Easter lily

jimmmy

Shane-1 wrote: »

Where did you get this autobahn story from? A reference would be handy, cause I've yet to hear anything about this!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Order_(political_system)

Shane-1 wrote: »

And how were the men in the Somme fighting for Irish freedom?

Freedom from terrorism ( thats why the rebels of 1916 were jeered + spat upon ) , freedom from the German invader in Europe, freedom from a lot of things....

Shane-1

jimmmy wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Order_(political_system)




Freedom from terrorism ( thats why the rebels of 1916 were jeered + spat upon ) , freedom from the German invader in Europe, freedom from a lot of things....

Freedom from terrorism? How? They didnt know that there would be a rising when they were enlisting in 1914, if they did then they should have given the heads up to British Intelligence.

Freedom from the German invader? How would Germany worry us in the slightest in the 1910's? And the war wasnt based on Germany invading people, it was based on the fallout from a single incident in Yugoslavia setting off the complex alliance system that existed in Europe at the time, any good general history book should have good information on that for you.

And do you honestly believe that the soldiers leaving this isle were all these highly moral, high minded individuals intent on freeing little Belgium etc? Nope, not at all, pragmatism was the key Im afraid, make the few bob for the wife and kids and other such practical concerns.

And I wouldnt trust wikipedia references Im afraid, this is the same website that I was listed amongst the notable people of County Clare for most of the year on, as well as the same website that we managed to put down the portaloo in Kilrush as one of Clares premier tourist attractions, a move which got reported in the local papers down here. So I guess after those experiences I wouldnt tend to put too much trust in wikipedia! Oh ya, I was middleweight champion of the UFC for a time and broke the story how Dingle Gardai were encouraging graffiti that was appearing around the town as 'any attempt at literacy should be encouraged'! Not a trustworthy site at all Im afraid.

O'Coonassa

dlofnep wrote: »

just actually use a real Lily.

They're highly poisonous to cats. So be warned :pac:

Shane-1

Plus the thing in the middle (excuse my lack of plant biology expertise) stains like a backstard, be warned it will ruin a good shirt for you

Ok I've just been informed that the stuff in the middle is pollen, there ya go!

dlofnep

jimmmy wrote: »

Better not to use a Lily at all, lest it be mistaken for a terrorist symbol.

It's just as well it's not a terrorist symbol then, isn't it?

O'Coonassa

It was the womens that chose it for a symbol. You'd think they'd have known these things

jimmmy

Shane-1 wrote: »

How would Germany worry us in the slightest in the 1910's?

Ah shure the Germans stayed within their borders in 1914-1918, the whole war was a dastardly British plot.

The well known plans the Germans had for the menfolk of these islands after WW2 was another dastardly imaginary plan. Shure Hitler was a grand lad, he was'nt even excommunicated, and its only propoganda he ever used slave labour / extermination camps. i

O'Coonassa

dlofnep wrote: »

It's just as well it's not a terrorist symbol then, isn't it?

It is if you're a cat I suppose

dlofnep

O'Coonassa wrote: »

It is if you're a cat I suppose

I was in Kilkenny today and I seen loads of them wearing it!

Shane-1

jimmmy wrote: »

Ah shure the Germans stayed within their borders in 1914-1918, the whole war was a dastardly British plot.

The well known plans the Germans had for the menfolk of these islands after WW2 was another dastardly imaginary plan. Shure Hitler was a grand lad, he was'nt even excommunicated, and its only propoganda he ever used slave labour / extermination camps. i

What a ridiculous arguament Yes indeed the Germans did move out, they were in a war! You wouldnt be much of a general! 'Lets just wait here lads, they can come to us!' War broke out, Germany moved out and invaded surrounding places, what is wrong with that? I was under the impression that things like that were pretty commonplace in any attempt to win a war? I suppose it would have been more convenient for the allies if they stayed where they were, inconsiderate Germans.

Well known plans! I have widely read up on this and this is the first I've hit on any plans for enslaving Irish males, and the best proof you can come up with is bloody wikipedia. I havent even checked that link, I wouldnt bother. And who said he didnt use slave labour and concentration camps? What are you on about mate?

Shane-1

dlofnep wrote: »

I was in Kilkenny today and I seen loads of them wearing it!

+1 Brilliant

jimmmy

Shane-1 wrote: »

War broke out, Germany moved out and invaded surrounding places, what is wrong with that?

Ah shure the whole war was a dastardly British plot. Germany never invaded too much outside its borders or did any harm anyway.

