what exactly has religion got to do with any of this? last I checked, neither the Catholic or Protestant church authorities advocate volence toward children.
Why can’t we call this what it is; ignorant asshole fuckwits looking for a fight (any excuse will do).
Jodi tells us that:
[QUOTE]
NO person with ANY decency makes war on children. And to throw a bomb at them?? Jesus. It makes me sick to my stomach.
[QUOTE]
To which I would add that no person with any decency uses their children to obtain a tactical or moral advantage over their enemies.
The simple fact of the involvement of children in this conflict does not turn one side into angels and the other into devils.
You are free to believe that the parents did nothing except try to take their kids to school. What evidence there is suggests that they also had less wholesome motivations.
T
Oh, surely you saw this coming:
CITE, PLEASE? I have seen nothing that indicates these folks did anything other than walk their kids to school. If you have something indicating any other motive for walking their kids to school other than to actually get the kids to school, then bring it on.
To the contrary, the “excuse” (and it is a lame-ass one at that) appears to be that because some of the adults felt they were being antagonized by a very few parents last year, they’ve decided the Catholic children should not be allowed to walk down “Protestant” streets to get to school.
It’s utter bullshit. If someone yells something at you, you ignore it. Or you take it up with him or her, grown-up to grown-up. You don’t try to blow up their child.
It is rare indeed that there are clear devils and angels. But we don’t need to hang those labels on anyone to agree that some actions are inexcusable and unjustifiable under any circumstances. There is NOTHING that could have been done to these people to justify throwing a bomb at small children. NOTHING. Anyone who would do it is beneath contempt – as is anyone who would attempt to defend it.
Yeah, my initial emotional response (gee how I’ve changed since my first child was born) was that these “people” should be treated like attacking rabid animals–in other words, they should be gunned down in the street.
But I’ve since cooled off a bit. “Should” isn’t strong enough. Unfortunately it isn’t a viable solution.
Methinks you’re wearing orange blinders dude.
From The Irish Times:
"The protesters have lost the media battle. The image of unionism has suffered greatly as pictures of schoolchildren having to run a gauntlet of hate to reach their classrooms are flashed around the world. Most observers find it impossible to accept that Protestant grievances are in any way alleviated by yelling and spitting at children and calling their mothers “whores” and “sluts”. The contrast of little Catholic girls with tears running down their faces and grown adult Protestants shouting abuse at them does nothing to advance unionism. E-mails to local newspapers from abroad have described the protesters as “savages”, “degenerates” and “mentally unstable”.
The bitter irony of this (as stated later in the above piece), is that the IRA has additional “cover” for NOT decommisioning their arms at this point.
Even David Trimble has condemned the acts…although I suspect Ian Paisley is grinning like a mother fucker.
See, this is one of the problems of these on-going ethnic clashes that last centuries.
From the outside it does look like “all those folks are the same”, but among those in the conflict the other side is another race, even another species.
It is not just religion. There are subtle differences in the English spoken by the Protestant Irish vs. the Catholic Irish that may be indistinguishable to foreigners but are quite distinct to the natives. They do not share the same ancestory. Irish Catholics are predominantly Celtic in origin, but the Prostestant Catholics arrived in large numbers under the reign of William of Orange (hence the term “orangemen”) when the English were clearing the British landscape of people to make way for sheep. Irish Protestants are largely Scottish and English, meaning they are Germanic, not Celtic. When the English took over Ireland they came as conquerors and treated the native Irish as a subordinate people, passing laws to discourage mixing between the two groups. The two groups do not share the same customs, traditions, and culture despite a superficial likeness.
Comparable conflicts are the messes in Eastern Europe between Slavs of different relgion (Orthodox, Roman, Muslim), customs living in close proximity. Also, the Middle East mess - Jews and Palestinians have been living in the area, each side claiming it wholely as theirs, for, oh, nearly 4000 years now. Maybe longer. It’s the “holy land” because everything has been shot up so many times.
Anyhow… I don’t have a good answer for this, and neither does anyone else. Simple solutions don’t work because it’s a very complicated problem with roots going back centuries. In Ireland, the Irish/English conflict goes back at least 800 years.
I don’t think it’s a sort of conflict we in the US understand very well. I used to live in Rogers Park, Chicago. On the block I lived on, just one city block, we had Jews, Christians (all stripes - Roman, Orthodox, Protestant, Mormon, Fundamentalist, etc.), Muslims, Buddists, Pagans, Vodoun, Africans, Asians, Latins, Anglos, Arabs, Croats, Serbs… about 40 or so different varieties of humanity, both US born and immigrants. We didn’t all like each other - but we weren’t killing each other, either. Somehow, folks come to the US and manage to live together without hidden warfare and terrorism. Or maybe it’s just that the ones sick of fighting are the ones that leave home and come here. I dunno. Wish I could bottle the capacity to tolerate one’s neighbor and give it away by the gallon and tanker-truck, really I do.
Geeze Jodi, do you read the papers ? Yesterday was bad, today was worse, and still these jokers refuse to go by the safe route that the school officials have told them to use. This has nothing at all to do with school kids, it’s just a bunch of ignorant asshole fuckwits looking for a fight. The childrens path to school merely provided a convenient excuse for both sides.
beagledave the Scots are hardly germanic! They’re celtic themselves, with pictish thrown in.
