93 years today!!

futurehope

jank wrote: »

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you.

Your post exactly illustrates and re-enforces in my view at least the need for an Irish republic, free from the rule of westminister. Thank god the men of 1916 woke up the Irish nation to this very point that there would always be some anglo-saxon empire worshiping fellows like your self!

Thank you! It has made my day.

Hi jank. I wonder could you tell me how a staunch Irish Republican like you feels living under this flag:



Oh, and how do you feel living in a country with QEII as the head of state?

No conflict of interest?

Acacia

futurehope wrote: »

Does anyone on UK forums keep moaning about how terrible it was to lose The Empire and wouldn't it be great if it could be recreated? Again, unlikely.

Eh, I'll just leave this here, so---> "The Truth about the British Empire".

http://youth.bnp.org.uk/archives/179

I'm sure you'll probably find a lot of the pro-Imperial guff written there to your taste, seeing as the rest of your post demonstrates similar rubbish.

It's posts like yours that remind me just how well the old colonial anti-Irish propaganda worked. Not on the British people, but the Irish themselves. It's sunken so deep into the national psyche that one can't express pro-1916 sentiments on an Irish forum with being a Shinner or a 'rah-head.

dlofnep

futurehope wrote: »

As for attacking Nationalists - I'd like to know when that happened?

9th-11th August, 1971, Ballymurphy.

30th of January, 1972 in Derry.

Talk about rejecting reality and substituting it with your own! :eek:

futurehope wrote: »

From what I gather, Republicans were responsible for 2057 deaths during 'the troubles' and The UK state only 363 (not all Army). Easy to see who the aggressors were wouldn't you say?

It's easy to see who the aggressors were when you look a little further back in history to see what actually caused this conflict in the first place. Britain expanding it's territory ring a bell?

I see how you conveniently forgot the murders by the UDA, UFF and UVF. Not to mention the collusion between British forces and loyalist paramilitaries. But don't leave that get in the way of a balanced conversation.

futurehope wrote: »

In fact, far from attacking Nationalists they often ended up defending them.

Yeah, they sure defended them on Bloody Sunday! Never have I heard such revisionist nonsense in my life. The British forces routinely harassed members of the nationalist community, interned innocent people without trial, colluded with loyalist terrorists and upheld an orange state.

futurehope wrote: »

The UDR always had at least 3% Catholic membership (much higher initially) and The RUC at least 8%.

WOW! A whole 8%.. Are you attempting to convince us that the RUC wasn't a unionist dominanted police force, which fed heavily to unionist demand? If so, you're not doing a good job.

futurehope wrote: »

Just as 26 counties had the right to go independent based on a democratic decision, the northern 6 counties had the same right.

The 26 counties and 6 counties were to operate under a single banner through two Governments - but this was not set under fair conditions, hence the 26 county walkout and creation of a new independant state, in which it specified the 6 counties to be categorically apart of it's territory.

Democratic my arse. Democratic would have been given a vote to every person in Ireland (which was one country at the time) - whether they wanted a united and soverign Ireland, or a divided Ireland which would result in a civil war. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been the latter.

futurehope wrote: »

The reality is that from partition, the people of Northern Ireland have always expressed their wish to remain part of The UK through the ballot box and continue to do so.

But yet, the people of "Ireland" have always expressed their wish to re-unite their country. However, Britain created a state that would ensure that unionist demands would be met under faux-democracy. The people of the "UK" actually don't want the North to be apart of the UK, and it has been evident in all recent polls in mainland Britain where the number of those who support Irish Unity far outweighs those who support the North remaining in the UK.

futurehope wrote: »

In the face of this act of self determination clearly expressed, The Republic's claim to Northern Ireland was indeed predatory and gave encouragement to the IRA's failed attempt to overthrow democracy by force (including many atrocities).

Predatory my arse. Because Britain created a state with intent to give a minority the majority voice, upheld by British security forces? The plantations were predatory.

futurehope wrote: »

How did Britain create sectarianism in an independent Ireland?

Britain created conditions in which catholics and protestants were immediately classified as two seperate identities. This was evident as early as the Penal Laws, when the catholics were treated as second class citizens. In more recent times in the 60's, where it took a strong civil rights movement at the cost of innocent life to address the plight of the catholic/nationalist people..

K-9

futurehope wrote: »

In order for corrupt, lazy and incompetent Irish politicians to prosper and in order for said politicians to maintain control over what was a very poor populace until relatively recently, they had to point the finger North and East. It was The terrible British and those nasty Prods who were to blame. And yet, said politicians could not have acted alone. No, they required the assistance of The RC church, which they received in abundance, particularly through the schools, where the anti-British and anti-Protestant bile was spewed out onto innocent children. In return The Irish state did not look to closely at what The RC priests were up to. Well, we all know now what they were up to don't we?

