Michael o muircheartaigh mentioned something about Down's representatives turning down the offer.
I presume a former president like Peter Quinn would have been invited but i didn't see him in the coverage????
Does anyone know anyone who turn down the visit
I thought he said down were the only
Northern county to accept their invitation?
Peter Quinn conspicuous by his absence, I'm happy to say.
I would be amazed if anyone from Down turned down an invitation - infact, i would be surprised if there wasn't a couple who invited themselves.
QuoteI thought he said down were the only Northern county to accept their invitation?
They were probably giving out about the temerity of the GAA to have a game spoiling their enjoyment of the Champions League final.
In fairness its every mans right to choose whether they would be involved or not. I do feel a sizable body of opinion within the gaa have kept their opposition quiet or been kept quiet involuntarily by the professional politicians running our association. Their silence and dignity should be respected by miceal etc Instead of highlighting it
Forcibly? How was that done?
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Yup. The Quinn family that has cost the Irish taxpayer how many hundreds of millions.
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
Now moving on or not is not the point hardy. There was no debate and therefore no voices heard at that time. And those who decided to be quiet or stayed away represent 1/4 of the democratic organisation me and you love dearly Their passive approach to the event should not be highlighted as a negative on their part, I believe
Peter quinn has done more for the gaa than you or me. A silly point.
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 05:05:22 PM
Now moving on or not is not the point hardy. There was no debate and therefore no voices heard at that time. And those who decided to be quiet or stayed away represent 1/4 of the democratic organisation me and you love dearly Their passive approach to the event should not be highlighted as a negative on their part, I believe
First of all they are perfectly entitled to stay away and they have made a dignified objection to the visit - not like the scumbags that disgraced us at Parnell Square yesterday.
To be honest I was very disappointed to hear that they had stayed away, as Hardy said I would have thought and expected that we have moved on from that. The Queen has been very dignified in her visit and did make the effort to visit Croker.
But they have their reasons and they are entitled to them.
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 05:05:22 PM
Now moving on or not is not the point hardy. There was no debate and therefore no voices heard at that time. And those who decided to be quiet or stayed away represent 1/4 of the democratic organisation me and you love dearly Their passive approach to the event should not be highlighted as a negative on their part, I believe
You're right that it would have been good if there had been a debate, but seeing as there was no debate where do you get the figure of 1/4 from?
Why would someone from the north want to go to that for? if a Down man turned it down fair play to him. Down abu
Quote from: deiseach on May 18, 2011, 05:44:50 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 05:05:22 PM
Now moving on or not is not the point hardy. There was no debate and therefore no voices heard at that time. And those who decided to be quiet or stayed away represent 1/4 of the democratic organisation me and you love dearly Their passive approach to the event should not be highlighted as a negative on their part, I believe
You're right that it would have been good if there had been a debate, but seeing as there was no debate where do you get the figure of 1/4 from?
Not sure but it may be based on the fact that 8 out of 32 counties declined the invite. All of which were Ulster counties.
Course that doesn't equal out to 1/4 of the whole organisation but given the GAA didn't entertain any debate on this it would be hard to get an actual figure of those that were opposed to it.
Taken from Hogan Stand website:
"Representative of every county board in Ireland were present when the Queen was welcomed to GAA Headquarters today, but it has been revealed that representatives of the Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Fermanagh and Tyrone county boards snubbed the invitation to be present at Jones Road..... It was known that there was a degree of unhappiness at the decision by the GAA to invite Queen Elizabeth to Croke Park, but there was no public comment by GAA officials on the subject after Christy Cooney instructed all county boards to remain silent on the issue."
I am proud that the Tyrone County Board stayed clear of it. Does this visit also not highlight the divisiveness and the ill-thought out idea of the visit, when the counties most affected by HM's government and forces clearly feel that this it is premature?
The instruction from Cooney that no debate shall be allowed is a total insult to the grassroots. Or "patrons" as he would say.
Quote from: supersarsfields on May 18, 2011, 06:05:24 PM
Quote from: deiseach on May 18, 2011, 05:44:50 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 05:05:22 PM
Now moving on or not is not the point hardy. There was no debate and therefore no voices heard at that time. And those who decided to be quiet or stayed away represent 1/4 of the democratic organisation me and you love dearly Their passive approach to the event should not be highlighted as a negative on their part, I believe
You're right that it would have been good if there had been a debate, but seeing as there was no debate where do you get the figure of 1/4 from?
Not sure but it may be based on the fact that 8 out of 32 counties declined the invite. All of which were Ulster counties.
Course that doesn't equal out to 1/4 of the whole organisation but given the GAA didn't entertain any debate on this it would be hard to get an actual figure of those that were opposed to it.
Fair point, saw your quote from Hoganstand.com on the Lily Windsor thread (http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=16587.msg961591#msg961591)
Quote from: Hardy on May 18, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
I think those who lived through the worst of it would struggle to move on. I dont personally have a problem with the Queen entering Croke Park- however I can see why others would.
Quote from: INDIANA on May 18, 2011, 06:33:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 18, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
I think those who lived through the worst of it would struggle to move on. I dont personally have a problem with the Queen entering Croke Park- however I can see why others would.
Aye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
QuoteAye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
That's a tad ungracious Nally Stand. In any case, it seems to me that the problem is not when a British soldier harassed or murdered anyone, which over a decade now anyhow, but that they are free to come back at any time in the future and do this. If they were gone forever then a decade is long enough to get over things, the EEC was founded only 11 years after WW2.
I think it was a poor move by the Derry officials not to attend today as it might be their only chance to attend Croker on a big occasion for a few more decades.
Quote from: armaghniac on May 18, 2011, 07:06:20 PM
QuoteAye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
That's a tad ungracious Nally Stand. In any case, it seems to me that the problem is not when a British soldier harassed or murdered anyone, which over a decade now anyhow, but that they are free to come back at any time in the future and do this. If they were gone forever then a decade is long enough to get over things, the EEC was founded only 11 years after WW2.
Over a decade ago, and some much longer.....and still HM Government is with-holding the truth behind most of them.
For those of us who love the GAA today is a step too far. At the site of the single greatest injustice in our history to invite those responsible back to the scene of the crime is galling. Some will say its time for neighbours to forget the past, but the sight of the royals out on the pitch surrounded by Gardai will only open old wounds. It wasn't a fuckin goal and Louth won Leinster!!!
Quote from: Harold Disgracey on May 18, 2011, 08:37:31 PM
For those of us who love the GAA today is a step too far. At the site of the single greatest injustice in our history to invite those responsible back to the scene of the crime is galling. Some will say its time for neighbours to forget the past, but the sight of the royals out on the pitch surrounded by Gardai will only open old wounds. It wasn't a fuckin goal and Louth won Leinster!!!
Priceless
Was that Fr Brian D'arcy about today?
Sort of event he loves to get going to.
Quote from: Harold Disgracey on May 18, 2011, 08:37:31 PM
For those of us who love the GAA today is a step too far. At the site of the single greatest injustice in our history to invite those responsible back to the scene of the crime is galling. Some will say its time for neighbours to forget the past, but the sight of the royals out on the pitch surrounded by Gardai will only open old wounds. It wasn't a fuckin goal and Louth won Leinster!!!
:D
That's the royals for ya
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 18, 2011, 08:53:51 PM
Quote from: Harold Disgracey on May 18, 2011, 08:37:31 PM
For those of us who love the GAA today is a step too far. At the site of the single greatest injustice in our history to invite those responsible back to the scene of the crime is galling. Some will say its time for neighbours to forget the past, but the sight of the royals out on the pitch surrounded by Gardai will only open old wounds. It wasn't a fuckin goal and Louth won Leinster!!!
:D
That's the royals for ya
Aye and wasn't Sheridan there today doing some royal ass kissing too
Did anyone catch the conversation today between Joe (God bless him), McAleese and Lily Windsor? I thought I heard McAleese talking about the Meath captain "fair play to him", being gentle with Louth in his acceptance speech after the Leinster final, but surely not? But I definitely heard Lizzie saying "replay? Yer 'avin a laff!"
Whether one approves or disapproves of the Croker visit, it has highlighted the growing democratic deficit within the Association. We dont know if the members from Down support their Co.Boards attendance, or if the members from other Ulster Cos, support their Counties boycott. Whether for or against all views are valid and no one should be critisized for their particular stance
Quote from: lfdown2 on April 08, 2011, 02:19:54 AM
Does no-one think that (as is implied either on this thread or the thread in general discussion) the only reason for her visiting Croke Park is to issue an apology?
Quote from: Maguire01 on April 09, 2011, 12:29:05 PM
Whilst this is clearly a sensitive subject, is it not likely that she's going there to mark or apologise for what happened there?
Quote from: Maguire01 on April 09, 2011, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: gerry on April 09, 2011, 09:45:17 PM
can anyone tell me why she going to croker?
Could you take an educated guess?
Quote from: Orangemac on April 10, 2011, 12:59:24 AM
You wouldimagne she will make some sort of statement when she goes to Croke park in terms of acknowledging Brithish wrongdoings in the past
Quote from: Maguire01 on April 09, 2011, 03:21:02 PM
Quote from: muppet on April 07, 2011, 09:56:15 PM
Reagan - no visit to Croke Park.
Clinton - no visit to Croke Park.
JKF - nope.
Prince Rainier - nope.
Has it occurred to anyone why she might be going to Croke Park?
Some people are a bit slow on the uptake. I also suspect some people don't really want acknowledgement or apologies and would rather 'retain' a perceived 'moral high ground'.
Quote from: muppet on April 09, 2011, 04:16:46 PM
And if the IRA are absolved simply by an apology, surely an apology by the Queen in Ireland will put an enter to your whataboutery?
So I heard the reports of her visit to croke Park, and I've read the text of her speech this evening. What happened this apology lads?
aye nally, its a little bit strange that a gd few weeks ago, information was 'leaked' that the queen was possibly going to announce an apology for britains role in the conflict here or for people's suffering. then we were told that this was unlikely and more likely was a statement of regret, in the end there was nothing at all more about the things in common between our islands. but sure we're 'mature' enough to put up with these things now and 'maturity' was always the problem
As Kevin Keegan (the Lurgan one) might say, I hope we bate the traitorous c***ts right out the gates of the Athletic Grounds for that alone.
Can we meet you halfway Nally?
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 09:56:05 PM
Quote from: lfdown2 on April 08, 2011, 02:19:54 AM
Does no-one think that (as is implied either on this thread or the thread in general discussion) the only reason for her visiting Croke Park is to issue an apology?
Now houl on a minute there Nally, no implication there from me that she was for issuing an apology, just a question. I had no more interest than yourself seeing her there and naively thought the only way she would be let through the gate would be to beg for forgiveness.
I would worry more as a gaa man as to why only 6000 went to donegal for a first round championship game, it might just not be as important these days as it used to be to many.
Quote from: Pangurban on May 18, 2011, 09:32:56 PM
Whether one approves or disapproves of the Croker visit, it has highlighted the growing democratic deficit within the Association. We dont know if the members from Down support their Co.Boards attendance, or if the members from other Ulster Cos, support their Counties boycott. Whether for or against all views are valid and no one should be critisized for their particular stance
Co. Boards are elected to make decisions on behalf of their membership. The Ulster County Boards were free to make their decision. They cannot be having a vote on every topic that comes up.
#I dont agree with them boycotting it but they were entitled to make that decision themselves.
Each to their own I suppose
Quote from: Ulick on May 18, 2011, 10:13:13 PM
As Kevin Keegan (the Lurgan one) might say, I hope we bate the traitorous c***ts right out the gates of the Athletic Grounds for that alone.
What sort of stupid comment is that . Suppose Paddy will throw that into the team talk to gee them up
Yawn yawn.
I wonder how many of our indignant anti-Lizzy posters support Man Utd?
Yawn leo yourself. Mature debate only
Quote from: Ulick on May 18, 2011, 10:13:13 PM
As Kevin Keegan (the Lurgan one) might say, I hope we bate the traitorous c***ts right out the gates of the Athletic Grounds for that alone.
wow wow wow - No one has proved Down were actually at it - if they were I am disgusted and it is not representative of the county
Quote from: rrhf on May 19, 2011, 12:16:39 AM
Yawn leo yourself. Mature debate only
Why dismiss Leo's point? Its getting fierce tiresome..how many anti-Lizzy folk on here claim the British dole, British housing benefit, support British soccer teams, take weekend breaks in Britain, buy British products, shop in British supermarkets, go / went to a British university, ie support the British and their economy?
What a load of complete bo**ocks. Its an argument thats always trotted out but its a stupid and irrelevant one.
Should all fianna fail supporters now be refusing to take hand-outs dealt them by a fine gael government for e.g.?
Quote from: haranguerer on May 19, 2011, 11:06:37 AM
What a load of complete bo**ocks. Its an argument thats always trotted out but its a stupid and irrelevant one.
Should all fianna fail supporters now be refusing to take hand-outs dealt them by a fine gael government for e.g.?
is it but? to dip in and out when it suits, when its handier?
Quote from: DuffleKing on May 18, 2011, 03:41:53 PM
I thought he said down were the only
Northern county to accept their invitation?
Peter Quinn conspicuous by his absence, I'm happy to say.
Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan were there so that makes 4
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:08:02 PM
Taken from Hogan Stand website:
"Representative of every county board in Ireland were present when the Queen was welcomed to GAA Headquarters today, but it has been revealed that representatives of the Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Fermanagh and Tyrone county boards snubbed the invitation to be present at Jones Road..... It was known that there was a degree of unhappiness at the decision by the GAA to invite Queen Elizabeth to Croke Park, but there was no public comment by GAA officials on the subject after Christy Cooney instructed all county boards to remain silent on the issue."
I am proud that the Tyrone County Board stayed clear of it. Does this visit also not highlight the divisiveness and the ill-thought out idea of the visit, when the counties most affected by HM's government and forces clearly feel that this it is premature?
The instruction from Cooney that no debate shall be allowed is a total insult to the grassroots. Or "patrons" as he would say.
