GAA Outreach in Action...

[Tony Baloney]

I have said it before but shit like this takes the attention off the gabshite loyalists who are making themselves look like cnuts on a daily basis.. Brolly would have been better keeping his trap shut.

[Myles Na G.]

There is little point arguing with this clown.

I had a look through his previous postings and on the same topic a number of years ago he referred to the GAA in NI as "basically Sinn Fein in football boots".

This from a man who claims not to be a Unionist.

An Irish nationalist is someone who believes that Ireland is one country which should be independent and governed as a 32 county state. It is possible to hold that view and, simultaneously, to be indifferent about gaelic games and Sinn Fein. So what point are you trying to make, clown?

It's even possible to be a nationalist and be a right wing reactionary, idiot and a liar.
What are your probabilities, clown? A liar for sure and not just indifferent about gaelic games, totally ignorant about gaelic games. Never had  anything more than the slightest contact with gaelic games. It's not a question of  liking or having indifference to gaelic games, it's that you have what can only be regarded as a chronic  unionist antagonist connection to gaelic games one that is only associated with reactionary unionists. Usually, no matter what antipathy a person has to gaelic games, one can scratch a bit and see what's under it.
it's like your name,  a 99.9% probability that you  had not read Brian O'Nolan, before picking a pen name of his when registering here. It was picked to create a false impression.

I'm indifferent to gaelic games, not antagonistic towards them at all. The actual games, that is. I played both gaelic football and hurling as a child, both at school and with a club. I lost interest as I got older, preferring both soccer and rugby. I still watch the odd gaelic football match on tv, but I wouldn't call myself a fan. The GAA as an organisation does antagonise me because I see it as a reactionary body stuck in the past and too close in politics to Sinn Fein. As for my interest in Myles - I've a decent 2:1 degree in English from a reputable British university that says that I have more than a passing interest in literature. What have you got, amadon?

I never seen a worse post on this board in my life.

That's the funniest post I've ever read on this board. And there are some very funny posts on this board.

[theticklemister]

How the hell can you be indifferent to the GAA when you clearly have strong opinions on GAA matters ya toolbag.

[Tonto]

I'm gonna be honest here. Since when was the GAA about appeasing Unionists?

Some people might argue that the Orange Order was never "about appeasing" nationalists, but it doesn't mean that some people from the "other side" don't find some parts of their organisations/ activities offensive.

Are we still content in 2013 to operate an "I don't give a f*** what they think" attitude?  We know Brolly is, but I was hoping to come on here and see more liberal/ open-minded thinking from some others here.

The truth is that, whatever the circumstances of Lynch's death, he wasn't put away for handing out sweeties to sick children, but was, in fact, a member of a terrorist organisation. No amount of revisionism from Irish Republicans will change that and, although I have no time for Robinson or the DUP, I agree with him that there is no difference between historical or contemporary terrorism.  The scum who murdered Mr Black or Constable Carroll or the soldiers in Antrim a few years ago are exactly the same class of human being as those who carried out similar acts in the 70s, 80s or 90s.

If people don't understand why the name "Kevin Lynch" attached to a sports club can be deemed offensive then, to be honest, I don't see much evidence of community outreach. But if you don't understand that, then here is a heads-up: don't bother criticising unionists for being openly anti-GAA.

[Dougal Maguire]

The contemporary v historic terrorist arguement was well shot down on The BBC Sunday Sequence programme when Jim Allister refused to accept that Edward Carson was a terrorist

[grounded]

I'm gonna be honest here. Since when was the GAA about appeasing Unionists?

Some people might argue that the Orange Order was never "about appeasing" nationalists, but it doesn't mean that some people from the "other side" don't find some parts of their organisations/ activities offensive.

Are we still content in 2013 to operate an "I don't give a f*** what they think" attitude?  We know Brolly is, but I was hoping to come on here and see more liberal/ open-minded thinking from some others here.

