There is so much wrong with your specious post that it’s hard to know where to begin. Not only are you historically wrong about some of your “facts,” [please see Nixon’s & LunTha’s excellent post above], you even display the stupidity and hubris of those that think they are destined to rule by order of the Deities. Your idiotic concept of a supra-national-organization, with England at its head, is the laughable garbage you have tried to foist on all the nations you have tried to subjugate throughout history. The Irish ARE NOT PART OF YOU, AND NEVER WANTED TO BE!
As your brutal nation has seen, the Irish have not been the pliant slaves you’d like them to be. You must remember, YOU Anglo Saxons were NOT invited, but came to pillage, plunder, rape, steal and murder.
As you have also seen on this board, you will not be able to bullswaggle this group with your imperious, self serving untruths.
Instead of making an exposition of my alleged ignorance, you have successfully shown your aversion to the truth and inability grasp the obvious.
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
This quaint version of English faux history is another attempt to put a kindly face on treachery and despotism by outright lies.
The Scots were sent over to Ireland, by England, to steal the land form the Irish in the name of the Crown.
There was no “search” for a common language but a systematic suppresion of the native tongue of the Irish, Gaelic, under the penalty of DEATH! There’s a reason the Irish speak English now, instead of Gaelic, they were forced to speak English, or die.
Things are a bit different when you know the ACTUALL TRUTH.
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
Just to Clarify a point.
As of June 1998, the repuplic of Ireland removed its constitutional claim to The North and redefined what “The Island of Ireland” entailed. If I can find the wording I will let you know.
Like a lot of us in the REpublic, I would like to see a devolved state with its own government, a unified police force. The people could call themselves “Northern Irish”, instead of “British” or “Irish”. they can keep their claims to the crown, but have stronger links with the Republic and Britian both Politically and Culturally.
but as John Lennon said, “people say I’m a dreamer…”
[hijack]
BTW, Has anyone noticed how both John Lennon and Paul McCartney both wrote pro- Irish songs, and both were honored by the Queen?
[/hijack]
J
“We should have as high a regard for the church so as to keep it out of as many things as possible”
Fluther Good -the Shadow of a Gunman.
Sean O’Casey
I agree entirely. I think that, in the long term, the solution will be some sort of independence for Northern Ireland, with political power heavily devolved to the local authority level (i.e. city and district councils) to provide maximum self-determination for each local community.
LunTha,
Quite right, but reading a book or paper does makes a person more informed wherever they are. It is clear from JohnJohn’s posts that he has done neither.
Wrong. As John Larrigan has pointed out, the Republic has dropped its constitutional claim to Northern Ireland.
Oh, really? Who is “Northern Ireland” in this context? Perhaps the people who returned more Unionist than Republican and Nationalist MPs to Westminster? Or maybe the people who elected 58 Unionists and 42 Nationalists and Republicans to the Northern Ireland Assembly?
Are you really suggesting that they’re so desperate to get their hands on Belfast’s moribund shipbuilding industry? Industrial regions throughout the EU have been in economic decline since the 1960s and Northern Ireland is no different.
This is what I have been saying since my very first post in this thread.
John John,
You moron!
I was talking, as everybody except for you seems to have realised, about the European Union. I am amazed that you couldn’t see than. What did you thin I meant when I said that both countries were part of a supra-national organisation.
That is simple racism of the kind you also exhibited in the African Americans are owed no more by the US thread.
Quite right. That is what I said. LunTha said they were English. I said they were Scottish. I was right, LunTha was mistaken. What’s your problem?
I never said there was. I was referring to recent events in the Northern Ireland Assembly. The Republican members insisted that job advertisements for Assembly posts be published in Gaelic and the Unionist members, not to be outdone, insisted that they also be published in “Ulster Scots” which they claim (IMO, wrongly) is the native language of the Northern Irish Protestants.
