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

[Hardy]

That's great, NS, but it's just a statement with no supporting argument. I'm not interested in what you believe, but in why you believe it. Can you elaborate and, if you like, answer the questions?

And please stop with the ould shite about insults. If such a mildly expressed argument insults you, I don't care.

No supporting argument? To back up my claim that Irish Independence has not been achieved yet? Does it really need one? Look at a map, and you will see six north eastern counties which are divided from the rest of the Island.
Your own quote contradicts yourself:

I take the view that, per the terms of the GFA, Irish independence IS a done deal. The terms are clear. It's available as soon as the majority want it

If Irish Independence is already a reality, then what is the "it" you refer to twice as being available when...??

We have the ability to vote for Irish Unity, but that ability is not Irish Independence Hardy. Rather, it is a hard earned method of achieving Independence. It's like saying that Ireland was Independent in 1916 because we had the ability to take up arms for Independence. As I say, if you were a republican who grew up and lived in Tyrone, you would probably not take too kindly to being told by a Meath man that Irish Independence has been achieved.

As for your questions:

1&2: I don't look at it in a partitionist way. The British Queen has been to Ireland many times in her lifetime, and I'm well used to that. If that improves relations, then fine and well, but laying a wreath in the Garden of Remembrance and playing the British National Anthem there? Too divisive and in my view, and in the views of certain patriot dead family members whom I've both spoken to and read comments from, an unnecessary insult. British and Irish relations have room for improvement, but rather than divisive and hypocritical actions like yesterdays, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? Maybe then I would be more inclined to buy into the idea that visits like this will normalise relations.
3: I support the GFA. It doesn't state that to improve Irish-British relations, that the British Queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance and that no other methods shall be considered.

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK. If you don't accept that the GFA delivers Irish unity on acceptable terms, you can't really get away with dodging the issue of what your alternative terms are. Are you really suggesting that we cannot pursue normal diplomatic relations with the UK UNTIL a United Ireland (which version?) is actually set up. Even if that doesn't happen for another 50 years? 100? 2000? That seems to me to be the logic of your position.

What, exactly, is to be gained by a Paisleyite "never, never, never" stance? Even Paisley eventually relented. For him, the trigger was the opportunity to get his spawgs under the table of power. What would be your trigger?

[Nally Stand]

It was ... apart from the 1918 to 1921 period.

So the only times the IRA weren't gangsters were when they won your freedom?

The Irish people through the GFA are now in control of their own destiny in accordance with the terms of that agreement ( the bit where the 6 Cos/ 26 Cos get to decide separately if they want an All Ireland political entity) that we voted overwhelmingly for.

See my response to Hardy re. Independence

Going by your earlier logic if we agree in future to have some sort of All Ireland Federation with some links between the 6 Cos and GB , you still wouldnt want the British monarch visiting the 26 Counties as we wouldnt have a 32 county Republic of the type you say Connolly , Pearse etc wanted. We'll never have the type of one those lads wanted because we won't be allowed to set up an early 20th Century Socialist State and none of ye hoors will speak Irirsh to give us the ideal Ireland Mac Piarais wanted.

Where to start. Firstly, I am opposed to any form of partition of Ireland, based on federation or any other such nonsense. (Ironically, you push this idea despite it not being mentioned in the GFA which you also lecture about). Would, in this federations idea, you allow the 26 counties to surrender some of it's power to the UK so that it would have equal ties to the UK as you would picture the six counties to have? If not, then is that not telling me that your right to full Independence from Britain supersedes mine? Secondly, as stated in an earlier post, I'd rather not look at this visit in your partitionist terms - the British Queen has visited Ireland many times, so I'm well used to it. My chief problem lies with yesterdays pathetic showcase event. Finally, you mention "a 32 county Republic of the type you say Connolly , Pearse etc wanted." Where did I say this?

[Nally Stand]

That's great, NS, but it's just a statement with no supporting argument. I'm not interested in what you believe, but in why you believe it. Can you elaborate and, if you like, answer the questions?

And please stop with the ould shite about insults. If such a mildly expressed argument insults you, I don't care.

No supporting argument? To back up my claim that Irish Independence has not been achieved yet? Does it really need one? Look at a map, and you will see six north eastern counties which are divided from the rest of the Island.
Your own quote contradicts yourself:

I take the view that, per the terms of the GFA, Irish independence IS a done deal. The terms are clear. It's available as soon as the majority want it

If Irish Independence is already a reality, then what is the "it" you refer to twice as being available when...??

