How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

Well now junkyard. Is there one single ira murderer that you would say remembering publicly would be obscene.

What do you mean by publicly? I don't think anyone should be forced to have secret funerals, even the likes of the serial-killers known as Shankill Butchers. Let people bury their dead in peace.

It's really weird that Unionists who make a virtue out of glorifying 300-year-old sectarian battles, world wars, mass death in foreign fields, poppies, memorial bands to paramilitaries, monuments, statues, and whatnot whinge about Republicans honouring their dead.

You are some of the least self-aware people on the planet.

FrancieBrady

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

You are some of the least self-aware people on the planet.

It is a bizarre lack of self awareness. Especially given the two months we are about to enter.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What do you mean by publicly? I don't think anyone should be forced to have secret funerals, even the likes of the serial-killers known as Shankill Butchers. Let people bury their dead in peace.

It's really weird that Unionists who make a virtue out of glorifying 300-year-old sectarian battles, world wars, mass death in foreign fields, poppies, memorial bands to paramilitaries, monuments, statues, and whatnot whinge about Republicans honouring their dead.

You are some of the least self-aware people on the planet.

I am surprised just how deep a nerve I have struck with you, Francie and Bonnie.
Are you incapable of suggesting an improvement unilaterally? Are you incapable of suggesting you community do the right thing, even just in one single case?

Watch what I can do!
“Terence McKnight should never ever have a statue, have a play park named after him or in other way have public honouring of him.
What he done to ordinary catholic (and Protestant) people was despicable and I would be disgusted if my community wanted to honour him. For me this is irrelevant of what republicans have with their dead” It’s just the right thing to say.

That’s fairly clear. No whataboutery. Posters are watching. Can any republican be as clear??

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I am surprised just how deep a nerve I have struck with you, Francie and Bonnie.
Are you incapable of suggesting an improvement unilaterally? Are you incapable of suggesting you community do the right thing, even just in one single case?

Watch what I can do!
“Terence McKnight should never ever have a statue, have a play park named after him or in other way have public honouring of him.
What he done to ordinary catholic (and Protestant) people was despicable and I would be disgusted if my community wanted to honour him. For me this is irrelevant of what republicans have with their dead” It’s just the right thing to say.

That’s fairly clear. No whataboutery. Posters are watching. Can any republican be as clear??

I totally agree with you. Terence McKnight should not get a statue or a park named after him.
In fact I will go further than that...NOBODY FROM ANY SIDE involved in the conflict or the running of the sectarian statelet should be memorialised.

Will you join me in saying that downcow?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I totally agree with you. Terence McKnight should not get a statue or a park named after him.
In fact I will go further than that...NOBODY FROM ANY SIDE involved in the conflict or the running of the sectarian statelet should be memorialised.

Will you join me in saying that downcow?

Francie. Same old same old. - Let’s make a whataboutery statement that we know is unachievable.

It takes balls to identify issues in your own community and speak out about them unilaterally. Easy to lump it in with the ‘others’

I think we have to accept that all republicans on this thread have failed miserably to show any concerns for their neighbours on this issue.

Your avoidance is plain for all to see.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Francie. Same old same old. - Let’s make a whataboutery statement that we know is unachievable.

It takes balls to identify issues in your own community and speak out about them unilaterally. Easy to lump it in with the ‘others’

I think we have to accept that all republicans on this thread have failed miserably to show any concerns for their neighbours on this issue.

Your avoidance is plain for all to see.

You invent statutes that don't exist to rail about.

And you rail about them so you can deflect from answering this question,

'Are you willing to have a conversation about existing memorials across the entire north and their removal?'
'What are your proposals re: doing this in a 'unilaterally' fair way?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You invent statutes that don't exist to rail about.

And you rail about them so you can deflect from answering this question,

'Are you willing to have a conversation about existing memorials across the entire north and their removal?'
'What are your proposals re: doing this in a 'unilaterally' fair way?