Look at all those nice grounds in the Sick Counties paid for by HMG.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 19, 2011, 11:12:59 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on May 18, 2011, 03:41:53 PM
I thought he said down were the only
Northern county to accept their invitation?
Peter Quinn conspicuous by his absence, I'm happy to say.
Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan were there so that makes 4
no,that still makes 1.those three are in the south.however there were 4 counties from
Ulster there.
Quote from: Dougal on May 19, 2011, 11:41:25 AM
Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan were there so that makes 4
[/quote]
no,that still makes 1.those three are
in the south.however there were 4 counties from
Ulster there.
[/quote]
Donegal was always up in the North West on any maps I ever saw ;)
Quote from: J OGorman on May 19, 2011, 11:11:00 AM
Quote from: haranguerer on May 19, 2011, 11:06:37 AM
What a load of complete bo**ocks. Its an argument thats always trotted out but its a stupid and irrelevant one.
Should all fianna fail supporters now be refusing to take hand-outs dealt them by a fine gael government for e.g.?
is it but? to dip in and out when it suits, when its handier?
Yes it is a horseshit argument because it is based on the assumption that anyone who opposes this visit is some sort of anti-British racist. And people in the six counties unfortunately have their taxes being paid to HMs government so why shouldnt they be allowed apply for benefits or grants where entitled?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 19, 2011, 11:16:13 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:08:02 PM
Taken from Hogan Stand website:
"Representative of every county board in Ireland were present when the Queen was welcomed to GAA Headquarters today, but it has been revealed that representatives of the Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Fermanagh and Tyrone county boards snubbed the invitation to be present at Jones Road..... It was known that there was a degree of unhappiness at the decision by the GAA to invite Queen Elizabeth to Croke Park, but there was no public comment by GAA officials on the subject after Christy Cooney instructed all county boards to remain silent on the issue."
I am proud that the Tyrone County Board stayed clear of it. Does this visit also not highlight the divisiveness and the ill-thought out idea of the visit, when the counties most affected by HM's government and forces clearly feel that this it is premature?
The instruction from Cooney that no debate shall be allowed is a total insult to the grassroots. Or "patrons" as he would say.
Look at all those nice grounds in the Sick Counties paid for by HMG.
Look at all those taxes paid by the people who play in these nice grounds. Are they not entitled to apply for funding? Or are opponants of this visit not allowed to stand by their principles despite this?
Quote from: Dougal on May 19, 2011, 11:41:25 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 19, 2011, 11:12:59 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on May 18, 2011, 03:41:53 PM
I thought he said down were the only
Northern county to accept their invitation?
Peter Quinn conspicuous by his absence, I'm happy to say.
Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan were there so that makes 4
no,that still makes 1.those three are in the south.however there were 4 counties from Ulster there.
Last I looked Donegal was the most Northerly county in Ireland.
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 05:05:22 PM
Now moving on or not is not the point hardy. There was no debate and therefore no voices heard at that time. And those who decided to be quiet or stayed away represent 1/4 of the democratic organisation me and you love dearly Their passive approach to the event should not be highlighted as a negative on their part, I believe
+1
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:46:50 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on May 18, 2011, 06:33:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 18, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
I think those who lived through the worst of it would struggle to move on. I dont personally have a problem with the Queen entering Croke Park- however I can see why others would.
Aye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
What is the appropriate time to wait before moving on?
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 01:09:35 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 19, 2011, 11:16:13 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:08:02 PM
Taken from Hogan Stand website:
"Representative of every county board in Ireland were present when the Queen was welcomed to GAA Headquarters today, but it has been revealed that representatives of the Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Fermanagh and Tyrone county boards snubbed the invitation to be present at Jones Road..... It was known that there was a degree of unhappiness at the decision by the GAA to invite Queen Elizabeth to Croke Park, but there was no public comment by GAA officials on the subject after Christy Cooney instructed all county boards to remain silent on the issue."
I am proud that the Tyrone County Board stayed clear of it. Does this visit also not highlight the divisiveness and the ill-thought out idea of the visit, when the counties most affected by HM's government and forces clearly feel that this it is premature?
The instruction from Cooney that no debate shall be allowed is a total insult to the grassroots. Or "patrons" as he would say.
Look at all those nice grounds in the Sick Counties paid for by HMG.
Look at all those taxes paid by the people who play in these nice grounds. Are they not entitled to apply for funding? Or are opponants of this visit not allowed to stand by their principles despite this?
+1 on this. We pay the taxes we get the funding.
I have nothing against the visit but if anyone is not in favour it is their perogative and should be allowed to state their opinion.
Quote from: J OGorman on May 19, 2011, 10:56:28 AM
Quote from: rrhf on May 19, 2011, 12:16:39 AM
Yawn leo yourself. Mature debate only
Why dismiss Leo's point? Its getting fierce tiresome..how many anti-Lizzy folk on here claim the British dole, British housing benefit, support British soccer teams, take weekend breaks in Britain, buy British products, shop in British supermarkets, go / went to a British university, ie support the British and their economy?
Fair point, were do ye draw the line. However, though I dont have a problem with the visit as I hope and think it will do more good than bad people shouldnt be lambasted for voicing there objection to it. I thinks unfair that the people who object are grouped with the scum bags who were protesting/burning bins in dublin.
Quote from: LeoMc on May 19, 2011, 01:39:19 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:46:50 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on May 18, 2011, 06:33:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 18, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
I think those who lived through the worst of it would struggle to move on. I dont personally have a problem with the Queen entering Croke Park- however I can see why others would.
Aye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
What is the appropriate time to wait before moving on?
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which
continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
Nally Stand can I ask what your position is in relation to the recent republican murder in county Tyrone?
Quote from: Agent Orange on May 19, 2011, 04:39:34 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
Nally Stand can I ask what your position is in relation to the recent republican murder in county Tyrone?
That's a pretty leading question Agent Orange. In fairness to Nally Stand he has said on numerous threads that he supports the GFA. I seriously doubt anyone involved in, or supportive of, that act would be a supporter of the GFA.
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 19, 2011, 04:45:43 PM
Quote from: Agent Orange on May 19, 2011, 04:39:34 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
Nally Stand can I ask what your position is in relation to the recent republican murder in county Tyrone?
That's a pretty leading question Agent Orange. In fairness to Nally Stand he has said on numerous threads that he supports the GFA. I seriously doubt anyone involved in, or supportive of, that act would be a supporter of the GFA.
I am not going to read through all his posts, but it would be interesting to know how these guys seem to be able to sit comfortably with a foot in both camps. They seem to be loyal to the crown when it suits them, but yet they seem to be vehemently opposed to her visiting Ireland.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
Quote from: LeoMc on May 19, 2011, 01:39:19 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:46:50 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on May 18, 2011, 06:33:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 18, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
I think those who lived through the worst of it would struggle to move on. I dont personally have a problem with the Queen entering Croke Park- however I can see why others would.
Aye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
What is the appropriate time to wait before moving on?
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
You are correct, people are entitled to object without being labelled. But how long do we wait until the time is right? Do we wait 10 years, 20 years, 100...
There were a lot of families bereaved on both sides and a lot more suffered injustices and injuries. Some people may find it difficult to see GSTQ played in Croke Park but others have the same issues with seeing former members of the IRA in government. Should we have waited 10 years, 20 years, 100 from the ceasefires for that?
I would not presume to tell you to not voice your opinion or be delighted about the events but
IMO* we all need to swallow the bile and get on with things lest we become green Jim Allisters.
BTW I have no objection to the events in Dublin. I would no more hold the Queen accountable than I would blame the Meath mascot for 1996 (cue Hardy!).
*I am not trying to start a debate NS, just giving my opinion.
Quote from: Agent Orange on May 19, 2011, 04:53:00 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 19, 2011, 04:45:43 PM
Quote from: Agent Orange on May 19, 2011, 04:39:34 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
Nally Stand can I ask what your position is in relation to the recent republican murder in county Tyrone?
That's a pretty leading question Agent Orange. In fairness to Nally Stand he has said on numerous threads that he supports the GFA. I seriously doubt anyone involved in, or supportive of, that act would be a supporter of the GFA.
I am not going to read through all his posts, but it would be interesting to know how these guys seem to be able to sit comfortably with a foot in both camps. They seem to be loyal to the crown when it suits them, but yet they seem to be vehemently opposed to her visiting Ireland.
1. I have never been, nor will I ever be loyal to any crown.
2. The victim in the murder you speak of was my friend so how the fcuk do you think I feel about it and how the fcuk do you think I feel about a**holes trying to drag it up to score cheap points?
Quote from: LeoMc on May 19, 2011, 05:15:54 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
Quote from: LeoMc on May 19, 2011, 01:39:19 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 18, 2011, 06:46:50 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on May 18, 2011, 06:33:54 PM
Quote from: Hardy on May 18, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: rrhf on May 18, 2011, 04:40:47 PM
Only surmising hardy I just know that such a political event as this was received no airtime or debate. We debated the life out of foreign sports etc. But not a birdy on this. If a conservative organisation like the gaa,allows itself to be politicised for events like this. There must be a serious sweetener on offer.
Or it could be that it just wasn't as controversial among GAA members as the "foreign" sports debate, etc.
Could it be that we have, in fact, moved on, if you'll pardon the expression?
I think those who lived through the worst of it would struggle to move on. I dont personally have a problem with the Queen entering Croke Park- however I can see why others would.
Aye it must be very easy to move on when the last time a british soldier harassed or murdered anyone in your locality was almost a century ago
What is the appropriate time to wait before moving on?
As I have repeatedly said, people can oppose this visit and be perfectly capable of "moving on". My reference to "moving on" in reply to Hardy is tongue in cheek.
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending. When such visit becomes less divisive, then the time might be more apropriate. If you think it isn't divisive, think about the topic of this thread. A lot of people are still very raw in the six counties about the ills visited upon them by British forces and by a British Government which continues to withhold the truth on hundreds of cases of collusion/state murder. If the British establishment could come clean, then maybe this farcical nonsense contained in her speech last night, and the media's spouting of "moving on" and "maturing as a nation" might be taken more seriously in the north east. "The Queen" produced a speech last night which was carefully sculpted to avoid having to make any type of an apology despite the fact that her security forces and government have been found guilty of certain instances of, and are suspected of much deeper involvement in, state sponsored murder of 'her subjects' in Ireland. It seems to be the elephant in the room for Republicans which official Ireland is determined to ignore.
You are correct, people are entitled to object without being labelled. But how long do we wait until the time is right? Do we wait 10 years, 20 years, 100...
There were a lot of families bereaved on both sides and a lot more suffered injustices and injuries. Some people may find it difficult to see GSTQ played in Croke Park but others have the same issues with seeing former members of the IRA in government. Should we have waited 10 years, 20 years, 100 from the ceasefires for that?
I would not presume to tell you to not voice your opinion or be delighted about the events but IMO* we all need to swallow the bile and get on with things lest we become green Jim Allisters.
BTW I have no objection to the events in Dublin. I would no more hold the Queen accountable than I would blame the Meath mascot for 1996 (cue Hardy!).
*I am not trying to start a debate NS, just giving my opinion.
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family? This visit is still too insulting and hypocritical to many of the people who should be looked out for most. When britain acknowledges that they were directly involved in a conflict here and not some poor refferee, then I would sit up and take them seriously or take their head of state's speeches seriously.
Anyone know how many Co Board reps went to meet her granda when he came to visit?
Quote from: ONeill on May 18, 2011, 08:03:08 PM
I think it was a poor move by the Derry officials not to attend today as it might be their only chance to attend Croker on a big occasion for a few more decades.
Yep, they'd have certainly felt at home with the Saxe Coburg Gothas considering the amount of inbreeding has gone on in that clan
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family? This visit is still too insulting and hypocritical to many of the people who should be looked out for most. When britain acknowledges that they were directly involved in a conflict here and not some poor refferee, then I would sit up and take them seriously or take their head of state's speeches seriously.
So you're not willing to move on then. Why do you get so upset when people point out the fact?
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending.
It's the truth. You don't want to move on by your own admission. Fact.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 07:15:20 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending.
It's the truth. You don't want to move on by your own admission. Fact.
Aye that's it. Drop the condescending, better than thou shite.
I see Tyrone GAA are saying they weren't asked.
I think I'm insulted by this. I'll ask around to see if I am.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 07:46:52 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 07:15:20 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending.
It's the truth. You don't want to move on by your own admission. Fact.
Aye that's it. Drop the condescending, better than thou shite.
Ok. With all due respect, you're incapable of moving on.
Is that better?
You're a bit slow Eamonn. NS has stated that he doesn't believe that enough has been done by the British to allow everyone to move on. That doesn't mean he's Incapable of moving on. Nor does it make him a dinosar. Your last few posts have been extremely condescending.
In "De Paper" today :-
Ulster GAA boards claim Croke Park snub for Queen's visit
By John Fogarty
Friday, May 20, 2011
FOUR of the five Ulster county boards in the North who did not attend Queen Elizabeth II's visit to Croke Park on Wednesday have claimed they weren't invited to the event.
a d v e r t i s e m e n t
County board officials from Tyrone, Fermanagh, Derry and Antrim told the Irish Examiner they were not asked to go to Headquarters for the British monarch's historic trip.
However, it is understood all counties' Central Council delegates were extended an invitation to attend.
Only Down were reported to have been represented at the Jones' Road venue, while it was claimed neither the Donegal, Cavan or Monaghan boards had any officials there.
But a number of delegates from the five counties were unable to get to Croke Park due to work commitments and it is believed the invitation was non-transferable.
Armagh, the fifth Ulster county who had no representation at the visit, refused to comment on the matter.
"It's not something we want to get involved in," said county secretary Paddy Óg Nugent. "We will be saying nothing about it whatsoever."
However, Tyrone chairman Ciaran McLaughlin was adamant in his claim his county hadn't been requested to be in attendance on Wednesday.
"I've no comment to make on it, to be honest, quite simply because the counties weren't invited individually in the first place," he said, "and that's the bottom line.
"There's no point in me saying anything more about it. People can say what they want but I know the facts and that's what I'm sticking with."