We have the ability to vote for Irish Unity, but that ability is not Irish Independence Hardy. Rather, it is a hard earned method of achieving Independence. It's like saying that Ireland was Independent in 1916 because we had the ability to take up arms for Independence. As I say, if you were a republican who grew up and lived in Tyrone, you would probably not take too kindly to being told by a Meath man that Irish Independence has been achieved.

As for your questions:

1&2: I don't look at it in a partitionist way. The British Queen has been to Ireland many times in her lifetime, and I'm well used to that. If that improves relations, then fine and well, but laying a wreath in the Garden of Remembrance and playing the British National Anthem there? Too divisive and in my view, and in the views of certain patriot dead family members whom I've both spoken to and read comments from, an unnecessary insult. British and Irish relations have room for improvement, but rather than divisive and hypocritical actions like yesterdays, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? Maybe then I would be more inclined to buy into the idea that visits like this will normalise relations.
3: I support the GFA. It doesn't state that to improve Irish-British relations, that the British Queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance and that no other methods shall be considered.

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK. If you don't accept that the GFA delivers Irish unity on acceptable terms, you can't really get away with dodging the issue of what your alternative terms are. Are you really suggesting that we cannot pursue normal diplomatic relations with the UK UNTIL a United Ireland (which version?) is actually set up. Even if that doesn't happen for another 50 years? 100? 2000? That seems to me to be the logic of your position.

What, exactly, is to be gained by a Paisleyite "never, never, never" stance? Even Paisley eventually relented. For him, the trigger was the opportunity to get his spawgs under the table of power. What would be your trigger?

Again, I am pro-agreement so why you continue to talk to me as though I'm not is beyond me. I don't want an alternative to the GFA. That is more or less part and parcel of being pro GFA, wouldn't you think? As mentioned repeatedly by me, at no stage in the GFA does it state that the British queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance in order to improve relations. And again, as I already asked you, and as it seems I also have to repeat, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? If that happened, would the symbolism of her visiting here not be MUCH more powerful? Would that not help on the road to normalization of the relationship? (A relationship which, in my mind will never be fully normal until partition is in the rubbish bin of history)

[seafoid]

The poverty around the north inner city is as bad under Irish republicanism as it ever was.

It sure is but sure they don't count as they are all junkies and spongers - Well according to official Ireland anyway

i think that's a bigger failure of the republican project than having GSTQ played, TBH.

[AZOffaly]

Christy's speech at Croker.


Uachtarán na hÉireann, Your Majesty, Your Royal Highness, Dr. McAleese, Airí Rialtais, Ard-Stiúrthóir, Iar-Uachtaráin agus a cáirde go léir.

Tá fáilte romhaibh go léir go Páirc an Chrócaigh.

Your Majesty, on behalf of the members of the Gaeli...c Athletic Association throughout Ireland and across the world, I am delighted to welcome you to our headquarters at Croke Park.

On 1st November 1884 a small group of visionary Irishmen, profoundly imbued with a spirit of national regeneration, formed our Association. The Gaelic Athletic Association was soon to become the largest organisation in Ireland, sporting or otherwise, and one moreover that, as its founding fathers envisaged, has consistently embodied the mood of the nation, culturally, socially and politically.

The Gaelic Athletic Association is deeply rooted in communities in every corner of Ireland, North and South, and throughout the world – above all in Britain – wherever Irish people have made their homes.

Our ethos is proudly voluntary and amateur, but at the pinnacle our teams and players thrill huge crowds with their skill, courage and commitment. The Gaelic Athletic Association offers unrivalled social and sporting opportunities to boys and girls at all levels of talent. We are proud of this vast modern stadium, built mainly through the efforts of our members, and our newly upgraded Museum conveys an exciting sense of our history but also of our present.

One of those present at the foundation of the Gaelic Athletic Association in 1884 was a man named J.K. Bracken whose son, Brendan went on to be a significant presence in the life of the United Kingdom – as founder of the Financial Times newspaper, one of Winston Churchill's closest friends, and as Minister for Information during the Second World War. This is just one example of the interlinked personal relationships between these islands which have individually and collectively enriched us all in both directions over so many years, and continue to do so today.

We also know that in our shared history there have been many tragic events which have inflicted hurt on us all. While acknowledging the significance of the past and honouring all those that have lost their lives, including those that died in this place, the Gaelic Athletic Association has consistently supported and helped advance the peace process in Northern Ireland.

In particular, we have encouraged the reconciliation and mutual understanding which have so successfully flowed from the Good Friday Agreement and its endorsement in referenda by the people of Ireland, North and South.

Your Majesty's State Visit, at the invitation of President McAleese, will result in a further important underpinning and advancement of this process, which I firmly believe is now irreversible.