The truth is that, whatever the circumstances of Lynch's death, he wasn't put away for handing out sweeties to sick children, but was, in fact, a member of a terrorist organisation. No amount of revisionism from Irish Republicans will change that and, although I have no time for Robinson or the DUP, I agree with him that there is no difference between historical or contemporary terrorism.  The scum who murdered Mr Black or Constable Carroll or the soldiers in Antrim a few years ago are exactly the same class of human being as those who carried out similar acts in the 70s, 80s or 90s.

If people don't understand why the name "Kevin Lynch" attached to a sports club can be deemed offensive then, to be honest, I don't see much evidence of community outreach. But if you don't understand that, then here is a heads-up: don't bother criticising unionists for being openly anti-GAA.

As long as openly anti-GAA doesn't involve assaulting GAA members, burning out Clubhouses/damaging GAA property or in anyway disrupting its activities that's fine by me.

[Tonto]

I'm gonna be honest here. Since when was the GAA about appeasing Unionists?

Some people might argue that the Orange Order was never "about appeasing" nationalists, but it doesn't mean that some people from the "other side" don't find some parts of their organisations/ activities offensive.

Are we still content in 2013 to operate an "I don't give a f*** what they think" attitude?  We know Brolly is, but I was hoping to come on here and see more liberal/ open-minded thinking from some others here.

The truth is that, whatever the circumstances of Lynch's death, he wasn't put away for handing out sweeties to sick children, but was, in fact, a member of a terrorist organisation. No amount of revisionism from Irish Republicans will change that and, although I have no time for Robinson or the DUP, I agree with him that there is no difference between historical or contemporary terrorism.  The scum who murdered Mr Black or Constable Carroll or the soldiers in Antrim a few years ago are exactly the same class of human being as those who carried out similar acts in the 70s, 80s or 90s.

If people don't understand why the name "Kevin Lynch" attached to a sports club can be deemed offensive then, to be honest, I don't see much evidence of community outreach. But if you don't understand that, then here is a heads-up: don't bother criticising unionists for being openly anti-GAA.

As long as openly anti-GAA doesn't involve assaulting GAA members, burning out Clubhouses/damaging GAA property or in anyway disrupting its activities that's fine by me.

I'm pretty sure that most unionists have in the past and will continue to meet your request.

Meanwhile, unionists can expect to do whatever they like because it's no business of anyone else (Brolly, 2013) and can expect that nationalists will not burn out or attack Orange Order property or, in any way, disrupt its activities.

Yes, that's a solution, both communities can live side by side, doing whatever they like but simultaneously pretend that the other side doesn't exist.  Why didn't we think of that before?

[Tonto]

The contemporary v historic terrorist arguement was well shot down on The BBC Sunday Sequence programme when Jim Allister refused to accept that Edward Carson was a terrorist

What illegal organisation was Carson a member of?

[armaghniac]

What illegal organisation was Carson a member of?

Like Gerry Adams, he probably wasn't in any illegal organisations.

[Tonto]

What illegal organisation was Carson a member of?

Like Gerry Adams, he probably wasn't in any illegal organisations.

I didn't ask anything about Gerry Adams.

[grounded]

I'm gonna be honest here. Since when was the GAA about appeasing Unionists?

Some people might argue that the Orange Order was never "about appeasing" nationalists, but it doesn't mean that some people from the "other side" don't find some parts of their organisations/ activities offensive.

Are we still content in 2013 to operate an "I don't give a f*** what they think" attitude?  We know Brolly is, but I was hoping to come on here and see more liberal/ open-minded thinking from some others here.

The truth is that, whatever the circumstances of Lynch's death, he wasn't put away for handing out sweeties to sick children, but was, in fact, a member of a terrorist organisation. No amount of revisionism from Irish Republicans will change that and, although I have no time for Robinson or the DUP, I agree with him that there is no difference between historical or contemporary terrorism.  The scum who murdered Mr Black or Constable Carroll or the soldiers in Antrim a few years ago are exactly the same class of human being as those who carried out similar acts in the 70s, 80s or 90s.