Fermanagh secretary Tom Boyle also insisted his board had not been asked to attend.
He also raised the issue of GAA President Christy Cooney's letter to counties instructing them that he was the Association's only spokesperson on the event at Croke Park.
"The only correspondence we got from Croke Park was the letter in which we were told the only person allowed to comment on the queen's visit was the Uachtarán," stated Boyle.
"I have had no more correspondence about it since then.
"The information that seems to have gone out seems to imply all county secretaries and chairmen were invited to the event. They were not all invited to the event.
"I can understand why some people weren't invited because of keeping up appearances and all that sort of thing. But there was no formal invitation sent to the Fermanagh secretary or chairman."
Derry secretary Liam Peoples echoed Boyle's point about being told not to comment about the occasion.
"We were instructed not to speak about the visit. The only person permitted to was the president but nobody else was given the opportunity to comment.
"I don't know what the protocol was, whether there were some people invited and some people who weren't but I wouldn't be annoyed about it."
Peoples' equivalent in Antrim, Frankie Quinn, confirmed neither he nor the board received an invitation to be present for the queen's visit.
"No invitation came to me for me personally or the county board," he said.
While maintaining their silence about the visit as requested by Cooney, several officials in Ulster are furious with the manner in which the matter has been dealt with by central GAA powers from a public relations perspective.
Some have even suggested they have been "gagged" by Croke Park.
Cooney's directive had been an attempt to ensure the Association maintained a dignified response to the visit.
This appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Friday, May 20, 2011
Read more: http://irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/ulster-gaa-boards-claim-croke-park-snub-for-queens-visit-155218.html#ixzz1MsVxtDtZ
to be honest i think this 'gang up on Nally' mentality or anyone who dares object to the queen is disgusting. Especially the cheap dig at trying to corner him on the murder of a policeman when everyone knows his position. In fact that is absolutley rotten.
He doesn't agree with the Queen's visit, neither do I - i don't think the time is right yet but out of respect for democracy I am keeping my own counsel. She's not that big an event to me as she has come to Ireland many times, this is just one more to me.
But to try and vilify Nally because he has a stance is sickening and i despair for the future of Ireland where no one is allowed to object to something they don't agree with, are we returning to our role as serf's?
Christ, some organisation it seems the GAA has turned into - a complete dictatorship. Its really worrying.
Whatever your views on the queen, and what the right thing to do is, and how it shows how progressive we are, the GAA represents its members, and the hierarchy should be aware of this. Instead it seems they're acting with impunity, believing to be safe from criticism because their stance is largely supported by the media and wider public as a whole.
Sean Kelly was interviewed on bbc ni (radio) and he was saying how great it was and how it showed we were great etc, and how much we had in common - quote ' we speak the same language' - am I mistaken in believing the GAA was set up specifically to promote Irish language and culture, and here this clown is speaking on his authority as an ex-gaa president contradicting everything the organsiation was set up for?! Its a joke.
Personally, I'm not that bothered the queen came, but its galling to see my president been a patronising bitch with her 'waows', and much moreso the gaa showing absolutely no respect for their members by purporting to speak for all without checking what all wanted them to say. They could have been a lot more dignified without being any less welcoming. Their entire ideals ditched it seems for the sake of a weeks good publicity.
Quote from: haranguerer on May 20, 2011, 10:16:43 AM
Christ, some organisation it seems the GAA has turned into - a complete dictatorship. Its really worrying.
Whatever your views on the queen, and what the right thing to do is, and how it shows how progressive we are, the GAA represents its members, and the hierarchy should be aware of this. Instead it seems they're acting with impunity, believing to be safe from criticism because their stance is largely supported by the media and wider public as a whole.
Sean Kelly was interviewed on bbc ni (radio) and he was saying how great it was and how it showed we were great etc, and how much we had in common - quote ' we speak the same language' - am I mistaken in believing the GAA was set up specifically to promote Irish language and culture, and here this clown is speaking on his authority as an ex-gaa president contradicting everything the organsiation was set up for?! Its a joke.
Personally, I'm not that bothered the queen came, but its galling to see my president been a patronising bitch with her 'waows', and much moreso the gaa showing absolutely no respect for their members by purporting to speak for all without checking what all wanted them to say. They could have been a lot more dignified without being any less welcoming. Their entire ideals ditched it seems for the sake of a weeks good publicity.
Was Sean Kelly speaking as an Irish MEP or as a GAA member?
What percentage of the GAA membership are actively promoting an Ghaeilge?
What percentage of GAA players or officials are able to be interviewed as Gaeilge ar TG4?
98% of Irish speak English ( unfortunately ) as their forst language and the GAA percentage is about the same I suspect.
Are they all to be "harangued" :D or is that honour specially reserved for Sean Kelly because he upset the backwoodsmen while he was Uachtaráin?
Quote from: Rossfan on May 20, 2011, 10:29:15 AM
What percentage of the GAA membership are actively promoting an Ghaeilge?
What percentage of GAA players or officials are able to be interviewed as Gaeilge ar TG4?
98% of Irish speak English ( unfortunately ) as their forst language and the GAA percentage is about the same I suspect.
Are they all to be "harangued" :D or is that honour specially reserved for Sean Kelly because he upset the backwoodsmen while he was Uachtaráin?
Backwoodsman or Stalinist lickspittle...is that really the only choice for GAA people. :-\ I hope not.
Quote from: Rossfan on May 20, 2011, 10:29:15 AM
What percentage of the GAA membership are actively promoting an Ghaeilge?
What percentage of GAA players or officials are able to be interviewed as Gaeilge ar TG4?
98% of Irish speak English ( unfortunately ) as their forst language and the GAA percentage is about the same I suspect.
Are they all to be "harangued" :D or is that honour specially reserved for Sean Kelly because he upset the backwoodsmen while he was Uachtaráin?
Rossfan, are you really that imbecilic that you cant see your post is at best (from your point of view) irrelevant, and at worst supports my point? You bemoan the fact very few are proficient in Irish, yet seem to have included this in an argument supporting an ex leader of the GAA in saying we have everything in common with england, including our language. You dont think he should possibly be promoting our own language, especially seing as how its in decline? Ffs, the queen did more to promote irish cultture with her cupla focal than he did.
And he didnt really upset me when he was president. I also have no objection really to the queens visit - its the manner in which the gaa treated its membership I would have issue with. The organsiation was set up to promote Irish language and culture. If its aims and its supposedly democratic make up is to be changed, then thats fine, do that, but dont pay lip service to the first when the actions scream the opposite.
Also, if a roscommon man isnt from the backwoods, who to f**k is?
Tubberman, the lead up was about the queens visit to Croke Park and the reasons for controversy, Sean Kelly was introduced as ex GAA president. To all listening to that interview he was speaking as a GAA member and ex-president.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 09:20:52 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 07:46:52 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 07:15:20 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending.
It's the truth. You don't want to move on by your own admission. Fact.
Aye that's it. Drop the condescending, better than thou shite.
Ok. With all due respect, you're incapable of moving on.
Is that better?
Well speaking of moving on.... I saw Joe Kiernan on with Ger Gilroy on the TV last night and he was asked about the visit to Croker and the trip in general. To my great surprise he was very positive about it. Mentioned it was time to move on and remarked about how well it was handled plus said things are far better than they ever were etc. He was also gushing with praise for Mary Mac. Some people on here claim extra weight for their arguments based on having an NI address. In view of Joe's club experiences alone with british army choppers etc and probably alot other worse things over the years of the troubles then should what he says not be taken very seriously ?
Quote from: haranguerer on May 20, 2011, 10:53:48 AM
Rossfan, are you really that imbecilic that you cant see your post is at best (from your point of view) irrelevant, and at worst supports my point? You bemoan the fact very few are proficient in Irish, yet seem to have included this in an argument supporting an ex leader of the GAA in saying we have everything in common with england, including our language. You dont think he should possibly be promoting our own language, especially seing as how its in decline?
Also, if a roscommon man isnt from the backwoods, who to f**k is?
Cén fáth nach bhfuil tusa ag scríobh i nGaeilge an t-am go léir , in áit bheith ag gearán faoi Sheáin O Ceallaigh ag insinnt an fhírinne go bhfuilimid go léir ( beagnach) ag labahirt sa theanga chéanna is na Sasanaigh.
As for your use of the term "imbecilic" -- I'm reporting to the mods.
and for your backward information Roscommon is the heart of Ireland and therefore of the Universe.
Quote from: ross matt on May 20, 2011, 11:00:33 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 09:20:52 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 07:46:52 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 07:15:20 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending.
It's the truth. You don't want to move on by your own admission. Fact.
Aye that's it. Drop the condescending, better than thou shite.
Ok. With all due respect, you're incapable of moving on.
Is that better?
Well speaking of moving on.... I saw Joe Kiernan on with Ger Gilroy on the TV last night and he was asked about the visit to Croker and the trip in general. To my great surprise he was very positive about it. Mentioned it was time to move on and remarked about how well it was handled plus said things are far better than they ever were etc. He was also gushing with praise for Mary Mac. Some people on here claim extra weight for their arguments based on having an NI address. In view of Joe's club experiences alone with british army choppers etc and probably alot other worse things over the years of the troubles then should what he says not be taken very seriously ?
Is that not essentially stating that the views of people in the six counties should only be taken seriously if they agree with the visit? What differentiates? Many people suffered a whole lot worse that big Joe and are wholly opposed to the visit. Should they not be taken equally as serious?
I dont know. Thats what I'm asking?
I dont know who has suffered more than Joe or how much the man has suffered. You clearly do if you're making that statement. I was surprised as I expected him to be opposed and I would have seen him as representative of those that suffered but maybe not.
Would totally agree with Nally Stand on this one . Many of my friends feel the exact same when this has arose in discussion. I am not a dinosaur or against moving on or whatever other title you wish to bestow upon six county nationalists whose only crime is that we want to be Irish and enjoy the same sense of freedom that our counterparts in the 26 have . We have made many compromises to hopefully acheive this aim some day.. We have moved on quite a lot. It may not happen in my generation but to hold high that ideal and make it possible someday is something that my father dreamed of I have and hopefully my children will. In the meantime we accept what the staus quo is at the moment. to that aim our only way of maintaining our identity is holding on to the culture that makes me feel Irish and keeps us together ie the GAA Irish language song dance etc.
The queens visit was again a divisive issue , for many in the 26 and some here to it's not a big deal. To us she is positioned as our Queen and we her loyal subjects . When she comes to the six counties she comes not as a foreign head of state but as a figure head ruler to visit her noble and loyal subjects of which whether I want it or not I am supposed to be one . All that was fought for meant nothing to us as we lost and you the 26 won. For her to recieve the accolades, the adulation the over celebrity like status is stomach churning . if thats what you call moving on thats fine it's certainly not a word I would use.
We in my area struggle to get our street names in Irish . We had our clubrooms burnt down twice withiin this past 10 years We didnt get any compo because the psni told us it wasnt a terrorist act because we couldnt prove that more than three people were involved. The council sent us a letter to complain about the flying of the tricolour at our matches and the letter was addressed to Mr Robert Emmett 16 **** road etc.Our church burnt to the ground 5 years ago by her loyal subjects. For us it is a struggle to be and maintain what many others take for granted. Times have improved and please god they will continue to improve but for the GAA or whoever to take the queen to Croke park when many of its patrons are denied the right to their national identity in my opinion is wrong.
Having said that i would not be involved in any protest and certainly have nothing to do with the neanderthals that protested on the street but quietly register my protest and opinion if asked (which wasnt ). i will continue to uphold my identity like many others whether the queen is here or not. AS I said life goes on
Quote from: rionach 4 on May 20, 2011, 01:11:23 PM
Would totally agree with Nally Stand on this one . Many of my friends feel the exact same when this has arose in discussion. I am not a dinosaur or against moving on or whatever other title you wish to bestow upon six county nationalists whose only crime is that we want to be Irish and enjoy the same sense of freedom that our counterparts in the 26 have . We have made many compromises to hopefully acheive this aim some day.. We have moved on quite a lot. It may not happen in my generation but to hold high that ideal and make it possible someday is something that my father dreamed of I have and hopefully my children will. In the meantime we accept what the staus quo is at the moment. to that aim our only way of maintaining our identity is holding on to the culture that makes me feel Irish and keeps us together ie the GAA Irish language song dance etc.
The queens visit was again a divisive issue , for many in the 26 and some here to it's not a big deal. To us she is positioned as our Queen and we her loyal subjects . When she comes to the six counties she comes not as a foreign head of state but as a figure head ruler to visit her noble and loyal subjects of which whether I want it or not I am supposed to be one . All that was fought for meant nothing to us as we lost and you the 26 won. For her to recieve the accolades, the adulation the over celebrity like status is stomach churning . if thats what you call moving on thats fine it's certainly not a word I would use.
We in my area struggle to get our street names in Irish . We had our clubrooms burnt down twice withiin this past 10 years We didnt get any compo because the psni told us it wasnt a terrorist act because we couldnt prove that more than three people were involved. The council sent us a letter to complain about the flying of the tricolour at our matches and the letter was addressed to Mr Robert Emmett 16 **** road etc.Our church burnt to the ground 5 years ago by her loyal subjects. For us it is a struggle to be and maintain what many others take for granted. Times have improved and please god they will continue to improve but for the GAA or whoever to take the queen to Croke park when many of its patrons are denied the right to their national identity in my opinion is wrong.
Having said that i would not be involved in any protest and certainly have nothing to do with the neanderthals that protested on the street but quietly register my protest and opinion if asked (which wasnt ). i will continue to uphold my identity like many others whether the queen is here or not. AS I said life goes on
Great post. Couldn't agree more.
Quote from: rionach 4 on May 20, 2011, 01:11:23 PM
for the GAA or whoever to take the queen to Croke park when many of its patrons are denied the right to their national identity in my opinion is wrong.
As the status quo in the North is maintained by the vote of the majority there surely the Nationalist parties should not be co operating with Unionist politicians as it is they (Unionists) who are denying you the right to your national identity rather than Britain's Queen.
