Hunger strike commemoration at a GAA ground

[DuffleKing]

So anyone who didn't support the most recent republican campaign "is ashamed of their irishness"?

[Maguire01]

Maguire do you really believe that the hatred of all things Gael, directed at the GAA by right wing Unionist (which includes a few that come on to this thread), has actually any real connection to how GAA grounds are used on occasion in the North?

Main Street, I've already said explicitly that iIm not even slightly concerned with what McCausland and his 'colleagues' think about the GAA. I'm well aware that they'll never accept the GAA, no matter what. So it's not about appeasing the right-wing Unionists. At the same time, events like this just give them ammunition and publicity - an opportunity to throw mud.

For me, it's about keeping the sport and the politics separate, for the sake of the Association. It's not about doing it for anyone else. Although it's fair to say that such events aren't doing the Association any favours in the eyes of moderate Unionists or Protestants in the north and won't help the GAA's attempts to attract people from these communities.

Fair enough then this is probaby what lynchboy was referring to when he talked of northern travesty.
The GAA is not a part of the forces that want to keep people apart or keep Irish sport away from schools.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that(?)

Did you ever think it might be a good beginning to strip mcCausland of any political responsibility for his attempts to raise levels of hatred and vitriol against another section of the community who are merely engaging in a peacefull civil commemoration.

That's a strange one. Obviously, if I had my way, I wouldn't have him anywhere near government. And I would never have a DUP politician anywhere near the Culture, Arts & Leisure portfolio, such is their narrow view of what culture constitutes, and their constsnt attempts to try and undermine aspects of Irish culture.

But at the end of the day, he hasn't broken the law and this is democratic politics - he has a mandate, and like it or not, he's probably a fair reflection of the opinions and attitudes of a large proportion of his constituents (which is clearly a terrible thought) - so what can you do?

[lynchbhoy]

OK I might be out here on my own about this one, but where these people not convicted terrorists? Alot of people consider terrorism a form of criminality. So you could say that criminals should not have special status!

Well said. And a starving man that steals a banana from a banana farm to feed his starving child is nothing more than a thief.

Regardless of your political persuasion and your view on whether members of paramilitary organisations were terrorists or heroes, that's a ridiculous comparison and has no credibility.

Why? Is criminality not black and white? Theft is a crime as is terrorism. Criminals the lot of them!

Criminality is clearly not black and white - that's my point. Furthermore, some crimes are more serious than others.

its your (and people like you) a la carte cherry picking and lack of consistency that caused all the problems in the first place.

all very well taking 'high moral ground'  ragarding people that used violence to counter violence.
Neither were right, but it was a necessity and has ended up granting a more peaceful and equal society in the north of Ireland.
easy for you when skulking below the border most of yer life.

I remember you once lecturing me that i "assume too much". Once again you've shown your inconsistency and hypocricy (as in the case of posting the contents of a PM).

But for your information, I've lived more than two-thirds of my life north of the border.

funny you should mention 'MY' hypocricy when you yerself broke you own pledge to me via your bleating pm some time ago professing that you wouldnt go commenting on my posts etc etc ....and you had no prob going back on yer own statement to break this in that other thread you mention....I let it pass then but as you are keen to keep up the bullsh*t, then check out yer own hypocricy ! !

What can I say - I just don't have the will power! I see someone with a spade in their hand and I just have to help them dig.
But once again you break your own rules on internet etiquette by publicising the details of a PM. 
But don't worry, i'm not that sensitive.

Touche ! ! !

And as i'm sure you're aware, Touché is an acknowledgement of your opponent's success. It's good to see that you came around in the end. 

FFS   
I did not 'post the contents of your whinging pm to me' 
so rebuttal number 1.

I put in touche as I know you would never admit back that I caught you out at your own game !

...so you now have no 'stats' that you referred to though were happy to quote them at me !
Artistic license stands !

so much time spent in the six counties yet so little understanding and knowledge !
Obv arrived late in the game and as a late sub you dont get any rating !

[Evil Genius]

Irish Unionists of all shades will continue to have little or nothing to do with such an organisation. 

That post contradicts itself a little.

Unless you are having difficulty with my describing myself as an "Irish Unionist" i.e. an Irishman who believes in the Union of (Northern) Ireland with Great Britain, I'm not sure what is contradictory about that? 

