orange provocation

alastair

cardwizzard wrote: »

Fact of the matter is that no matter how much the OO try to dress up their organisation, they are rotting to the core with bigots and scum.

And until these elements are ousted, which IMO will never happen because they don't want them out, they will continue to be the same narrow minded, pathetic excuse of a 'culture' know to mankind.

Just a reminder that all but one of the parades this year were arranged with consideration to those who object to the parades. For an organisation comprised largely of bigots, and to some degree of, yep, scumbags. They seem to be generally managing to work out some sort of compromise for the future.

Jimoslimos

alastair wrote: »

Yeah - keep ignores the hundreds of thousands out on the roads in support of this withering organisation. Maybe no-one will come out next year, eh?

Again I'll ask, since when does mass support of a movement mean it's right?

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

Are you going to address the collapse in membership or not? Jesus H.:rolleyes:

There's no collapse in OO membership that doesn't reflect the decline in broader (Protestant and Catholic) participation on this island. If you think the OO is going to disappear, you're presumably of the same opinion for the main churches too. Maybe someday, but there's nothing imminent.

alastair

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Again I'll ask, since when does mass support of a movement mean it's right?

I don't approve of their principles, but I've no problem with those who do participating in marches. The point isn't really whether we (outside that tradition) think it's right or not - it's how we all learn to get along with some mutual respect.

cardwizzard

alastair wrote: »

Just a reminder that all but one of the parades this year were arranged with consideration to those who object to the parades. For an organisation comprised largely of bigots, and to some degree of, yep, scumbags. They seem to be generally managing to work out some sort of compromise for the future.

What has that got to do with what I posted?

Are they not the masters anymore, that they once thought. Are you trying to tell me they are trying to devolp and move with the times?

Do the still expel or try to, any members who attend a Catholic Mass? Police officer who was murdered at that. This time last year, nice compromise for the future.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-13064956

Noreen1

billybudd wrote: »

I am sorry but william of orange is not symbol of the protestant religion, he is a symbol of war and in this case it is the battle of the boyne and from an Irish context that war was about being released from sectarian and etnic rule and to have rights to own land and have rights to hold office as a catholic and to one day self govern as an independent state.

Also you can be proud to be Irish and be protestant without the need to join and be part of an order that celebrates from its earliest onset sectarian and bigotry behaviour.

If it is a orange order lodge then the clue is in the name, orange=william of orange, a Dutch man who came to Ireland to preserve the right to treat Irish nationlists as second rate citizens with no rights.

I include RC & COI as Irish nationals btw.

Of course you can be proud to be Irish and Protestant without being a member of the OO.

I'm not a member, or supporter, of the OO, by the way.
But plenty of Protestants, who are not members of the OO, go to these marches, and, whether I like it or not, some Protestants see King Billy as the defender of their Religion, and the defender of Religious freedom, but without seeing any need for triumphalism, or having any dislike against either the Irish, or Catholics.

If we prevent an orderly, peaceful march in Dublin - and again, I stress the need to respect Nationalist sentiments - then we are discriminating against them, in the same way that Catholics in Northern Ireland were discriminated against for years - and the extremists among the OO get to bleat about how we're intolerant.

I'm fully aware of the hypocrisy of the "victim complex" that some Northern OO members like to portray. I just don't believe in either giving them fuel for that particular fire - or allowing them any triumphalist nonsense.

Therefore, if the Irish lodges are allowed march, avoiding sensitive areas - and assuming that they are going to behave in a civilised manner - then, fair enough, let them march.

If they choose not to behave in a civilised manner - then future marches can be banned. (And the bill for damages should be forwarded to any lodge that causes trouble.)

If any of the yobs from Northern Ireland show up, and decide to start trouble, then they should be flung in Mountjoy, and subjected to every charge the Gardaí can throw at them.
I'm tempted to suggest that they should be escorted back across the border, preferably by the Irish army, and at gunpoint, but
a: I doubt if that's possible, and
b: The idea of them spending a while locked up, and subjected to justice, appeals to me.:D

alastair

cardwizzard wrote: »

What has that got to do with what I posted?

Are they not the masters anymore, that they once thought. Are you trying to tell me they are trying to devolp and move with the times?

