web analytics

Funeral For a Friend

By Mahons On July 1st, 2020

The funeral of IRA alumnus Bobby Storey was held and attended by Sinn Fein leadership in contradiction and violation of NI’s social distancing regulations limiting outdoor gatherings to 30 people. They were over the limit by over a thousand people. Masks dont appear to have been worn which seems odd given the usual availability of balaclavas. The usual calls for apologies and counterclaims followed as expected by those familiar with NI politics. The bottom line to me is we have yet another example of rules and regulations that apply to the general population are flaunted or ignored by politicians. Maybe Adams, McDonald and Doherty felt if an Orangeman can get away with it in the States, Republicans should be able to get away with it in Belfast.

232 Responses to “Funeral For a Friend”

  1. Maybe Adams, McDonald and Doherty felt if an Orangeman can get away with it in the States, Republicans should be able to get away with it in Belfast.

    They were probably looking at cops and politicians in Mayo:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/det-garda-colm-horkan-epitomised-what-members-of-force-should-strive-to-be-funeral-told-1.4284667

  2. Is it OK because of the Mayo funeral?

  3. one of my favorites

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p_xAToFzck

  4. The US Republicans and the Sinn Phonies are both ” friends of the virus “

  5. Is it OK because of the Mayo funeral?

    No it’s not but the Mayo funeral was a precedent and any criticism leveled at the Belfast funeral should also be laid at the FG national government, Garda Commissioner Drew Harris and the hundreds of Garda and public who attended the funeral.

  6. Breaking

    Irish American calls Sinn Fein ‘phonies’

    Former SF President and most popular politician in Ireland, Gerry Adams, replies ‘who?’

  7. What about this and what about that.

    The Sinn Fein mob is responsible for what they did. No one else needs to be dragged into it.

    Just as Trump and the attendees are solely responsible for the lack of masks and lack of social distancing at the Tulsa and Phoenix hate rallies.

  8. The Sinn Fein mob is responsible for what they did. No one else needs to be dragged into it.

    Sauce for the goose isn’t sauce for the gander after all?

    I suppose it depends on who’s breaking the guidelines.

  9. Unlike very many here, I have condemned all who break the guidelines.

    Including pig ignorant Americans who are partying like its 2019 in bars, and bad governors who opened up too early and who overrode local mask ordinances.

    I follow the guidance and example of Dr. Fauci, not any president or political cult, in America or anywhere else.

  10. Unlike very many here, I have condemned all who break the guidelines […]

    The US Republicans and the Sinn Phonies are both ” friends of the virus “

    Did you make any comment, now or since Saturday regarding Government Ministers, a Garda Commissioner, scores of Gards and hundreds of public breaking the guidlines by attending the Garda Horan funeral?

    Did you even know about it?

  11. Oh for God’s sake.

  12. That’ll be a no then. Fair enough.

  13. To the extent that social distancing guidelines in Mayo were not followed it was wrong. Although I note that some representatives of the government were present as it was after all a State Funeral, though others who would ordinarily attended such as the President did not.
    Mr.Storey’s funeral however was not a State Funeral, as I am sure all would agree.

  14. Paul

    Be honest – If someone here had put up a post or a comment remarking on the social distancing lapses at the Mayo funeral would you have inserted a comment asking why the Belfast funeral wasn’t being equally highlighted ?

  15. My aunt died a month ago. I couldn’t carry her coffin. There was no funeral mass. My uncle wasn’t allowed at the graveside when they put his wife in the ground. I couldn’t give my uncle a hug to comfort him. I couldn’t give my cousin a hug.

    Michelle O’Neill should resign. So should Drew Harris. So should Mary Lou. So should Charlie Flanagan.

    “it was after all a State Funeral”

    I’m not sure the virus sees the distinction.

  16. Mr.Storey’s funeral however was not a State Funeral, as I am sure all would agree

    No it wasn’t but it still doesn’t detract from the principle of broken guidelines.

    Perhaps not Colm but the fact is that no one that thought that broken guidelines at the Horkan funeral warranted a post yet broken guidelines at the Storey one did. As a matter of fact, I’d wager that no one here was even aware that guidelines at the Horkan funeral were broken until I raised it.

    As I said above, it seems that sauce for the goose isn’t sauce for the gander.

  17. All those who party or attend unmasked gatherings as though there were no virus are to be condemned.

    As Seamus says, the virus has no party label.

    Half of the US, and maybe a big chunk of Europe think that the virus is a ” chicom flu “, nothing to be concerned about, which is why the virus continues to have a strong run in many places.