Why didnt you raise the Council's letter with your local Nationalist reps and with the Irish government, British government etc as it's obviously against the "parity of esteem" principles underlying the good Friday Agreement.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 20, 2011, 11:50:16 AM
Quote from: ross matt on May 20, 2011, 11:00:33 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 09:20:52 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 07:46:52 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 19, 2011, 07:15:20 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 02:05:28 PM
The idea (which MANY people seem to have) that if you oppose the visit, then you must be a dinosaur who can't move on is condescending.
It's the truth. You don't want to move on by your own admission. Fact.
Aye that's it. Drop the condescending, better than thou shite.
Ok. With all due respect, you're incapable of moving on.
Is that better?
Well speaking of moving on.... I saw Joe Kiernan on with Ger Gilroy on the TV last night and he was asked about the visit to Croker and the trip in general. To my great surprise he was very positive about it. Mentioned it was time to move on and remarked about how well it was handled plus said things are far better than they ever were etc. He was also gushing with praise for Mary Mac. Some people on here claim extra weight for their arguments based on having an NI address. In view of Joe's club experiences alone with british army choppers etc and probably alot other worse things over the years of the troubles then should what he says not be taken very seriously ?
Is that not essentially stating that the views of people in the six counties should only be taken seriously if they agree with the visit? What differentiates? Many people suffered a whole lot worse that big Joe and are wholly opposed to the visit. Should they not be taken equally as serious?
Nally, a lot of Clubs in Ulster including my own lost members during the troubles and it is the case that some like your self do not feel it was appropriate for Croke Park to host the Queen. But we live in a democracy. I am in favour of the visit I think it is positive but I acknowledge that you have a right to object and I feel that others here should allow you to express your opinions, because that's what a forum is all about. It is right that we should all move on
but in our own time.
Quote from: rionach 4 on May 20, 2011, 01:11:23 PM
Would totally agree with Nally Stand on this one . Many of my friends feel the exact same when this has arose in discussion. I am not a dinosaur or against moving on or whatever other title you wish to bestow upon six county nationalists whose only crime is that we want to be Irish and enjoy the same sense of freedom that our counterparts in the 26 have . We have made many compromises to hopefully acheive this aim some day.. We have moved on quite a lot. It may not happen in my generation but to hold high that ideal and make it possible someday is something that my father dreamed of I have and hopefully my children will. In the meantime we accept what the staus quo is at the moment. to that aim our only way of maintaining our identity is holding on to the culture that makes me feel Irish and keeps us together ie the GAA Irish language song dance etc.
The queens visit was again a divisive issue , for many in the 26 and some here to it's not a big deal. To us she is positioned as our Queen and we her loyal subjects . When she comes to the six counties she comes not as a foreign head of state but as a figure head ruler to visit her noble and loyal subjects of which whether I want it or not I am supposed to be one . All that was fought for meant nothing to us as we lost and you the 26 won. For her to recieve the accolades, the adulation the over celebrity like status is stomach churning . if thats what you call moving on thats fine it's certainly not a word I would use.
We in my area struggle to get our street names in Irish . We had our clubrooms burnt down twice withiin this past 10 years We didnt get any compo because the psni told us it wasnt a terrorist act because we couldnt prove that more than three people were involved. The council sent us a letter to complain about the flying of the tricolour at our matches and the letter was addressed to Mr Robert Emmett 16 **** road etc.Our church burnt to the ground 5 years ago by her loyal subjects. For us it is a struggle to be and maintain what many others take for granted. Times have improved and please god they will continue to improve but for the GAA or whoever to take the queen to Croke park when many of its patrons are denied the right to their national identity in my opinion is wrong.
Having said that i would not be involved in any protest and certainly have nothing to do with the neanderthals that protested on the street but quietly register my protest and opinion if asked (which wasnt ). i will continue to uphold my identity like many others whether the queen is here or not. AS I said life goes on
A great post I have only one small point to make, you are only her loyal subject if you want to be. I am Irish in my heart my soul and passport I will never bow to any monarch. Another small point I don't think she would condone the base actions of those so called loyal subjects who continue to harass your club. It seems to be difficult for some of our Southern Brethern to understand what life was like and is like for GAA members and clubs in some parts of Ulster.
Their letter Rossfan was to point out to us that objections had been raised by local ratepayers as to the flying of the flag . They, the council were informing us about the objections . the point I was making was not about the objections but rather the fact that the council thought Mr Robert Emmett was our secretary and not the name of our club.. The so called majority in the North is supported and aided by the British government. In an effort to compromise we have indeed agreed to work with this self created majority as we have no other choice. I never wanted to be British I never asked to be but due to the establishment of N-Ireland by the Government of Ireland act I am officially classified as that. I can shout all I like about being Irish etc but i am classed different than you . Live here and you feel it.
Rossfan if the british government withdrew its support for the state of N-Ireland it couldnt exist. Wasnt that the point of the struggle for this past 40 years whether you agree with it or not. I am Irish but my right to be Irish is denied . I stand over my statement
Quote from: ross matt on May 20, 2011, 12:50:34 PM
I dont know. Thats what I'm asking?
I dont know who has suffered more than Joe or how much the man has suffered. You clearly do if you're making that statement. I was surprised as I expected him to be opposed and I would have seen him as representative of those that suffered but maybe not.
Well I know that there are families who have lost multiple immediate family members at the hands of HM forces and who are opposed to this visit. You say Joe Kernan's club had their ground occupied, and he can support the visit, so therefor his views should be taken seriously. My question is, what specifically makes Joe Kernan's opinion more worthy of being taken seriously than the opinion of families I mentioned in my opening sentence of this post? If the very same Joe Kernan in that interview had opposed the visit, would you still have said his views should be taken seriously in light of british abuses of his club or would he have just been another person who 'couldn't move on'? I'm not trying to get at you here, I'm asking it as a genuine question.
Have you got an Irish passport Rionach?
Do you vote for ( or have the right to vote for) Irish politicians in a local Irish based Assembly?
The Irish ( 26 Co) Constitution declares you have the right to be Irish.
But the point I was raising was that it's not Britain's Queen or even their Government that is standing between us and an All Ireland Independent entity ... it is the majority of your Irish 6 Co residents who won't vote for Unity.
If the Brits withdraw their support for the entity known as "Northern(sic) Ireland" no one else could afford to pick up where they left off at present and anyway they are leaving it up to the majority of locals to decide.
The local Council don't sound very "parity of esteem" minded right enough but moan/complain etc through official channels till they get sick of you. ;)
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 20, 2011, 02:56:45 PM
Quote from: ross matt on May 20, 2011, 12:50:34 PM
I dont know. Thats what I'm asking?
I dont know who has suffered more than Joe or how much the man has suffered. You clearly do if you're making that statement. I was surprised as I expected him to be opposed and I would have seen him as representative of those that suffered but maybe not.
Well I know that there are families who have lost multiple immediate family members at the hands of HM forces and who are opposed to this visit. You say Joe Kernan's club had their ground occupied, and he can support the visit, so therefor his views should be taken seriously. My question is, what specifically makes Joe Kernan's opinion more worthy of being taken seriously than the opinion of families I mentioned in my opening sentence of this post? If the very same Joe Kernan in that interview had opposed the visit, would you still have said his views should be taken seriously in light of british abuses of his club or would he have just been another person who 'couldn't move on'? I'm not trying to get at you here, I'm asking it as a genuine question.
Listen I could care less about the visit. I posted a few days ago that its a cost and distraction we cant afford. I think the concept of Monarchy is laughable anyway. I wouldnt belittle any of the opinions of anyone that suffered at the hands of British forces. I dont think Joe's opinion is any more worthy as you put it than theirs. I only assumed Joe would have been representative of alot of NI GAA community but like I said maybe I'm wrong there. He or his family may also have suffered more than helicopter pitch invasions from the security forces during the troubles. I dont know if this is the case but I dont think you know him well enough to know if it is either. Like I said I was surprised he was so positive about it and I assumed many people in the immediate Crossmaglen area at least would have alot in common with Joe and even be infleunced by him. He is a legend in fairness. Dunno if that answers your question but its the best I can do.
Quote from: rionach 4 on May 20, 2011, 01:11:23 PM
Would totally agree with Nally Stand on this one . Many of my friends feel the exact same when this has arose in discussion. I am not a dinosaur or against moving on or whatever other title you wish to bestow upon six county nationalists whose only crime is that we want to be Irish and enjoy the same sense of freedom that our counterparts in the 26 have . We have made many compromises to hopefully acheive this aim some day.. We have moved on quite a lot. It may not happen in my generation but to hold high that ideal and make it possible someday is something that my father dreamed of I have and hopefully my children will. In the meantime we accept what the staus quo is at the moment. to that aim our only way of maintaining our identity is holding on to the culture that makes me feel Irish and keeps us together ie the GAA Irish language song dance etc.
The queens visit was again a divisive issue , for many in the 26 and some here to it's not a big deal. To us she is positioned as our Queen and we her loyal subjects . When she comes to the six counties she comes not as a foreign head of state but as a figure head ruler to visit her noble and loyal subjects of which whether I want it or not I am supposed to be one . All that was fought for meant nothing to us as we lost and you the 26 won. For her to recieve the accolades, the adulation the over celebrity like status is stomach churning . if thats what you call moving on thats fine it's certainly not a word I would use.
We in my area struggle to get our street names in Irish . We had our clubrooms burnt down twice withiin this past 10 years We didnt get any compo because the psni told us it wasnt a terrorist act because we couldnt prove that more than three people were involved. The council sent us a letter to complain about the flying of the tricolour at our matches and the letter was addressed to Mr Robert Emmett 16 **** road etc.Our church burnt to the ground 5 years ago by her loyal subjects. For us it is a struggle to be and maintain what many others take for granted. Times have improved and please god they will continue to improve but for the GAA or whoever to take the queen to Croke park when many of its patrons are denied the right to their national identity in my opinion is wrong.
Having said that i would not be involved in any protest and certainly have nothing to do with the neanderthals that protested on the street but quietly register my protest and opinion if asked (which wasnt ). i will continue to uphold my identity like many others whether the queen is here or not. AS I said life goes on
Rionach that's a very intelligent, well argued and balanced post.
Yes I have an Irish passport which I get through Dublin as Dublin recognises my right to be Irish.
It did however surrender articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution which claimed jurisdiction over the north and as such left me and many of my fellow nationalists feeling a sense of abandonment .
However Rossfan it was done in the name of moving on and I have to accept that. i may not like the fact that we sit in a "Local Irish based assembly" Stormont or have a police force half reformed(patton Report was never fully implemented) or pay my taxes to support an army that waged war on Iraq and carried out many foul deeds against my fellow countrymen(and arm and help others to do it) or sit back and watch a state relinquish its title hold on its northern counterpart but it's all called moving on and I may not like and I don't it but hey life goes on . i can sleep in my bed at night without fear of seeing men with pickaxes chopping my door down holding sub machine guns (happened me twice ) Living in fear and moving the family out during Drumcree . putting reinforced steel under my bed so that when they did get in they could only fire through the ceiling up into the bed and they would hit the reinforced steel. I dont want that again I couldnt go through again . I llost a lot here , a lot but when you and i are arguing about a queens visit .when I sit back and think , you know it's great that thats all I have to shout about. i'll move on
rionach is that robert emmets in cushendun. driving me mad cant think of any other one's!
Quote from: rionach 4 on May 20, 2011, 04:10:14 PM
i can sleep in my bed at night without fear of seeing men with pickaxes chopping my door down holding sub machine guns (happened me twice ) Living in fear and moving the family out during Drumcree . putting reinforced steel under my bed so that when they did get in they could only fire through the ceiling up into the bed and they would hit the reinforced steel. I dont want that again I couldnt go through again .
In a week when "movin on " became the most abused phrase around ... thanks God things have moved on ( sorry! ) from that . :-\
eskragh emmetts
Lisnakea Emmetts
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 06:14:11 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
Perfect example here. People are not happy with the royal love in and you shout them down as being dinosaurs. Thanks for the example!
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 06:14:11 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
I bet you wouldn't dream of saying "move on" to the family or friends of someone who died in a car accident or who were murdered in some sort of "normal" (for the want of a better word) circumstances so why in God's name would anyone think it's acceptable to say it to people who've lost loved ones in the troubles? I don't understand.
According to the examiner tyrone,fermanagh, derry and antrim didn't get an invite. Instead fuhrer cooney told them he was the only one allowed to comment on the visit. It also says Cavan, monaghan & donegal didn't show up although it doesn't say whether they were actually invited.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 06:14:11 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
You really do not have a clue do you? The fact that you say you are from the north makes it even worse. I'm not up on any 'republican fundamentalist high horse'. I'm simply saying that it is very wrong of you or anyone to tell others, who may have lost loved ones, when is the right time to 'move on'. Some wounds are still very raw.
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 03:26:03 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 06:14:11 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
You really do not have a clue do you? The fact that you say you are from the north makes it even worse. I'm not up on any 'republican fundamentalist high horse'. I'm simply saying that it is very wrong of you or anyone to tell others, who may have lost loved ones, when is the right time to 'move on'. Some wounds are still very raw.
You jumped to a conclusion that I am in favour of the Queen's visit therefore I know nothing about what happened in the north and led some sort of sheltered life. That's a contemptible statement and you ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 11:07:53 AM
I bet you wouldn't dream of saying "move on" to the family or friends of someone who died in a car accident or who were murdered in some sort of "normal" (for the want of a better word) circumstances so why in God's name would anyone think it's acceptable to say it to people who've lost loved ones in the troubles? I don't understand.
Pints, I don't want to come across the wrong way on what is obviously a sensitive issue, but councillors would be very likely to encourage close relatives of bereaved to do exactly that. Speaking strictly from a personal point of view the last thing I would want my relatives doing, if I died suddenly, would be to beat themselves up every day with what might have been.
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2011, 04:00:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 11:07:53 AM
I bet you wouldn't dream of saying "move on" to the family or friends of someone who died in a car accident or who were murdered in some sort of "normal" (for the want of a better word) circumstances so why in God's name would anyone think it's acceptable to say it to people who've lost loved ones in the troubles? I don't understand.
