Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How long before Irish reunification?

Options
18889919394335

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,424 ✭✭✭janfebmar


    They shouldn't have bothered as the Unionist did a good job of wrecking the economy all on their own. They shouldn't be allowed to run a sweet shop let alone a sectarian backwater.

    Francie has plans to deport them so all will be well.


  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    eire4 wrote: »
    I was thinking the same myself. The term British Isles has absolutely no legal standing in any shape or form. It has no official status and is not used even in the Good Friday Agreement. It simply is an Anglo-Centric imperialist term usually used these days it seems to me as a cheap point scoring exercise.

    Not only are they trying to shoehorn the word British into the definition for obvious reasons. Janfebmar in her pedantry is using Hawaiians as an example, obviously oblivious to what happened to the Hawaiians at the hands of America which mirrors what happened to us here. Except the Americans apologised for illegally overthrowing the Hawaiian government. No true Hawaiian native would refer to themselves as 'American'.

    Bizarre.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,424 ✭✭✭janfebmar


    No true Hawaiian native would refer to themselves as 'American'.

    If they travel outside the USA they have American passports. They cheer on the American teams and American sports people in the Olympics. They vote in the American (USA) elections. Of course their nationality is American.

    As in the other example I used, people born and living in Tasmania are Australian as well as Tasmanian. Their passport is Australian. Tasmania is part of Australia.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,035 ✭✭✭trashcan


    janfebmar wrote: »
    It is much easier to say you are "British" than to say you are a "United Kingdomer".

    It is exactly the same as Hawaiians calling themselves American. America is a continent thousands of miles from Hawaii. The call themselves Hawaiian, and / or American. Usually too much of a tongue twister to say they are from the United States of America, when they can simply say they are "American".

    Nah. Your analogy might work if that place was called the United Sates of America and Hawaii.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    10-15 years
    eire4 wrote: »
    I was thinking the same myself. The term British Isles has absolutely no legal standing in any shape or form. It has no official status and is not used even in the Good Friday Agreement. It simply is an Anglo-Centric imperialist term usually used these days it seems to me as a cheap point scoring exercise.

    Not only are they trying to shoehorn the word British into the definition for obvious reasons. Janfebmar in her pedantry is using Hawaiians as an example, obviously oblivious to what happened to the Hawaiians at the hands of America which mirrors what happened to us here. Except the Americans apologised for illegally overthrowing the Hawaiian government. No true Hawaiian native would refer to themselves as 'American'.

    Bizarre.
    What is bizarre is you trying to tell people who and where they can identify with or from,especially if they have British passports and choose to identify as British.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,424 ✭✭✭janfebmar


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    What is bizarre is you trying to tell people who and where they can identify with or from,especially if they have British passports and choose to identify as British.

    The way Francie tells others who and where they can identify with is against the spirit of the g.f.a. They have a right to identify as British or part of the UK if they so wish, just as others have a right to identify as Irish if they so wish. No parity of esteem from Francie.

    Next thing is he will be telling Hawaiian they should not get an American passport or call themselves American. He will be telling people from Sicily to resist those nasty Coloniasts from Italy and not to be calling themselves Italian when they travel the world, they are Sicilians only.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,806 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    10-15 years
    janfebmar wrote: »
    The way Francie tells others who and where they can identify with is against the spirit of the g.f.a. They have a right to identify as British or part of the UK if they so wish, just as others have a right to identify as Irish if they so wish. No parity of esteem from Francie.

    Next thing is he will be telling Hawaiian they should not get an American passport or call themselves American. He will be telling people from Sicily to resist those nasty Coloniasts from Italy and not to be calling themselves Italian when they travel the world, they are Sicilians only.

    People from Hawaii are Hawaiian and American.
    People from Sicily are Sicilian and Italian.

    What point were you trying to make?

    People from.Northern Ireland are Northern Irish, which means they are both Irish and citizens of the UK, which people call being British as they don’t have another term for being a citizen of the UK despite not being from the island of Great Britain.

    Trying to reject that they are Irish is an insult to everyone living peacefully on the Island of Ireland.
    What’s so bad about admitting you’re from this island?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,424 ✭✭✭janfebmar


    FV
    People from Hawaii are Hawaiian and American.
    People from Sicily are Sicilian and Italian.

    What point were you trying to make?

    People from.Northern Ireland are Northern Irish, which means they are both Irish and citizens of the UK, which people call being British as they don’t have another term for being a citizen of the UK despite not being from the island of Great Britain.

    My point exactly. People from Hawaii can call themselves American, people from N Ireland can call themselves British if they so wish, as many have a UK passport ( "British " passport for short). I do not mind what nationality people call themselves or where they identify with.
    If they are born in the UK, live in the UK, pay their taxes in the UK, support the UK then they are more than entitled to call themselves British or United Kingdomers or Northern Irelanders ( part of the UK) or whatever they want.