The problem is Francie that you play games of all or nothing, when you know ‘all’ is unachievable - thereby nothing happens.
You also talk in vague riddles.

But let’s talk existing memorials then if you wish.

I again will name existing memorials which my community have been put up in relation to the recent conflict that I believe should be taken down because they are offensive to Catholics.

Will you do the same?
No more ‘all’, ‘everyone’, ‘them’. Let’s give specific examples. Unless of course you want to duck and dive again

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

The problem is Francie that you play games of all or nothing, when you know ‘all’ is unachievable - thereby nothing happens.
You also talk in vague riddles.

But let’s talk existing memorials then if you wish.

I again will name existing memorials which my community have been put up in relation to the recent conflict that I believe should be taken down because they are offensive to Catholics.

Will you do the same?
No more ‘all’, ‘everyone’, ‘them’. Let’s give specific examples. Unless of course you want to duck and dive again

You see, you can't help revealing yourself.

You don't want to address the issue at all.

Why is it 'unachievable' to work towards an inoffensive public space?

jm08

downcow wrote: »

There is a lot of ducking and diving going on as usual. The tried and tested method of ‘let’s throw up a few grey areas as red herrings’. It’s a great way of avoiding the issues.
Let’s try this! How about we try to name examples of people from our own community who participated in the ‘conflict’ and who we think it would be inappropriate to remember by putting up a statue, memorial stone or naming a play park after.
Unless of course you think no one is beyond the pale with regard to publicly remembering?
I will start the ball rolling.
Michael Stone, Johnny Adair, Billy Hutchinson,
And remember I fully respect their families right to remember them quietly and privately in whatever way they wish, but it should absolutely not be done publicly because of the many victims out there still alive.
Over to you guys

I see you ignore my point that no one was convicted for the Kingsmills massacre (including Raymond McCreesh). Why do you think that is?



Personally, I wouldn't have any public memorials to anyone. I would suggest a memorial garden and put them all in there and bring every child to visit it at least once.


As for Michael Stone etc. There are plenty of wall murals to them, so your question is irrelevant as they are being venerated anyway.

downcow

jm08 wrote: »

I see you ignore my point that no one was convicted for the Kingsmills massacre (including Raymond McCreesh). Why do you think that is?



Personally, I wouldn't have any public memorials to anyone. I would suggest a memorial garden and put them all in there and bring every child to visit it at least once.


As for Michael Stone etc. There are plenty of wall murals to them, so your question is irrelevant as they are being venerated anyway.

Jm08. Unfortunately your mask has slipped as well.
Let me be categoric with you.
I believe memorials to michael stone are inappropriate, offensive and an insult to his victims. They should be taken down now. Irrespective of what republicans do.

Now can you say anything similar about ira memorials????

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Jm08. Unfortunately your mask has slipped as well.
Let me be categoric with you.
I believe memorials to michael stone are inappropriate, offensive and an insult to his victims. They should be taken down now. Irrespective of what republicans do.

Now can you say anything similar about ira memorials????

Unbelievable. :rolleyes:

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Unbelievable. :rolleyes:

I completely understand why you would be shocked by anyone identifying issues within their own community. You have a long way to travel to catch up with me. Sadly.

jm08

downcow wrote: »

Jm08. Unfortunately your mask has slipped as well.
Let me be categoric with you.
I believe memorials to michael stone are inappropriate, offensive and an insult to his victims. They should be taken down now. Irrespective of what republicans do.

Now can you say anything similar about ira memorials????

How has my mask slipped? Trying to reverse the memorial thing is about 200 years too late. The memorials on walls to Michael Stone are now a tourist attraction and in fairness, they are in places where they won't offend their victims.



Maybe you could learn something up north from us down here. Our best public memorials are now tributes to Phil Lynott, Luke Kelly, Christy Ring, Patrick Kavanagh, with recent bridges named after Mary McAleese, George Mitchell, Samuel Beckett and Rosie Hackett.