  18. I absolutely agree, (as shown by my reply at 1.34 to Mahons’ question). The blind eyes being turned and double standards being applied to identical situations are however shameless.

    As I said above, I’d wager that most if not all here weren’t even aware of the guidelines being broken at the Horkan funeral until it was raised.

  19. actually this is one scenario where all wearing a mask ( or balaclava ) would help as regards social distancing .. thanks, I’ll get me coat 🙂

  20. The ” no mask for me “ cause is one of the more pathetic movements that we’ve seen in our lifetimes.

    In the name of politics, lifestyle, or some idiot’s idea of liberty/personal responsibility, these people are friends of the virus, who are doing damage to their neighbors.

  21. Seamus – you are right the virus sees no distinction. However I do see a bit of mitigation in the fact that the Garda’s killing was a more traumatic death in the nation. But they should still have kept to the guidelines.

  22. I watched the reports of the Horan funeral at the time and knew that the guidelines appeared to be violated. Considering the raw shock and grief of his murder, which resonated all over the Republic, I could understand if not condone the infractions. Storey’s funeral was a different matter in my eyes, but maybe one day you’ll be able to be critical of a SF action with our trying to excuse it.

  23. “However I do see a bit of mitigation in the fact that the Garda’s killing was a more traumatic death in the nation.”

    I disagree. Grief is grief. And the presence of politicians at Garda Horkan’s funeral was made all the worse by the presence of the Garda Commissioner. The Garda Commissioner, the chief police officer of the state, broke the law. In my opinion that is a more egregious breech than what happened yesterday.

  24. Police and senior ministers should be more responsible than the average Joe.

    Discipline.

  25. I think the Garda Commissioner had to attend the funeral of a fallen officer. In a nation where a police officer is killed being so rare, it was necessary that he be present. Probably should have done so while making sure the painful but needed social distancing.

  26. Storey’s funeral was a different matter in my eyes, but maybe one day you’ll be able to be critical of a SF action with our trying to excuse it.

    I’m pretty sure I’ve been critical of both SF and the IRA in the past.

    I watched the reports of the Horan funeral at the time and knew that the guidelines appeared to be violated

    Yet you didn’t feel the need to write a blog on it. Maybe you should look at that ‘trying to excuse it’ accusation above a bit closer.

  27. Phantom,
    //The ” no mask for me “ cause is one of the more pathetic movements that we’ve seen in our lifetimes//

    Absolutely agree. How much of a hardship is it to wear a mask? It shows incredible selfishness not to make that small sacrifice to protect them more vulnerable.

  28. We all ‘need’ to do a lot of things that have been curtailed by coronavirus and the response to it. He broke the law. And he should resign. I honestly see no mitigation for Harris, or Charlie Flanagan, that aren’t also mitigants for the Shinners.

  29. Are you critical of them on this occasion?

    I can’t write a blog post about everything. A story or thought strikes me and when I have time I write something.

  30. Perhaps Seamus. I’m not fully convinced but you make some good points.

  31. Are you critical of them on this occasion?

    Absolutely I am. You asked me did the Mayo funeral make the Belfast funeral okay and I answered no, IMO MON and MLMcD should resign.

    However, the double standards applied to almost identical situations is breathtaking.

  32. What double standards? There is none.

    No one here as far as I know has praised any of the idiots who gather in groups without masks

    They’re all wrong, including the Trump hate rallies.

    And not all the virus fan gatherings can or should be addressed.

  33. I missed it in the exchange. Ok.

    I also attended a funeral last month, the numbers were restricted. Very difficult wearing masks at the wake and not touching anyone. Surreal.

  34. What double standards? There is none

    Apart from the fact that Government Ministers and Cheifs of Police broke the law last Saturday and it wasn’t commented on let alone condemned and an identical situation happens in Belfast and it’s all over the papers, (and ATW).

    Yes, none at all.

  35. I’m talking about what is spoken of here.

    There have been multiple criticisms by me and others here of the grossly irresponsible unmasked Trump rallies, of the grossly irresponsible BLM rallies, the grossly irresponsible Michigan McVeigh Militia protests.

    No one can speak to everything, no one should ever expect that.

  36. No one can speak to everything, no one should ever expect that

    Mahons admits above that he recognised the restrictions were being broken during the Horkan funeral but didn’t feel the need to comment on it.

    Do you think that Government Minister Charlie Flanagan, Garda Commissioner and those Gards that attended the funeral broke the law? If so what should the penalty be?