I was of course deeply saddened to attend last month, on behalf of the Gaelic Athletic Association, the tragic funeral of our murdered young member from County Tyrone, PSNI Constable Ronan Kerr.

I was also very heartened by the utter and united determination of people and political leaders across the island, and across the whole community, to stand together against violence and hatred.

The Gaelic Athletic Association for its part will continue to try and build new relationships and to reach out in particular to members of the Unionist community.

Today above all, it is in a positive spirit that we welcome your Majesty and Your Royal Highness to Croke Park. Your presence does honour to our Association, to its special place in Irish life, and to its hundreds of thousands of members. Today will go down in the history of the Gaelic Athletic Association.
Míle buíochas – my great appreciation to all.

[trileacman]

That's great, NS, but it's just a statement with no supporting argument. I'm not interested in what you believe, but in why you believe it. Can you elaborate and, if you like, answer the questions?

And please stop with the ould shite about insults. If such a mildly expressed argument insults you, I don't care.

No supporting argument? To back up my claim that Irish Independence has not been achieved yet? Does it really need one? Look at a map, and you will see six north eastern counties which are divided from the rest of the Island.
Your own quote contradicts yourself:

I take the view that, per the terms of the GFA, Irish independence IS a done deal. The terms are clear. It's available as soon as the majority want it

If Irish Independence is already a reality, then what is the "it" you refer to twice as being available when...??

We have the ability to vote for Irish Unity, but that ability is not Irish Independence Hardy. Rather, it is a hard earned method of achieving Independence. It's like saying that Ireland was Independent in 1916 because we had the ability to take up arms for Independence. As I say, if you were a republican who grew up and lived in Tyrone, you would probably not take too kindly to being told by a Meath man that Irish Independence has been achieved.

As for your questions:

1&2: I don't look at it in a partitionist way. The British Queen has been to Ireland many times in her lifetime, and I'm well used to that. If that improves relations, then fine and well, but laying a wreath in the Garden of Remembrance and playing the British National Anthem there? Too divisive and in my view, and in the views of certain patriot dead family members whom I've both spoken to and read comments from, an unnecessary insult. British and Irish relations have room for improvement, but rather than divisive and hypocritical actions like yesterdays, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? Maybe then I would be more inclined to buy into the idea that visits like this will normalise relations.
3: I support the GFA. It doesn't state that to improve Irish-British relations, that the British Queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance and that no other methods shall be considered.

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK. If you don't accept that the GFA delivers Irish unity on acceptable terms, you can't really get away with dodging the issue of what your alternative terms are. Are you really suggesting that we cannot pursue normal diplomatic relations with the UK UNTIL a United Ireland (which version?) is actually set up. Even if that doesn't happen for another 50 years? 100? 2000? That seems to me to be the logic of your position.

What, exactly, is to be gained by a Paisleyite "never, never, never" stance? Even Paisley eventually relented. For him, the trigger was the opportunity to get his spawgs under the table of power. What would be your trigger?

The same.

[armaghniac]

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK.

The GFA is all very fine, but all it says is that the British will leave quietly. In this day and age of EU, UN etc they could not really do anything else. What is objectionable about British policy is that they are working to keep Ireland divided, and that is not acceptable.

[Hardy]

That's great, NS, but it's just a statement with no supporting argument. I'm not interested in what you believe, but in why you believe it. Can you elaborate and, if you like, answer the questions?

And please stop with the ould shite about insults. If such a mildly expressed argument insults you, I don't care.

No supporting argument? To back up my claim that Irish Independence has not been achieved yet? Does it really need one? Look at a map, and you will see six north eastern counties which are divided from the rest of the Island.
Your own quote contradicts yourself:

I take the view that, per the terms of the GFA, Irish independence IS a done deal. The terms are clear. It's available as soon as the majority want it

If Irish Independence is already a reality, then what is the "it" you refer to twice as being available when...??

We have the ability to vote for Irish Unity, but that ability is not Irish Independence Hardy. Rather, it is a hard earned method of achieving Independence. It's like saying that Ireland was Independent in 1916 because we had the ability to take up arms for Independence. As I say, if you were a republican who grew up and lived in Tyrone, you would probably not take too kindly to being told by a Meath man that Irish Independence has been achieved.

