, which has gone better than I might have expected. Indeed, taken in the round, I think it is proving a success, which will be beneficial for all the people of Ireland and Britain.
However, in the midst of it all, two things jarred for me, the presence of Jackie McDonald, and (when I heard it) the absence of the Ulster GAA Reps.
Imo it would have been better had he been absent and they been present.

However my main point was your assertion that "many (Unionists) will go further and conclude that the GAA's stated aim of wanting to reach out to all Irish people is a sham (in Ulster, at least).

Now here I admit you don't claim to speak for all Unionists, just "many".  How many, 10, 1,000, 99%?  How do you know this?

I don't know this.
It was merely my opinion and by "many" I mean more than "a few", but less than "all".

As relevant is my straw poll of three Unionists (all of whom live in NI ) at work.  Now two of these (66%) knew the Queen was at Croke Pk yesterday but didn't know that some counties were not represented and had no strong views on the fact that, for instance, my own county was not there.  One of these (33%) actually said "Well it's good if most of them were there" The third (33%) knew that some counties were not represented but said he could understand this position and he also understood the position the Shinners had taken in relation to the visit (and let's just say this person has been directly affected by Republican violence, albeit a long time ago and isn't time he moved on?)

Fine.
You must set my posts against the conversations you had with your three work colleagues and form your own conclusion.
However, I would counsel that those who are willing to talk openly with you about such matters face-to-face may well not be reflect the more hardline elements within Unionism, who will more likely decline to "open up" (if nothing else for the sake of avoiding an argument).

Lastly I can assure you that outreach work being undertaken by the GAA, in Antrim at least, is anything but a sham.  Get out from behind your computer screen and ask some of the Unionists who have experienced this (or are there not that many in Hampstead or Barnsley)?

As I said earlier, I have no doubt that the outreach people on the ground are committed, sincere and doing good work, for which I would commend them.
However, if yesterday's Croke Park snub is anything to go by, their job is being made harder by their bosses.
In the end, the "proof of the pudding is in the eating".
In which respect, I would ask how many people, of all ages, from the Unionist community in Antrim regularly participate in GAA? 10? 1,000? 99%? 

[AQMP]

In which respect, I would ask how many people, of all ages, from the Unionist community in Antrim regularly participate in GAA? 10? 1,000? 99%? 

More than a few...less (fewer??) than all

[AQMP]

Will have to do this as a separate post, fecking computer screen jumps all over the place when I try to quote.

The number of people from the Unionist community in Co Antrim who regularly participate in GAA activities (apart from drinking in the club) is very low.  In fact I'd go as far as to say that 5 years ago the baseline figure would have been somewhere between 0 and 25 (an "educated" guess).  In certain areas it might be less than zero .  However I would say that the number of Unionists who have an interest in Gaelic games would be a lot bigger than that.  Can I include yourself in that as you spend a good few hours on this board   As you say it remains to be seen whether the presence of Jackie McDonald discourages GAA people from engaging with the Unionist community or whether the absence of a county board man from Antrim dissuades Unionist youngsters from engaging with the GAA.  At this juncture I simply don't know.  But my guess is neither will be significant.