  37. I won’t comment on what’s legal or not there, I don’t know.

    But anyone who was in a group, unmasked, at an event of some duration at this time, they chose to do the wrong thing.

    In the US, many fools are following the lead of a very bad and ignorant president.

    I have no idea why Irish people would be doing things like this.

  38. I think I am the one who first brought up the Belfast funeral on another comment thread. I just thought with the Blacks taking a hit and the Trump fans taking a hit and the pasty English sunbathers taking a hit, for the sake of balance I had to throw some rule breaking Paddies into the mix.

    So yes I take the blame for stirring the pot 🙂

  39. I won’t comment on what’s legal or not there, I don’t know

    No?

    Like ‘the Sinn Fein mob’ above Charlie Flanaghan, Drew Harris and the Gards that attended the funeral are also ‘responsible for what they did?’

  40. Everyone is responsible for what they choose to do.

    Those who choose to spread the virus should be condemned. Every one of them. Regardless of the legalities.

  41. Okay. We agree that the same standard must be applied across the board.

    That’s a fair enough unequivocal comment.

  42. I read in the Irish Times that once inside the church in Co. Mayo, masks and social distancing was used. I’m not taking a swipe at SF, but on all sides it seems to be “freedom for me, but not for thee.”

  43. Yes Paul. I agree the same standard must be applied.

  44. Or

    ” It’s just the kung flu, keep carrying on as normal, belly up to the bar “

    Which is the attitude of many in the US.

  45. I read in the Irish Times that once inside the church in Co. Mayo, masks and social distancing was used

    Which was also reportedly the case at Bobby’s funeral in St Agnes’ yesterday.

  46. Anyone who thought Dominic Cummings should have resigned, should also support calls for O’Neill and McDonald’s resignations. But if they do resign, which I doubt they will, then Cummings should be forced to resign, yes?

  47. Yes

  48. This is at least the fourth Shinner funeral which has broken the rules in the past few months. Michelle O’Neill even saw fit to pose for a selfie outside the church with two fellow-travellers.

    The fact is that law-breaking is in the Shinners’ DNA. A few years ago Gerry Kelly’s car was clamped for illegal parking in Belfast. He was caught out liberating it with bolt-cutters. That tells you a lot about their attitude to the law in general.

  49. Social distancing is necessary to stop the spread of the virus and governments have introduced rules on it. SF is part of the NI government which introduced such rules. Michelle O’Neill is Deputy First Minister of the NI government and was at the funeral violating the rules she introduced. She should resign. As a party SF took the decision to break the rules as they would have discussed this before attending the funeral. I agree with Peter above “fact is that law-breaking is in the Shinners’ DNA.” So, there is a major party in government which is by nature criminal. What type of government is that? Would Tony Soprano and his gang be welcome to join a government in Westminster or Washington?

    In addition to breaking the rules and putting themselves on top of everyone else in NI, SF has given the bonfire boys of this month a ready-made excuse – why should we have to social distance while building bonfires if SF do not have to social distance?

  50. What type of government? The type which allows high ranking members travel 250 miles during a lockdown? The type that allows the same person to drive 30 miles to a beauty spot on his wife’s birthday, to ‘test his eyesight? The type that wouldn’t demand his resignation? That type of government?

    Everyone here is of the same mind: MO’ Néill AMD McDonald should resign. Shouldn’t the same be true of Cummings? And Drew Harris? And C Flanagan?

    “… they would have discussed this…”

    So now you’re claiming to know what SF discuss in their meetings? We’re you there? Was it on Bobby Sands Boulevard?

  51. Michelle O’Neill needs to resign but a Nelsonian eye is turned to Charlie Flanaghan and Drew Harris.

    Shhhhhhhh.

    Don’t you know that NYer knows everything about SF? Old men in bars are everywhere.

  52. Seimi

    “So now you’re claiming to know what SF discuss in their meetings? We’re you there? Was it on Bobby Sands Boulevard?” There were several people from the Republic including Kerry there. Do you think they all just thought ‘Oh, my, I must go to dear Bobby’s funeral’? This was premeditated and orchestrated. SF do not do independent thinking. Independent SF thinkers have unfortunate accidents like getting shot in the legs.

    But, I’m sure you are an independent thinker. Here is a question for you: Would Tony Soprano and his gang be welcome to join a government in Westminster or Washington? What say you independent thinker?