So, instead of blaming The British for their plight (the same British who helped fund Ireland's prosperity through The EU and who welcomed The Irish into England as immigrants) or blaming Northern Protestants (the one's, who contrary to Irish speak, were actually incredibly slow to anger, even during the worst of The Provo outrages), The Irish should take a much closer look at themselves, and damn well grow up.

I wouldn't agree with the first part of your full post, but this part I do.

FF in power for about 62/77 years kind of bears it out.

futurehope

wolfpawnat said:

I have spent a bit of time in England, thats why I said that

Why are you talking for two forum members wolfpawnat? Are you and Shane-1 the same person? In any case, perhaps you could answer me this:

How does a staunch Irish Republican like you live under this flag:




You hated England so much you moved there? What was it, you moved for more money? Not the first Irishman to bow down for a financial incentive and unlikely to be the last!

I have heard it all time and time again, my sister lives in England and she has heard it all over the years, about does she have a bomb etc etc. So indeed I can say with some authority that the English do indeed go on about us just as much as we go on about them! And they do go on about the French and Germans quite a bit also, you ever seen the build up to one of their football games? Or listened to any average English stand up comedian? Plenty of material there!

The key here is humour - not the intolerant chauvinistic tripe the average Irish Nationalist spews out, with a made up version of history all rolled in. I see your sister also loved Ireland so much she also moved to England. Does she sing 'God Save The Queen'?

We are involved in world affairs. And half of your above post seems to flit between history from the 20's 60's etc in no conherent order, thus it all comes across as a bit confused.

Yes, many on this forum are confused when it comes to history - that's where I come in.

And we didnt extradite 'these animals' to UK cause we put them through our own legal system!

Yes, that was the problem from what I remember.

Are you aware also that the IRA were reorganised and reformed in the period you mention about public support, poles etc as a defensive force?

For a defencive force they seemed to slaughter an awful lot of people - over 2000 I believe, more than The Security Forces and Loyalists put together. In what way were they acting defensively when they blew up a bunch of teenagers in Birmingham, or a couple of school kids in Warrington, or ten workers in Kingsmill, or a bunch of unarmed people including 2 schoolgirls on The Shankill, etc, etc, etc?

So it was under those circumstances that many of the people of the south showed support for the actions of the IRA!

Interesting. Would you say The UVF got wind of this support and as a result bombed Dublin and Monaghan in 1974?

O'Coonassa

futurehope wrote: »

That's so amusing. Just as 26 counties had the right to go independent based on a democratic decision, the northern 6 counties had the same right.

But there was a democratic majority of Unionists in only three counties? Those three would surely have had the right to 'go independant based on a democratic decision' but claiming that six counties being included had anything to do with democratic wishes is wilfull blindness on your part.

Grudaire

futurehope wrote: »

You hated England so much you moved there? What was it, you moved for more money? Not the first Irishman to bow down for a financial incentive and unlikely to be the last!

Yea - I remember the Protestants not having the whole Charity thing down:

We'll give you soup if you give up all you believe, and join our actually very similar Church:rolleyes:

Alcatel

Just to throw in my .02 cents in a slightly different direction, while we celebrate the Easter Risings I can't help each year but stop and think about how we've managed to brush our dead from the First World War under the carpet - many Irish republicans left to fight in the British army at the urging of Republican leaders, eager to help push forward the Home Rule Bill that was delayed by the war.

A Russian journalist in 2004 attempted to figure out how many people from Ireland (as opposed to the rest of the UK at the time) died. 51,000 was the number of killed that he came to, with 50,000 of those having been in the British army.

Including those executed after the Easter rising, the number killed on the republican side numbered less than a hundred. A life's a life and each is worth remembering, and the lads who rose up in 1916 deserve praise, but at the same time I can't help but stop and wonder at a nation that has managed to sweep the deaths of so many others in such another tragic conflict under the carpet for the sake of political expediency at putting all distance between ourselves and our past, so entwined as it is with the British.

Just a thought.

O'Coonassa

Cliste wrote: »

Yea - I remember the Protestants not having the whole Charity thing down:

We'll give you soup if you give up all you believe, and join our actually very similar Church:rolleyes:

Roman Catholic propaganda :rolleyes: Some small minority of evangalists behaved in the way you mention.