Shane-1 wrote: »

Well known plans! I have widely read up on this and this is the first I've hit on any plans for enslaving Irish males, and the best proof you can come up with is bloody wikipedia.

There are other sources, such as referenced at the bottom of the wiki article. Its common history knowledge if you are well read up on WW2, which you obviously are not. Shure maybe Hitler being the good Catholic he was would have, in the event of a German victory in WW2, brought good Irish lads and have them doing Riverdance in Berlin...shure Hitlers use of slave labour in occupied countries of Europe was just a British propoganda lie anyway.

Grudaire

jimmmy wrote: »

Better not to use a Lily at all, lest it be mistaken for a terrorist symbol.

Can we wear a lilly with a badge saying "Definitely NOT a P/R/C IRA supporter"?

Sand wrote: »

Until it starts making sense - sure, theyre different organisations. But they are otherwise very alike. The Provos are the inheritors of the men of 1916 with their dismissal of consitutional means and the need for public support.

No, not yet: It was used because you were questioning my dismissal of Provos on this thread as having a hive mind mentality and a few stock responses.

As for Provo, its just a short hand term for all the militant republicans on boards. As I said the Provos are the true inheritors of Pearses dream, though perhaps the mantle is now moving on to the Real IRA. I cant be bothered keeping track of all the Judean Peoples Front type splinter groups, but Provo tends to cover it.

Always hilarious how all the fans of militant republicanism get so desperately offended at being classed along with all the other fans of militant republicanism though. Theyre all unique and special snowflakes.

Right - I'd ask for a better explanation of the bolded above, but to be honest it's clear that you, my friend, are full of sh|t.

Sand wrote: »

Again I dont really concern myself with acting like some sort of missionary to rescue the poor devils of the internet from their confused and wholly unSandian views.

So... what then, you're here to annoy people (that's called trolling - a word I rate up there with whataboutery)

Dyr

Cliste wrote: »

Right - I'd ask for a better explanation of the bolded above, but to be honest it's clear that you, my friend, are full of sh|t.

Nah, he'll just troll away until you finally make a comment like that then a mod will ban you. Its a cosy little arrangement

Nodin

jimmmy wrote: »

Better not to use a Lily at all, lest it be mistaken for a terrorist symbol.

Its only a "terrorist" symbol in the eyes of some. Seeing as you think Ireland was better off under British rule, and have trotted out how much better off we were then (whilst studiously avoiding refutations of same), its hardly suprising you're coming out with that particular line.

jimmmy wrote: »

Freedom from terrorism ( thats why the rebels of 1916 were jeered + spat upon ) , freedom from the German invader in Europe, freedom from a lot of things.... .

...things like the freedom for the French and British to carve the middle east up amongst themselves, but not freedom for India, Kenya, Burma etc. Freedom from terror which will allow Winston churchill to order gas dropped on Iraqi villages, but not freedom for Uganda or Tanzania.

So in fact they weren't fighting for freedom, but a limited version of it. They weren't fighting for "freedom from terrorism", because one of the ways the empire was sustained was carefully applied fear and terror. Of course they neither knew that or thought it at the time, but we know now, and its best to keep it clear in our minds.

dlofnep

As for Provo, its just a short hand term for all the militant republicans on boards.

You'd better tell the Provos that, they disarmed many a moon ago.

If you're looking for a catchy word, maybe Contos or Reals might be more suitable.

seanybiker

8 pages just because someone asked where could they buy something. Hmm .

Sand

Whole can of worms attempting to be opened here me boy, please refer to my previous post vis a vis lack of historical knowledge. If you were to tell, lets say, a RSF/ Continuity IRA man that the Provisional IRA were the inheritors and holders of the nationalist tradition in Ireland, well you may find an interesting reply awaits. You need to get an appreciation of the complexity of the situation that you seem to be professing to know so well. If you want your arguaments to be taken seriously of course!

Yeah, yeah - theyre all unique and special snowflakes. If it makes you feel better, the RIRA and CIRA are also inheritors of the 1916 love of violence and contempt of democracy. Its a proud heritage to compete over.

Well if you cant be bothered, and are as thus admitting that your knowledge of this situation is less than satisfactory, then why do you continue to try and debate something that you clearly do not have an interest/ knowledge of?