Now, do you think all war memorials should be removed, like I do?

gormdubhgorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

oh..it's 'qualified majorities' now when it comes to a decision? Who was asked about the Carson statue?

You asked me to give you answer and I did. Since you did not like the answer you resorted to 'what about'.

But I gave you the solution in my previous post cross border committees. Committees to decide upon such issues depending on the level of concern caused by memorials, and naming of places and so on.

I believe such committees (if properly run) would result in real integration in NI.
After meeting up some might even get to know each other and become friends.

Paul (Unionist) and Pòl (Nationalist) could discuss thier favorite Liverpool players of all time, over a pint afterwards. Maybe kids of both sides of the divide could become friends as a result. Instead of kids throwing stones at 'Prods'/'Taigs' depending on thier side. Something good could come of it.

Who knows such committees might even result in a few 'mixed marriages' if for example committee member Mairead (Catholic - Nationalist) took a fancy to committee member Edward (Protestant-Unionist)?

Also places could be named after apolitical things such as a local charity worker who helps the homeless, or some unfortunate local lad who committed suicide. Actually trying to inspire others and make NI a better place. Looking for common humane ground instead of looking for division.

It is the only way a real united sense - common bond can occur in whatever form a future state could take.

Also you are worried about 'honouring the dead'. As you said in the RIC commemoration thread. You said you would be happy if it left to academics, or small local events for local individuals. This is what could be done for anything which some people think should be commemorated but would otherwise caused offence. If a statue or renaming was not permitted by a committee due to its percived contentious nature.Such low key events could be arranged.

Unfortunately I think NI has turned into one big 'Nolan show' common sense and decency gets drowned out by loud aggressive voices. Hindering the prospect of any prospect of a UI or a stable UI.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I completely understand why you would be shocked by anyone identifying issues within their own community. You have a long way to travel to catch up with me. Sadly.

You still haven't answered the question...why is removing all offensive memorials 'unachievable'?

Is it because a certain section of society would kick and scream Never Never Never?

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

One simple sentence from you or Francie would sort it. Or even having the balls to say, “I disagree and while others put up offensive memorials then I am happy republicans put up memorials that offend unionists“
Which is the subtext of what he is saying

Why am I involved?

Is this Unionist psychology at play?

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

I completely understand why you would be shocked by anyone identifying issues within their own community. You have a long way to travel to catch up with me. Sadly.

Catch up? You're years behind us. Stuck in traffic on the R1690 to Never Never Land.

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I totally agree with you. Terence McKnight should not get a statue or a park named after him.
In fact I will go further than that...NOBODY FROM ANY SIDE involved in the conflict or the running of the sectarian statelet should be memorialised.

Will you join me in saying that downcow?

downcow wrote: »

Francie. Same old same old. - Let’s make a whataboutery statement that we know is unachievable.

It takes balls to identify issues in your own community and speak out about them unilaterally. Easy to lump it in with the ‘others’

I think we have to accept that all republicans on this thread have failed miserably to show any concerns for their neighbours on this issue.

Your avoidance is plain for all to see.

---

Explain how Francie's (repeated) statement above is unclear?

FrancieBrady

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

You asked me to give you answer and I did. Since you did not like the answer you resorted to 'what about'.

But I gave you the solution in my previous post cross border committees. Committees to decide upon such issues depending on the level of concern caused by memorials, and naming of places and so on.

I believe such committees (if properly run) would result in real integration in NI.
After meeting up some might even get to know each other and become friends.

Paul (Unionist) and Pòl (Nationalist) could discuss thier favorite Liverpool players of all time, over a pint afterwards. Maybe kids of both sides of the divide could become friends as a result. Instead of kids throwing stones at 'Prods'/'Taigs' depending on thier side. Something good could come of it.

Who knows such committees might even result in a few 'mixed marriages' if for example committee member Mairead (Catholic - Nationalist) took a fancy to committee member Edward (Protestant-Unionist)?