Grudaire

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Roman Catholic propaganda :rolleyes: Some small minority of evangalists behaved in the way you mention.

It happened - and it was meant more as an ironic post - not in the 'all brits are evil ra ra ra' sense

Eitherway surely we can all see that futurehope is trying to get a rise out of people - he's come to a 1916 thread - the aim of that was of course to get Ireland free from British rule. Now he has twice posted the Union jack(well - the other one's actually not the Union Jack blah blah).

Moriarty

The most satisfying thing about "true republicans"? Knowing that every time they open their mouths they reveal their true zealotry to the uninitiated.

You can no more contain yourselves than Dr. Strangelove, which makes it just so much fun to watch. Thanks guys.

GuanYin

If you want to post in gaelic, go to the correct forum for it.

This is an english language forum and it exceptionally rude to post in a language that some users may not understand.


I'm going to view continued posting in Gaelic as uncivil, and off topic and infract or ban.


This is a moderation post. Read the forum rules on moderation posts.

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST

If you have a problem with this post, PM or post in the correct thread.

O'Coonassa

Cliste wrote: »

It happened - and it was meant more as an ironic post - not in the 'all brits are evil ra ra ra' sense

Sorry Cliste, I took it for Brit/Proddy bashing.

Cliste wrote: »

Eitherway surely we can all see that futurehope is trying to get a rise out of people - he's come to a 1916 thread - the aim of that was of course to get Ireland free from British rule. Now he has twice posted the Union jack(well - the other one's actually not the Union Jack blah blah).

Ah yeah he's here to point out his 'truth' but the thing about poor futurehope is that like his bugbear the Provos he's only half right.

GAAwebsite

1916 Rising - brilliant day.

GAAwebsite

futurehope wrote: »

wolfpawnat said:



Why are you talking for two forum members wolfpawnat? Are you and Shane-1 the same person? In any case, perhaps you could answer me this:

How does a staunch Irish Republican like you live under this flag:




You hated England so much you moved there? What was it, you moved for more money? Not the first Irishman to bow down for a financial incentive and unlikely to be the last!



The key here is humour - not the intolerant chauvinistic tripe the average Irish Nationalist spews out, with a made up version of history all rolled in. I see your sister also loved Ireland so much she also moved to England. Does she sing 'God Save The Queen'?



Yes, many on this forum are confused when it comes to history - that's where I come in.



Yes, that was the problem from what I remember.



For a defencive force they seemed to slaughter an awful lot of people - over 2000 I believe, more than The Security Forces and Loyalists put together. In what way were they acting defensively when they blew up a bunch of teenagers in Birmingham, or a couple of school kids in Warrington, or ten workers in Kingsmill, or a bunch of unarmed people including 2 schoolgirls on The Shankill, etc, etc, etc?



Interesting. Would you say The UVF got wind of this support and as a result bombed Dublin and Monaghan in 1974?

I didn't bother reading your post I just request you take down that flag as it is a total disrespest to the name of this thread and the heroes of Ireland.

Nodin

futurehope wrote: »

The British Army were sent into Northern Ireland at the request of Northern Nationalists, who then started sticking broken glass in the sandwiches they gave the young squadies - true Irish hospitality.

The first British soldier to be killed was shot by the UVF. Nationalist hostility to British soldiers came due to them being placed under local control.

futurehope wrote: »

When Gerry Adams was shot, it was an army unit who arrested the UFF unit involved..

Ahh yes, that was where under cover police (and not the army, afaik) were available to seal off the road after the attack and apprehend the attackers. What a stroke of luck they just happened to be there, on the street, at that time, to swing into action.

futurehope wrote: »

Even following massive PIRA intimidation, The UDR always had at least 3% Catholic membership (much higher initially) and The RUC at least 8%.

..

....none of which ameliorates the large scale and proven collusion between both organisations and Loyalist paramilitaries.

futurehope wrote: »

Yes, many on this forum are confused when it comes to history - that's where I come in. ..

Given the evidence above, were I you I'd cut back on the crowing.

Grudaire

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Ah yeah he's here to point out his 'truth' but the thing about poor futurehope is that like his bugbear the Provos he's only half right.

Well what I was inviting anyone who speaks Irish to discuss this in teach na Gealt (forum name), I set up a similar thread, but hopefully we can stay more on topic there!

One of the things I said there is that I feel it's important not to let things like this be hyjacked by Militant Republicans. Something that has happened to be honest.

Hagar

GAAwebsite wrote: »

I didn't bother reading your post I just request you take down that flag as it is a total disrespest to the name of this thread and the heroes of Ireland.