Pints, I don't want to come across the wrong way on what is obviously a sensitive issue, but councillors would be very likely to encourage close relatives of bereaved to do exactly that. Speaking strictly from a personal point of view the last thing I would want my relatives doing, if I died suddenly, would be to beat themselves up every day with what might have been.
Muppet I don't think Councillors of the bereaved would say "move on" in the sneering, patronising way that those still hurting from the troubles are told daily. It's simply unacceptable. Plus, councillors of the bereaved would be aiming at helping those who are bereaved to pick up the pieces and not treat them like an embarrassing nuisance in the way families of the victims of the troubles are treated.
If you knew someone who'd lost someone close to them and were having a hard time dealing with it you would not say to them to "move on", they would be shown sympathy by any right thinking person but when it's in relation to the troubles they're a dinosaur, living in the past and if we shout "move on" in their face enough times they will forget that their father, son, sister, brother etc was murdered.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 04:36:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2011, 04:00:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 11:07:53 AM
I bet you wouldn't dream of saying "move on" to the family or friends of someone who died in a car accident or who were murdered in some sort of "normal" (for the want of a better word) circumstances so why in God's name would anyone think it's acceptable to say it to people who've lost loved ones in the troubles? I don't understand.
Pints, I don't want to come across the wrong way on what is obviously a sensitive issue, but councillors would be very likely to encourage close relatives of bereaved to do exactly that. Speaking strictly from a personal point of view the last thing I would want my relatives doing, if I died suddenly, would be to beat themselves up every day with what might have been.
Muppet I don't think Councillors of the bereaved would say "move on" in the sneering, patronising way that those still hurting from the troubles are told daily. It's simply unacceptable. Plus, councillors of the bereaved would be aiming at helping those who are bereaved to pick up the pieces and not treat them like an embarrassing nuisance in the way families of the victims of the troubles are treated.
If you knew someone who'd lost someone close to them and were having a hard time dealing with it you would not say to them to "move on", they would be shown sympathy by any right thinking person but when it's in relation to the troubles they're a dinosaur, living in the past and if we shout "move on" in their face enough times they will forget that their father, son, sister, brother etc was murdered.
Been there ,as I'm sure many on here have and the only way for them is to move on. As a friend sometimes you have to be the one to tell them. You certainly don't deliver the message in the manner you outlined above and you definitely don't deliver it too soon after the event. But the message is the same.
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2011, 04:43:03 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 04:36:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2011, 04:00:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 11:07:53 AM
I bet you wouldn't dream of saying "move on" to the family or friends of someone who died in a car accident or who were murdered in some sort of "normal" (for the want of a better word) circumstances so why in God's name would anyone think it's acceptable to say it to people who've lost loved ones in the troubles? I don't understand.
Pints, I don't want to come across the wrong way on what is obviously a sensitive issue, but councillors would be very likely to encourage close relatives of bereaved to do exactly that. Speaking strictly from a personal point of view the last thing I would want my relatives doing, if I died suddenly, would be to beat themselves up every day with what might have been.
Muppet I don't think Councillors of the bereaved would say "move on" in the sneering, patronising way that those still hurting from the troubles are told daily. It's simply unacceptable. Plus, councillors of the bereaved would be aiming at helping those who are bereaved to pick up the pieces and not treat them like an embarrassing nuisance in the way families of the victims of the troubles are treated.
If you knew someone who'd lost someone close to them and were having a hard time dealing with it you would not say to them to "move on", they would be shown sympathy by any right thinking person but when it's in relation to the troubles they're a dinosaur, living in the past and if we shout "move on" in their face enough times they will forget that their father, son, sister, brother etc was murdered.
Been there ,as I'm sure many on here have and the only way for them is to move on. As a friend sometimes you have to be the one to tell them. You certainly don't deliver the message in the manner you outlined above and you definitely don't deliver it too soon after the event. But the message is the same.
I don't disagree with you, what those still hurting from the troubles need is sensitivity and guidance to "move on". Not some sneering jumped up pricks like some people on here shouting it in their faces every five minutes.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 03:26:03 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 06:14:11 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
You really do not have a clue do you? The fact that you say you are from the north makes it even worse. I'm not up on any 'republican fundamentalist high horse'. I'm simply saying that it is very wrong of you or anyone to tell others, who may have lost loved ones, when is the right time to 'move on'. Some wounds are still very raw.
You jumped to a conclusion that I am in favour of the Queen's visit therefore I know nothing about what happened in the north and led some sort of sheltered life. That's a contemptible statement and you ought to be ashamed of yourself.
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Moving on is a very personal issue. Not in the generalisation manner being suggested here. Some find it easier to do so than others but just because they have doesnt mean they should expect the same standard of others who find it harder to let go of the grievances of the past.
Many families who suffered unjustly or lost family members as a result of the actions of the crown forces would find the Queen's visit and all round love in this week hard to stomach. However there are many who suffered at the hands of and lost family members to the provos who must find it difficult to see McGuinness and Adams as suited and booted parliamentarians. Others again who are probably sickened to see former loyalist paramilitaries turned politicians hob nobbing it as guests of the Queen this past week.
For victims to move on truth move first come out and responsibility accepted followed by apologies. That did'nt happen this week. So thats why I think the visit came too soon and there was alot of media air brushing to enhance the overall feelgood factor.
As others mentioned here before a truth and reconciliation forum needs to be established and objectively presided over. Then the Brits would need to come clean about the Dublin/Monaghan bombings and other covert activities which resulted in deaths of innocent people. Adams should then come clean about his IRA involvement and the provos in general for the disappeared amongst other atrocities. The loyalists should do the same and also accept their part in stoking the flames of the troubles back to the civil rights days and the catholic discrimination they were happy to participate in or at best turn a blind eye to.
I dont know if its too late for any of the above to occur. Many people have benefited from the peace process. The north of ireland has become a safer less violent place of that there is no doubt. But many politicans like Ahern, Clinton, Blair, McAleese and even the Queen this week have used it (sometimes honestly sometimes not) to leave a legacy after their public career.
But from reading here and in general there are alot of people on all sides holding grievances and feeling left behind. They were largely ignored and treated like a troublesome embarrassing relative this week who had to be shunted away when they post visitors came calling. This causes bitterness and resentment. It also leaves an opening for the scum that protested via lighting wheelie bins and firing rocks this week not to mention the murdering dissidents lurking in the shadows.
There is alot more groundwork here to do and I dont think the fast track approach of this week however well intentioned will have any effect when the hype dissapates. And dont get me started on the financial cost to our already bankrupt Republic!
Excellent post Matt .
Well said and well put.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 21, 2011, 11:22:36 AM
According to the examiner tyrone,fermanagh, derry and antrim didn't get an invite. Instead fuhrer cooney told them he was the only one allowed to comment on the visit. It also says Cavan, monaghan & donegal didn't show up although it doesn't say whether they were actually invited.
Hoganstand reporting it too:
We weren't invited, Ulster counties claim
20 May 2011
Four of the Ulster counties who weren't represented at Wednesday's historic visit by Queen Elizabeth to Croke Park have claimed they weren't invited. Today's Irish Examiner reports that Tyrone, Fermanagh, Derry and Antrim weren't asked to attend. Only Down were believed to have been represented, while it was reported that no officials from Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan turned up either. Armagh have refused to comment on their "no-show" at the event. Tyrone chairman Ciaran McLaughlin was adamant in his claim his county hadn't been requested to attend.
"I've no comment to make on it, to be honest, quite simply because the counties weren't invited individually in the first place and that's the bottom line," he said.
"There's no point in me saying anything more about it. People can say what they want but I know the facts and that's what I'm sticking with." Fermanagh secretary Tom Boyle also insisted his board had not been asked to attend. "The only correspondence we got from Croke Park was the letter in which we were told the only person allowed to comment on the Queen's visit was the Uachtarán," stated Boyle. "I have had no more correspondence about it since then. "The information that seems to have gone out seems to imply all county secretaries and chairmen were invited to the event. They were not all invited to the event. "I can understand why some people weren't invited because of keeping up appearances and all that sort of thing. But there was no formal invitation sent to the Fermanagh secretary or chairman." Derry secretary Liam Peoples also claimed that his board were instructed not to comment about the occasion. "We were instructed not to speak about the visit. The only person permitted to was the president but nobody else was given the opportunity to comment.
"I don't know what the protocol was, whether there were some people invited and some people who weren't but I wouldn't be annoyed about it."
Antrim secretary Frankie Quinn, meanwhile, confirmed neither he nor the board received an invitation to be present for the visit. "No invitation came to me for me personally or the county board," he said.
http://www.hoganstand.com/tyrone/ArticleForm.aspx?ID=148243
willie frazer says he would have represented armagh but he wasnt invited either ;)
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 04:36:09 PM
... but when it's in relation to the troubles they're a dinosaur, living in the past and if we shout "move on" in their face enough times they will forget that their father, son, sister, brother etc was murdered.
Nobody's saying that.
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 04:54:51 PM
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Jumping to conclusions again. What makes you think I wasn't affected by the troubles? Had that thought never crossed your jurrasic mind?
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 04:33:41 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 04:54:51 PM
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Jumping to conclusions again. What makes you think I wasn't affected by the troubles? Had that thought never crossed your jurrasic mind?
In what way were u effected? Try to answer like an adult this time.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 04:32:17 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 04:36:09 PM
... but when it's in relation to the troubles they're a dinosaur, living in the past and if we shout "move on" in their face enough times they will forget that their father, son, sister, brother etc was murdered.
Nobody's saying that.
Um, yes they are.
Including yourself.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 04:50:36 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2011, 04:43:03 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 04:36:09 PM
Quote from: muppet on May 21, 2011, 04:00:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 21, 2011, 11:07:53 AM
I bet you wouldn't dream of saying "move on" to the family or friends of someone who died in a car accident or who were murdered in some sort of "normal" (for the want of a better word) circumstances so why in God's name would anyone think it's acceptable to say it to people who've lost loved ones in the troubles? I don't understand.
Pints, I don't want to come across the wrong way on what is obviously a sensitive issue, but councillors would be very likely to encourage close relatives of bereaved to do exactly that. Speaking strictly from a personal point of view the last thing I would want my relatives doing, if I died suddenly, would be to beat themselves up every day with what might have been.
Muppet I don't think Councillors of the bereaved would say "move on" in the sneering, patronising way that those still hurting from the troubles are told daily. It's simply unacceptable. Plus, councillors of the bereaved would be aiming at helping those who are bereaved to pick up the pieces and not treat them like an embarrassing nuisance in the way families of the victims of the troubles are treated.
If you knew someone who'd lost someone close to them and were having a hard time dealing with it you would not say to them to "move on", they would be shown sympathy by any right thinking person but when it's in relation to the troubles they're a dinosaur, living in the past and if we shout "move on" in their face enough times they will forget that their father, son, sister, brother etc was murdered.
Been there ,as I'm sure many on here have and the only way for them is to move on. As a friend sometimes you have to be the one to tell them. You certainly don't deliver the message in the manner you outlined above and you definitely don't deliver it too soon after the event. But the message is the same.
I don't disagree with you, what those still hurting from the troubles need is sensitivity and guidance to "move on". Not some sneering jumped up pricks like some people on here shouting it in their faces every five minutes.
Coming from the King of sneering.
Quote from: EC Unique on May 22, 2011, 10:39:58 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 04:33:41 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 04:54:51 PM
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Jumping to conclusions again. What makes you think I wasn't affected by the troubles? Had that thought never crossed your jurrasic mind?
In what way were u effected? Try to answer like an adult this time.
Irrelevant. You jumped to the conclusion that I wasn't affected, and as I've explained elsewhere my family was affected.
You see here's what pisses me off about the attitude I'm seeing all over this discussion. It's the all-or-nothing attitude. If you're not a Brit-hating provo fan then you must be a boot-licking grovelling loyalist who knows nothing about what happened in the troubles. Has it ever crossed your mind that maybe there's a happy medium? Maybe it's possible to be a northern nationalist who had no love for the Brits (or the provos) when the troubles were in full swing but has moved on and can see the diplomatic significance of this visit?
Oh by the way, I saw this morning that 95% of the people had a positive view of the visit. Looks like this place has an unusually high concentration of the "too early to move on" crowd.
(http://www.epm.org/static/uploads/images/brontosaurus_02.JPG)
Quote from: ross matt on May 21, 2011, 08:15:25 PM
Moving on is a very personal issue. Not in the generalisation manner being suggested here. Some find it easier to do so than others but just because they have doesn't mean they should expect the same standard of others who find it harder to let go of the grievances of the past.
Many families who suffered unjustly or lost family members as a result of the actions of the crown forces would find the Queen's visit and all round love in this week hard to stomach. However there are many who suffered at the hands of and lost family members to the provos who must find it difficult to see McGuinness and Adams as suited and booted parliamentarians. Others again who are probably sickened to see former loyalist paramilitaries turned politicians hob nobbing it as guests of the Queen this past week.
For victims to move on truth move first come out and responsibility accepted followed by apologies. That did'nt happen this week. So thats why I think the visit came too soon and there was alot of media air brushing to enhance the overall feelgood factor.
As others mentioned here before a truth and reconciliation forum needs to be established and objectively presided over. Then the Brits would need to come clean about the Dublin/Monaghan bombings and other covert activities which resulted in deaths of innocent people. Adams should then come clean about his IRA involvement and the provos in general for the disappeared amongst other atrocities. The loyalists should do the same and also accept their part in stoking the flames of the troubles back to the civil rights days and the catholic discrimination they were happy to participate in or at best turn a blind eye to.
I dont know if its too late for any of the above to occur. Many people have benefited from the peace process. The north of ireland has become a safer less violent place of that there is no doubt. But many politicans like Ahern, Clinton, Blair, McAleese and even the Queen this week have used it (sometimes honestly sometimes not) to leave a legacy after their public career.
But from reading here and in general there are alot of people on all sides holding grievances and feeling left behind. They were largely ignored and treated like a troublesome embarrassing relative this week who had to be shunted away when they post visitors came calling. This causes bitterness and resentment. It also leaves an opening for the scum that protested via lighting wheelie bins and firing rocks this week not to mention the murdering dissidents lurking in the shadows.