Also places could be named after apolitical things such as a local charity worker who helps the homeless, or some unfortunate local lads who committed suicide. Actually trying to inspire others and make NI a better place. Looking for common humane ground instead of looking for division.

It is the only way a real united sense can occur in whatever form a future state could take.

Also you are worried about 'honouring the dead'. As you said in the RIC commemoration thread. You said you would be happy if it left to academics, or small local events for local individuals. This is what could be done for anything which some people think should be commemorated but would otherwise caused offence. If a statue or renaming was not permitted by a committee due to its percived contentious nature.Such low key events could be arranged.

Unfortunately I think NI has turned into one big 'Nolan show' common sense and decency gets drowned out by loud aggressive voices. Hindering the prospect of any prospect of a UI or a stable UI.

A 'committee' in the form of a locally democratically elected council made the decision on the McCreesh Park. The SDLP, SF and Independents supported it.

Was that not democratic?


I'll go back to my original point. If the goal is to allow people to remember their dead in a respectful way, then accommodation must be made for people you find objectionable.

If the goal is to disallow people remembering their dead, then that has to be done on a cross community basis.

downcow's difficulty here is that he cannot bring himself to allow a cross community approach because he knows what will have to be taken down.

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

This is one of the big problems here. Republicans can never just for ‘the right thing’ It has to be negotiated out of them.

No matter what memorials republicans have, I can say categorically that I believe public remembrance of Jonny Adair is wrong, hurtful and simply should not happen. Sad you can’t say same about an ira member who has murdered my community. Actually it is disgusting

Oh my God; that is a lack of awareness at an award winning level.

downcow

Guys. I have tried very hard to find a single republican here who has the courage to name one person in their own community who is beyond the pale for a memorial.
I have just encountered riddles, waffle, avoidance, unachievable nonsense, whataboutery, etc, etc.

I would love to see some physiological analysis of republicans as to why they are so reluctant to move unilaterally on anything. Their life seems to be so infatuated with unionists. They will only do anything if unionists agree to do something in return.

Well guys no matter about your intransigence, I still believe it would be obscene and offensive to name a play park after billy Mcgaughey (RUC).

Whilst republicans have no balls, it’s going to be very difficult to move this society on

gormdubhgorm

downcow wrote: »

This is one of the big problems here. Republicans can never just for ‘the right thing’ It has to be negotiated out of them.

No matter what memorials republicans have, I can say categorically that I believe public remembrance of Jonny Adair is wrong, hurtful and simply should not happen. Sad you can’t say same about an ira member who has murdered my community. Actually it is disgusting

Calling a spade a spade and a shovel a shovel. I think there is a pair of youse in it both Republicans and Unionists.

When NI matures politically and moves on to the next stage of real compromise and decency from both sides. Only then will there be movement forward.
Personally I think the DUP and SF are just as bad as each other. Ironically the main thing they have in common is they know how to constantly wind each other up, getting constant digs in. Playing to the gallery. Heaven forbid that they try and look for common ground!

I find it gas that for any change to really happen the moderates with a bit of cop on will have to take charge. All the school playground antics (literally and metaphorically) means thing may never change. It is always high on negative symbolism for one side and low on consensus on the other.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Guys. I have tried very hard to find a single republican here who has the courage to name one person in their own community who is beyond the pale for a memorial.
I have just encountered riddles, waffle, avoidance, unachievable nonsense, whataboutery, etc, etc.

ALL OF THEM ARE BEYOND THE PALE IF THEY TOOK PART IN THE CONFLICT/WAR

Now are you going to tell us why removing all offensive memorials is 'unachievable'?

Junkyard Tom

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

for any change to really happen the moderates with a bit of cop on will have to take charge

You have a suspect understanding of Unionism and seem to have been gaslit by it. I'm unaware of Republicans demanding Unionists/loyalists stop remembering their dead. Meanwhile Unionists make a culture out of remembering those who terrorised their nationalist neighbours for decades in the RUC/UDR/UVF and assorted unionist paramilitaries.