  53. People should socially distance themselves from this terrorist gangster and many of those paying respects to him whether there is a law requiring it or not, whether there is a plague or not, and irrespective of what happened at some other unrelated funeral.

    But if one must talk about other funerals as well, there are more apt comparisons:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8200589/Residents-hold-huge-funeral-service-local-gang-leader-died-heart-attack-Colombia.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/14/mafia-linked-funeral-investigated-amid-coronavirus-lockdown

  54. There were people there from around the country – and? Storey was a well known Republican, and many people wanted to pay their respects. Social distancing should have been complied with, but it wasn’t, and the SF leadership, who attended the funeral and should have dealt with this didn’t, so they should resign. I doubt if they will, but that’s a different matter.
    How about answering my question – should Dominic Cummings, Charlie Flanagan and Drew Harris also resign?
    Your question is stupid. Tony Soprano is a fictional character, just like your old man in the bar and whoever took you to west Belfast.

  55. //The funeral of IRA alumnus Bobby Storey was held and attended by Sinn Fein leadership in contradiction and violation of NI’s social distancing regulations //

    Maybe mass funerals are the answer, with the coffins forming sort of barriers between mourners and the dead being a kind of herd immunity to protect the quick.

  56. Frank- but Gerry Adams said he was a gentle man….

  57. Seimi

    “How about answering my question – should Dominic Cummings, Charlie Flanagan and Drew Harris also resign?” Your question is irrelevant and a clumsy attempt to divert.

    There are ‘Tony Sopranos’ in SF. Should they be welcomed into government? You are an independent thinker, correct?

  58. I don’t know if anyone should resign, but they should apologize and concede they made a mistake and things could have been handled better.

  59. Your question is irrelevant and a clumsy attempt to divert.

    It’s not irrelevant nor is it an attempt to divert. I simply want to know if you would apply the same standards to the British and Irish governments as you would to Assembly members in NI. The fact that you refuse to answer suggests you wouldn’t.

    There are ‘Tony Sopranos’ in SF.

    Tony Soprano is a fictional character. Do you also believe in Santa Claus and the easter Bunny?

    Should they be welcomed into government?

    Of course they should. They were democratically voted in. I hate to break it to you, but the days of ‘Croppy lie down’ are long gone, and they aren’t coming back. Your Unionist bigotry and sectarianism don’t work anymore.

    You are an independent thinker, correct?

    Yes, I am. I don’t need to invent characters in bars etc to bolster my bullshit.

  60. I totally hate this idea that people must resign if they do anything wrong.

    Endless gotcha.

    Even here, where it was no mistake, it was intentional wrongdoing, intentional harm to the public, even here I would not call for resignation

    They should just ask the morons to cut it out.

  61. I don’t know if anyone should resign, but they should apologize and concede they made a mistake and things could have been handled better.

    Yes, they should, instead of the ‘political point scoring’ line they are currently using. A bit of honesty from a politician – any politician! – would be most welcome around now.

    However, when cummings decided to go for a drive with his family, the calls were for him to resign. If we are to consistent, then the same call should be made regarding O’Neill, McDonald, Flanagan and Harris.

  62. Cummings reasons were frivolous and he covered them with obvious lies so I think his transgression was worse.

  63. I think in all three cases, people who were charged with keeping the general public safe and who should be setting an example, let down that public. They also broke the law, in all 3 cases.

  64. I don’t know if anyone should resign, but they should apologize and concede they made a mistake and things could have been handled better.

    Good luck with that Mahons. The Shinners don’t do apologies or admitting mistakes. Not then, not now, not ever. What they do is double down, with snarling defiance.

    Just like your guy in the White House.

  65. Just like most politicians, Peter. I know you have a particular dislike for SF, but how many of our current or past crop of politicians do you think would have apologised and actually meant it?

  66. Peter – True.

  67. The likes of ( the under-rated ) Jimmy Carter and John Hume would maybe have nothing to apologize for.

  68. Séimí

    Politicians of whatever stripe do not apologize, you’re right.

    Peter, I didn’t know Trump was SF!

  69. Charles – they wouldn’t let an Orange man in SF.

  70. Mahons, lol, you’re right, dead give away!

  71. He is a Shinner through and through!

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-attended-sinn-f-in-fundraiser-months-before-ira-attacked-london-a6767601.html

  72. With all this talk of Trump being in Sinn Fein you’ll be driving our poor Seimi to the jawbox! (Nice Belfast double entendre if I do say so myself! 🙂 )

  73. It is with the greatest malicious pleasure to present that to the other Trump supporters every so often! They like it!

