GAA Outreach in Action...

[Milltown Row2]

And there in lies the nub.  People point to nationalist/32 county references in GAA rules but to me the primary aim is to promote the games.

And there in lies the nub. It's not about what you regard the primary aims to be. The "nationalist/32 county references in GAA rules" are just that: in the GAA rules.

I would fear that sticking pictures of RA men on the back of medals could get in the way promoting the games.

How many tournaments have medals with a picture of "RA men" on them? I can think of only one, (the Vol. Martin McCaughey one) but it isn't an official GAA tournament.

They have changed a lot of rules lately, letting players play rugby and soccer, soccer and rugby play in certain grounds and police teams in the Gaa, these rules aren't set in stone, with it being a democracy these things can come up for debate and changed

[Myles Na G.]

Times have changed since Dungiven named their club, if it was to renamed today I am not it would happen but I don't think that you can retrospectively change these things.

I think the GAA/Ulster Council should be harder on clubs that host tournaments in honour of terrorists etc..  (Looking at the example that started this thread).  As a GAA member I entitled to have an opinion on what a club does if I feel it reflects on the rest of the organisation.

I also think the GAA should engage with those that want to constructively engage with them, accept their suggestions and act on them where appropriate.  There is no point in engaging with the Jim McAllisters of the world.  Nothing the GAA could ever do will appease them (short of disbanding). However someone who is genuninely interested in supporting/playing the games should always be listen to.

Myles Na G is one that there is no point engaging with and will take umbrage with everything.  Previously he has criticised the GAA for not having a formal view on candidates for the Irish Presidency and eligibility rules of international soccer.  Not only did he want them to have such formal views but ranted that members were no disciplined for expressing contrary positions to these views.

That's what you are dealing with here.

/Jim

Can you provide a link to those posts? They don't ring a bell with me.

[Myles Na G.]

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.

OK then, if that is a fact then NI was founded on historic terrorist violence and the threat of inssurection. That makes it an illegal entity...applying your logic. I have said before I suspect that many of those debating the troubles were either not born or too young to remember the '60's, '70's and early '80's. There would have been widespread support and sympathy for the IRA and the hunger strikers in that period when catholics and nationalists were very much under siege from the British and Unionists. Time have changed and we are inching towards equality, it is therefore hard to judge that period by what we have today. I applaude Joe Brolly for saying what he said, whatever his motives. Unionism still cherry picks what is terrorism and what is acceptable violence.

That's not true, and I speak as someone old enough to remember the 60s, 70s and 80s. The IRA may have enjoyed support in Catholic working class areas, but it was by no means universal and it didn't extend much outside those areas. The SDLP was the largest supported nationalist party right up to the 1980s. Sinn Fein only became the best supported nationalist party after the peace process had started and when they showed they were prepared to move beyond violence, after John Hume had opened the door for them and shown them the road forward.

What exact part of the north did you grow up in? I am not from a working class background. I and my family would not have had any support for the IRA's killing. But at that time to be catholic was to be second class, to play GAA was to be a terrorist and that was evident from the actions of the state, unionism and state forces. So with the exception of the uncle toms most catholic nationalists whilst not on the face of it supportive of some of the IRA's actions would have had an understanding. This is a fact lost on a lot of Southerners and conveniently forgotton by some nationalists. You drew the line and everyone new which side to stand on.

I grew up in north Belfast, where something like 25% of all the killings during the troubles took place. Who did I fear in those dark days? The tartan gangs; the sectarian killers of the uvf and uda, who trawled the streets looking for random Catholics to kill; and the IRA, with their indiscriminate, no warning bombs. Of that list, only the IRA was a threat to me personally. The others were more of a threat to my father and older members of my family, but IRA bombs killed children too. Did I fear the security forces? No, they were no threat or bother to me.

Eh, run that one by me again.

I was too young to be targeted  by loyalists, but I wasn't too young to be caught up in a no warning bomb.

[Myles Na G.]

Quote from: Myles Na G. on December 26, 2008, 12:58:19 PM

Most of that post is just standard Irish republican revisionism, especially the attempt to make some equivalence between the state forces and the IRA. That doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny at all, but that's for another thread. You compare the Garnerville Gaels with the Dungiven club and hint that you have some difficulty in seeing them as Gaels. Why? Who died and made you arbiter of all things Irish? Because they happen to be police recruits you think that makes them somehow less Irish than you?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see your first ever post was about the Kevin Lynchs club also.

At least I'm consistent then.

[Myles Na G.]

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.

OK then, if that is a fact then NI was founded on historic terrorist violence and the threat of inssurection. That makes it an illegal entity...applying your logic. I have said before I suspect that many of those debating the troubles were either not born or too young to remember the '60's, '70's and early '80's. There would have been widespread support and sympathy for the IRA and the hunger strikers in that period when catholics and nationalists were very much under siege from the British and Unionists. Time have changed and we are inching towards equality, it is therefore hard to judge that period by what we have today. I applaude Joe Brolly for saying what he said, whatever his motives. Unionism still cherry picks what is terrorism and what is acceptable violence.