That's what I'm telling you. It might well be smallish steps - but it is definitely different to what it used to be. The same is true (moreso imo) for the Apprentice Boys.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

There's no collapse in OO membership that doesn't reflect the decline in broader (Protestant and Catholic) participation on this island. If you think the OO is going to disappear, you're presumably of the same opinion for the main churches too. Maybe someday, but there's nothing imminent.

Over 100,000 in 1968....30,000 and falling today, in the highest church going population in the UK.
I'm afraid church participation doen't explain a collapse of that nature.
What does explain it though, is the realisation that this organisation will continue to embarass decent christians and they want none of it.

PauloMN

alastair wrote: »

Just a reminder that all but one of the parades this year were arranged with consideration to those who object to the parades. For an organisation comprised largely of bigots, and to some degree of, yep, scumbags. They seem to be generally managing to work out some sort of compromise for the future.

"They" are working it out? :rolleyes: Nothing to do with the Parades Commission, politicians and the local representatives then? The OO in NI historically showed little concern to those who objected to their parades. Without changing times and outside influences, I doubt anything would have changed with regard to OO parades.

Still nothing I can see on the OO website with regard to the behaviour of Orangemen in the OP. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place, so if anyone can point me to an OO statement on the incident, and how the OO will be dealing with it, I'd appreciate it.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

Over 100,000 in 1968....30,000 and falling today, in the highest church going population in the UK.
I'm afraid church participation doen't explain a collapse of that nature.

Of course it does - what were the mass-going numbers for '68 compared to today?

alastair

PauloMN wrote: »

"They" are working it out? :rolleyes: Nothing to do with the Parades Commission, politicians and the local representatives then? The OO in NI historically showed little concern to those who objected to their parades. Without changing times and outside influences, I doubt anything would have changed with regard to OO parades.

That's all well and good - but you can say the same for anything. The fact is that they have shifted their stance on discussing routing, times, and music - and have made changes.

Happyman42

Noreen1 wrote: »

If we prevent an orderly, peaceful march in Dublin - and again, I stress the need to respect Nationalist sentiments - then we are discriminating against them, in the same way that Catholics in Northern Ireland were discriminated against for years - and the extremists among the OO get to bleat about how we're intolerant.

No we are not discriminating, we are simply NOT legitimising a sectarian organisation. I have no respect for them and no amount of PC pressure is going to extract it from me.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

No we are not discriminating, we are simply NOT legitimising a sectarian organisation. I have no respect for them and no amount of PC pressure is going to extract it from me.

That attitude sounds awfully orangey.

PauloMN

cardwizzard wrote: »

What has that got to do with what I posted?

Are they not the masters anymore, that they once thought. Are you trying to tell me they are trying to devolp and move with the times?

Do the still expel or try to, any members who attend a Catholic Mass? Police officer who was murdered at that. This time last year, nice compromise for the future.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-13064956

It's quite incredible to think that was only last year. Unsurprising, but incredible that this sort of thinking is still apparent in modern day NI.

cardwizzard

alastair wrote: »

That's what I'm telling you. It might well be smallish steps - but it is definitely different to what it used to be. The same is true (moreso imo) for the Apprentice Boys.

What about the rest of my post. No opinion on that.

I'd disagree with you 100% that they are changing or want to. IMO they are so deeply engrained in bigotry and hatred of all things Cathloic or Irish that they will never change.

Noreen1

alastair wrote: »

Heh. I note you felt 'ethnic dances' watered down your position somewhat. All the pasty-faced indigenous residents of NI are from the same ethnic melting pot. There's no racism at play outside that church - just common or garden sectarianism.

Where did I say there was?
Incitement to hatred of Catholics, most of whom in Northern Ireland, identify themselves as being of Irish ethnicity, however, is another matter entirely.

Incidently, I felt "ethnic dances" wasn't relevant, not that it watered down my argument.
Then again, if you consider that display by a bandmember of hopping around the place like a deranged monkey as some kind of "ethnic dance" - maybe it does have relevance.......:p:D

Incidently, what's an "Ulster Scot", if not a member of an ethnic group?

alastair

cardwizzard wrote: »

What about the rest of my post. No opinion on that.

I'd disagree with you 100% that they are changing or want to. IMO they are so deeply engrained in bigotry and hatred of all things Cathloic or Irish that they will never change.

Except that they have.

cardwizzard

PauloMN wrote: »

It's quite incredible to think that was only last year. Unsurprising, but incredible that this sort of thinking is still apparent in modern day NI.