  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    What’s so bad about admitting you’re from this island?

    This is why the British Isles was introduced. Behind this is the same belligerent Unionist desire to insult, it has the same root as Arlene's need to reject 1916 and to refuse to recognise it.

    Paisley and many Unionists were and are, quite happy to be seen as Irish who identify as British.
    Which would be how most people in the world would see them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    10-15 years
    What’s so bad about admitting you’re from this island?

    This is why the British Isles was introduced. Behind this is the same belligerent Unionist desire to insult, it has the same root as Arlene's need to reject 1916 and to refuse to recognise it.

    Paisley and many Unionists were and are, quite happy to be seen as Irish who identify as British.
    Which would be how most people in the world would see them.
    Francie please don't start with the conspiracy theories,be gracious in defeat.:)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    Francie please don't start with the conspiracy theories,be gracious in defeat.:)

    Are we not all born on the island of Ireland now Rob?

    Funny, because I thought you were the very one who makes a simple geographical distinction between yourself and your wife...that you were not born here, that you are English and she is Irish because she was born here. :D:D

    Feel a wee bit silly now?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    10-15 years
    RobMc59 wrote: »
    Francie please don't start with the conspiracy theories,be gracious in defeat.:)

    Are we not all born on the island of Ireland now Rob?

    Funny, because I thought you were the very one who makes a simple geographical distinction between yourself and your wife...that you were not born here, that you are English and she is Irish because she was born here. :D:D

    Feel a wee bit silly now?
    I don't see your point- Ireland and England/Britain are different. England/Britain are the same as NI/Britain.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,806 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    10-15 years
    janfebmar wrote: »
    FV

    My point exactly. People from Hawaii can call themselves American, people from N Ireland can call themselves British if they so wish, as many have a UK passport ( "British " passport for short). I do not mind what nationality people call themselves or where they identify with.
    If they are born in the UK, live in the UK, pay their taxes in the UK, support the UK then they are more than entitled to call themselves British or United Kingdomers or Northern Irelanders ( part of the UK) or whatever they want.

    I agree with the bit in bold above, and I think this is the common ground that everyone agrees with on this forum.

    The part that people disagree with is the claim that a person born and living their life on the island of Ireland is not Irish.
    By definition a person born and living their life on the island of Ireland is Irish. There's no other way to say that.
    To paraphrase a popular modern saying, people are entitled to their own convictions but are not entitled to their own facts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,971 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I agree with the bit in bold above, and I think this is the common ground that everyone agrees with on this forum.

    The part that people disagree with is the claim that a person born and living their life on the island of Ireland is not Irish.
    By definition a person born and living their life on the island of Ireland is Irish. There's no other way to say that.
    To paraphrase a popular modern saying, people are entitled to their own convictions but are not entitled to their own facts.


    That isn't a fact, it is an opinion, and is only an opinion that ignores other realities.

    You can equally say that by definition a person born and living their life on the American continent is American (even if they are Canadian or Mexican), you can also equally say that by definition a person born and living their life on the British Isles is British. They are all equally opinions that ignore other realities.

    You call the island Ireland, so you say anyone born on the island is Irish. Someone else calls the northern part of the island Northern Ireland and says that anyone born on the northern part of the island is Northern Ireland. Both are opinions, both are true from certain perspectives and from looking through certain prisms.

    The reality is if you call somewhere Palestine, you are Palestinian, if you call it Israel, you are Israeli. Similarly, if you are born in the six northern counties of this country and call them Northern Ireland, you are Northern Irish, if you call them part of Britain, you are British, if you call them part of Ireland, you are Irish. All are equally valid, and it is utter nonsense to say that be definition being born on this island makes you Irish. That is the sort of racist nationalism that was discredited in the middle of the last century.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    10-15 years
    FFG won’t do feck all .


  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    That isn't a fact, it is an opinion, and is only an opinion that ignores other realities.

    You can equally say that by definition a person born and living their life on the American continent is American (even if they are Canadian or Mexican), you can also equally say that by definition a person born and living their life on the British Isles is British. They are all equally opinions that ignore other realities.

    You call the island Ireland, so you say anyone born on the island is Irish. Someone else calls the northern part of the island Northern Ireland and says that anyone born on the northern part of the island is Northern Ireland. Both are opinions, both are true from certain perspectives and from looking through certain prisms.