I totally agree. It serves no purpose other than to cause provocation in a thread about 1916.
I have reported the post.

futurehope

Acacia wrote: »

Eh, I'll just leave this here, so---> "The Truth about the British Empire".

http://youth.bnp.org.uk/archives/179

I'm sure you'll probably find a lot of the pro-Imperial guff written there to your taste, seeing as the rest of your post demonstrates similar rubbish.

So the best equivalent to routine Irish chauvinism you could come up with is The BNP? Speaks volumes.

:rolleyes:

GAAwebsite

Hagar wrote: »

I totally agree. It serves no purpose other than to cause provocation in a thread about 1916.
I have reported the post.

Good man.

Scofflaw

futurehope wrote:

You hated England so much you moved there? What was it, you moved for more money? Not the first Irishman to bow down for a financial incentive and unlikely to be the last!

I have no option but to consider that a personal attack. The use of the Union Jack falls under my previous comments about calling people Unionist. If you repeat this kind of thing, you'll be banned. This is your only warning.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Hagar

There is no reference to any restrictions on the language used for posting in the Charter.

This is a simple statement of fact.

sceptre

Hagar wrote: »

There is no reference to any restrictions on the laguage used for posting in the Charter.

This is a simple statement of fact.

Take it to Feedback or the Help Desk. The charter specifically covers what you're currently doing.

gurramok

Cliste wrote: »

Well what I was inviting anyone who speaks Irish to discuss this in teach na Gealt (forum name), I set up a similar thread, but hopefully we can stay more on topic there!

One of the things I said there is that I feel it's important not to let things like this be hyjacked by Militant Republicans. Something that has happened to be honest.

I assume you mean The Rising?

If the govt of this country had brought about a proper remembrance ceremony for the heroes pre-2006, we wouldn't have had militant republicans taking up the flag of the occasion as to speak.

An analogy would be flying the Irish tricoulour pre 1988. To fly it in the 80's was to be branded an IRA supporter. As soon as the Irish soccer team went to great heights in 1988, it was embraced without any shame by anyone who wanted to fly it.

At least we had politicians from FF and FG united on Easter Sunday remembering the freedom fighters, wish they would learn one or two things before lining their own pockets.

Grudaire

gurramok wrote: »

I assume you mean The Rising?

If the govt of this country had brought about a proper remembrance ceremony for the heroes pre-2006, we wouldn't have had militant republicans taking up the flag of the occasion as to speak.

An analogy would be flying the Irish tricoulour pre 1988. To fly it in the 80's was to be branded an IRA supporter. As soon as the Irish soccer team went to great heights in 1988, it was embraced without any shame by anyone who wanted to fly it.

At least we had politicians from FF and FG united on Easter Sunday remembering the freedom fighters, wish they would learn one or two things before lining their own pockets.

Yea - I'm still talking about the rising (which at this stage means that I could be done for off topic posting:pac:)

Yea - I think that it would do a lot of good for all the parties to celebrate the rising. Labour should have a big interest in the rising as well. But I would love to see every party come together and do something. To claim back the Easter lily for instance would be a massive step, and all it would take would be getting all the parties to wear one.

I found the coverage last year (In fact 3 years ago) of the rising was great, the times did a very good supplement on the rising. Made for interesting reading, and while I claim to know what happened I learned a lot from it. Ahhhh if I had power.....

dlofnep

Instead of celebrating the lifes of the many brave who took part in the events surrounding 1916, we have the usual suspects trying to have a dig. The mind truly boggles. For once, just once - I'd like to have a thread on here, where we can be proud of our fallen friends and be truly thankful for the great sacrifices that they gave. Some people wouldn't give the space on the shirt in memory of them, but yet - those brave people gave up their lifes.

Are people so bitter that they come into such a thread, post images of the Union Jack in an attempt to get a rise out of someone?

I've said all I need to say in this thread. If there was ever a heaven, I would be ashamed of what Pearse and Connolly would think if they read the nonsense posted in here.

I don't want to get into a flag-waving, patriot type rant - But for feck sake, show a bit of class and respect.

futurehope

dlofnepsaid said:

9th-11th August, 1971, Ballymurphy.

30th of January, 1972 in Derry.

Talk about rejecting reality and substituting it with your own! :eek:

Whatever happened on either of these occasions happened because of the ongoing PIRA campaign. No PIRA campaign - no British Army presence. Simple.

It's easy to see who the aggressors were when you look a little further back in history to see what actually caused this conflict in the first place. Britain expanding it's territory ring a bell?