Rules are rules and they must be upheld. :eek::eek: WTF.

alastair

cardwizzard wrote: »

Rules are rules and they must be upheld. :eek::eek: WTF.

When were Rules 21 and 42 suspended in the GAA? No shortage of dodgy sectarianism in all our recent history.

PauloMN

alastair wrote: »

That's all well and good - but you can say the same for anything. The fact is that they have shifted their stance on discussing routing, times, and music - and have made changes.

Yes, they have, but to try and give them credit for doing so when, in reality, their hand was forced is short-sighted.

I welcome them to have a parade in Dublin if they so wish. We live in a democracy. I would expect the OO to work with the Gardaí and local authorities on planning it though, giving careful consideration to the timing, its route and the expected behaviour of the participants.

My main concern is the lack of control they have over their members, which was quite clear by the carry on at that church. I'd expect full accountability from the organising ROI lodge if such incidents happened here, and the deafening silence that we see from the OO up north would not be acceptable if we were to allow such marches here. I'd also expect the ROI organisers to take full responsibility for the behaviour of any OO members travelling from the six counties for such a parade in Dublin.

Finally, if this were to happen, it would need to be exclusively an OO march. No tag-on groups like Love Ulster, FAIR or other such organisations.

Jimoslimos

alastair wrote: »

When were Rules 21 and 42 suspended in the GAA? No shortage of dodgy sectarianism in all our recent history.

If you want to start a new thread on the historical follies of the GAA go ahead. Otherwise explain how this is relevant.

Anyway I don't see how Rule 42 relates to anything, sporting organisation in competition with others keeping hold of its assets. Pretty standard.

PauloMN

alastair wrote: »

When were Rules 21 and 42 suspended in the GAA? No shortage of dodgy sectarianism in all our recent history.

How was rule 21 sectarian? Are the PSNI a religion now?

Anyway, the point is, those rules have been changed. The OO seem hell bent on not changing, even when a member attends a Mass to grieve for a young man who gave his life to serve all people of NI.

alastair

PauloMN wrote: »

Yes, they have, but to try and give them credit for doing so when, in reality, their hand was forced is short-sighted.

I welcome them to have a parade in Dublin if they so wish. We live in a democracy. I would expect the OO to work with the Gardaí and local authorities on planning it though, giving careful consideration to the timing, its route and the expected behaviour of the participants.

My main concern is the lack of control they have over their members, which was quite clear by the carry on at that church. I'd expect full accountability from the organising ROI lodge if such incidents happened here, and the deafening silence that we see from the OO up north would not be acceptable if we were to allow such marches here. I'd also expect the ROI organisers to take full responsibility for the behaviour of any OO members travelling from the six counties for such a parade in Dublin.

Finally, if this were to happen, it would need to be exclusively an OO march. No tag-on groups like Love Ulster, FAIR or other such organisations.

The band in front of the church were the YCV - UVF youth band. They wouldn't really have massive representation amongst the Southern OO lodges.

golden lane

the orange order has had it's glory days........best for them to give it up and form a few wonderfull marching bands.......

yes, it is time it changed it's tune/s...

alastair

PauloMN wrote: »

How was rule 21 sectarian? Are the PSNI a religion now?

Anyway, the point is, those rules have been changed. The OO seem hell bent on not changing, even when a member attends a Mass to grieve for a young man who gave his life to serve all people of NI.

The motivation was pretty clearly sectarian, as was the ban, and rule 42. That a sports organisation managed to hang on to such nonsense for so long should make clear enough how a highly conservative, insular, and suspicious religious organisation hangs on to patently sectarian nonsense in it's rules to date.

Jimoslimos

alastair wrote: »

The motivation was pretty clearly sectarian, as was the ban, and rule 42. That a sports organisation managed to hang on to such nonsense for so long should make clear enough how a highly conservative, insular, and suspicious religious organisation hangs on to patently sectarian nonsense in it's rules to date.

Thread in danger of being derailed here, but hey when you're losing an argument....

What was sectarian about Rule 21? I didn't agree fully with it but remember this was an organisation which suffered greatly from British military intimidation, Crossmaglen? The GAA have had no issues with people from any religious background - unlike the OO.