No, I cant be bothered. I could try differentiate between all the splits and schisms and bollocks, but why bother? Your Judean Peoples Front groupings arent all that important. You all basically support militant republican terrorism in contempt of the Irish peoples will, youve all got the same "Our murdering scumbags are heros, their murdering scumbags are murdering scumbags" double think, and youve all got the same playbook "Whatabout <insert some British or Loyalist crime here>..." (which only betrays that the double think I mentioned is so ingrained that you cant conceive of people actually condemning both...) or some snide remark that translates as "Shure hes only a West Brit!"

Youre idealogical differences just arent interesting enough to merit differentiation. Provos is my short hand, deal with it.

Wouldnt it be true that a 'fan' of the Provisional IRA would no longer be a 'fan' of militant republicanism, what with them laying down their arms and ceasing said militant republican activity? Is'nt it equally hilarious how people with the least knowledge of what they are talking about find themselves getting the most involved in threads on here?

I've yet to see a Provo whose rejected their terrorism - they still hold it was wholly correct and right. Their involvement in the peace process was argued by Adams and his allies on the Army Council in purely strategic terms. Their disagreement with the CIRA and RIRA is based purely on a disagreement over strategy.

Same way I guess that physical force elements on the loyalist side felt that killing some people would ensure it?

More whataboutery. Whats your point here? Are you so indoctrinated with supporting Provo murderous terrorism, whilst rejected Loyalist murderous terrorism that it seems impossible to you that someone could reject both on the basis of it being murderous terrorism?

Seeing as this is a pretty typical attitude amongst your "fellow travellers", can you see why Provo is perfectly acceptable as a short hand term. I dont even see much difference between Loyalist terrorists and Provo terrorists. All scumbags at the end of the day.

O'Coonassa

seanybiker wrote: »

8 pages just because someone asked where could they buy something. Hmm .

Ya it's funny, there's always lilysqabbles at this time of year for the last 8 decades. It seems the outward show of being seen to wear an emblem aligned to one or other faction is something aspired to many primates.

Grudaire

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Ya it's funny, there's always lilysqabbles at this time of year for the last 8 decades. It seems the outward show of being seen to wear an emblem aligned to one or other faction is something aspired to many primates.

This topic is over shadowed by the annual 'why can't we buy drink today' rants - also to be seen at this time of year

dlofnep

Sand wrote: »

Youre idealogical differences just arent interesting enough to merit differentiation. Provos is my short hand, deal with it.

We're dealing with it quite well. It doesn't change the fact that it's a ignorant and false term to use to label militant republicans. You can wax around with your wordplay all day, but it doesn't make your opinions anymore valid.

Sand wrote: »

No, I cant be bothered. I could try differentiate between all the splits and schisms and bollocks, but why bother?

In order to have any form of relevancy in your points, perhaps?

Sand wrote: »

Your Judean Peoples Front groupings arent all that important.

I would argue that they are infact important, given that the provisional movement is not engaged in an armed campaign, has put down it's weapons and is firmly in support of peaceful progress. While others are polar opposite, who feel that armed action is still practical/relevant.

We're talking people who have two completely different ideologies. You might save yourself further embarrassment by at least acknowledging it.

Sand wrote: »

I've yet to see a Provo whose rejected their terrorism

I'd fit into your definition of "Provo" (Although in fairness so would half of this thread by your broad definitions) and I reject terrorism.

jimmmy

dlofnep wrote: »

I'd fit into your definition of "Provo" (Although in fairness so would half of this thread by your broad definitions) and I reject terrorism.

I think you are just a bit confused dlofnep

Sand

Right - I'd ask for a better explanation of the bolded above, but to be honest it's clear that you, my friend, are full of sh|t.

I find that hurtful

So... what then, you're here to annoy people (that's called trolling - a word I rate up there with whataboutery)

Nah, I'm here to represent my own views. I just dont really care if you agree with them or not. Lets face it. Lets take one scenarios: A man throws a nailbomb into a resteraunt, packed with families. Do you A) celebrate him as a hero? or denounce him as a thug?

Provos wont be interested in the act itself. Theyll only be interested in if the man was a Provo or a Loyalist. If he was a Provo, he was at worst, misguided. If he was a Loyalist, hes scum, and probably a British agent to boot.

The shoot to kill policy is the same: The Provos willingly seek to murder as many of their targets as they can, they are morally outraged at the concept that their targets might actually shoot back with the intention of killing them.

The tortured Provo logic over being an army is the same: They claim to be an army fighting a war, but completely ignore geneva conventions - Prisoners are tortured and executed, civillians are targeted and murdered and so on. None of this seems....odd behaviour for an army to Provos. On the otherhand, British army crimes (like Bloody Sunday) are denounced and the memory reinforced.