You amuse me. How far back in history do you want to go? The plantation perhaps? Perhaps we should redraw the map of Europe as it existed in 1641 - no Germany, no Italy etc - oh, and no United Ireland either - we had to wait for The British to bring that about.

I see how you conveniently forgot the murders by the UDA, UFF and UVF.

Yes, sorry about that, here are those figures:

Republican killings: 2057
Loyalist killings: 1019

So it appears that Republicans were responsible for twice as many deaths as Loyalists. Doesn't appear that Republicans were on the defencive does it? On the contrary, as soon as The IRA called their ceasefire, Loyalists did likewise. Think how many lives might have been saved if The IRA had wound up their campaign earlier.

Not to mention the collusion between British forces and loyalist paramilitaries. But don't leave that get in the way of a balanced conversation.

Yes, I'm sure there was some collusion between UK forces and Loyalist militants, you can hardly blame either side for that, given the death and destruction Republicans were causing. Of course, Nationalists working for The UK state often put the finger on members of the security forces as well didn't they? Not so well publicised for some reason...

Yeah, they sure defended them on Bloody Sunday! Never have I heard such revisionist nonsense in my life. The British forces routinely harassed members of the nationalist community, interned innocent people without trial, colluded with loyalist terrorists and upheld an orange state.

Again, none of that would have happened without The IRA campaign. The IRA were at the root of the problem, no one else.

WOW! A whole 8%.. Are you attempting to convince us that the RUC wasn't a unionist dominanted police force, which fed heavily to unionist demand? If so, you're not doing a good job.

You're quite dismissive of those Catholic police officers who stood shoulder to shoulder with their Protestant comrades in the face of IRA fascism - many of them paying with their lives. I can assure you without IRA intimidation the figure would have exceeded 8%, as it does now, of course.

The 26 counties and 6 counties were to operate under a single banner through two Governments - but this was not set under fair conditions, hence the 26 county walkout and creation of a new independant state, in which it specified the 6 counties to be categorically apart of it's territory.

No, the 26 counties wanted out of The Union - fair enough, but as they were entitled to self determination, so were the Northern 6 counties. It's called democracy. The fact that the new Southern State laid claim to part of The UK was a disgrace.

Democratic my arse. Democratic would have been given a vote to every person in Ireland (which was one country at the time) - whether they wanted a united and soverign Ireland, or a divided Ireland which would result in a civil war. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been the latter.

Wrong again. You seem to assume that self determination could only have been exercised on an island wide basis. There is absolutely no reason why that had to be the case.

Predatory my arse. Because Britain created a state with intent to give a minority the majority voice, upheld by British security forces? The plantations were predatory.

Wrong again. Britain was in favour of home rule for all of Ireland, but it accepted that democracy demanded the creation of a Northern statelet (or region of The UK, to be more accurate). As for the plantations, they are ancient history and occurred long before The US was settled, any reference to them is laughable.

Britain created conditions in which catholics and protestants were immediately classified as two seperate identities. This was evident as early as the Penal Laws, when the catholics were treated as second class citizens. In more recent times in the 60's, where it took a strong civil rights movement at the cost of innocent life to address the plight of the catholic/nationalist people.

Yes, the civil rights movement that was hijacked by The IRA - as it's members at the time have admitted. Isn't it funny that The UK state delivered 'civil rights' in the early '70s but The Provo campaign continued? But then it was never about civil rights really, was it?

futurehope

O'Coonassa wrote: »

But there was a democratic majority of Unionists in only three counties? Those three would surely have had the right to 'go independant based on a democratic decision' but claiming that six counties being included had anything to do with democratic wishes is wilfull blindness on your part.

Where was it written that a county by county vote was the most democratic? Perhaps it should have been a province by province vote - that would have meant all 9 Ulster counties staying in The UK.

gurramok

futurehope wrote: »

Where was it written that a county by county vote was the most democratic? Perhaps it should have been a province by province vote - that would have meant all 9 Ulster counties staying in The UK.

Yes, maybe it should of been a province wide vote. Did you actually do the maths before posting that nonsense? 9 counties would of made NI ungovernable.

Now, wtf has the Troubles got to do with this thread?:rolleyes:

futurehope

GAAwebsite wrote: »

I didn't bother reading your post I just request you take down that flag as it is a total disrespest to the name of this thread and the heroes of Ireland.

I'm sorry you find The Union Flag so offencive and indeed I'm surprised given how many Southern Irishman fought and indeed died under it in WW1 (whilst Pearse was being spat at by women in Dublin).