As for rule 42, explain to me what is unusual about a sporting organisation seeking to protect its assets from competition?

alastair

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Thread in danger of being derailed here, but hey when you're losing an argument....

What was sectarian about Rule 21? I didn't agree fully with it but remember this was an organisation which suffered greatly from British military intimidation, Crossmaglen? The GAA have had no issues with people from any religious background - unlike the OO.

As for rule 42, explain to me what is unusual about a sporting organisation seeking to protect its assets from competition?

What had the RUC got to do with Crossmaglen? That was the British Army.

Rule 42 was the last vestiges of the ban - it's no accident that the last stronghold of support for rule 42 was the NI clubs. It wasn't about protecting the survival of the game at all.

PauloMN

alastair wrote: »

The motivation was pretty clearly sectarian, as was the ban, and rule 42. That a sports organisation managed to hang on to such nonsense for so long should make clear enough how a highly conservative, insular, and suspicious religious organisation hangs on to patently sectarian nonsense in it's rules to date.

The motivation was not sectarian. You were the one at pains earlier on to highlight was is/is not sectarian, and now you are trying to label rule 21 as sectarian? It was quite obvious that GAA centres, particularly in rural border areas, were subject to intimidation from security forces. I don't ever remember a "no Protestants" rule in the GAA, do you?

Comparing the situations is frankly ludicrous. The GAA have got rid of rule 21 as the RUC changed and became the PSNI, and it was not a sectarian rule in any case. To compare that to the OO - one of whose members wanted another member removed for attending a Mass - is like comparing chalk and cheese.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

What had the RUC got to do with Crossmaglen? That was the British Army.

Rule 42 was the last vestiges of the ban - it's no accident that the last stronghold of support for rule 42 was the NI clubs. It wasn't about protecting the survival of the game at all.

When all else fails...deflect. :rolleyes:

Bessiebee

Lest there be any doubt, Sam Maguire was Protestant :eek:

alastair

PauloMN wrote: »

The motivation was not sectarian. You were the one at pains earlier on to highlight was is/is not sectarian, and now you are trying to label rule 21 as sectarian? It was quite obvious that GAA centres, particularly in rural border areas, were subject to intimidation from security forces. I don't ever remember a "no Protestants" rule in the GAA, do you?

No - but I certainly remember a set of rules that aimed, and succeeded in ensuring that unionists and loyalists (who kinda tended to be Protestant) were excluded from the GAA. Which resulted in the same outcome. That Rule 42 hung on in for so long was down to NI clubs - which puts the lie to the motivations for the ban.

PauloMN wrote: »

Comparing the situations is frankly ludicrous. The GAA have got rid of rule 21 as the RUC changed and became the PSNI, and it was not a sectarian rule in any case. To compare that to the OO - one of whose members wanted another member removed for attending a Mass - is like comparing chalk and cheese.

Not chalk and cheese - two sets of organisations who set out to create nice segregated situations for themselves. The OO does it in it's own clumsy and blunt manner - and yep - the GAA approach isn't quite so bad, but honestly - would any Protestant really want to follow Kevin Lynch GAC, or participate in a sport that gets up to this sort of ****e:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18322046

alastair

Bessiebee wrote: »

Lest there be any doubt, Sam Maguire was Protestant :eek:

Well. that's that sorted then. :rolleyes:

Cú Giobach

alastair wrote: »

No - but I certainly remember a set of rules that aimed, and succeeded in ensuring that unionists and loyalists (who kinda tended to be Protestant) were excluded from the GAA. Which resulted in the same outcome. That Rule 42 hung on in for so long was down to NI clubs - which puts the lie to the motivations for the ban.



Not chalk and cheese - two sets of organisations who set out to create nice segregated situations for themselves. The OO does it in it's own clumsy and blunt manner - and yep - the GAA approach isn't quite so bad, but honestly - would any Protestant really want to follow Kevin Lynch GAC, or participate in a sport that gets up to this sort of ****e:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18322046

Yes a protestant like Sam Maguire, and the many other Irish or nationalist protestants who have been involved with the organisation.
You seem to making out nationalism is exclusively catholic, you are so so wrong.
You claim an organisation that names it's second biggest award after a protestant was inherently sectarian, doesn't this seem a bit odd??
Jack Boothman ex presedent of the GAA, a protestant head of an anti-protestant organisation?? Give us a break.
How about a club named after one of the protestant heros of Ireland. http://wolfetonesshannon.clare.gaa.ie/