It is clear from your posts, JohnJohn, that you are:
[ul][li]highly ignorant of the history and politics of the British Isles;[/li][li]unable to get even the simplest facts about Ireland or anywhere else straight;[/li][li]not reading my posts, or anyone else’s, properly; and[/li][li]I don’t know how to put this politely but not, perhaps, and intellectual giant.[/ul][/li]
If you are really interested in the politics of Northern Ireland. I suggest you go away and read a book on the subject. Once you have done so, in a few weeks’ time, come back and we can resume the debate. Until then I am no longer interested in arguing with you. [N.B. No disrespect intended to anybody else posting in this thread.]
I can recommend The Green Flag by Robert Kee, which will probably put you straight on some of your factual misunderstandings while still according to some extent with your overall view of the situation. If you don’t have time to read that rather lengthy (three-volume) work, Conor Cruise O’Brien Ireland: A Concise History covers a lot of the same ground.
In the meantime, as a “quick fix” for your utter ignorance of what “England” actually is, I suggest you read this article from the SD Mailbag Archives. That should set you right.
Of course if, as I suspect, you are not really interested in the politics and history of the region, I suggest you take up my Okalhoma City invitation.
What is really interesting TomHBull, is not so much what you say, even when you skirt dangerously near the truth, as you have here, but what you do not say. What was the intent of sending 60,000 Scots Protestants to Catholic Ireland? What was the AIM of the Crown, old boy? Intent is key here.
As to your concern of “my problem,” I would say it is people like you trying to put a dignified face on Englilsh/British theift and butchery. It is quite clear that your motives are to make it appear that I do not have all the facts, when the simple and actual truth is, which you have an aversion to, that I do not agree with your lies. Nor does anyone else here, it seems.
Your faux version of Irish history glosses over the despotic treatment that the Irish received at the hands of the Anglo Saxon INVADERS.
It is truly amazing that any Scots, Lowland kilted Anglos notwithstanding, still consider themselves as part of the putrid Crown, after your ancestors SLAUGHTERED THOUSANDS OF THEM on any given day. From what I hear, that is soon to change.
Things are changing, the World is watching.
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
My contention, the logic of which escapes your uneducateded mind and your total lack of real history, is that, as an American, I think, many of us think, the true ancestors of the actual slave traders ie.,the English,YOU, should pay reperations, that is, after yu pay the Irish. You people bought the slaves for transport here and had the fruits of their slave labor delivered to YOUR country ENGLAND.
Do you feel any shame, Tom Bull? Your scholarship is as puny as your desire for the truth. You even tried to do it to the Jews in Palestine. They, like the Irish, were not going to roll over. This is NOT the Punjab!
NEVER AGAIN!
You can destroy your now by worrying about tomorrow. Janis Joplin
My belief (IMHO) is that the chief stumbling block to peace in northern Ireland are my distant relatives, the Scotch-Irish.
Yes, one day, like the English farmers in Kenya or Zimbabwe, they will either submit to majority rule or leave the colony.
Despite the extremist murderers on both sides, the IRA or UDA and other splinter terror groups are not the problem but only the violent manifestation of a much deeper division.
It doesn’t really involve religion either. Ulster extremists (and perhaps even a majority of the Scotch-Irish) hold a totalitarian ideology that is more anti-Irish Catholic than pro-Protetsant. Their religion has little to do with modern Protestant thought but everything to do with the constant demonization of their Catholic neighbors.
For example, Americans think nothing of, say the marriage of Ronald Reagan’s Catholic mother with his Irish-Protestant father. In Ulster, even today such a marriage can and has led to murder.
Nor does the ideology of the Ulster Scotch-Irish really involve loyalty to Great Britain. Their movement to revolt against the crown in 1914 is evidence enough. More to the point is the persistence of extreme prejudice and discrimination by the Scotch-Irish in stark contrast to its relative decline in the rest of Great Britain.
For example, while you’ll find many West Indies neighborhoods in London and the larger cities in Britain, you just don’t find many at all in northern Ireland - despite West Indians being both good Protestants and loyal Britons.