  74. I think that if you’re a Trump supporter that you’re probably a SF supporter as well. I mean doesn’t this article prove that?

  75. SF are such a fearsome revolutionary movement. One of their murderers dies and they cast care to the devil and without fear break the social distancing rules at his funeral in a pandemic. What next for this revolutionary movement – counterfeit senior bus passes, a daring raid on a warehouse of crutches…They march bravely into the future they will create following two corpulent waddling molls. Most people would like to see them dig a big grave and the whole lot jump in. There will be crowds to shovel the removed soil over the ancient remnants of SF.

  76. LOL. unable to respond properly, NYer has to resort to personal insults directed towards women! Way to go, you misogynistic idiot! 🙂

  77. To be fair Seimi, New Yorker was only observing the funeral cortege as it went along Bobby Sands Boulevard. Everything and everyone looks distorted and out of shape along that vista 🙂

  78. It’s clear that aspects of the Storey funeral have caused a crisis, contrived or otherwise.

    MON shouldn’t step aside but she can alleviate the situation by adopting a contrite and conciliatory tone.

    They march bravely into the future they will create following two corpulent waddling molls.

    Why do you dislike women so much?

  79. all posts on SF Irish matters descend to this level thanks to NewYorker.
    seems to bring out the worst in him, and the he displays his ugly side more and more ( now misogyny ) The irony is he wants to point the finger at SF and say ” Ughh yukk how ugly ” whilst being an ugly cunt himself .. they hypocrisy is hilarious , he just can’t help himself.

  80. kurt

    No need for part of that last comment. You know which part !

  81. kurt
    //all posts on SF Irish matters descend to this level thanks to NewYorker.//

    To be fair, this thread was pretty much a car crash from the beginning.

  82. I don’t see any comments previously criticising women for how they appear physically, Dave.

  83. A car crash? Jeez, the thanks I get for including an Irish topic. Actually I thought it was a timely post with a discussion on funerals of public figures during a pandemic, the need for and flaunting of social distancing, the double standard of the political class etc.

  84. I thought it was a good conversation until New Yorker got his usual bout of Irish topic tourettes.

  85. Yes but since you didn’t mention every other worldwide case of unmasked virus spreader events, you must be the worst guy who ever lived.

    The Sinn Fein base has spoken.

  86. He gets a bit worked up on NI topics which is odd cause he is pretty reasonable and thoughtful on American politics and other matters. I suppose we all have an Achilles heel.

  87. All political parties and the unthinking and unwavering bovine base that supports them deserves a sharp jab every so often.

    All of them. No exception.

  88. “He gets a bit worked up on NI topics which is odd cause he is pretty reasonable and thoughtful on American politics and other matters. I suppose we all have an Achilles heel.”

    It almost reminds me. I used to work for an MP who was quite good friends with a number of former Northern Ireland MPs. People like Martin Smyth and a few others. And he remarked that each of them were almost two different people. 90% of the time they were genial, affable, Christian men. And then someone would mention Northern Ireland and by fuck the hellfire came out.

  89. The Sinn Fein base has spoken

    The usual nonsensical, mocking inanities:

    Absolutely I am. You asked me did the Mayo funeral make the Belfast funeral okay and I answered no, IMO MON and MLMcD should resign.

    However, the double standards applied to almost identical situations is breathtaking

    I for one thought it was a great thread Mahons.

  90. It was different at least. We need more Irish stuff here. Keep em coming 🙂

  91. I reject cancel culture, I want it cancelled.

    But if we go down that road, then all Sinn Fein party members who attended the virus super spreader event that they for some reason decided to attach to a funeral should be expelled from the party.

    Only the pure should be members, as we go back to the Year Zero.

  92. Mahons,

    A car crash? Jeez, the thanks I get for including an Irish topic. Actually I thought it was a timely post with a discussion on funerals of public figures during a pandemic, the need for and flaunting of social distancing, the double standard of the political class etc.

    Well done mate. Jump down my throat in true ATW fashion.
    I thought your post was good and the points perfectly valid.

  93. Mahons,

    He gets a bit worked up on NI topics which is odd cause he is pretty reasonable and thoughtful on American politics and other matters. I suppose we all have an Achilles heel.

    To be fair though, when it comes to NI discussions, he’s not alone in that.
    It’s why I tend to steer clear of topics on NI on ATW.

  94. The points were a million percent valid.

    And they were consistent with the conversations we had been having about Trump and BLM unmasked hate rallies.