You really are clutching at straws to continue arguing here.

alastair

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Yes a protestant like Sam Maguire, and the many other Irish or nationalist protestants who have been involved with the organisation.
You seem to making out nationalism is exclusively catholic, you are so so wrong.
You claim an organisation that names it's second biggest award after a protestant was inherently sectarian, doesn't this seem a bit odd??
Jack Boothman ex presedent of the GAA, a protestant head of an anti-protestant organisation?? Give us a break.
How about a club named after one of the protestant heros of Ireland. http://wolfetonesshannon.clare.gaa.ie/

You really are clutching at straws to continue arguing here.

No sniff of sectarianism in a sports club that currently awards youth medals with an IRA terrorist on them then? My mistake. That must just be an expression of 'nationalism' eh?

Cú Giobach

alastair wrote: »

No sniff of sectarianism in a sports club that currently awards youth medals with an IRA terrorist on them then? My mistake. That must just be an expression of 'nationalism' eh?

Yes. You got it.

Just once on this thread why don't you at least try to respond to a point someone makes, please explain how a sectarian anti-protestant organisation had a protestant head, names one of its major awards after a protestant and even names clubs after a protestant. (not to mention the many protestants who play with the organisation).
If you cannot explain this, your argument falls flat on its face.

alastair

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Yes. You got it.

I'm sure if the OO fielded a lacrosse team with the Billy Wright medal for the kiddies - it'd get a pass on the same basis. I'm sure.

cowzerp

These complete Morons are no better than Nazi's-Bigoted, sectarian muppets

Playing a famine song is just pathetic and shows them up for what they are, Idiots.

And they also look so camp in there silly sailor suits-funny considering their known for been Homophobes too, I think they protest too much to be honest..

Cú Giobach

alastair wrote: »

I'm sure if the OO fielded a lacrosse team with the Billy Wright medal for the kiddies - it'd get a pass on the same basis. I'm sure.

So no response once again to the points I raised.
Your argument has therefore been thoroughly trounced. Time to admit defeat Ali.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

No - but I certainly remember a set of rules that aimed, and succeeded in ensuring that unionists and loyalists (who kinda tended to be Protestant) were excluded from the GAA. Which resulted in the same outcome. That Rule 42 hung on in for so long was down to NI clubs - which puts the lie to the motivations for the ban.



Not chalk and cheese - two sets of organisations who set out to create nice segregated situations for themselves. The OO does it in it's own clumsy and blunt manner - and yep - the GAA approach isn't quite so bad, but honestly - would any Protestant really want to follow Kevin Lynch GAC, or participate in a sport that gets up to this sort of ****e:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18322046

The rule did not discriminate between catholic or protestant, it did not allow members of the RUC to join. That was a polictical stance totally in line with the republican ethos of the GAA, not a sectarian one. Many protestants joined and played for the GAA without a problem.
The rule was dropped when sectarianism was rooted out of the RUC and it became the PSNI.T
he club that presented the medals where simply paying tribute to a club member who had given much service to the club. Everyone is allowed to respectfully remember their past.
End of, Alastair, the GAA has no relevance to the debate about a sectarian and provocative organisation. As said, there is a list of stuff you haven't and are avoiding addressing on this thread

alastair

Cú Giobach wrote: »

So no response once again to the points I raised.
Your argument has therefore been thoroughly trounced. Time to admit defeat Ali.

I'm not feeling any love for the Billy Wright medal for the kids - come on now - it's just a bit of harmless nationalism.

Cú Giobach

alastair wrote: »

I'm not feeling any love for the Billy Wright medal for the kids - come on now - it's just a bit of harmless nationalism.

If you can't answer the mind bogglingly simple question of how come there are protestants in this anti-protestant organisation, then it is time to stop making a fool of yourself, I'm starting to feel embarrassed for you now.

alastair

Cú Giobach wrote: »

If you can't answer the mind bogglingly simple question of how come there are protestants in this anti-protestant organisation, then it is time to stop making a fool of yourself, I'm starting to feel embarrassed for you now.

How many protestants participated in the GAA up north for all those years of the ban etc? The experience of those few protestants who did? The ongoing issues in that regard: http://thescore.thejournal.ie/sectarian-storm-armagh-complain-of-racist-abuse-towards-players-391260-Mar2012/

Sure - there's ample evidence of a different situation south of the border (to a degree mind), but you would have to be delusional not to see how the various rules, ethos, and choices that NI clubs made/make are geared towards sectarian segregation.

Honestly - the prospect of a kiddies' Billy Wright medal wouldn't bother you in the slightest? Those are some blinkers.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

How many protestants participated in the GAA up north for all those years of the ban etc? The experience of those few protestants who did? The ongoing issues in that regard: http://thescore.thejournal.ie/sectarian-storm-armagh-complain-of-racist-abuse-towards-players-391260-Mar2012/

Sure - there's ample evidence of a different situation south of the border (to a degree mind), but you would have to be delusional not to see how the various rules, ethos, and choices that NI clubs made/make are geared towards sectarian segregation.

Honestly - the prospect of a kiddies' Billy Wright medal wouldn't bother you in the slightest? Those are some blinkers.

Hope you are writing to the GAA telling them why, in your opinion, that there is no racism in Northern Ireland, Alastair!

The GAA had a 'Republican' ethos, what part of that do you not understand? But nobody was denied membership because of their religion. Give it up Alastair, your repeated attempts to deflect and drag the thread off topic say more about the weakness of your argument than anything else.

karma_

alastair wrote: »

How many protestants participated in the GAA up north for all those years of the ban etc? The experience of those few protestants who did? The ongoing issues in that regard: http://thescore.thejournal.ie/sectarian-storm-armagh-complain-of-racist-abuse-towards-players-391260-Mar2012/

What are you rambling about? The incident you have linked to had nothing to do with taunting Protestant players, this is the taunting that all Northern GAA teams endure on the pitch, and have done for some time.

Also, just why the fúck are you even bringing the GAA into this thread is completely beyond me, talk about completely derailing a thread, but even by AH standards this is going above and beyond the call of duty.

Had you been consistent from the start, and rightly criticised the actions of the band the thread was about, there would have been no need for the thread to go this distance, but oh no, you had to go FULL Nelson McCausland on it! Well done.

Cú Giobach

alastair wrote: »

How many protestants participated in the GAA up north for all those years of the ban etc? The experience of those few protestants who did? The ongoing issues in that regard: http://thescore.thejournal.ie/sectarian-storm-armagh-complain-of-racist-abuse-towards-players-391260-Mar2012/

This link is actually showing the GAA itself is not sectarian
Of course less protestants play GAA it is not that common in protestant schools, rugby and hockey being the preferred games.

Sure - there's ample evidence of a different situation south of the border (to a degree mind), but you would have to be delusional not to see how the various rules, ethos, and choices that NI clubs made/make are geared towards sectarian segregation.

You have had this explained numerous times (with you ignoring the explanations as usual).

Honestly - the prospect of a kiddies' Billy Wright medal wouldn't bother you in the slightest? Those are some blinkers.

Give it a break, I ignored your comment because it was irrelevant. Nothing more than an embarrassing, attempted deflection of a desperate man.

billybudd

Lets see.

GAA: Highest prize named after a protestant...tick

Allows protestants to participate ..... tick


Some clubs named after protestents.....tick


Trys to include rather than exclude....tick


OO: No catholics allowed......tick

hmmmm

billybudd

alastair wrote: »

I'm guessing that whooshing noise over your head means nothing to you?



As long as it is not the sound of aggressive Army helicopters, its fine.

alastair

karma_ wrote: »

Had you been consistent from the start, and rightly criticised the actions of the band the thread was about, there would have been no need for the thread to go this distance, but oh no, you had to go FULL Nelson McCausland on it! Well done.

I'd look into those comprehension issues.

alastair

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Give it a break, I ignored your comment because it was irrelevant. Nothing more than an embarrassing, attempted deflection of a desperate man.

Nonsense - it's entirely relevant. If you're telling me that as an unassuming apolitical Tryone Catholic parent, you'd sent your kid out to compete for the Billy Wright medal - you're a liar. You'd know exactly how welcome you were in that fold. Flip that around and let's talk Protestant family and the Martin McCaughey medal - same story. Different blinders.

karma_

alastair wrote: »

I'd look into those comprehension issues.

Aren't we the clever one.

So clever, your greatest contribution to the thread has been "Sure ignore them or leave." ..... AND then you share with us all the faults of the GAA.