I’m pretty sure that both sides think they have grievances and reasons. They go back decades and further, and all the reasons are very deep and complicated and nuanced and there for people who aren’t directly getting bombed and beaten to utter intellectual sighs and wring their hands over. A person could spend a lifetime studying them, yadda etcetera ad nauseum.
And intellectually, I grasp all that. In my gut understanding of things, though, the theory I actually put stock in is this: the reasons aren’t the reasons. They’re rationalizations. The truth is, these assnozzles hate because they hate–and it’s as simple and depressing as that. It’s things like this that make me have sympathy for the idea of just building a great big wall around the whole area and just occasionally looking over the top to count the bodies. Eventually the memes involved will die off, with the slim possibility that they’ll do so before all the brains to house them do.
huh? Did you mean Broomstick?
A MONTH? Try a DAY. The total number of people killed in Northern Ireland, Ireland and Great Britain over this whole ugly, sordid mess is substantially less than the number of drug-related murders Washington D.C. had in the 1990s. Rwanda was so far above that level it’s crazy.
But that’s just ample reason for us to talk about Rwanda more, not talk about Ireland less. The vile behaviour of the odious scum on the Ardoyne Road is the sort of behaviour that can grow, like a fungus, INTO a Rwanda or a Bosnia.
Yes, I meant broomstick. Sorry. My bad. Knew I shoulda been paying more attention to my posting and less attention to that patient back in the treatment room with a heart rate of 40.
The whole idea that these folk are expected to use the back door to their school to be safe is awfully reminiscent to me of the old signs: “Tradesmen and Coloreds use the back entrance”.
The comparison to the Little Rock Nine was very apt. I don’t find anything unwholesome in teaching anyone how profoundly wrong and unacceptable it is that children can’t even walk down certain streets because of their religion.
Squink, if I’m reading your point correctly, you fault the parents for putting their children “in harms way” and question whether any point justifies that. From accounts thus far, the situation is so volatile the children–and adults–are already on the firing line, in forms subtle to actively dangerous.
The parents are not terrorizing their children. The hate-spewing morons are doing that. Shifting the blame is unworthy. The distinction really isn’t that fine. What’s the alternative? Teach children to cower and evade now and hope that the boundaries don’t shift too much before one of them innocently wanders down the wrong street by mistake? Children internalize those messages too. Wrong store, wrong friend…bigotry and fear carry a stink that poisons the most routine activities of life.
The question becomes, where do you draw the line? How far do you retreat, placate, evade until bullies have been ceded everything that makes life liveable? Children facing hate mobs because they walk down certain streets to school seems like a pretty reasonable “heel to the line” limit to me. It’s ludicrous. What possible justification could gloss the mob’s actions? A 3-ft. munchkin cutting loose with a Hail Mary on the sidewalk? Whoa, jump back, now there’s a threat.
You’re shifting blame from the haters to the parents for not accomodating–and thereby legitimizing–the hate. Maybe you don’t agree with where thir heels hit the line but it’s grossly unfair to shift the blame aside from the adults spewing hate and abuse at children because they don’t walk a specified “safe” route to school. Please grant that possibly the parents are showing their children that they don’t contaminate streets just by walking down them.
Veb
I’m trying to shift blame away from the bottle throwing jerks, simply pointing out that the parents motives might not be as lofty as they are being given credit for.
As you say, it’s possible that the parents are teaching their children that they don’t contaminate streets just by walking down them. It’s also possible that they are presenting the children to the worst possible face of the opposition in order to carry the hatred onward through yet another generation-damn what a depressing thought that is. All this Rosa Parks, facing down hatred stuff is wonderful and all, and it’d be great if this were a beginning to the end of the troubles, but I think people are letting their emotional response to children in danger rule their perception of events.
Oh that’s just WONDERFUL ! The first sentence should read:
I’m NOT trying to shift blame away from the bottle throwing jerks, simply pointing out that the parents motives.
I’ll bet I get accused of eating my own slave-babies for that little typo !
Are we in the Pit?
Good.
My response to those who throw rocks(and worse) at children, to those who blame the children, and to those who try to justify such violence with political and/or social and/or religious reasoning:
Fuck You.
I do not feel the need to listen to your reasons. I do not feel the need to “hear the other side”. I feel absolutely no need to be civil about this.
Fuck you.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Squink *
**
Fair enough, and you have a point. I’ve read diligently about “the troubles” and still get hopelessly muddled. The situation reeks of ancient hatreds. Everybody loses, generation on generation, and untangling “who started it” is an exercise in futility. The world has too many examples of of racial/religious/ethnic horrors even now.
All I’m saying is that standing against a wrong doesn’t always translate into grandstanding a vote for the whole historical ticket. Sometimes, maybe, it can just mean ordinary people, now, saying “this specific thing is wrong”. Maybe Gordian knots aren’t untangled but dissolved, thread by thread.
Forget complications and finger-pointing. People who stand against everyday wrongs aren’t immune to “history poisoning” either but sometimes everyday wrongs they protest can, maybe, find solutions in law given teeth by common will and fairness.
People can only start from where they are.
Veb
I haven’t seen anything to suggest it was the parents who were antagonizing them. Just that it was Catholics, in general. If true, it would most likely be Catholic youths.
What evidence suggests this? Go on, tell us.
O’Fuck you.
Michael “Fuck you, I’m Irish” Ellis