That's not true, and I speak as someone old enough to remember the 60s, 70s and 80s. The IRA may have enjoyed support in Catholic working class areas, but it was by no means universal and it didn't extend much outside those areas. The SDLP was the largest supported nationalist party right up to the 1980s. Sinn Fein only became the best supported nationalist party after the peace process had started and when they showed they were prepared to move beyond violence, after John Hume had opened the door for them and shown them the road forward.

What exact part of the north did you grow up in? I am not from a working class background. I and my family would not have had any support for the IRA's killing. But at that time to be catholic was to be second class, to play GAA was to be a terrorist and that was evident from the actions of the state, unionism and state forces. So with the exception of the uncle toms most catholic nationalists whilst not on the face of it supportive of some of the IRA's actions would have had an understanding. This is a fact lost on a lot of Southerners and conveniently forgotton by some nationalists. You drew the line and everyone new which side to stand on.

I grew up in north Belfast, where something like 25% of all the killings during the troubles took place. Who did I fear in those dark days? The tartan gangs; the sectarian killers of the uvf and uda, who trawled the streets looking for random Catholics to kill; and the IRA, with their indiscriminate, no warning bombs. Of that list, only the IRA was a threat to me personally. The others were more of a threat to my father and older members of my family, but IRA bombs killed children too. Did I fear the security forces? No, they were no threat or bother to me. Nor did they ever bother the older members of my family who were members of GAA clubs. Do I 'understand' the IRA? Yes, but then I also 'understand' why the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but I still think that those actions were immoral and unjustifiable. I also 'understand', to an extent, what motivates Islamist extremists to strap themselves with bombs and blow themselves up in crowded places, but not for a moment do I think what they're doing is right. Most Catholics in the north knew where the IRA came from, most Catholics may have shared some of their aims, but not for a second do I believe that the majority of Catholics were supportive of their actions. And your Uncle Toms jibe is an insult to people like John Hume who believed passionately in non violence and did far more to bring about conditions of equality than McGuinness, Adams or Kelly ever did.

ha ha that is the greatest load of balls I have ever read on this board.Where in N.Belfast as a "Catholic" did you grow up without harassment from the Brits but lived in fear of no warning IRA bombs and felt no threat from the UDA/UFF/UVF/RED HAND/UDR or any other Loyalist killer gangs.

You've got that wrong mucker.

[Jim_Murphy_74]

Times have changed since Dungiven named their club, if it was to renamed today I am not it would happen but I don't think that you can retrospectively change these things.

I think the GAA/Ulster Council should be harder on clubs that host tournaments in honour of terrorists etc..  (Looking at the example that started this thread).  As a GAA member I entitled to have an opinion on what a club does if I feel it reflects on the rest of the organisation.

I also think the GAA should engage with those that want to constructively engage with them, accept their suggestions and act on them where appropriate.  There is no point in engaging with the Jim McAllisters of the world.  Nothing the GAA could ever do will appease them (short of disbanding). However someone who is genuninely interested in supporting/playing the games should always be listen to.

Myles Na G is one that there is no point engaging with and will take umbrage with everything.  Previously he has criticised the GAA for not having a formal view on candidates for the Irish Presidency and eligibility rules of international soccer.  Not only did he want them to have such formal views but ranted that members were no disciplined for expressing contrary positions to these views.

That's what you are dealing with here.

/Jim

Can you provide a link to those posts? They don't ring a bell with me.

Search out the topic on Michael O Neill and Gerry Armstrong's efforts to recruit nationalists to play for OWC. You criticized the GAA for not dealing with Joe Brolly for an article saying nationalist would not be happy playing for OWN. Equally you proposed that Jarlath Burns be disciplined for attending a canvassing event for Martin McGuinness.

/Jim

[Myles Na G.]

Times have changed since Dungiven named their club, if it was to renamed today I am not it would happen but I don't think that you can retrospectively change these things.

I think the GAA/Ulster Council should be harder on clubs that host tournaments in honour of terrorists etc..  (Looking at the example that started this thread).  As a GAA member I entitled to have an opinion on what a club does if I feel it reflects on the rest of the organisation.

I also think the GAA should engage with those that want to constructively engage with them, accept their suggestions and act on them where appropriate.  There is no point in engaging with the Jim McAllisters of the world.  Nothing the GAA could ever do will appease them (short of disbanding). However someone who is genuninely interested in supporting/playing the games should always be listen to.

Myles Na G is one that there is no point engaging with and will take umbrage with everything.  Previously he has criticised the GAA for not having a formal view on candidates for the Irish Presidency and eligibility rules of international soccer.  Not only did he want them to have such formal views but ranted that members were no disciplined for expressing contrary positions to these views.

That's what you are dealing with here.

/Jim

Can you provide a link to those posts? They don't ring a bell with me.