As for your questions:

1&2: I don't look at it in a partitionist way. The British Queen has been to Ireland many times in her lifetime, and I'm well used to that. If that improves relations, then fine and well, but laying a wreath in the Garden of Remembrance and playing the British National Anthem there? Too divisive and in my view, and in the views of certain patriot dead family members whom I've both spoken to and read comments from, an unnecessary insult. British and Irish relations have room for improvement, but rather than divisive and hypocritical actions like yesterdays, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? Maybe then I would be more inclined to buy into the idea that visits like this will normalise relations.
3: I support the GFA. It doesn't state that to improve Irish-British relations, that the British Queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance and that no other methods shall be considered.

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK. If you don't accept that the GFA delivers Irish unity on acceptable terms, you can't really get away with dodging the issue of what your alternative terms are. Are you really suggesting that we cannot pursue normal diplomatic relations with the UK UNTIL a United Ireland (which version?) is actually set up. Even if that doesn't happen for another 50 years? 100? 2000? That seems to me to be the logic of your position.

What, exactly, is to be gained by a Paisleyite "never, never, never" stance? Even Paisley eventually relented. For him, the trigger was the opportunity to get his spawgs under the table of power. What would be your trigger?

Again, I am pro-agreement so why you continue to talk to me as though I'm not is beyond me. I don't want an alternative to the GFA. That is more or less part and parcel of being pro GFA, wouldn't you think? As mentioned repeatedly by me, at no stage in the GFA does it state that the British queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance in order to improve relations. And again, as I already asked you, and as it seems I also have to repeat, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? If that happened, would the symbolism of her visiting here not be MUCH more powerful? Would that not help on the road to normalization of the relationship? (A relationship which, in my mind will never be fully normal until partition is in the rubbish bin of history)

I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. You're pro-GFA, but you don't accept that it normalises British-Irish relations. Therefore, I conclude the GFA is not enough for you. What additional agreements/arrangements/treaties do you want before you stop setting down the conditions for how we should conduct our relations with the UK and specifying which events/locations the British head of state should/shouldn't attend and prescribing the format of any particular ceremonial involving the British head of state?

Is that question clear enough to elicit a clear answer?

[Rossfan]

It was ... apart from the 1918 to 1921 period.

So the only times the IRA weren't gangsters were when they won your freedom?
I'm telling you that that was the only time a lot of Irish people didnt look on them as using methods which revolted and alienated the majority of the Irish people both Nationalist and Unionist

The Irish people through the GFA are now in control of their own destiny in accordance with the terms of that agreement ( the bit where the 6 Cos/ 26 Cos get to decide separately if they want an All Ireland political entity) that we voted overwhelmingly for.

See my response to Hardy re. Independence
Independence is the right of people to make decisions on their Country's future ... unlike before the GFA when the British govt had a veto over the north's future

Going by your earlier logic if we agree in future to have some sort of All Ireland Federation with some links between the 6 Cos and GB , you still wouldnt want the British monarch visiting the 26 Counties as we wouldnt have a 32 county Republic of the type you say Connolly , Pearse etc wanted. We'll never have the type of one those lads wanted because we won't be allowed to set up an early 20th Century Socialist State and none of ye hoors will speak Irirsh to give us the ideal Ireland Mac Piarais wanted.

Where to start. Firstly, I am opposed to any form of partition of Ireland, based on federation or any other such nonsense. (Ironically, you push this idea despite it not being mentioned in the GFA which you also lecture about). Would, in this federations idea, you allow the 26 counties to surrender some of it's power to the UK so that it would have equal ties to the UK as you would picture the six counties to have? If not, then is that not telling me that your right to full Independence from Britain supersedes mine? Secondly, as stated in an earlier post, I'd rather not look at this visit in your partitionist terms - the British Queen has visited Ireland many times, so I'm well used to it. My chief problem lies with yesterdays pathetic showcase event. Finally, you mention "a 32 county Republic of the type you say Connolly , Pearse etc wanted." Where did I say this?

I'm looking at a Federation/confederation as a practical way of having an All Ireland entity with local autonomy for the constituent parts e.g like the US/Germany/Switzerland etc none of ehich consider themselves partitioned.

you said that until the Rebublic which Connolly etc died for was established you didnt want Mrs Windsor in the Garden.

[Hardy]

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK.

The GFA is all very fine, but all it says is that the British will leave quietly.

It says a hell of a lot more than that, Armaghniac. It does no less than lay down the (agreed) conditions for political unity in Ireland.

In this day and age of EU, UN etc they could not really do anything else. What is objectionable about British policy is that they are working to keep Ireland divided, and that is not acceptable.

I'm not aware of this - what do you mean? The ultimate arbiters are the Irish people, so I'm not sure what work the Brits do against the interests of a united Ireland would be effective.

[armaghniac]

I'm not aware of this - what do you mean?

I mean that the British should be promoting partition of Ireland. Simple as.