Anyhow, the point I was making was that GAA fans should not try to ascribe Unionist anger at such events solely to hardline politicians like McCausland (someone who, since he is a DUP representative, I would never ever vote for, btw).

I have no doubt whatever that even the most moderate of Unionists find such a blithe mixing of "sport" with extreme Republican politics/terrorism/criminality etc to be utterly obnoxious and repellent.

Therefore when GAA fans who try to assert that sport is "open to all", they must be made to confront the hard reality that the GAA may retain its Republican/Nationalist ethos, or, it may hope to attract Irish Unionists, but it hasn't a snowball's chance in Hell of doing both.

[Main Street]

"I have no doubt whatever that even the most moderate of Unionists find such a blithe mixing of "sport" with extreme Republican politics/terrorism/criminality etc to be utterly obnoxious and repellent."

As the hunger strikers commemoration would have sympathy right throughout the nationalist community in the 6 counties, that would translate to an obnoxious and repellant attitude towards the nationalist community from so called moderate Unionists, as well as an obnoxious and repellant attitude towards the GAA.
Not too dissimilar to the antics of so called hardliner McCausland.

It is nothing less than communal hatred.

[Evil Genius]

"I have no doubt whatever that even the most moderate of Unionists find such a blithe mixing of "sport" with extreme Republican politics/terrorism/criminality etc to be utterly obnoxious and repellent."

As the hunger strikers commemoration would have sympathy right throughout the nationalist community in the 6 counties, that would translate to an obnoxious and repellant attitude towards the nationalist community from so called moderate Unionists, as well as an obnoxious and repellant attitude towards the GAA.
Not too dissimilar to the antics of so called hardliner McCausland.

It is nothing less than communal hatred.

If that's how you want to interpret my post, then knock yourself out.

I am merely pointing out that the average Unionist views displays of paramilitarism by men in dark glasses and black berets etc, or the "armed patrols" by men in balaclavas etc, such as those in and around Galbally to be obnoxious and repellent.

Of course, we also accept that such things go on, and have a degree of sympathy and support amongst our Nationalist neighbours etc.

Nonetheless, when the GAA turns a blind eye to member clubs hosting such demonstrations, indeed to organising childrens' tournaments in "honour" of someone like Joe Cahill (seen by us as an unrepentently sectarian, murderous monster), then as a group, we will decline to have anything to do with the GAA.

But then, as I've pointed out many times before on this Board, the GAA is your organisation and may do as you, its members, see fit. Just don't expect us to want anything to do with it if Galbally is the sort of thing we'd have to put up with as the "price" for our participation. 

[Hardy]

I am merely pointing out that the average Unionist views displays of paramilitarism by men in dark glasses and black berets etc, or the "armed patrols" by men in balaclavas etc, such as those in and around Galbally to be obnoxious and repellent.

So does the average nationalist.

[Evil Genius]

I am merely pointing out that the average Unionist views displays of paramilitarism by men in dark glasses and black berets etc, or the "armed patrols" by men in balaclavas etc, such as those in and around Galbally to be obnoxious and repellent.

So does the average nationalist.

(Assuming you are correct) I'm gratified that that is so.

Anyhow, Gail Walker offers an interesting perspective in today's Belly Telly:


How GAA scored an own goal over SF demonstration (Tuesday, 25 August 2009)

Gail Walker, Belfast Telegraph

Just because it's Nelson McCausland, it doesn't mean he's wrong. The events surrounding that Hunger Strike anniversary rally at Galbally GAA grounds pose very disturbing questions for the organisation.

Since McCausland's measured statement about his concerns, we've had a lot of flack raised in a bid to make the issue 'just go away'. The DUPer's refusal to attend Catholic services; the admission that he doesn't follow the sport; and, well, he's Nelson McCausland.

Nelson McCausland measured? Well, yes. In his statements, he's made it clear that he thinks many in the GAA will be horrified with the rally. He calls for a rapid investigation.

He hasn't foamed at the mouth, called for the GAA to be banned or hit by the withdrawal of public funds, just that it bring forward recommendations to ensure this won't happen again.

McCausland was simply reflecting the concerns of many here —and not just unionists.

Yet SF's defence of the rally has been surreal. While the military-style parade is beyond question following publication of photographs of men on the pitch, the balaclava'ed men with the guns were on the streets outside.