Search out the topic on Michael O Neill and Gerry Armstrong's efforts to recruit nationalists to play for OWC. You criticized the GAA for not dealing with Joe Brolly for an article saying nationalist would not be happy playing for OWN. Equally you proposed that Jarlath Burns be disciplined for attending a canvassing event for Martin McGuinness.

/Jim

I don't want to go searching for them, thanks - too much like hard work.  The onus is on you to do that. I'm happy to stand over what I've written on here, but I don't think I should be expected to defend edited versions of what I'm alleged to have said, or to go trawling through pages of old stuff to find out what I actually did say.

[Myles Na G.]

Were the IRA the only group who bombed? Were the other groups not responsible for the deaths of children in nationalist areas?
I'm genuinely baffled by this.

Loyalists did plant bombs - McGurks Bar and the Dublin and Monaghan bombs spring immediately to mind - but  they were nowhere near as prolific as the provos.

[Jeepers Creepers]

Were the IRA the only group who bombed? Were the other groups not responsible for the deaths of children in nationalist areas?
I'm genuinely baffled by this.

Loyalists did plant bombs - McGurks Bar and the Dublin and Monaghan bombs spring immediately to mind - but  they were nowhere near as prolific as the provos.

Only because they did not have the capability to have a prolonged bombing campaign rather than their conscious got the better of them

[Jim_Murphy_74]

Times have changed since Dungiven named their club, if it was to renamed today I am not it would happen but I don't think that you can retrospectively change these things.

I think the GAA/Ulster Council should be harder on clubs that host tournaments in honour of terrorists etc..  (Looking at the example that started this thread).  As a GAA member I entitled to have an opinion on what a club does if I feel it reflects on the rest of the organisation.

I also think the GAA should engage with those that want to constructively engage with them, accept their suggestions and act on them where appropriate.  There is no point in engaging with the Jim McAllisters of the world.  Nothing the GAA could ever do will appease them (short of disbanding). However someone who is genuninely interested in supporting/playing the games should always be listen to.

Myles Na G is one that there is no point engaging with and will take umbrage with everything.  Previously he has criticised the GAA for not having a formal view on candidates for the Irish Presidency and eligibility rules of international soccer.  Not only did he want them to have such formal views but ranted that members were no disciplined for expressing contrary positions to these views.

That's what you are dealing with here.

/Jim

Can you provide a link to those posts? They don't ring a bell with me.

Search out the topic on Michael O Neill and Gerry Armstrong's efforts to recruit nationalists to play for OWC. You criticized the GAA for not dealing with Joe Brolly for an article saying nationalist would not be happy playing for OWN. Equally you proposed that Jarlath Burns be disciplined for attending a canvassing event for Martin McGuinness.

/Jim

I don't want to go searching for them, thanks - too much like hard work.  The onus is on you to do that. I'm happy to stand over what I've written on here, but I don't think I should be expected to defend edited versions of what I'm alleged to have said, or to go trawling through pages of old stuff to find out what I actually did say.

There's the thread

http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=20907.0

[reddgnhand]

I have no axe to grind here btw, politics is for other people to worry about I don't vote and didn't send in my letter for voting last month

This is a rather irresponsible approach for a person concerned about the next generation.

I'm concerned with mortages, bills, work, rates, education, my kids my parents and rest of the family. If you want to fight the fight go ahead.

That's all politics.

[johnneycool]

Were the IRA the only group who bombed? Were the other groups not responsible for the deaths of children in nationalist areas?
I'm genuinely baffled by this.

Loyalists did plant bombs - McGurks Bar and the Dublin and Monaghan bombs spring immediately to mind - but  they were nowhere near as prolific as the provos.

Only because they did not have the capability to have a prolonged bombing campaign rather than their conscious got the better of them

More than likely the British Army stopped making the bombs for them.

[Milltown Row2]

I have no axe to grind here btw, politics is for other people to worry about I don't vote and didn't send in my letter for voting last month

This is a rather irresponsible approach for a person concerned about the next generation.

I'm concerned with mortages, bills, work, rates, education, my kids my parents and rest of the family. If you want to fight the fight go ahead.

That's all politics.

It's political issues in normal countries, when they try to get the working man a better way of life instead of talking about marching and bringing up the past I might be interested, if thats you're type of politics then you're sorted

[take_yer_points]

I have no axe to grind here btw, politics is for other people to worry about I don't vote and didn't send in my letter for voting last month

This is a rather irresponsible approach for a person concerned about the next generation.

I'm concerned with mortages, bills, work, rates, education, my kids my parents and rest of the family. If you want to fight the fight go ahead.

That's all politics.

It's not NI politics

[Champion The Wonder Horse]

That's not true, and I speak as someone old enough to remember the 60s, 70s and 80s.

I was too young to be targeted by loyalists, but I wasn't too young to be caught up in a no warning bomb.

Rare boy.

No harm, myles, but you are just telling lies to suit your agenda. I don't think anyone is buying them.

According to this, of the 156 children under the age of 16 murdered, 47 were killed by the IRA.

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/cgi-bin/tab2.pl