    The reality is if you call somewhere Palestine, you are Palestinian, if you call it Israel, you are Israeli. Similarly, if you are born in the six northern counties of this country and call them Northern Ireland, you are Northern Irish, if you call them part of Britain, you are British, if you call them part of Ireland, you are Irish. All are equally valid, and it is utter nonsense to say that be definition being born on this island makes you Irish. That is the sort of racist nationalism that was discredited in the middle of the last century.

    Honestly, can you not see the twisting and gyrations here. Paisley had better things to be at and just accepted who he incontestably was.

    Stop pandering to the playground antics of belligerent unionism.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,035 ✭✭✭trashcan


    janfebmar wrote: »
    The way Francie tells others who and where they can identify with is against the spirit of the g.f.a. They have a right to identify as British or part of the UK if they so wish, just as others have a right to identify as Irish if they so wish. No parity of esteem from Francie.

    Next thing is he will be telling Hawaiian they should not get an American passport or call themselves American. He will be telling people from Sicily to resist those nasty Coloniasts from Italy and not to be calling themselves Italian when they travel the world, they are Sicilians only.

    Your Hawaiian analogy is nonsense, for the second time. Hawaii is one of the fifty states of the US. Therefore an integral part of the USA. Same goes for Sicily as far as I'm aware. Northern Ireland is not part of Great Britain. That's not my opinion, that is a statement of fact, according to the official name of the UK.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    10-15 years
    trashcan wrote: »
    janfebmar wrote: »
    The way Francie tells others who and where they can identify with is against the spirit of the g.f.a. They have a right to identify as British or part of the UK if they so wish, just as others have a right to identify as Irish if they so wish. No parity of esteem from Francie.

    Next thing is he will be telling Hawaiian they should not get an American passport or call themselves American. He will be telling people from Sicily to resist those nasty Coloniasts from Italy and not to be calling themselves Italian when they travel the world, they are Sicilians only.

    Your Hawaiian analogy is nonsense, for the second time. Hawaii is one of the fifty states of the US. Therefore an integral part of the USA. Same goes for Sicily as far as I'm aware. Northern Ireland is not part of Great Britain. That's not my opinion, that is a statement of fact, according to the official name of the UK.
    If you look on the UK passport site NI residents are classed as British,the same as English,Welsh and Scottish.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,035 ✭✭✭trashcan


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    If you look on the UK passport site NI residents are classed as British,the same as English,Welsh and Scottish.

    Front page of the passport describes it as a U.K. passport though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,273 ✭✭✭jh79


    The nationality is an ethnic or racial concept. On the other hand, citizenship is a legal or juristic concept. The nationality of a person indicates his/her place or country of birth while the citizenship of a person shows that the individual is registered as a citizen by the government of the respective country.24 Jul 2019
    Difference Between Nationality and Citizenship (with Comparison ...


    https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-nationality-and-citizenship.html

    Northern Ireland is part of the UK. However, under the Belfast Agreement(external link opens in a new window / tab), also known as the Good Friday Agreement, people born in Northern Ireland can choose to be British citizens, Irish citizens or both. If they choose to be both British and Irish citizens, this means they have a dual citizenship.

    https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/about-northern-ireland

    So if you were born in Belfast your nation of birth is the UK so you are British but your place of birth is Ireland so you could also say Irish.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,971 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    jh79 wrote: »
    The nationality is an ethnic or racial concept. On the other hand, citizenship is a legal or juristic concept. The nationality of a person indicates his/her place or country of birth while the citizenship of a person shows that the individual is registered as a citizen by the government of the respective country.24 Jul 2019
    Difference Between Nationality and Citizenship (with Comparison ...


    https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-nationality-and-citizenship.html

    Northern Ireland is part of the UK. However, under the Belfast Agreement(external link opens in a new window / tab), also known as the Good Friday Agreement, people born in Northern Ireland can choose to be British citizens, Irish citizens or both. If they choose to be both British and Irish citizens, this means they have a dual citizenship.

    https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/about-northern-ireland

    So if you were born in Belfast your nation of birth is the UK so you are British but your place of birth is Ireland so you could also say Irish.


    That is the legal position, no matter how others such as Francie try to spin something different.


  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I'm in Enniakillen typing this and this repudiation of all things Irish makes sense.
    It is the function of insecure Unionism which expresses itself belligerently.
    Everything Irish has to be rejected. Insecure unionism is 'insulted and offended' by even glimpsing the Irish language, insults, if invited to Irish independence celebrations and is so afraid of being Irsh they paint everyhing in sight red white and blue and hang the union Jack
    Confident unionism doesn't need to do that .

    By the way. I didn't have to leave the island to get to Enniskillen and unless I tell people my identity I am the same as everyone else if a tad better looking! :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,971 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Honestly, can you not see the twisting and gyrations here. Paisley had better things to be at and just accepted who he incontestably was.