Anyway,according to SF, it was — and it would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic —'street theatre' put on by actors. (Actors? Were they Equity members or are we talking AmDram? "No, we're not doing Run For Your Wife this year, but something more edgy, Armed Struggle. Frank, you're the Quartermaster ...") Oh, and lack of facilities in Tyrone meant the republicans had nowhere else to go.

Let's be blunt. This wasn't a vague cultural demonstration, but a Hunger Strike commemoratation, sponsored by Sinn Fein, addressed by Gerry Adams and celebrating the struggle not just of the Hunger Strikers but of the IRA itself.

Theatre or not, inside the ground or not, the pictures on the internet glorify terrorism. And yet we're meant to believe that somehow this isn't party political and flying in the face of the GAA's own constitution.

Party political? No, cry |the event's defenders, it also |commemorated INLA hunger strikers. And any part of the wider republican 'family' — left, mainstream SF or, er, dissident — were welcome to come along.

It was a broader 'community event'. So, er, 7A hasn't technically been breached.

Imagine the response to a rally at Windsor Park commemorating the sacrifice of UDA and UVF 'volunteers', complete with paramilitary trappings?

Linfield out of the Irish League? The NI footballing authorities in crisis? A withdrawal of public funds? A campaign to ban Northern Ireland from international sporting events?

None are ridiculous scenarios, yet we're meant to believe that it's 'just different' when it comes to the GAA.

The Association's response to the crisis has been less than convincing. After McCausland's complaints, the organisation made a terse 'No Comment'.

It was only after SDLP deputy leader Alasdair McDonnell complained to the GAA leadership in Dublin that the organisation creaked into action, changed tack and said that they were "not aware" of the event until afterwards and had determined to find out what happened and "the involvement of the association in these events, if any".Doesn't exactly sound like anyone's been given 24 hours to crack the case, does it? And what's this "if any" business?

Are the GAA seriously suggesting the Galbally ground was somehow "taken over" by republicans without the association's permission? Even though the event had, apparently, been advertised for weeks.

Good relations cut both ways. It isn't just up to unionists to be nice to nationalists. It works the other way round too. Many — and, yes, mainly unionists (but unionists are, in the final analysis, human beings too) — will not remember hunger strikers as 'martyrs' but as part of an organisation dedicated to low level ethnic cleansing. They will ask why is the GAA giving its blessing to Sinn Fein's version of the Troubles?

We're constantly being reminded by our betters, that it's time to move on, and it is. But that applies as much to the GAA — or (weary sigh) 'elements within it' — as anyone else. Instead of playing host to a sinister version of the Commemoration Game, it should get into the 21st century.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/gail-walker/gail-walker-how-gaa-scored-an-own-goal-over-sf-demonstration-14467025.html

[talktothehand]

all wars are dirty and should be avoided. unfortunately in 1969 we didn't really have much choice. come to coleraine and see how equal this society is and how wearing a gaelic top can put the lives of you and your families at risk. these are the facts of the situation here. we are supposed to be in a peaceful society yet we have people on here agreeing with nelson mccausland ffs!! the man is the foulest of the foul and people who stoop to try and placate these people are living in a dream world. come up here for a look around sometime!!

Or travel round the coast a bit to Derry, put a Rangers top on and try walking round the town centre on a Friday night. See how far you get. Then when you get out of Altnagelvin, have a chat with the residents of the Fountain. You'll find you have a lot in common.
Not all the sectarian bigots are prods, and not all the victiims are Catholics.

unless you are a protestant from the fountain i fail to see what relevance this has. i was talking about my life!! not some hypothetical fantasy of yours you knob!

This is a discussion board, not a therapy session. Get over yourself.

in our estate we had a man kicked to death in front of his wife and another nearly so. if you think i'm going to listen to you spouting shite and let it go unchallenged you are very much mistaken. you may be ashamed of what you are pal but i'm not. you sound like an alliance candidate who has never lived in ireland. this is a GAA discussion board so i fail to see the point you were making. it was certainly off topic at the very least. no one said sectarianism was a one way street but my point was in relation to northern irish catholics having a gaelic/irish/republican viewpoint that is dangerous to your own safety. when the IRA walk into the fountain with 100 people(like the UDA did here) then i will agree with the arguement you were trying to make. 