There is alot more groundwork here to do and I dont think the fast track approach of this week however well intentioned will have any effect when the hype dissapates. And dont get me started on the financial cost to our already bankrupt Republic!
Not 100% sure about the north being a safer less violent place post the cease fire, I think normal crime has risen; stabbings, muggings, rapes, etc, but have no figures to back this up as I'm too lazy to google.
Glad Armagh sent no one. I really don't care what anybody thinks, but until the Windsors and their government apologise "unconditionally" to the peoples of Ireland, then feck them.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 07:43:49 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 22, 2011, 10:39:58 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 04:33:41 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 04:54:51 PM
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Jumping to conclusions again. What makes you think I wasn't affected by the troubles? Had that thought never crossed your jurrasic mind?
In what way were u effected? Try to answer like an adult this time.
Irrelevant. You jumped to the conclusion that I wasn't affected, and as I've explained elsewhere my family was affected.
You see here's what pisses me off about the attitude I'm seeing all over this discussion. It's the all-or-nothing attitude. If you're not a Brit-hating provo fan then you must be a boot-licking grovelling loyalist who knows nothing about what happened in the troubles. Has it ever crossed your mind that maybe there's a happy medium? Maybe it's possible to be a northern nationalist who had no love for the Brits (or the provos) when the troubles were in full swing but has moved on and can see the diplomatic significance of this visit?
Oh by the way, I saw this morning that 95% of the people had a positive view of the visit. Looks like this place has an unusually high concentration of the "too early to move on" crowd.
(http://www.epm.org/static/uploads/images/brontosaurus_02.JPG)
There is nothing wrong with the view you hold. My problem is that you seem to think that everyone, including victims and their families, should hold the same view. Calling people dinosaurs and Brit hating provos is very patronising and immature, try to realise that other people can rightly hold different views and should not be lectured by you or anyone else.
By the way. I laughed when I read your 95% bullsh1t. Did you ever hear of propaganda or spin? Don't believe all you read son. I'm finished with you now.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 07:43:49 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 22, 2011, 10:39:58 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 04:33:41 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 04:54:51 PM
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Jumping to conclusions again. What makes you think I wasn't affected by the troubles? Had that thought never crossed your jurrasic mind?
In what way were u effected? Try to answer like an adult this time.
Irrelevant. You jumped to the conclusion that I wasn't affected, and as I've explained elsewhere my family was affected.
You see here's what pisses me off about the attitude I'm seeing all over this discussion. It's the all-or-nothing attitude. If you're not a Brit-hating provo fan then you must be a boot-licking grovelling loyalist who knows nothing about what happened in the troubles. Has it ever crossed your mind that maybe there's a happy medium? Maybe it's possible to be a northern nationalist who had no love for the Brits (or the provos) when the troubles were in full swing but has moved on and can see the diplomatic significance of this visit?
Oh by the way, I saw this morning that 95% of the people had a positive view of the visit. Looks like this place has an unusually high concentration of the "too early to move on" crowd.
(http://www.epm.org/static/uploads/images/brontosaurus_02.JPG)
Where did you see this 95% figure, in the Sunday independent? Who in their right mind would believe anything they print.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 07:43:49 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 22, 2011, 10:39:58 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 22, 2011, 04:33:41 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 04:54:51 PM
If you really believe some of the rubbish you are posting and not on some sort of sick wind up then you are one disgusting person. I suspect you are just a windup merchant with too much time. You should have more respect for victims and their family's.
Jumping to conclusions again. What makes you think I wasn't affected by the troubles? Had that thought never crossed your jurrasic mind?
In what way were u effected? Try to answer like an adult this time.
Irrelevant. You jumped to the conclusion that I wasn't affected, and as I've explained elsewhere my family was affected.
You see here's what pisses me off about the attitude I'm seeing all over this discussion. It's the all-or-nothing attitude. If you're not a Brit-hating provo fan then you must be a boot-licking grovelling loyalist who knows nothing about what happened in the troubles. Has it ever crossed your mind that maybe there's a happy medium? Maybe it's possible to be a northern nationalist who had no love for the Brits (or the provos) when the troubles were in full swing but has moved on and can see the diplomatic significance of this visit?
Oh by the way, I saw this morning that 95% of the people had a positive view of the visit. Looks like this place has an unusually high concentration of the "too early to move on" crowd.
(http://www.epm.org/static/uploads/images/brontosaurus_02.JPG)
You seem to impose the same black and white attitude yourself, if you're not delighted that Ireland was graced with the presence of her majesty you are a dinosaur who won't move on.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 21, 2011, 03:26:03 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on May 21, 2011, 06:14:11 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on May 20, 2011, 10:46:24 PM
I'm with Nally on this one. Some of the 'move on' comments are disgusting and people that have that opinion obviously have a sheltered and nieive knowledge of what actually went on in the occupied 6 over the last few decades. People lost their lives simply due to the fact they were members of the GAA and their murders were directly aided and facilitated by Brittish forces. Tell those families to 'move on'. Discusting and shameful stuff. Sadly not suprising though.
Away and shite. How dare you jump to that conclusion about people you've never met and know nothing about. I'm a nationalist from the north, I'm GAA to the core, I know exactly what went on since I grew up with it, and I happen to think that "let's move on" is a perfectly valid thing to say. There's been enough hatred, enough targetting of people because they're GAA members, enough having to duck below the windows on the train home from matches in Dublin every time it goes through that hole in Portadown, and enough burning of GAA halls because people think we're evil. Enough, do you hear me? Enough!
You don't like the tone of the "move on" comments? Well I don't like the tone of the "don't tell me to move on" comments because they're presumptuous, jurassic, and some of them are so bitter and twisted they sound like they're coming out of the mouths of the Celtic shirt-wearing "no to foreign games" crowd. Don't get on your republican fundamentalist high horse with me, son.
You really do not have a clue do you? The fact that you say you are from the north makes it even worse. I'm not up on any 'republican fundamentalist high horse'. I'm simply saying that it is very wrong of you or anyone to tell others, who may have lost loved ones, when is the right time to 'move on'. Some wounds are still very raw.
You jumped to a conclusion that I am in favour of the Queen's visit therefore I know nothing about what happened in the north and led some sort of sheltered life. That's a contemptible statement and you ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Eamon , what about the family of Sean Brown? Should they move on? A father of 6 who was murdered by the LVF in 1997, whilst locking the gates to Bellaghy GAA grounds? state sanctioned murder actually!
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
There are a few subtle differences:
1. People vote for SF, so SF have a democratic mandate to be in a power sharing executive as outlined in the GFA, voted for by the majority of the Irish people.
2. The IRA apologised to all it's non-combatant victims in 2002 and has never denied to those victims that it was an active participant in a conflict. It's 2011 and the British Government still has not done this.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 23, 2011, 10:53:13 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
There are a few subtle differences:
1. People vote for SF, so SF have a democratic mandate to be in a power sharing executive as outlined in the GFA, voted for by the majority of the Irish people.
2. The IRA apologised to all it's non-combatant victims in 2002 and has never denied to those victims that it was an active participant in a conflict. It's 2011 and the British Government still has not done this.
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday. Sovereign Governments are not going to issue wide spread apologies. I believe we have got to where we can with all sides. It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect thier postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday. Sovereign Governments are not going to issue wide spread apologies. I believe we have got to where we can with all sides. It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect thier postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
+1
In this regard, as I've said here recently, I think that the SF leadership handled this quite well.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
The IRA apology was not conditional...
"Sunday 21 July marks the 30th anniversary of an IRA operation in Belfast in 1972 which resulted in nine people being killed and many more injured..... It is therefore appropriate on the anniversary of this tragic event, that we address all of the deaths and injuries of non-combatants caused by us.
We offer our sincere apologies and condolences to their families.
There have been fatalities amongst combatants on all sides. We also acknowledge the grief and pain of their relatives....The future will not be found in denying collective failures and mistakes or closing minds and hearts to the plight of those who have been hurt. That includes all of the victims of the conflict, combatants and non-combatants."
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
The British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
No applesisapples, that is just an apology for the events of one particular day. There are hundreds of families out there bereaved by collusion. Britain has not even admitted involvement, never mind apologised to those families. When the Stevens Report into various accusations of collusion was concluded, the British Government released only 20 heavily edited pages of the 3,000 page report. That to me, is a long way of "Britain having apologised where appropriate". That is Britain continuing to cover up it's activities. Do victims of collusion not fall into this "appropriate for an apology" category?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect thier postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
Agreed
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 08:14:31 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 23, 2011, 10:53:13 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
There are a few subtle differences:
1. People vote for SF, so SF have a democratic mandate to be in a power sharing executive as outlined in the GFA, voted for by the majority of the Irish people.
2. The IRA apologised to all it's non-combatant victims in 2002 and has never denied to those victims that it was an active participant in a conflict. It's 2011 and the British Government still has not done this.
We could get hung up on subtle differences. But do you really think that the IRA apology made any significant difference to its victims? I'm not so sure it would have made it much easier for them to move on.
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 08:14:31 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?
Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion. The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 09:06:35 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 08:14:31 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?
Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion. The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.
I'm not sure their victim status is being questioned.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on May 21, 2011, 11:22:36 AM
According to the examiner tyrone,fermanagh, derry and antrim didn't get an invite. Instead fuhrer cooney told them he was the only one allowed to comment on the visit. It also says Cavan, monaghan & donegal didn't show up although it doesn't say whether they were actually invited.
This seems to be the way Cooney has been running the GAA. I have no problem with the Queen coming to Croke Park but each county board should have the right to decide whether they attended this or not AND the right to express their opinion on this.
The GAA prides itself on how democratic it is but it has resembled a communist version of democracy over the last few years.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 23, 2011, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
The IRA apology was not conditional...
"Sunday 21 July marks the 30th anniversary of an IRA operation in Belfast in 1972 which resulted in nine people being killed and many more injured..... It is therefore appropriate on the anniversary of this tragic event, that we address all of the deaths and injuries of non-combatants caused by us.
We offer our sincere apologies and condolences to their families.
There have been fatalities amongst combatants on all sides. We also acknowledge the grief and pain of their relatives....The future will not be found in denying collective failures and mistakes or closing minds and hearts to the plight of those who have been hurt. That includes all of the victims of the conflict, combatants and non-combatants."
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
The British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
No applesisapples, that is just an apology for the events of one particular day. There are hundreds of families out there bereaved by collusion. Britain has not even admitted involvement, never mind apologised to those families. When the Stevens Report into various accusations of collusion was concluded, the British Government released only 20 heavily edited pages of the 3,000 page report. That to me, is a long way of "Britain having apologised where appropriate". That is Britain continuing to cover up it's activities. Do victims of collusion not fall into this "appropriate for an apology" category?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect their postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
Agreed
The IRA apology does not include British combatants and is therefore conditional as is the British apology. The point I am making is that a Sovereign Government can't issue the type of apology you want norwill the IRA issue the grovelling apology Willie Frazer demands. But I believe the words of the queen and the words you have quoted are sufficient at this time. It maybe that in 20 years time things will be different and a more wholesome and all encompassing apology is given by all.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 09:06:35 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 08:14:31 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?
Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion. The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.
Well actually if you look at the enquiries and their results then victims of the state have faired better than victims of the IRA. As a Nationalist/Republican I do have difficulties with some of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of some such as Loughgall, Rosemary Nelson. Unpalatable as it is though I wouldn't expect to the British to own up to collusion any more than I would expect Sinn Fein to denounce the actions of the IRA.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 10:56:14 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 23, 2011, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
The IRA apology was not conditional...
"Sunday 21 July marks the 30th anniversary of an IRA operation in Belfast in 1972 which resulted in nine people being killed and many more injured..... It is therefore appropriate on the anniversary of this tragic event, that we address all of the deaths and injuries of non-combatants caused by us.
We offer our sincere apologies and condolences to their families.
There have been fatalities amongst combatants on all sides. We also acknowledge the grief and pain of their relatives....The future will not be found in denying collective failures and mistakes or closing minds and hearts to the plight of those who have been hurt. That includes all of the victims of the conflict, combatants and non-combatants."
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
The British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
No applesisapples, that is just an apology for the events of one particular day. There are hundreds of families out there bereaved by collusion. Britain has not even admitted involvement, never mind apologised to those families. When the Stevens Report into various accusations of collusion was concluded, the British Government released only 20 heavily edited pages of the 3,000 page report. That to me, is a long way of "Britain having apologised where appropriate". That is Britain continuing to cover up it's activities. Do victims of collusion not fall into this "appropriate for an apology" category?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect their postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
Agreed
The IRA apology does not include British combatants and is therefore conditional as is the British apology. The point I am making is that a Sovereign Government can't issue the type of apology you want norwill the IRA issue the grovelling apology Willie Frazer demands. But I believe the words of the queen and the words you have quoted are sufficient at this time. It maybe that in 20 years time things will be different and a more wholesome and all encompassing apology is given by all.
The IRA apologising for combatant victims would have been tantamount to accepting that their entire campaign was wrong. The IRA made a full unconditional apology to ALL of it's innocent victims and acknowledged the hurt it had caused to the families of it's combatant victims. Why should the victims of state violence be told that they must settle for anything less than a reciprocation of this? You keep referring to "the British apology". When was this momentous apology, because I must have been away somewhere that day? The British only apologised to a small number of its victims, but outside of that, Britain still keeps up it's pretence that it was just an unfortunate peace-keeper or referee in a sectarian conflict. Collusion can no longer be described as "republican propaganda". It has been proven, so if there is to be no hierarchy of victims, then why can't the state's innocent victims receive the same apology from the state as innocent IRA victims received from the IRA?
People seem to have been conditioned into the view that this is acceptable. That we should lie down and live with it and HM's speech last week typified it. The Irish nation suffered unimaginable hardship at the hands of British monarchs and governments for centuries, and when the British head of state comes over and reads a speech which basically makes clear that Britain will not apologise for any of it, the Irish people (or a large section of) trip over themselves in praise of her and of her "excellent speech".