    Stop pandering to the playground antics of belligerent unionism.


    Of course I can see the twisting and gyrations here. You are blatantly engaging in it.

    You claim anyone born on the island of Ireland is Irish, yet you won't accept that anyone born on the continent of America is American or anyone born on the British Isles is British or anyone born in Israel is Israeli. You are cherry-picking your definition of territory arbitrarily to suit your version of rabid nationalism.

    What is clear is that you don't actually see it, just as you don't see how your relocation offer mirrors the Cromwellian attitude of to hell or to Connacht. At least Cromwell was a man of his time, you have no excuse.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,971 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I'm in Enniakillen typing this and this repudiation of all things Irish makes sense.
    It is the function of insecure Unionism which expresses itself belligerently.
    Everything Irish has to be rejected. Insecure unionism is 'insulted and offended' by even glimpsing the Irish language, insults, if invited to Irish independence celebrations and is so afraid of being Irsh they paint everyhing in sight red white and blue and hang the union Jack
    Confident unionism doesn't need to do that .

    By the way. I didn't have to leave the island to get to Enniskillen and unless I tell people my identity I am the same as everyone else if a tad better looking! :)


    More nonsense. How can saying that a person from Northern Ireland be equally British or Irish by birthright be repudiation of all things Irish.
    blanch152 wrote: »
    That isn't a fact, it is an opinion, and is only an opinion that ignores other realities.

    You can equally say that by definition a person born and living their life on the American continent is American (even if they are Canadian or Mexican), you can also equally say that by definition a person born and living their life on the British Isles is British. They are all equally opinions that ignore other realities.

    You call the island Ireland, so you say anyone born on the island is Irish. Someone else calls the northern part of the island Northern Ireland and says that anyone born on the northern part of the island is Northern Ireland. Both are opinions, both are true from certain perspectives and from looking through certain prisms.

    The reality is if you call somewhere Palestine, you are Palestinian, if you call it Israel, you are Israeli. Similarly, if you are born in the six northern counties of this country and call them Northern Ireland, you are Northern Irish, if you call them part of Britain, you are British, if you call them part of Ireland, you are Irish. All are equally valid, and it is utter nonsense to say that be definition being born on this island makes you Irish. That is the sort of racist nationalism that was discredited in the middle of the last century.

    You have a black and white view of the world rooted in 1930s nationalism, you are politically closer to De Valera than anyone else I know, a man whose ideas were out-of-date even then.

    Confident nationalism doesn't need to deport every unionist or deny their birthright to be British.


  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    More nonsense. How can saying that a person from Northern Ireland be equally British or Irish by birthright be repudiation of all things Irish.



    You have a black and white view of the world rooted in 1930s nationalism, you are politically closer to De Valera than anyone else I know, a man whose ideas were out-of-date even then.

    Confident nationalism doesn't need to deport every unionist or deny their birthright to be British.

    And now blanch needs to lie about what I said.

    Your degradation is complete.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,719 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    I came up with: if you are born on an island called Ireland you are Irish?

    You are pushing an identity on people who don't want to identify as Irish. This right is protected under the GFA. It is that simple. Those that say all people born in the North are Irish are going against the GFA.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,719 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    downcow wrote: »
    Guys try to embrace diversity. It’s not really that scary

    It really is sad that we still have this supremacist attitude from nationalists of all people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 69,227 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    You are pushing an identity on people who don't want to identify as Irish. This right is protected under the GFA. It is that simple. Those that say all people born in the North are Irish are going against the GFA.

    Nobody has a problem with expressed identity if they voted for the GFA.

    It is ineffably sad that insecure partitionist is alligning itself with insecure belligerent unionism.
    Sad and doomed.

    I never thought I would say this but on the silly repudiation of where they are from they really need to take a lead out of Ian Paisley's and other confident unionists book


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,719 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    No. Did you go to school in Ireland? Canada is in the Americans, but Canada is a country. Anyone born there is a Canadian. Same goes for Mexicans. Seriously this is kindergarten stuff.

    Yeap kindergarten stuff alright, when you have absolutely no clue about the history of any of these countries.
    Perhaps you left school when you yourself were in primary school as your level of knowledge and insight on this topic supports this assumption.

    Regards Canada, have you ever heard of the Quebec sovereignty movement?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sovereignty_movement

    Spent a bit of time there myself and Quebencians will tell you (in an odd French dialect) that they are Quebecian's first and foremost. They even flirted with car bombs and the like, Provo style.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,719 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Nobody has a problem with expressed identity if they voted for the GFA.

    Then why do you insist on calling people in the North, Irish as well by default?
    This is not in the GFA.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement