Mass unmarked grave for 800 babies in Tuam

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Glengormanjay wrote: »

GCU – Answer one question – How can you defend and even play with this issue? When seemingly one of the 796 bodies found in this authority owned septic tank was at least nine years of age.

I don't follow the question. And, unless I've missed something, no physical remains have yet been found.

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

You want proof that the Dail is a public forum?

Still obfuscating I see.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Still obfuscating I see.

Not really, just puzzled that you're pursuing such a pointless line.

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

you're pursuing such a pointless line.

Indeed.

Why bother investigating decades of human rights violations when a few people knew all about it at the time?

We should all content ourselves with discussing how we discuss things- we could call them our terms of reference.

Any sign of that evidence to show the contents of Dáil debates were widely known in the 1920s yet?

same ol sh1te

Thread has gone ridiculous, why we need to justify the inactions of previous generations is beyond me

Cabaal

same ol sh1te wrote: »

Thread has gone ridiculous, why we need to justify the inactions of previous generations is beyond me

I think its just he/she wants to de-rail the thread anyway they can,

Frankly I'll be ignoring them from now on in this thread as they add nothing helpful/useful or interesting

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Any sign of that evidence to show the contents of Dáil debates were widely known in the 1920s yet?

But, sure, you're not responding to what I've said. Several times. Dáil debates from the 1920s most certainly are a valid source of information on public debate from the period.

You can't seriously be disputing that.

Glengormanjay

Ok - I will shorten the question. Why do you "play" with this topic? Making no real point, continuing to derail the actual discussion line around such a serious topic.

I have noticed that you haven't really addressed the actual topic that the rest of us want to discuss. Also that you don't acknowledge the real issues. I hate to draw parralels but that was the type of thinking that facilitated the worst of the German National Socialist Party 1921 - 45.

Please let us know if you only want to add "gust" and be in the centre of disscussion - because i'm sure someone of us will know the name of an appropriate bar in your area.

Spring Onion

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Grand, I'd just wonder if any of them sees a connection.

I have no idea what you are on about. what have fee paying schools got to do with it?

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

But, sure, you're not responding to what I've said. Several times. Dáil debates from the 1920s most certainly are a valid source of information on public debate from the period.

You can't seriously be disputing that.

I'm not.

I am disputing your assertion that what was discussed during Dáil debates was widely known and that the existence of such Dáil debates renders any current discussion pointless.

Do you stand by your 'widely known' and if so please provide evidence or retract.

Spring Onion

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I don't follow the question. And, unless I've missed something, no physical remains have yet been found.

None will ever be found if you have your way.

Bannasidhe

Glengormanjay wrote: »

Ok - I will shorten the question. Why do you "play" with this topic? Making no real point, continuing to derail the actual discussion line around such a serious topic.

.

Meh. Same thing happened in the Abortion thread.

same ol sh1te

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Meh. Same thing happened in the Abortion thread.

Can we all just click ignore at the same time and carry on

Glengormanjay

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Meh. Same thing happened in the Abortion thread.

Don't say you mean same thing same person?

Look GCU! Be brave, truth and dignity will make you a better person, it will certainly make this a better country!

Corkfeen

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

But, sure, you're not responding to what I've said. Several times. Dáil debates from the 1920s most certainly are a valid source of information on public debate from the period.

You can't seriously be disputing that.

You're using the existence of Dáil debates and some CSO stats to justify not investigating. Just because many were aware of potentially awful conditions isn't adequate reason for further investigation to be done into the matter. Most Irish people I'd suspect would agree with this statement rather than sweeping it under the carpet as just one of those things that happened at the time. It needs to be properly addressed.

Bannasidhe

Glengormanjay wrote: »

Don't say you mean same thing same person?

!

Same person. Same M.O. with added comments about women getting emotional when there was no need. We were discussing that all wrong too.

Think it's time this woman went and sat in her garden and continued reading a rollocking story about Barbary pirates and the Sun King. Someone call me if that evidence re 'widely known' ever emerges. I have a few colleagues who would like to see it ..(or do I...)

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Spring Onion wrote: »

I have no idea what you are on about. what have fee paying schools got to do with it?

It has to do with people paying for a school with a religious ethos.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

When the Bon Secours Medical Group doesn't account for about 15% of private hospital income, it might be evidence of people thinking the Church is no longer underwriting the life they want to lead. When people aren't willing to pay €5,000 a year to send their daughters to Mary Robinson's old school, now held in a trust to protect the ethos of the Sacred Heart Sisters, that might mean something.

Glengormanjay wrote: »

Ok - I will shorten the question. Why do you "play" with this topic?

I'm not playing with the topic. I'm mostly just pointing out factual errors, as in the way you seemed to be under the impression that physical remains have been found.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I'm not.
I am disputing your assertion that what was discussed during Dáil debates was widely known and that the existence of such Dáil debates renders any current discussion pointless.
Do you stand by your 'widely known' and if so please provide evidence or retract.

Ah, this is an invented dispute. The point, that Dáil Debates are an adequate indication of the state of public discussion, stands. I take it you appreciate that the fact these matters were discussed in public undermines the view that a conspiracy ensured these deaths were hidden and unrecorded.

Corkfeen wrote: »

Just because many were aware of potentially awful conditions isn't adequate reason for further investigation to be done into the matter.

Well, if we accept that many were aware, that's at least progress.

Corkfeen

Nobody ever disputed that what occured was tolerated. We've repeatedly said this to you. However claiming Dáil debates were common knowledge to the majority of the public is rubbish.

Glengormanjay

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Same person. Same M.O. with added comments about women getting emotional when there was no need. We were discussing that all wrong too.

Think it's time this woman went and sat in her garden and continued reading a rollocking story about Barbary pirates and the Sun King. Someone call me if that evidence re 'widely known' ever emerges. I have a few colleagues who would like to see it ..(or do I...)

Hey Bannasidhe, et al
Keep the flag for transparency and accountability flying. They and they only will bring Ireland into the light.

I in my own small way am commited to taking that energy sapping blanket of shadows and misdirected interest away from people like GCU and our political class.

Glengormanjay

Oh no! I really thought you might have picked up on the many requests to desist. You obviously can't see what is staring you in the face - you can't see the big picture!

There must be a mechanism to have you banned from this discussion. If for no other reason - you haven't had a single thumbs up or thank you posted in reply to any of your comments.

robindch

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls -

Can we all please agree to differ on our individual beliefs, and our individual beliefs concerning the applicability, usefulness and accuracy of none or one or more of our individual beliefs concerning the imputed beliefs of one or more other groups concerning the legitimacy, or the factual accuracy, or any other attribute(s), or any other alleged attribute(s), concerning whatever on earth it is that GCU is complaining about, or importantly, appears to one or more forum posters, to be complaining about.

Honestly, this part of this important discussion could be bottled and sold as sleeping tablets.

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Ah, this is an invented dispute. .

Irony lolz.

Glengormanjay

To keep this discussion on track. Can anyone give any insight into exactly where the whole thing is at relevant to an investigation. I've just gone off and read several articels about remains and investigations, all seem aligned but none are definitive.

Bannasidhe

Glengormanjay wrote: »

To keep this discussion on track. Can anyone give any insight into exactly where the whole thing is at relevant to an investigation. I've just gone off and read several articels about remains and investigations, all seem aligned but none are definitive.

As far as I can determine officialdom is off on some merry tangent of it's own bickering about terms of reference with govt trying to set limits citing financial reasons and others - mainly those on the left - calling for a full investigation. (Let us not comment that financial considerations were also paramount 'back then and irony irony irony').

2 Garda detectives had a walk around and are chatting to people.

Private company did a ground penetrating mapping survey paid for by a newspaper which found two anomalies.

Um..think that's about it...oh - some files were borrowed (by Dept of Health?) from the National Archives and they seem to have gone walkabout...

Did I miss anything?

Glengormanjay

Thanks - all it will take is one person to "do the right thing" then I'm sure that the momentum will swing on this.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Glengormanjay wrote: »

To keep this discussion on track. Can anyone give any insight into exactly where the whole thing is at relevant to an investigation. I've just gone off and read several articels about remains and investigations, all seem aligned but none are definitive.

The official update is here:

http://www.merrionstreet.ie/index.php/2014/06/update-from-minister-flanagan-on-commission-of-investigation-minister-sets-out-information-counselling-services-available/?cat=12

<...>New email address for submissions on Terms of Reference of Commission of Investigation (motherandbabyhomes@dcya.gov.ie)<...>“The Government is anxious to have the Commission of Investigation established before the Dáil recess and has set a tight deadline. I am urging those who wish to make submissions to act without delay in availing of this opportunity to inform the considerations now underway.<...>

I suspect, if they go forward with this investigation, they'll have to dig up the site. I've been wondering a bit around how comprehensive burial records would be in practice, given the amount of "your grandad is in that mount over there" stuff that you hear at country funerals

http://www.oireachtas-debates.gov.ie/D/0098/D.0098.194512120029.html


Dáil Éireann - Volume 98 - 12 December, 1945
Public Health Bill, 1945—Second Stage.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Dr. Ward): <...>
It will probably come as a surprise to Deputies that under the existing law human remains may be buried in a place which is not a recognised burial-ground. There can be no records kept of such a burial, and it is not subject to the conditions which public health and public decency require. Section 92 of the Bill is intended to provide the necessary control in regard to the burial of bodies of deceased persons, and prescribes that such burials shall only be permitted in places recognised as burial grounds.

If burial in recognised grounds was only introduced in 1945, I'd take it to mean there is no chance of finding a previously undiscovered record in respect of the Tuam home.

Quite a good article by Kathy Sheridan today.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/casting-a-fresh-eye-on-the-tuam-controversy-1.1835766

<...> as the media gallops away on another Dan Brown- style Angels and Demons blockbuster, it is all starting to sound a little too convenient.<...>Yes, the Catholic Church was obsessive about controlling female sexuality but it happened to dovetail neatly with a national obsession over land and property and economic alliances called marriage. How much of this national child-dumping was simple economics? <...>

Brian Shanahan

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Same person. Same M.O. with added comments about women getting emotional when there was no need. We were discussing that all wrong too.

Think it's time this woman went and sat in her garden and continued reading a rollocking story about Barbary pirates and the Sun King. Someone call me if that evidence re 'widely known' ever emerges. I have a few colleagues who would like to see it ..(or do I...)

Or alternatively, you could read yourself some Kate Beaton comics.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

abaddon_ire wrote: »

These matters were intentionally brushed under the carpet.

You could be right, but have you any evidence? Bearing in mind, there is evidence that these matters were reported on annually and openly discussed. It would be strange to take flat public statements of fact as evidence of those same facts being suppressed.

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

You could be right, but have you any evidence? Bearing in mind, there is evidence that these matters were reported on annually and openly discussed. It would be strange to take flat public statements of fact as evidence of those same facts being suppressed.

Speaking of evidence....

Does 'Dáil debates widely known' ring any bells?

Lingua Franca

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What is being disputed is your assertion that it was widely known simply because it was discussed in the Dáil and some statistics were produced at the time. You have provided no evidence to support your claim that it was a matter of public knowledge.

Nor have you explained how this information came to be so widely disseminated in a country where large swathes of it had no electricity, no Irish radio station outside Dublin and that (2 RN) only began broadcasting in 1926, phones were rare, telegrams expensive...Was there, perchance, a town cryer yelling out Dáil reports and statistics to a population mainly educated to primary school level?

You are also ignoring the fact that as it was known to elected representatives in the 1920s it makes it worse because it still continued unabated for decades.

Since you think the whole issue is done and dusted and everyone knew - may I ask why your are posing here still having made you point several times now?

I think that the main reason that this is dominating news and why the population is so disgusted is that our relatively new fangled internet means that we can disseminate this information now. When Sinead O'Connor first took her stance against the goings on of the Catholic church in Ireland the majority didn't believe her and treated her with contempt, and we all know now that she was right but for some the attitude is already "well, we KNOW that so why keep banging on about it?".

We didn't know then. What little we (being the general populace and not the civil service or the clergy) did know wasn't the full horrific extent. We're finding that out now.

I, for one, am still digesting all of these atrocities and am not ready to brush them under the carpet or say "oh well, it was historical".

We are currently facing our very recent past. Stop pretending that it doesn't matte.