While we are at it, better get the Danes/ Norweigans over to apologise for the viking invasion.
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:01:47 PM
While we are at it, better get the Danes/ Norweigans over to apologise for the viking invasion.
Not relevent or helpful.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:03:29 PM
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:01:47 PM
While we are at it, better get the Danes/ Norweigans over to apologise for the viking invasion.
Not relevent or helpful.
Didn't know the blog police were conducting audits today! ::)
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:09:47 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:03:29 PM
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:01:47 PM
While we are at it, better get the Danes/ Norweigans over to apologise for the viking invasion.
Not relevent or helpful.
Didn't know the blog police were conducting audits today! ::)
If they ever did apples would have very few posts left
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Nally stand, been reading your posts recently, i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:38:27 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Nally stand, been reading your posts recently, i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.
Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:38:27 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Nally stand, been reading your posts recently, i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.
Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.
Fair enough, i really think that after lizzies visit last week down here, moves will be made to close out this issue, if for no other reason than to give the dissidents even less of an agenda. I don't claim to know whats its like to spend 40 years looking for answers or justice for a loved one who died or was killed by whoever. But its some life sentence.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 12:42:37 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 10:56:14 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 23, 2011, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
The IRA apology was not conditional...
"Sunday 21 July marks the 30th anniversary of an IRA operation in Belfast in 1972 which resulted in nine people being killed and many more injured..... It is therefore appropriate on the anniversary of this tragic event, that we address all of the deaths and injuries of non-combatants caused by us.
We offer our sincere apologies and condolences to their families.
There have been fatalities amongst combatants on all sides. We also acknowledge the grief and pain of their relatives....The future will not be found in denying collective failures and mistakes or closing minds and hearts to the plight of those who have been hurt. That includes all of the victims of the conflict, combatants and non-combatants."
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
The British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
No applesisapples, that is just an apology for the events of one particular day. There are hundreds of families out there bereaved by collusion. Britain has not even admitted involvement, never mind apologised to those families. When the Stevens Report into various accusations of collusion was concluded, the British Government released only 20 heavily edited pages of the 3,000 page report. That to me, is a long way of "Britain having apologised where appropriate". That is Britain continuing to cover up it's activities. Do victims of collusion not fall into this "appropriate for an apology" category?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect their postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
Agreed
The IRA apology does not include British combatants and is therefore conditional as is the British apology. The point I am making is that a Sovereign Government can't issue the type of apology you want norwill the IRA issue the grovelling apology Willie Frazer demands. But I believe the words of the queen and the words you have quoted are sufficient at this time. It maybe that in 20 years time things will be different and a more wholesome and all encompassing apology is given by all.
The IRA apologising for combatant victims would have been tantamount to accepting that their entire campaign was wrong. The IRA made a full unconditional apology to ALL of it's innocent victims and acknowledged the hurt it had caused to the families of it's combatant victims. Why should the victims of state violence be told that they must settle for anything less than a reciprocation of this? You keep referring to "the British apology". When was this momentous apology, because I must have been away somewhere that day? The British only apologised to a small number of its victims, but outside of that, Britain still keeps up it's pretence that it was just an unfortunate peace-keeper or referee in a sectarian conflict. Collusion can no longer be described as "republican propaganda". It has been proven, so if there is to be no hierarchy of victims, then why can't the state's innocent victims receive the same apology from the state as innocent IRA victims received from the IRA?
People seem to have been conditioned into the view that this is acceptable. That we should lie down and live with it and HM's speech last week typified it. The Irish nation suffered unimaginable hardship at the hands of British monarchs and governments for centuries, and when the British head of state comes over and reads a speech which basically makes clear that Britain will not apologise for any of it, the Irish people (or a large section of) trip over themselves in praise of her and of her "excellent speech".
Personally I would put a head of states expression of regret on a par with an anonymous statement in An Phoblacht / Republican news but I am sure everyone has their own opinion on what is required.
Quote from: LeoMc on May 24, 2011, 01:58:51 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 12:42:37 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 10:56:14 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 23, 2011, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
Nally the IRA apology was conditional, the British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
The IRA apology was not conditional...
"Sunday 21 July marks the 30th anniversary of an IRA operation in Belfast in 1972 which resulted in nine people being killed and many more injured..... It is therefore appropriate on the anniversary of this tragic event, that we address all of the deaths and injuries of non-combatants caused by us.
We offer our sincere apologies and condolences to their families.
There have been fatalities amongst combatants on all sides. We also acknowledge the grief and pain of their relatives....The future will not be found in denying collective failures and mistakes or closing minds and hearts to the plight of those who have been hurt. That includes all of the victims of the conflict, combatants and non-combatants."
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
The British have apologised where appropriate e.g. Bloody Sunday.
No applesisapples, that is just an apology for the events of one particular day. There are hundreds of families out there bereaved by collusion. Britain has not even admitted involvement, never mind apologised to those families. When the Stevens Report into various accusations of collusion was concluded, the British Government released only 20 heavily edited pages of the 3,000 page report. That to me, is a long way of "Britain having apologised where appropriate". That is Britain continuing to cover up it's activities. Do victims of collusion not fall into this "appropriate for an apology" category?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 23, 2011, 03:30:56 PM
It is time to move on but as I have stated previously there are some who aren't ready (on both sides) and who might never be ready. We should respect their postion and try and help where we can. It is not however helpful as some in this forum suggest, to insist that they must move on or be left behind.
Agreed
The IRA apology does not include British combatants and is therefore conditional as is the British apology. The point I am making is that a Sovereign Government can't issue the type of apology you want norwill the IRA issue the grovelling apology Willie Frazer demands. But I believe the words of the queen and the words you have quoted are sufficient at this time. It maybe that in 20 years time things will be different and a more wholesome and all encompassing apology is given by all.
The IRA apologising for combatant victims would have been tantamount to accepting that their entire campaign was wrong. The IRA made a full unconditional apology to ALL of it's innocent victims and acknowledged the hurt it had caused to the families of it's combatant victims. Why should the victims of state violence be told that they must settle for anything less than a reciprocation of this? You keep referring to "the British apology". When was this momentous apology, because I must have been away somewhere that day? The British only apologised to a small number of its victims, but outside of that, Britain still keeps up it's pretence that it was just an unfortunate peace-keeper or referee in a sectarian conflict. Collusion can no longer be described as "republican propaganda". It has been proven, so if there is to be no hierarchy of victims, then why can't the state's innocent victims receive the same apology from the state as innocent IRA victims received from the IRA?
People seem to have been conditioned into the view that this is acceptable. That we should lie down and live with it and HM's speech last week typified it. The Irish nation suffered unimaginable hardship at the hands of British monarchs and governments for centuries, and when the British head of state comes over and reads a speech which basically makes clear that Britain will not apologise for any of it, the Irish people (or a large section of) trip over themselves in praise of her and of her "excellent speech".
Personally I would put a head of states expression of regret on a par with an anonymous statement in An Phoblacht / Republican news but I am sure everyone has their own opinion on what is required.
Well it was still an IRA apology, was it not? I couldn't care less if the british apology was sent into a newspaper and signed off with nothing but "Sincerely, HM's Government"; it would still be what it would be - an apology.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Be realistic Nally, they are never going to acknowledge collusion.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:38:27 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Nally stand, been reading your posts recently, i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.
Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.
Think I posted a few days ago here that would be the way to go. But there is a flip side to that coin. Apart from providing info on graves of disappeared etc the IRA would have to reveal Adam & McGuinness's full role as paramilitary leaders not to mention the atrocities committed during their "term". The same for loyalist politicians. British collusion of course amongst other things would be opened up. But for SF it could open a can of worms. Not sure they'd want it. I do agree with you however that the Queen's apology didnt go far enough and that there is far too much significance being made of her visit and statement. But you also have to bear in mind the provos apology in the poblacht or wherever probably gives little comfort to the relatives of the men, women and children killed in Warrington, Birmingham, Guilford, Enniskillen not to mention Marie McConville's kids. The victims you're talking about dont have a monoply on grief.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 02:12:43 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Be realistic Nally, they are never going to acknowledge collusion.
Thanks to the good work of groups like An Fhirinne, Relatives for Justice and The Pat Finucane Centre, there will come a day when they will have no choice. Of that I'm confident.
Quote from: ross matt on May 24, 2011, 02:20:26 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:38:27 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Nally stand, been reading your posts recently, i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.
Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.
Think I posted a few days ago here that would be the way to go. But there is a flip side to that coin. Apart from providing info on graves of disappeared etc the IRA would have to reveal Adam & McGuinness's full role as paramilitary leaders not to mention the atrocities committed during their "term". The same for loyalist politicians. British collusion of course amongst other things would be opened up. But for SF it could open a can of worms. Not sure they'd want it. I do agree with you however that the Queen's apology didnt go far enough and that there is far too much significance being made of her visit and statement. But you also have to bear in mind the provos apology in the poblacht or wherever probably gives little comfort to the relatives of the men, women and children killed in Warrington, Birmingham, Guilford, Enniskillen not to mention Marie McConville's kids. The victims you're talking about dont have a monoply on grief.
My point all along has been about victims. And im my post about a truth and reconciliation forum, as I mentioned, all sides would have to commit to it. That includes republicans. As for your statement that the IRA apology to it's victims might be of little comfort; well, that may be the case for some, though I would imagine there were some families who on some level, took it as a positive development. As I keep saying, to ensure no hierarchy of victims, the families of state murder should not be denied a similar gesture.
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 02:29:49 PM
Quote from: ross matt on May 24, 2011, 02:20:26 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
Quote from: An Gaeilgoir on May 24, 2011, 01:38:27 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 24, 2011, 01:10:13 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 01:02:13 PM
Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.
I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.
Nally stand, been reading your posts recently, i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.
Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.
Think I posted a few days ago here that would be the way to go. But there is a flip side to that coin. Apart from providing info on graves of disappeared etc the IRA would have to reveal Adam & McGuinness's full role as paramilitary leaders not to mention the atrocities committed during their "term". The same for loyalist politicians. British collusion of course amongst other things would be opened up. But for SF it could open a can of worms. Not sure they'd want it. I do agree with you however that the Queen's apology didnt go far enough and that there is far too much significance being made of her visit and statement. But you also have to bear in mind the provos apology in the poblacht or wherever probably gives little comfort to the relatives of the men, women and children killed in Warrington, Birmingham, Guilford, Enniskillen not to mention Marie McConville's kids. The victims you're talking about dont have a monoply on grief.
My point all along has been about victims. And im my post about a truth and reconciliation forum, as I mentioned, all sides would have to commit to it. That includes republicans. As for your statement that the IRA apology to it's victims might be of little comfort; well, that may be the case for some, though I would imagine there were some families who on some level, took it as a positive development. As I keep saying, to ensure no hierarchy of victims, the families of state murder should not be denied a similar gesture.
Nally's point is correct - an a pology by definition has the words apology or i am sorry - the IRA did this, whether people want to admit it or not they have apologised for their part in the conflict. The British Government has not. This isn't a grey area where people feel the queen did enough to nearly apologise. To me that's a whitewash, Nicholas Witchell the BBC royal correspondent said ''the queen doesn't apologise and that's as close as it comes''.
My question is why? why can she not? do the Brits think they are that a superior race that they have never done any wrong.
Reminds me of the old adge, the man who has never made a mistake....
Lads there is a huge difference between a sovereign Government and the IRA. They can not apologise for shooting insurgents. Not only from their own point of view but can you imagine the effect on Evil Genius and his community. Lets be realistic...it only words anyway.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 05:04:46 PM
Lads there is a huge difference between a sovereign Government and the IRA. They can not apologise for shooting insurgents. Not only from their own point of view but can you imagine the effect on Evil Genius and his community. Lets be realistic...it only words anyway.
Since when could all collusion victims be labeled insurgents?
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 11:04:50 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 09:06:35 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 08:14:31 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?
Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion. The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.
Well actually if you look at the enquiries and their results then victims of the state have faired better than victims of the IRA. As a Nationalist/Republican I do have difficulties with some of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of some such as Loughgall, Rosemary Nelson. Unpalatable as it is though I wouldn't expect to the British to own up to collusion any more than I would expect Sinn Fein to denounce the actions of the IRA.
Sweet Jesus, how do you work that out? How many members of British Security forces have served time in jail?
i breathed a sigh of relief last night reading the local paper - the down representative meeting the queen was a DERRY MAN. Paddy McFlynn, former GAA president currently living in Tullylish and i stand open to correction but from the article it appeared he was asked on a persoanl basis and not via the county board - i knew Down weren't as spineless as people would have us believe!!!
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 24, 2011, 07:57:58 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 24, 2011, 11:04:50 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 09:06:35 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 23, 2011, 08:14:31 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on May 23, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.
But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?
Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 19, 2011, 05:32:59 PM
well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?
By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?
By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.
I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult. I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".
Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?
Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion. The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.
Well actually if you look at the enquiries and their results then victims of the state have faired better than victims of the IRA. As a Nationalist/Republican I do have difficulties with some of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of some such as Loughgall, Rosemary Nelson. Unpalatable as it is though I wouldn't expect to the British to own up to collusion any more than I would expect Sinn Fein to denounce the actions of the IRA.
Sweet Jesus, how do you work that out? How many members of British Security forces have served time in jail?
You can't have it both ways was it a war or violent activity of a criminal gang? Both sides are hypocritical in their approach to this for propaganda reasons.
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
In most cases the British have continued to deny involvement. There are HUNDREDS of families out there who have good reason to believe that their relatives were murdered through collusion. How can you keep saying that in most cases, Britain has apologised?! It boggles the mind! Is releasing 20 (heavily edited) pages of a 3,000 page collusion report your idea of Britain being remorseful for it's actions? That's a funny apology. And when was "
the British apology" you talked about earlier?
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 26, 2011, 10:34:33 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
In most cases the British have continued to deny involvement. There are HUNDREDS of families out there who have good reason to believe that their relatives were murdered through collusion. How can you keep saying that in most cases, Britain has apologised?! It boggles the mind! Is releasing 20 (heavily edited) pages of a 3,000 page collusion report your idea of Britain being remorseful for it's actions? That's a funny apology. And when was "the British apology" you talked about earlier?