As for 'the Downcow challenge', as patently ridiculous as it is, I think the guy who blew up Frizzles Fish shop should be remembered discreetly when he goes and not have a band named after him like Unionists do.

gormdubhgorm

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

You have a suspect understanding of Unionism and seem to have been gaslit by it. I'm unaware of Republicans demanding Unionists/loyalists stop remembering their dead. Meanwhile Unionists make a culture out of remembering those who terrorised their nationalist neighbours for decades in the RUC/UDR/UVF and assorted unionist paramilitaries.

As for the Downcow challenge as patently ridiculous it is I think the guy who blew up Frizzles Fish shop should be remembered discreetly when he goes and not have a band named after him like Unionists do.

Using internet trendy buzzwords like gaslit are not going to make your arguement seem any stronger. I am made my points perfectly clear.

'Remembering dead' is NI code for winding up the other-side and creating divisiveness . Both sides do it. But it does not seem to be the done thing to say it.

I don't want all this codology brought in the ROI I believe all this little things add up and increase bitterness.

I think until this is sorted out a UI will not work, the middle ground will be put by it. As I said in a previous post I suggest events from academics or local levels. And cross community committees who can decide on rename places and so on. What is wrong with that?

As they up North they should 'catch themselves on'. And stop the pantomimes of piss taking.

Fionn1952

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Using internet trendy buzzwords like gaslit are not going to make your arguement seem any stronger. I am made my points perfectly clear.

'Remembering dead' is NI code for winding up the other-side and creating divisiveness . Both sides do it. But it does not seem to be the done thing to say it.

I don't want all this codology brought in the ROI I believe all this little things add up and increase bitterness.

I think until this is sorted out a UI will not work, the middle ground will be put by it. As I said in a previous post I suggest events from academics or local levels. And cross community committees who can decide on rename places and so on. What is wrong with that?

As they up North they should 'catch themselves on'. And stop the pantomimes of piss taking.

A term from the 1930s/40s is an internet trendy buzzword now, GDG?!?

Certainly there is merit in cross-community groups deciding place names (or feasibly a blanket ban on anyone involved with The Troubles on either side for now until more time passes), but the idea that controversial memorials are unique to NI is absurd.

Ignoring a discussion on the merits of Black Lives Matter, you'll notice there are controversial statues all around the world being targeted through this movement. Closer to home, the Sean Russell statue is hardly uncontroversial.

Junkyard Tom

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I don't want all this codology brought in the ROI I believe all this little things add up and increase bitterness. I think until this is sorted out a UI will not work, the middle ground will be put by it.

This is largely caused by partition itself and Republicanism doesn't stop at where the border was. I fully expect moderates to inherit the north in the wake of a United Ireland particularly former unionists as the 'never, never, never' unionists of yesteryear will have nothing to offer, or gain, by playing the 'Lundy' card against their own.

Junkyard Tom

Fionn1952 wrote: »

A term from the 1930s/40s is an internet trendy buzzword now, GDG?!?

Hilarious isn't it? I wasn't going to bother trying to explain that.

TheShow

Never gonna happen IMO. Make the north independent of uk/ROI is what’s best IMO.

gormdubhgorm

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

This is largely caused by partition itself and Republicanism doesn't stop at where the border was. I fully expect moderates to inherit the north in the wake of a United Ireland particularly former unionists as the 'never, never, never' unionists of yesteryear will have nothing to offer, or gain, by playing the 'Lundy' card against their own.

Well I hope your right because I am sick listening to all the carry on of the DUP and SF.
But partition was not only caused by Unionists it was caused by Republicans as well. If the long game was played instead of crash, bang, wallop Republicanism.Ireland would be better off today. I still think things should be left well enough alone rather than risking chaos.