[Hardy]

I am merely pointing out that the average Unionist views displays of paramilitarism by men in dark glasses and black berets etc, or the "armed patrols" by men in balaclavas etc, such as those in and around Galbally to be obnoxious and repellent.

So does the average nationalist.

(Assuming you are correct) I'm gratified that that is so.

It's fine to be gratified, but what does that achieve? It's not the average nationalist that you will have difficulty reaching an accommodation with. The man with his head in the freezer and his feet in the oven is, on average, at a comfortable temperature.

Gratification that the majority feels uncomfortable with paramilitary trappings doesn't do anything to help you live with the people who see their history in a different light than you (or me or whoever else). The point is that they exist in large numbers. Your disapproval won't make them change their minds, so you'll have to come to terms with their existence and their beliefs. Same as they'll have to come to terms with the OO marching through the streets proclaiming their contempt for the religion of their neighbours.

Personally, I'd like to see an end to all parades and commemorations, as an earnest from each side to accommodate the sensitivities of the other. But that's unlikely to happen anytime soon. Until it does, I think all we can do is our best to ignore the ones we don't like and try to resist the temptation to jump up and down about them and make an issue of every one as it arises.

[lynchbhoy]

Irish Unionists of all shades will continue to have little or nothing to do with such an organisation. 

That post contradicts itself a little.

Unless you are having difficulty with my describing myself as an "Irish Unionist" i.e. an Irishman who believes in the Union of (Northern) Ireland with Great Britain, I'm not sure what is contradictory about that? 

Anyhow, the point I was making was that GAA fans should not try to ascribe Unionist anger at such events solely to hardline politicians like McCausland (someone who, since he is a DUP representative, I would never ever vote for, btw).

I have no doubt whatever that even the most moderate of Unionists find such a blithe mixing of "sport" with extreme Republican politics/terrorism/criminality etc to be utterly obnoxious and repellent.

Therefore when GAA fans who try to assert that sport is "open to all", they must be made to confront the hard reality that the GAA may retain its Republican/Nationalist ethos, or, it may hope to attract Irish Unionists, but it hasn't a snowball's chance in Hell of doing both.

there will be a lot of people like you who will WANT to take offense at this and try to continue to insist that the GAA had anything to do with whatever demonstration etc took place or indeed takes place.

there are Irish unionists that play gaelic games and have the sense to realise that in the current pseudo-state that the 6 counties are, there will be demonstrations and marches etc on both sides until the renunification outlaws them all ( with a bit of luck) , but these are confined to a few areas where shows of patriotism run high. they mean feck all and dont affect these GAA players (no more than they affect the nationalist/catholic/Irishsoccer players that have to put up the sectarinism that still exists in the ifa and irish league/northern ireland soccer team.

but knock yourself out speaking for the 'Irish unionists' that you seem to think you are representing - I dont think the Irish unionist hurlers in fermanagh or down for example are heeding or listening to you !

[boojangles]

Imagine the response to a rally at Windsor Park commemorating the sacrifice of UDA and UVF 'volunteers', complete with paramilitary trappings?

I have stayed out of this debate because TBH I couldn't really make my mind up about what I felt was right and wrong but I think the above line has done just that. I do not feel ashamed about the actions in the past of Volunteers such as the Hunger Strikers.I do not view them as terrorists like some on here.I also feel that it is important to remember the sacrifices these men and others have made to rid this country of a foreign ruler. What I do feel however is that the actions of these men were in a different time and different political climate and it is best that for the purpose of everybody moving on that demonstrations and paramilitary style shows like the pictures we have seen should be a thing of the past-Especially on GAA grounds.

[lynchbhoy]

I am merely pointing out that the average Unionist views displays of paramilitarism by men in dark glasses and black berets etc, or the "armed patrols" by men in balaclavas etc, such as those in and around Galbally to be obnoxious and repellent.

So does the average nationalist.

(Assuming you are correct) I'm gratified that that is so.

Anyhow, Gail Walker offers an interesting perspective in today's Belly Telly:


How GAA scored an own goal over SF demonstration (Tuesday, 25 August 2009)

Gail Walker, Belfast Telegraph

Just because it's Nelson McCausland, it doesn't mean he's wrong. The events surrounding that Hunger Strike anniversary rally at Galbally GAA grounds pose very disturbing questions for the organisation.

Since McCausland's measured statement about his concerns, we've had a lot of flack raised in a bid to make the issue 'just go away'. The DUPer's refusal to attend Catholic services; the admission that he doesn't follow the sport; and, well, he's Nelson McCausland.

Nelson McCausland measured? Well, yes. In his statements, he's made it clear that he thinks many in the GAA will be horrified with the rally. He calls for a rapid investigation.

He hasn't foamed at the mouth, called for the GAA to be banned or hit by the withdrawal of public funds, just that it bring forward recommendations to ensure this won't happen again.

McCausland was simply reflecting the concerns of many here —and not just unionists.

Yet SF's defence of the rally has been surreal. While the military-style parade is beyond question following publication of photographs of men on the pitch, the balaclava'ed men with the guns were on the streets outside.

Anyway,according to SF, it was — and it would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic —'street theatre' put on by actors. (Actors? Were they Equity members or are we talking AmDram? "No, we're not doing Run For Your Wife this year, but something more edgy, Armed Struggle. Frank, you're the Quartermaster ...") Oh, and lack of facilities in Tyrone meant the republicans had nowhere else to go.

Let's be blunt. This wasn't a vague cultural demonstration, but a Hunger Strike commemoratation, sponsored by Sinn Fein, addressed by Gerry Adams and celebrating the struggle not just of the Hunger Strikers but of the IRA itself.

Theatre or not, inside the ground or not, the pictures on the internet glorify terrorism. And yet we're meant to believe that somehow this isn't party political and flying in the face of the GAA's own constitution.

Party political? No, cry |the event's defenders, it also |commemorated INLA hunger strikers. And any part of the wider republican 'family' — left, mainstream SF or, er, dissident — were welcome to come along.

It was a broader 'community event'. So, er, 7A hasn't technically been breached.

Imagine the response to a rally at Windsor Park commemorating the sacrifice of UDA and UVF 'volunteers', complete with paramilitary trappings?

Linfield out of the Irish League? The NI footballing authorities in crisis? A withdrawal of public funds? A campaign to ban Northern Ireland from international sporting events?

None are ridiculous scenarios, yet we're meant to believe that it's 'just different' when it comes to the GAA.

The Association's response to the crisis has been less than convincing. After McCausland's complaints, the organisation made a terse 'No Comment'.

It was only after SDLP deputy leader Alasdair McDonnell complained to the GAA leadership in Dublin that the organisation creaked into action, changed tack and said that they were "not aware" of the event until afterwards and had determined to find out what happened and "the involvement of the association in these events, if any".Doesn't exactly sound like anyone's been given 24 hours to crack the case, does it? And what's this "if any" business?

Are the GAA seriously suggesting the Galbally ground was somehow "taken over" by republicans without the association's permission? Even though the event had, apparently, been advertised for weeks.

Good relations cut both ways. It isn't just up to unionists to be nice to nationalists. It works the other way round too. Many — and, yes, mainly unionists (but unionists are, in the final analysis, human beings too) — will not remember hunger strikers as 'martyrs' but as part of an organisation dedicated to low level ethnic cleansing. They will ask why is the GAA giving its blessing to Sinn Fein's version of the Troubles?

We're constantly being reminded by our betters, that it's time to move on, and it is. But that applies as much to the GAA — or (weary sigh) 'elements within it' — as anyone else. Instead of playing host to a sinister version of the Commemoration Game, it should get into the 21st century.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/gail-walker/gail-walker-how-gaa-scored-an-own-goal-over-sf-demonstration-14467025.html

not much of an argument - just a piece that tries to contnue to inflame.
Misses the goalposts though.
Rule 7A has not ben breached.
These people are obv trying to get so much press going that the GAA has to make a move to ban these marches etc.

will we see the same people in the media then turn their attention to the sectarian oo marches, the sectarian soccer practices or the sectarian un-eveness of the psni at places like coleraine ?
I wont be holding my breath.

[Evil Genius]

I am merely pointing out that the average Unionist views displays of paramilitarism by men in dark glasses and black berets etc, or the "armed patrols" by men in balaclavas etc, such as those in and around Galbally to be obnoxious and repellent.

So does the average nationalist.

(Assuming you are correct) I'm gratified that that is so.