  95. More (straw man), nonsensical, mocking inanities.

    I agree about NYer, he’s fairly informed and measured about US & EU matters but as soon as Ireland is mentioned logic and reason seem to take flight. I also think that referring to a (particularly female) politician’s physical appearance says more about the commentator than the politico.

  96. I would could contest the fact that NYer is perfectly sensible about American politics. He’s as wild eyed and OTT about Trump as he is about Sinn Fein.

  97. logic and reason seem to take flight.

    Well he does see himself as a Logical Unionist. 🙂

  98. To be fair though, when it comes to NI discussions, he’s not alone in that

    I assume you’re referring to the Irish contributors there Dave? I wear my opinions about Ireland on my sleeve and think that for those of us who lived through or were close to the conflict expressing strong opinions on such intense and far-reaching circumstances is completely normal.

  99. “I would could contest the fact that NYer is perfectly sensible about American politics. He’s as wild eyed and OTT about Trump as he is about Sinn Fein.”

    I don’t think he has ever claimed that he knows everything about Trump because some (unnamed) Trump insider told him everything.

  100. Dave I wasn’t jumping down your throat.

    Charles – funny even as I typed it I thought we all find that people are reasonable when they agree with us.

  101. Paul McMahon,

    I assume you’re referring to the Irish contributors there Dave? I wear my opinions about Ireland on my sleeve and think that for those of us who lived through or were close to the conflict expressing strong opinions on such intense and far-reaching circumstances is completely normal.

    That’s fair enough Paul, but I’ve noticed many times, especially in conversations about NI and Irish politics in general, there can be a lot of double standards on multiple things, such as making insults, whataboutary and actions taken by peoples respective political parties.
    And although I have more republican views, I don’t have a dog in this fight.

  102. Commentators on my 2:05AM statement mistake the allegorical for the literal. The Storey funeral and SF’s breaking of the rules indicates they retain some of old-time revolutionary impulse while marching to their graveyard. It illustrates their current status as a near dead movement led by ridiculous figures. They are past it and how they acted at the funeral shows that. Some commentators are forever looking for a grievance against them, my statement is to help them realize the movement they revere has had its day and will soon find itself in the graveyard of discredited movements. That is how I see it but Irish Republicans have a fetish for mourning violent nobodies when everyone else carries on in the present.

  103. Such as making insults, whataboutary and actions taken by peoples respective political parties.

    C’mon Dave, this is ATW. such things are par for the course and I certainly haven’t noticed any increase, barring NYer’s Irish Tourettes, on such threads.

    Although I have more republican views, I don’t have a dog in this fight.

    Understood but no doubt you also understand how such an emotive issue where the scars still haven’t properly healed and where so many commentators here were close to it, lived through it and where affected by it can generate such polarising impassioned opinions?

    NYer,

    following two corpulent waddling molls

    Is a very obvious reference to the physical appearance of the female SF Pres and female VP. You can’t try to walk back on this now.

  104. two corpulent waddling molls

    I would not listen to anybody who made such a comment. Trash talk.

  105. I predict a doubling-down on the allegorical v literal statement, coupled with an increase in the ‘you’re all too stupid to understand me’ angle.

  106. Seimi

    You know NYer too well 🙂

  107. Seimi

    “I predict a doubling-down on the allegorical v literal statement, coupled with an increase in the ‘you’re all too stupid to understand me’ angle.” No doubling- down needed. Your above comments confirm the second part of your statement, ie, “too stupid to understand”. I doubt you would know what an allegory is if it stared you in the face.

  108. Colm

    See? “I’m sticking with what I said and you’re too stupid to understand what I meant.”
    So predictable. Also, NYer always seems to leave these oh-so clever remarks until late night/early morning, when there are less people on the site, as if he’s slipping it in under the radar, in the hope that nobody notices or something.
    No doubt now I’ll get a lecture on the time difference between here and NY.

  109. No, I think he will stick to his lecture that you – and indeed any Irish nationalists – are incapable of rising to his level of intellectual awareness.

  110. Colm

    Irish nationalism is fine with me. It is violent Irish Republicanism I detest. Unless Irish Republicans repudiate the use of violence past, present and future I consider them violent Irish Republicans.

  111. New Yorker

    In the past you have written here about your opposition to the whole Irish Nationalist movement to break away from the U.K. You have indicated a belief that Ireland would have been better off not seeking independence until the U.K. agreed it voluntarily – like with Canada . Australia and New Zealand. IT isn’t just violent Republicanism you have opposed but the very idea of Irish separation from the Kingdom.