If people don't understand why the name "Kevin Lynch" attached to a sports club can be deemed offensive then, to be honest, I don't see much evidence of community outreach. But if you don't understand that, then here is a heads-up: don't bother criticising unionists for being openly anti-GAA.

As long as openly anti-GAA doesn't involve assaulting GAA members, burning out Clubhouses/damaging GAA property or in anyway disrupting its activities that's fine by me.

I'm pretty sure that most unionists have in the past and will continue to meet your request.

Meanwhile, unionists can expect to do whatever they like because it's no business of anyone else (Brolly, 2013) and can expect that nationalists will not burn out or attack Orange Order property or, in any way, disrupt its activities.

Yes, that's a solution, both communities can live side by side, doing whatever they like but simultaneously pretend that the other side doesn't exist.  Why didn't we think of that before?

Just interested on your views on this one. Dan Breen was a leading member of the IRA during the war of independence and would have fulfilled all your criteria of a terrorist. The Dan Breen cup is presented each year in Tipperary. Is this acceptable in your eyes?

[orangeman]

I'm gonna be honest here. Since when was the GAA about appeasing Unionists?

Some people might argue that the Orange Order was never "about appeasing" nationalists, but it doesn't mean that some people from the "other side" don't find some parts of their organisations/ activities offensive.

Are we still content in 2013 to operate an "I don't give a f*** what they think" attitude?  We know Brolly is, but I was hoping to come on here and see more liberal/ open-minded thinking from some others here.

The truth is that, whatever the circumstances of Lynch's death, he wasn't put away for handing out sweeties to sick children, but was, in fact, a member of a terrorist organisation. No amount of revisionism from Irish Republicans will change that and, although I have no time for Robinson or the DUP, I agree with him that there is no difference between historical or contemporary terrorism.  The scum who murdered Mr Black or Constable Carroll or the soldiers in Antrim a few years ago are exactly the same class of human being as those who carried out similar acts in the 70s, 80s or 90s.

If people don't understand why the name "Kevin Lynch" attached to a sports club can be deemed offensive then, to be honest, I don't see much evidence of community outreach. But if you don't understand that, then here is a heads-up: don't bother criticising unionists for being openly anti-GAA.

As long as openly anti-GAA doesn't involve assaulting GAA members, burning out Clubhouses/damaging GAA property or in anyway disrupting its activities that's fine by me.

I'm pretty sure that most unionists have in the past and will continue to meet your request.

Meanwhile, unionists can expect to do whatever they like because it's no business of anyone else (Brolly, 2013) and can expect that nationalists will not burn out or attack Orange Order property or, in any way, disrupt its activities.

Yes, that's a solution, both communities can live side by side, doing whatever they like but simultaneously pretend that the other side doesn't exist.  Why didn't we think of that before?

Just interested on your views on this one. Dan Breen was a leading member of the IRA during the war of independence and would have fulfilled all your criteria of a terrorist. The Dan Breen cup is presented each year in Tipperary. Is this acceptable in your eyes?

When this was last debated on here it was said that it was acceptable as long as it was far enough back in history. Some people mentioned a 100 years, some less than that. Living memory was also mentioned.

So is it the Dan Breen cup acceptable ?

[Tonto]

I'm gonna be honest here. Since when was the GAA about appeasing Unionists?

Some people might argue that the Orange Order was never "about appeasing" nationalists, but it doesn't mean that some people from the "other side" don't find some parts of their organisations/ activities offensive.

Are we still content in 2013 to operate an "I don't give a f*** what they think" attitude?  We know Brolly is, but I was hoping to come on here and see more liberal/ open-minded thinking from some others here.

The truth is that, whatever the circumstances of Lynch's death, he wasn't put away for handing out sweeties to sick children, but was, in fact, a member of a terrorist organisation. No amount of revisionism from Irish Republicans will change that and, although I have no time for Robinson or the DUP, I agree with him that there is no difference between historical or contemporary terrorism.  The scum who murdered Mr Black or Constable Carroll or the soldiers in Antrim a few years ago are exactly the same class of human being as those who carried out similar acts in the 70s, 80s or 90s.