What part of my posts stating that a Sovereign Government is not going to admit to collusion do you not understand. We need to get real here. There are aspects of the conflict which we are all going to be uncomfortable with. The British Government have apologised for the failings of the state in innocent deaths. I do understand where you are coming from but it's a bit like the unionists constantly bringing up Gerry's past. we are where we are and as Nationalists and Republicans we need to move confidently onwards.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on May 26, 2011, 10:34:33 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
In most cases the British have continued to deny involvement. There are HUNDREDS of families out there who have good reason to believe that their relatives were murdered through collusion. How can you keep saying that in most cases, Britain has apologised?! It boggles the mind! Is releasing 20 (heavily edited) pages of a 3,000 page collusion report your idea of Britain being remorseful for it's actions? That's a funny apology. And when was "the British apology" you talked about earlier?
What part of my posts stating that a Sovereign Government is not going to admit to collusion do you not understand. We need to get real here. There are aspects of the conflict which we are all going to be uncomfortable with. The British Government have apologised for the failings of the state in innocent deaths. I do understand where you are coming from but it's a bit like the unionists constantly bringing up Gerry's past. we are where we are and as Nationalists and Republicans we need to move confidently onwards.
As I say, why should we accept that Britain will never admit to collusion? It isn't something that they can deny! The proof exists. I'm confident that the day will come when they will not have a choice but to apologise. We're not talking about a small fraction of victims here. Anything short of an apology is tantamount to the sustaining of a hierarchy of victims. I fail to see how you can, in the same post, admit that Britain is covering up mass state murder/collusion, and also state that "The British Government have apologised for the failings of the state in innocent deaths". Have they f**k.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
What the f**k are you talking about - On one post you say the brits have apologised in "most cases" when in the next you say we can't expect them to admit to collusion - so they haven't apologised in most cases then? In most cases they won't admit any wrong doing never mind issue an apology.
Lets leave out the victims of collusion for a minute then and concentrate on the unarmed civilians state forces directly murdered and maimed. Where are all these apologies? I can only think of two - Bloody Sunday and Majella O'Hare - when did they apologise for the rest, I must have missed it?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 26, 2011, 07:14:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
What the f**k are you talking about - On one post you say the brits have apologised in "most cases" when in the next you say we can't expect them to admit to collusion - so they haven't apologised in most cases then? In most cases they won't admit any wrong doing never mind issue an apology.
Lets leave out the victims of collusion for a minute then and concentrate on the unarmed civilians state forces directly murdered and maimed. Where are all these apologies? I can only think of two - Bloody Sunday and Majella O'Hare - when did they apologise for the rest, I must have missed it?
Take Rosemary Nelson, whilst they did not admit collusion, and I don't accept this denial they did however apologize for the states failures. I am no apologist for the British and don't accept that there was no collusion. But they won't admit it. I just think it is time to try and move on and I am uncomfortable with some of the IRA's actions as well but again would like to see progress towards a peaceful reunification. To this end drawing a line under many acts of violence on all sides is necessary. I have seen the work of loyalists at first hand and have experienced discrimination in my time. I want a better future not forgetting the past but not trapped in it either. You may disagree but I have aright to my opinion.
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 27, 2011, 01:48:21 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 26, 2011, 07:14:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
What the f**k are you talking about - On one post you say the brits have apologised in "most cases" when in the next you say we can't expect them to admit to collusion - so they haven't apologised in most cases then? In most cases they won't admit any wrong doing never mind issue an apology.
Lets leave out the victims of collusion for a minute then and concentrate on the unarmed civilians state forces directly murdered and maimed. Where are all these apologies? I can only think of two - Bloody Sunday and Majella O'Hare - when did they apologise for the rest, I must have missed it?
Take Rosemary Nelson, whilst they did not admit collusion, and I don't accept this denial they did however apologize for the states failures. I am no apologist for the British and don't accept that there was no collusion. But they won't admit it. I just think it is time to try and move on and I am uncomfortable with some of the IRA's actions as well but again would like to see progress towards a peaceful reunification. To this end drawing a line under many acts of violence on all sides is necessary. I have seen the work of loyalists at first hand and have experienced discrimination in my time. I want a better future not forgetting the past but not trapped in it either. You may disagree but I have aright to my opinion.
So we've got to the bottom of it, they've actually apologised for f**k all, it's just that you think it's time to "move on".
You'd need to send that memo out to those still waiting on an explanation for their loved ones death.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 27, 2011, 08:04:50 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 27, 2011, 01:48:21 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 26, 2011, 07:14:17 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on May 26, 2011, 10:09:46 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on May 25, 2011, 06:49:39 PM
I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.
I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.
What the f**k are you talking about - On one post you say the brits have apologised in "most cases" when in the next you say we can't expect them to admit to collusion - so they haven't apologised in most cases then? In most cases they won't admit any wrong doing never mind issue an apology.
Lets leave out the victims of collusion for a minute then and concentrate on the unarmed civilians state forces directly murdered and maimed. Where are all these apologies? I can only think of two - Bloody Sunday and Majella O'Hare - when did they apologise for the rest, I must have missed it?
Take Rosemary Nelson, whilst they did not admit collusion, and I don't accept this denial they did however apologize for the states failures. I am no apologist for the British and don't accept that there was no collusion. But they won't admit it. I just think it is time to try and move on and I am uncomfortable with some of the IRA's actions as well but again would like to see progress towards a peaceful reunification. To this end drawing a line under many acts of violence on all sides is necessary. I have seen the work of loyalists at first hand and have experienced discrimination in my time. I want a better future not forgetting the past but not trapped in it either. You may disagree but I have aright to my opinion.
So we've got to the bottom of it, they've actually apologised for f**k all, it's just that you think it's time to "move on".
You'd need to send that memo out to those still waiting on an explanation for their loved ones death.
No no no no. I at no time have said that everyone should move on regardless, but in their own time. I am making the point that both the British and Sinn Fein were and still are to an extent engaged in a propaganda war as are the Unionists.Everyone takes a different position depending on the victim and their allegiance. Look at the Unionist approach to the Tribunal on Cobb and Breen which is in direct opposition to their position on the Bloody Sunday and Nelson enquiries. Yes everyone needs closure. Yes in an ideal world all sides would admit the wrong doings during war and yes the British have a hypocritical approach to the conflict but so does everyone involved. We do need to carve out a future for our children and it is going to involve pain on all sides. Victims will need consideration in all of this and there can be no hierarchy of victim either. However we can not continue with round after round of whataboutery. There also has to be some recognition of reality thats all I'm saying. I am not saying it is right or just. The reality is that the British Government as with most governments can only go so far. Sinn fein and the Unionists are no different they can only go so far. In relation to collusion I have no doubt that given the sectarian nature of the RUC and UDR and the use of informers by intelligence services that collusion by any definition took place but the British will never accept that publicly until the whole process here is well bedded in, to do so would be to give momentum to the dissidents and leverage to Republicans not to mention destroying their credibility on foreign policy. We can't afford an inquiry into every single death so perhaps a truth and reconciliation process is required the problem is in a divided society agreement on this could take years. I want to make it clear that I am trying to give an analysis of were we are and my opinion on how we should proceed. I am not justifying British actions or those of loyalist are the IRA but as I say we can either acknowledge the past and move forward or we can continue to look backwards, a position I have heard Sinn Fein rightly espouse to Unionists when the mention Clady, Darkley etc...
Applesisapples, you're making one tiny, but fatal error. You're being reasonable.
Quote from: Hardy on May 27, 2011, 10:08:57 AM
Applesisapples, you're making one tiny, but fatal error. You're being reasonable.
Who's being unreasonable and why?
Who said someone was being unreasonable?
You implied it in your post to applesisapples.
I didn't. I said he was being reasonable. I implied he was getting flak for being reasonable. I didn't say anything about anybody else. People often get a hard time here just for being reasonable.
It may be easy to be 'reasonable' in Co. Meath or where ever, but try being reasonable having this sort of shite spouted:
Quote'Biggest winners are the lawyers' says Simpson
Published on Thursday 26 May 2011 14:34
THE biggest winners in the Rosemary Nelson Inquiry have been the lawyers, DUP MP David Simpson has said.
Noting the findings that there was 'no evidence' of state involvement in the death of Mrs Nelson he pointed out: "I also note that the cost of this exercise is projected to be in excess of £45million. It would seem as though, as has been the case in other inquiries of this nature, the biggest winners have not been those affected or the wider community, but rather the lawyers.
"This Inquiry has confirmed what most people already knew – namely that the allegations of RUC collusion were simply incorrect. Those of us who lived through the darkest days of the Troubles know of the extraordinary bravery of both the RUC and military personnel.
"We know too of their dedication and terrible sacrifice in defence of our freedoms.
"Indeed as the Member of Parliament for Upper Bann I feel that now is a good day to enquire of the Government as to its stance on the security force personnel killed and wounded in this part of Northern Ireland and the fact that they were exposed to danger and death as a result of the direct role played by the Dublin government in the formation, financing, training and arming of the Provisional IRA and for making the South a safe haven for terrorists for many years. When will the UK government insist that Dublin steps up to the mark and accepts its responsibility?
"In the past the government gave assurances that locally there were to be no more costly, open-ended inquires into past events. I trust that they will stand by their word on that front. As a community we can go in two directions: we can say there will be no more costly inquiries of this kind, or we can grant inquiries into every single past event in Northern Ireland, where everyone, not just the army or the police, will be made to give account for their actions.
"What we cannot tolerate is a few high profile cases receiving lavish amounts of government largesse and attention, whilst victims of other incidents are left isolated or ignored. At this time my thoughts are with the families of those who lost loved ones and who have never received any government or media attention.
"The DUP will continue to fight to ensure fairness and equality prevails and I urge to government to resist the calls for any further inquiries of this nature. They will achieve nothing other than to exacerbate the already strong sense of injustice that exists within the community at the disproportionate attention certain cases have received."
That's my 'elected representative' speaking there. Just a typical example as to what one might have to endure when reading the local paper.
Quote from: fitzroyalty on May 28, 2011, 03:57:33 PM
It may be easy to be 'reasonable' in Co. Meath or where ever, but try being reasonable having this sort of shite spouted:
Quote'Biggest winners are the lawyers' says Simpson
Published on Thursday 26 May 2011 14:34
THE biggest winners in the Rosemary Nelson Inquiry have been the lawyers, DUP MP David Simpson has said.
Noting the findings that there was 'no evidence' of state involvement in the death of Mrs Nelson he pointed out: "I also note that the cost of this exercise is projected to be in excess of £45million. It would seem as though, as has been the case in other inquiries of this nature, the biggest winners have not been those affected or the wider community, but rather the lawyers.
"This Inquiry has confirmed what most people already knew – namely that the allegations of RUC collusion were simply incorrect. Those of us who lived through the darkest days of the Troubles know of the extraordinary bravery of both the RUC and military personnel.
"We know too of their dedication and terrible sacrifice in defence of our freedoms.
"Indeed as the Member of Parliament for Upper Bann I feel that now is a good day to enquire of the Government as to its stance on the security force personnel killed and wounded in this part of Northern Ireland and the fact that they were exposed to danger and death as a result of the direct role played by the Dublin government in the formation, financing, training and arming of the Provisional IRA and for making the South a safe haven for terrorists for many years. When will the UK government insist that Dublin steps up to the mark and accepts its responsibility?
"In the past the government gave assurances that locally there were to be no more costly, open-ended inquires into past events. I trust that they will stand by their word on that front. As a community we can go in two directions: we can say there will be no more costly inquiries of this kind, or we can grant inquiries into every single past event in Northern Ireland, where everyone, not just the army or the police, will be made to give account for their actions.
"What we cannot tolerate is a few high profile cases receiving lavish amounts of government largesse and attention, whilst victims of other incidents are left isolated or ignored. At this time my thoughts are with the families of those who lost loved ones and who have never received any government or media attention.
"The DUP will continue to fight to ensure fairness and equality prevails and I urge to government to resist the calls for any further inquiries of this nature. They will achieve nothing other than to exacerbate the already strong sense of injustice that exists within the community at the disproportionate attention certain cases have received."
That's my 'elected representative' speaking there. Just a typical example as to what one might have to endure when reading the local paper.
Are you a victim now because of something you read in the paper? And what has being from Co. Meath got to do with being reasonable or otherwise?
(Louth responses taken as read.)
That your interpretation of the term may differ to that of others...
I'm not a victim nor am I implying such, nor is this isn't directed solely at you; but I just feel that it is a kick in the goolies to have people ('being reasonable') come on here and bandy about terms like 'move on', 'don't live in the past' etc.
I would share pog's view re your insinuation that any contrary view is that of an unreasonable person.
Quote from: fitzroyalty on May 28, 2011, 04:12:59 PM
That your interpretation of the term may differ to that of others...
... because I'm from Meath? Can you give me the list of qualifications I must achieve in order that my interpretation may meet the official requirement?
QuoteI'm not a victim nor am I implying such, nor is this isn't directed solely at you; but I just feel that it is a kick in the goolies to have people ('being reasonable') come on here and bandy about terms like 'move on', 'don't live in the past' etc.
Well since you
Quoteshare pog's view re your insinuation that any contrary view is that of an unreasonable person
despite my specific clarification that it isn't, I'll feel free to interpret your elevation of something an anonymous entity writes on an internet discussion board to "a kick in the goolies" as a claim of victimhood.
Hardy do you think POG was being unreasonable in his discussions with Apples?
What the f**k is this dross doing on the main GAA discussion board?
Who moderates this tireless sh**t?
Quote from: trueblue1234 on May 29, 2011, 12:48:10 AM
Hardy do you think POG was being unreasonable in his discussions with Apples?
POG is always unreasonable. That's what makes him such an interesting poster.
For the record I am not from Meath. I try to look at the situation here from both sides. That in no way dilutes by ambition to see our Country reunited, yes reunited!