  112. New Yorker I think the tragedy of your position is it doesn’t allow others to come to a different view
    despite having reviewed the evidence same as you .

  113. Now that the pubs are open again, NYer will be able to get some advice from that old man he knows.

    So I take it you are 100% a pacifist? You oppose ALL violence of any form, past, present or future?

    The 4th of July must really piss you off no end.

  114. I doubt you would know what an allegory is if it stared you in the face.

    You very blatantly commented of the physical appearance of the SF female Pres & VP and you’re now trying to sell it as some kind of figurative analogy. Your very deliberate reference is there for all to see above and its intention and meaning are quite obvious.

    Colm, when it comes to Ireland NYer is a British unionist. It’s that simple.

  115. Seimi I’ve always found those that get all defensive are usually the ones that lack wisdom as wisdom brings understanding and maturity . One day he may come to accept that we all hold differing opinions and that’s ok. In a similar way pat has on this subject . They’ve hammered it out over many years .
    It’s a positive and a fruit from the tree of ATW

  116. It’s very like no it’s exactly that NY drinks the poison of resentment thinking it’s harming you but it’s harming himself . Tough one to drop .I read a book ok it had the Christian slant but no matter it was all about taking offense and the deadly traps . It really helped me grow out if it and recognise it in myself.

  117. Opposing the use of violence in the 20s order to get independence or to deal with the partition and situation in the North in the late 60s is a perfectly valid position to hold. However I recall NY writing here that he believed the Irish people were not mature enough to be a sovereign country regardless of how it was achieved and he believed Ireland would have had amore progressive and economically and socially more successful development had it remained within the UK. He effectively said in a nutshell that the Irish were too backward and stupid to govern themselves and needed to be lead from the superior and advanced British .

  118. Fuck thats an awful way to think . I believe you Colm . Come on NY fess up. What is the real issue ?

  119. Colm

    I’ll explain my opinion on Ireland in the 1910s/1920s. I believe it would have been better if Ireland organically reached nationhood without violence. There was a growing class of Catholics who gained economic wherewithal, educational achievement, international connections and artistic maturity who felt a sense of nationhood but who who did not support the use of violence and were not anti-Brit. A nation would have evolved organically without using violence and retain a friendly relationship with the UK but not be subservient to the UK. I’m far from alone in such an opinion on the national question.

  120. Paul McMahon

    “You very blatantly commented of the physical appearance of the SF female Pres & VP”. I said they were “two corpulent waddling molls”. That is an accurate characterization because they are both overweight with flabs of fat protruding from under their ill-fitting clothing and they walk leaning from one side to the other. What is inaccurate about that? You may see them as two svelte babes but I don’t. They were paying homage to hard men who expected them at the funeral. They had to comply even thought it meant breaking social distancing rules and the consequent PR and political damage.

  121. A nation would have evolved organically without using violence and retain a friendly relationship with the UK but not be subservient to the UK.

    The denial of Home Rule and capitulation to the threat of unionist terrorism ensured such opinions were pipe dreams.

  122. New Yorker

    I am referring more to comments you made about how the ‘free state’ governed itself from the 1930s up until fairly recent times. You clearly implied that the Irish people would have been better off having stayed in the UK indicating they were not mature enough to develop a functioning Sovereign state. Your opposition was a lot more than just anti-violence. Now in terms of the austere suffocating pro-clerical nature of the State that evolved there is a great deal to be critical about, but that is about the choices and directions taken not simply by being Irish and therefore immature in comparison to the people of the big island next door !

  123. Colm

    The horrible conditions from the 1920s to about the 1980s supports my position. In that period there were many more problems than the suffocating pro-clerical position. There was widespread poverty and mass emigration largely because industry did not develop and export trade was low and it need not have been. The post revolutionary state that because the Republic was insular and introverted. It did not try to get international assistance to develop industry and the mentality did not allow them to expand into foreign markets. The educational system also suffered and fell behind other comparable nations so human potential was frustrated. And, on and on.

    It was not a matter of staying in or out of the UK but having a friendly relationship with the UK would have been beneficial. Ireland could have evolved into nation with a friendly relationship with the UK instead it was mostly anti-Brit during those years. Of course, the resort to violence was unhelpful in every way.

  124. Paul McMahon

    “The denial of Home Rule and capitulation to the threat of unionist terrorism ensured such opinions were pipe dreams.” That is a stupid comment. You apparently have no idea what a nation evolving organically means. Examples are Australia and New Zealand. There is no good reason why something similar could not have happened with Ireland. Instead a gang of hotheaded criminals grabbed power without a democratic mandate.