Neither should they promote it in practical matters of government nor should they issue statements supporting it.

[Nally Stand]

That's great, NS, but it's just a statement with no supporting argument. I'm not interested in what you believe, but in why you believe it. Can you elaborate and, if you like, answer the questions?

And please stop with the ould shite about insults. If such a mildly expressed argument insults you, I don't care.

No supporting argument? To back up my claim that Irish Independence has not been achieved yet? Does it really need one? Look at a map, and you will see six north eastern counties which are divided from the rest of the Island.
Your own quote contradicts yourself:

I take the view that, per the terms of the GFA, Irish independence IS a done deal. The terms are clear. It's available as soon as the majority want it

If Irish Independence is already a reality, then what is the "it" you refer to twice as being available when...??

We have the ability to vote for Irish Unity, but that ability is not Irish Independence Hardy. Rather, it is a hard earned method of achieving Independence. It's like saying that Ireland was Independent in 1916 because we had the ability to take up arms for Independence. As I say, if you were a republican who grew up and lived in Tyrone, you would probably not take too kindly to being told by a Meath man that Irish Independence has been achieved.

As for your questions:

1&2: I don't look at it in a partitionist way. The British Queen has been to Ireland many times in her lifetime, and I'm well used to that. If that improves relations, then fine and well, but laying a wreath in the Garden of Remembrance and playing the British National Anthem there? Too divisive and in my view, and in the views of certain patriot dead family members whom I've both spoken to and read comments from, an unnecessary insult. British and Irish relations have room for improvement, but rather than divisive and hypocritical actions like yesterdays, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? Maybe then I would be more inclined to buy into the idea that visits like this will normalise relations.
3: I support the GFA. It doesn't state that to improve Irish-British relations, that the British Queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance and that no other methods shall be considered.

Excellent, NS, but I'm none the wiser as to your alternative to the GFA as a model of how we should proceed in our relations with the UK. If you don't accept that the GFA delivers Irish unity on acceptable terms, you can't really get away with dodging the issue of what your alternative terms are. Are you really suggesting that we cannot pursue normal diplomatic relations with the UK UNTIL a United Ireland (which version?) is actually set up. Even if that doesn't happen for another 50 years? 100? 2000? That seems to me to be the logic of your position.

What, exactly, is to be gained by a Paisleyite "never, never, never" stance? Even Paisley eventually relented. For him, the trigger was the opportunity to get his spawgs under the table of power. What would be your trigger?

Again, I am pro-agreement so why you continue to talk to me as though I'm not is beyond me. I don't want an alternative to the GFA. That is more or less part and parcel of being pro GFA, wouldn't you think? As mentioned repeatedly by me, at no stage in the GFA does it state that the British queen must visit the Garden of Remembrance in order to improve relations. And again, as I already asked you, and as it seems I also have to repeat, would some form of practical co-operation not be much better? Would it also not be better if the British were perhaps to admit that they were an even an active protagonist in the conflict of the past 40 years here, rather than some sort of peace-keeping referee which at worst, maybe had one or two bad apples? If that happened, would the symbolism of her visiting here not be MUCH more powerful? Would that not help on the road to normalization of the relationship? (A relationship which, in my mind will never be fully normal until partition is in the rubbish bin of history)

I'm sorry, but I just don't get it. You're pro-GFA, but you don't accept that it normalises British-Irish relations. Therefore, I conclude the GFA is not enough for you. What additional agreements/arrangements/treaties do you want before you stop setting down the conditions for how we should conduct our relations with the UK and specifying which events/locations the British head of state should/shouldn't attend and prescribing the format of any particular ceremonial involving the British head of state?

Is that question clear enough to elicit a clear answer?

Seriously hardy there is absolutely nothing in that which I haven't already answered here.

[Hardy]

Indulge me - I didn't understand your previous answers. Undoubtedly that's my fault. I've tried to put my question as succinctly as possible so that I get a succinct answer I might understand. The distilled version of the question - what agreements or treaties do you need in addition to the GFA in order to allow for normal intercourse between Ireland and Britain?

[Hardy]

I'm not aware of this - what do you mean?

I mean that the British should be promoting partition of Ireland. Simple as.

Neither should they promote it in practical matters of government nor should they issue statements supporting it.

Do you mean they're promoting it by continuing to implement the institutions of government and/or that they should unilaterally withdraw from the North? In that case, what were the four years of GFA negotiations and the twelve years it took to implement all about?

[seafoid]

That was a lovely óráid from Criostóir. The Ronan Kerr funeral was very sad but the cross community unity was something else to see.