When Provos are so utterly uninterested in actual examination of their methods and logic, when they are so utterly Orwellian in their thought process, whats the point of worrying about if they agree with you or not? Provos are wrong, end of. I save myself some time and just jump to the punchline.

Grudaire

Sand wrote: »

I find that hurtful

You call me a Provo - I find THAT hurtfull

Sand wrote: »

Nah, I'm here to represent my own views. I just dont really care if you agree with them or not. Lets face it. Lets take one scenarios: A man throws a nailbomb into a resteraunt, packed with families. Do you A) celebrate him as a hero? or denounce him as a thug?

Provos wont be interested in the act itself. Theyll only be interested in if the man was a Provo or a Loyalist. If he was a Provo, he was at worst, misguided. If he was a Loyalist, hes scum, and probably a British agent to boot.

The shoot to kill policy is the same: The Provos willingly seek to murder as many of their targets as they can, they are morally outraged at the concept that their targets might actually shoot back with the intention of killing them.

The tortured Provo logic over being an army is the same: They claim to be an army fighting a war, but completely ignore geneva conventions - Prisoners are tortured and executed, civillians are targeted and murdered and so on. None of this seems....odd behaviour for an army to Provos. On the otherhand, British army crimes (like Bloody Sunday) are denounced and the memory reinforced.

When Provos are so utterly uninterested in actual examination of their methods and logic, when they are so utterly Orwellian in their thought process, whats the point of worrying about if they agree with you or not? Provos are wrong, end of. I save myself some time and just jump to the punchline.

Huh - what has this to do with 1916?

Sand

I'd fit into your definition of "Provo" (Although in fairness so would half of this thread by your broad definitions) and I reject terrorism.

Nah, as pointed out, youre confused.

Allah Hu Akbar

Cliste wrote: »

So... what then, you're here to annoy people (that's called trolling - a word I rate up there with whataboutery)

Be careful mate.

Once someone is anti Republican they never get a warning / ban, once you're anyway Republican minded they love to pick reasons for a ban.

dlofnep

Sand wrote: »

Nah, as pointed out, youre confused.

You're*

Sand

You call me a Provo - I find THAT hurtfull

I'm not sure I specifically called you a Provo actually. You just siezed on my usage of the term, I described it, and you (apparently) identified it. Thats not my issue.

Huh - what has this to do with 1916?

You queried why I dont care about winning Provos over: I explained the pointlessness wasting time talking to brick walls. You really need to try keep up with the thread.

You're*

Profound. Very zen.

jimmmy

Sand wrote: »

Lets take one scenarios: A man throws a nailbomb into a resteraunt, packed with families. Do you A) celebrate him as a hero? or denounce him as a thug?

Provos wont be interested in the act itself. Theyll only be interested in if the man was a Provo or a Loyalist. If he was a Provo, he was at worst, misguided. If he was a Loyalist, hes scum, and probably a British agent to boot.

The shoot to kill policy is the same: The Provos willingly seek to murder as many of their targets as they can, they are morally outraged at the concept that their targets might actually shoot back with the intention of killing them.

The tortured Provo logic over being an army is the same: They claim to be an army fighting a war, but completely ignore geneva conventions - Prisoners are tortured and executed, civillians are targeted and murdered and so on. None of this seems....odd behaviour for an army to Provos. On the otherhand, British army crimes (like Bloody Sunday) are denounced and the memory reinforced.

Excellent post. Those who are indoctrinated with an extremist nationalist mindset - those who would answer (A) to the question in the first paragraph above - should really study the whole post.

Grudaire

Sand wrote: »

I'm not sure I specifically called you a Provo actually. You just siezed on my usage of the term, I described it, and you (apparently) identified it. Thats not my issue.

Here is where you used Provo as a reply to me.

Sand wrote:

Me!/Cliste wrote:

You have acted in a very insulting manner and do less to convince people that your version is the truth, and more to drive people to the old trenches - just as they falsely coined it the Sinn Féin rising you are giving credence to the PIRA by associating them with it.

I'm not too bothered if Provos agree with me or not to be honest. If they cant see that people throwing nail bombs into resteraunts packed with families arent heros then my view is

Sand wrote: »

You queried why I dont care about winning Provos over: I explained the pointlessness wasting time talking to brick walls. You really need to try keep up with the thread.

The thread is about the Easter lily, nothing you mentioned abouve has anything to do with that