If people don't understand why the name "Kevin Lynch" attached to a sports club can be deemed offensive then, to be honest, I don't see much evidence of community outreach. But if you don't understand that, then here is a heads-up: don't bother criticising unionists for being openly anti-GAA.

As long as openly anti-GAA doesn't involve assaulting GAA members, burning out Clubhouses/damaging GAA property or in anyway disrupting its activities that's fine by me.

I'm pretty sure that most unionists have in the past and will continue to meet your request.

Meanwhile, unionists can expect to do whatever they like because it's no business of anyone else (Brolly, 2013) and can expect that nationalists will not burn out or attack Orange Order property or, in any way, disrupt its activities.

Yes, that's a solution, both communities can live side by side, doing whatever they like but simultaneously pretend that the other side doesn't exist.  Why didn't we think of that before?

Just interested on your views on this one. Dan Breen was a leading member of the IRA during the war of independence and would have fulfilled all your criteria of a terrorist. The Dan Breen cup is presented each year in Tipperary. Is this acceptable in your eyes?

He was a terrorist to my mind (and based on the little information I have just read, a Nazi supporter). I do, however, accept that, enough time has now passed since he carried out his activities to deem it less offensive, so I would be in no rush to have things like that changed.

That said, shooting someone in the 1920s has the same end result as doing it in the 1970s or in 2012.  I think it's clear that, from this point on, the GAA really need to look at how they act.  They can't, in 2013, do the same things that they did 100 years ago if they are really serious about promoting better community relations.

[LeoMc]

There is little point arguing with this clown.

I had a look through his previous postings and on the same topic a number of years ago he referred to the GAA in NI as "basically Sinn Fein in football boots".

This from a man who claims not to be a Unionist.

An Irish nationalist is someone who believes that Ireland is one country which should be independent and governed as a 32 county state. It is possible to hold that view and, simultaneously, to be indifferent about gaelic games and Sinn Fein. So what point are you trying to make, clown?

It's even possible to be a nationalist and be a right wing reactionary, idiot and a liar.
What are your probabilities, clown? A liar for sure and not just indifferent about gaelic games, totally ignorant about gaelic games. Never had  anything more than the slightest contact with gaelic games. It's not a question of  liking or having indifference to gaelic games, it's that you have what can only be regarded as a chronic  unionist antagonist connection to gaelic games one that is only associated with reactionary unionists. Usually, no matter what antipathy a person has to gaelic games, one can scratch a bit and see what's under it.
it's like your name,  a 99.9% probability that you  had not read Brian O'Nolan, before picking a pen name of his when registering here. It was picked to create a false impression.

I'm indifferent to gaelic games, not antagonistic towards them at all. The actual games, that is. I played both gaelic football and hurling as a child, both at school and with a club. I lost interest as I got older, preferring both soccer and rugby. I still watch the odd gaelic football match on tv, but I wouldn't call myself a fan. The GAA as an organisation does antagonise me because I see it as a reactionary body stuck in the past and too close in politics to Sinn Fein.As for my interest in Myles - I've a decent 2:1 degree in English from a reputable British university that says that I have more than a passing interest in literature. What have you got, amadon?

Wtf?

[theskull1]

Tonto...the way unionist power brokers treated the nationalist community as second class citizens for decades are you telling me that any military response and support from sections of the nationalist community to that "fight back" had nothing to do with unionism? It absolutely did so if anything we should all accept the part both sides contributed to the troubles.

If we can see that then the whataboutery argument disappears and we can accept that in a lot of communities these men were seen to be fighting their corner because of the political bias. It is what it is because of our history. This is a reason for people who have zero interest in the GAA to blacken what is one of the  best organisations in the world. Take this argument away and as HS suggested the next reason will present itself.

I personally have many friends from the protestant community who could testify to what the GAA brings to a local community. Real shame the hard liners want to believe what they want to believe