It's fine to be gratified, but what does that achieve? It's not the average nationalist that you will have difficulty reaching an accommodation with. The man with his head in the freezer and his feet in the oven is, on average, at a comfortable temperature.

It wasn't meant to "achieve" anything, it was merely a statement of my opinion, as well as an acknowledgement of yours.

Gratification that the majority feels uncomfortable with paramilitary trappings doesn't do anything to help you live with the people who see their history in a different light than you (or me or whoever else). The point is that they exist in large numbers.

Did you not notice my acknowledgement of that when I added in the same post:
"Of course, we also accept that such things go on, and [such things] have a degree of sympathy and support amongst our Nationalist neighbours etc" 

Your disapproval won't make them change their minds, so you'll have to come to terms with their existence and their beliefs. Same as they'll have to come to terms with the OO marching through the streets proclaiming their contempt for the religion of their neighbours.

Jeez, talk about missing the [my] point!
Imo, everyone who lives in NI has a duty to "come to terms with" neighbours who hold differing views to his/her own (assuming, of course, there is no illegality involved).
Which is why I never claimed that political (or other) groups may not eg commemorate the Hunger Strikers. Indeed, I have never claimed that GAA clubs may not get involved, either. (Your organisation, your choice, remember).

But that is a hell of a sight away from requiring people (in this case, Unionists) to "approve", condone or overlook manifestations of contrary opinions which we find deeply repugnant and offensive.
For under the principle of freedom of speech and conscience, we Unionists must be allowed to express our contempt for such demonstrations every bit as freely as eg the organisers of this demonstration may express their contempt for us (i.e. the very people who were threatened, targeted and murdered by the men in black berets or balaclavas etc.)

Which principle applies exactly the same for the OO. I personally hold no brief for that organisation - I think it is anachronistic, needlessly provocative at times and dreadfully badly led (in particular), such that certain members have behaved disgracefully on occasion.
Which is why I have nothing to do with it (despite having a family history of involvement which goes back at least decades).
But in describing the OO as being: "anachronistic*, needlessly provocative at times and dreadfully badly led (in particular), such that certain members have behaved disgracefully on occasion", I might just as easily make the same claim about the GAA, which is why I have nothing to do with that organisation, either.

However, I will make one significant distinction between the OO and the GAA. Namely, the OO is unreprentant about being a sectarian/political organisation, whose membership may be drawn only from one community in NI.
By contrast, the GAA claims to be "open to all", whilst at the same time retaining a sectional, partisan and controversial political ethos.

Which in itself would be bad enough, were it not that sport, which elsewhere in the world has proven capable of being a force for good and a means of bringing people together, should not imo allow itself to be hijacked by (collude with? promote?) any partisan political movement or other, especially in so controversial a context as Ireland.

* - I would not desribe the GAA as "anachronistic" per se , however I do consider that it has an severely and unwelcome anachronitic streak to it, in the way it insists on clinging onto 19th Century political values, even whilst the rest of us are stumbling our way into the 21st Century.

Personally, I'd like to see an end to all parades and commemorations, as an earnest from each side to accommodate the sensitivities of the other. But that's unlikely to happen anytime soon. Until it does, I think all we can do is our best to ignore the ones we don't like and try to resist the temptation to jump up and down about them and make an issue of every one as it arises.

Fine.
If it suits you for us to "ignore" what goes on in GAA grounds and clubhouses etc, then we will do so.

Just don't try and blame us for believing the GAA's claim to be "open to all" to be a crock of shit. Or for declining to get involved with such an organisation. Or for feeling aggrieved that taxpayers' money which ought by law to be allocated to sporting groups which are non-partisan, is instead going to clubs such as Galbally Pearses GAC, which prove unwilling and/or unwilling to live up to the spirit of such law, if not the letter:
http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/qanda/2007mandate/writtenans/2008/090213.htm
Galbally Pearses GFC - Construction of a natural turf training pitch - £200,565

[redhugh]

I see no issue whatsoever with a Hunger Strike commemoration, in fact it's something that should be remembered, however the fact that it was held in a GAA ground is regrettable and very short sighted indeed by the Sinn Fein leadership.I also feel that most Unionists don't understand why so many Nationalists/Republicans feel the need to commemorate these men and this period in our recent history. I would love to know if anyone has ever actually tried to explain to the wider Unionist community why we feel these events are so important.