The British also remain an obstacle to peace. They are unwilling to lose their last colony, especially to the Irish republic. It’s a curious illusion, founded on the obsessive Union Jack flag waving by Ulstermen.
The British can’t even imagine that if they had granted a separate Irish parliament in 1914, the IRA probably never would have formed and the loyal Ulstermen would have collaborated with Hitler during the next war.
What’s the difference between boogers and broccoli? Kids won’t eat broccoli.
You’re right, Nixon, about the Unionists. Despite their rhetoric, they enjoy the kind of semi-detached status which Northern Ireland has in the UK. They want to be “loyal Britons” when it suits them and not when it doesn’t; for example, when they want to hold an illegal parade through Drumcree.
I’m sure that there is a deep streak of racism in the Orange movement, but it’s worth bearing in mind that you don’t find many West Indians in rural parts of England either and that Northern Ireland is largely rural.
However, I don’t agree with the suggestion that
A large proportion of the population of England believes that we should pull the troops out and leave “the Irish” to sort it out themselves.
In the eyes of many English people, Northern Ireland is a massive drain on the national resources,* it is a source of violent conflict in this country and it is populated by a bunch of homicidal bigots.
I do not condone this view; I think it is narrow-minded and irresponsible, not to say racist. But it is the way that many English people think. I can assure you that the majority of the people of England would breathe a huge sigh of relief if the Republic ever took the Province back.
[*According to the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, GDP per capita in NI is about 80% of the UK average and the claimant-based unemployment rate is 8.3%, more than twice the UK average. This does not begin to take account of the additional costs of security, etc.]
Ouch! That’s a lot of material Tom I do second the recommendation, though.
With the caveat that none of the errors in that article - discussed in this Comments on Mailbag Answers thread - have been rectified. (OK, just a plug for my own thread …)
Nixon: The term “Scotch-Irish” should really only be used if you’re talking about 17th-19th century American immigrants. It isn’t proper to use it to refer to Northern Ireland Protestants today.
The funniest example of this was during the mad cow crisis, when the farmers (including the loyalist farmers) wanted to have their cows declared Irish in order to avoid the EU ban on British beef! I nearly went into fits over that!
I expect everyone’s heard the latest news by this point. That is, that Home Rule has been indefinitely suspended. The IRA has submitted another proposal regarding their disarmament. Frustration all round.
Is there any solution, even supposing that all parties could be persuaded to agree, that is reasonably fair to everyone?
You’re right about the Mailbag article not being perfect, but it’s still a good starting-point for someone who hasn’t go the first clue about UK politics and geography.
As for the Kee book, I also recommended Conor Cruise O’Brien’s much briefer history which is IIRC less than 200 pages. The advantage of the Kee book, of course, is that you can pick one or two of the volumes depending on which period you’re interested in.
Is there any solution, even supposing that all parties could be persuaded to agree, that is reasonably fair to everyone?
What would it be?
[\quote]
Thats the last question on Who wants to be a millionaire ::end hijack::
In all reality, If anyone had the answer this thread wouldnt exist!!
JOhnJohn, sorry about that, but I had to say it.
ruadh, Scots Irish was the Language chosen by the Assembly members, so it is relevant to mention it here.
and to quote the Late, Great Dermot Morgan,
Conor Cruise O’Brien should have his name shortened to something like “Gobshite”. Personally I cant stand his literary style and I find great use for his sunday Independent columns. Soft, Strong and Thoroughly Absorbant.
J
“We should have as high a regard for the church so as to keep it out of as many things as possible”
Fluther Good -the Shadow of a Gunman.
Sean O’Casey
We’re showing the usual displeasure at having the insistence of a one-sided display of disarmament. There has been a lot of talk before about an LVF disarmament, but what about the UFF and UVF, and the rest of the UDA umbrella groups?
Still, I would love to see the disarmament happen.
[hijack]
I had a pint with Bertie Ahern on Friday. He was in good form. Things are looking up, I think
[end hijack]
J
Krusty Opinionated told me to use American Swear words. so I will.
I do second the recommendation, though.