  125. //a gang of hotheaded criminals grabbed power//

    Like our Founding Fathers??

  126. Charles

    I don’t think our founding fathers were criminals. Do you? And, they did not grab power they fought for many difficult years.

  127. NYer,

    They were criminals at the time. Luckily they won, and wrote the history! Had the British won the war, the Founders would have hanged, by their own admission.

  128. Oh god the knowledge gaps are so poor New Yorker. There is not one iota of acknowledgement about the position of the UK govts and unionist frustration to the cause of Irish unity . It’s such an important factor. Comparisons to AUS and NZ are laughable . The Brits had the boot on the throat if the Irish for centuries. 3 home bills denied . Freedom denied by partition with the threat of terrible war if Collins did not sign . It’s like as if you read just one half of the book on Irish History. It’s honestly the worst appraisal if Irish affairs I’ve read in a long time . I can’t think of a book to recommend can anyone else help NY fill in the gaps . Just the facts. The actual political history of the interactions . Dear oh dear

  129. That is an accurate characterization because they are both overweight with flabs of fat protruding from under their ill-fitting clothing and they walk leaning from one side to the other. What is inaccurate about that?

    The issue isn’t about accuracy it’s about the fact that you shallowly referred to the physical appearance of the female SF Pres & VP and then tried to present as some kind of figurative metaphor. When Trump mocked a disabled guy the accuracy of the guy having a disability didn’t make it any less tasteless.

    Thankfully you now seem to have abondoned your fallacy.

    You apparently have no idea what a nation evolving organically means

    I have a perfect idea of what it means thanks and the denial of the democratically mandated Home Rule as a capitulation to the threat of unionist terrorism meant that any such notions are pie in the sky.

    A gang of hotheaded criminals grabbed power without a democratic mandate

    SF taking almost 70% of seats in the Irish general election of 1918 shows just how jaded and incorrect that statement is.

  130. “Instead a gang of hotheaded criminals grabbed power without a democratic mandate.”

    1918 would beg to differ. Sinn Féin won 70% of the seats in Ireland. What would be needed for a democratic mandate?

  131. “And, they did not grab power they fought for many difficult years.”

    The fought for many difficult years, after grabbing power (illegally).

  132. you know when you chart the various levels of irish emancipation including land reform, catholic freedom of religion , voting rights, representation. I can’t think of a country that has had to fight for every inch every breath of its liberty though the political systems, through protest, through endurance, and through sacrifice .
    The cinderalla of the Empire NY’er never had a chance ; UK’s role was a miserable record of brutality. occupation and denial.
    The above is not even a prejorative account its just a factual scan for the purposes of ATW and debate . Note even Unionists or British Gov’t would deny any of the above.
    that’s why they came to the table in 1993 and rrealised their responsibility , good old John Major and pre_Iraq Tony Blair, aul Bertie Aherne, Mr Trimble, John Hume and of course Gerry and Martin.
    Jaysus no wonder its called the struggle 🙂

  133. If the UK had granted the whole of Ireland Dominion status before WW1 within the Empire and with the UK Sovereign remaining Head of State similar to Australia and Canada that may well have mollified Unionists probably and Ireland may well have developed as a friendly peaceful Commonwealth partner of Britain throughout the 20th Century. Alas it wasn’t to be and that cannot be blamed purely on the insurrectionist Republicans on the island.

  134. Every single one of you is too stupid to understand any of this, as New yorker will tell you, probably at about 4.30 AM, when he’s hoping you’ll all be asleep.

    Debating Ireland’s history with him is pointless. Like kurt suggested, it’s like he has read one half of one book and bases everything on that. And the book was probably written by Ruth Dudley Edwards!

  135. thanks seimi, yup ms dudley is a awful snob , the invisible crime as I call it
    Snob: a person who believes himself or herself an expert or connoisseur in a given field and is condescending toward or disdainful of those who hold other opinions or have different tastes regarding this field-
    NY-er ?

  136. Colm

    “If the UK had granted the whole of Ireland Dominion status before WW1 within the Empire and with the UK Sovereign remaining Head of State similar to Australia and Canada that may well have mollified Unionists probably and Ireland may well have developed as a friendly peaceful Commonwealth partner of Britain throughout the 20th Century.” That would have been one way.

    It was important at the time for the UK to guard against enemy countries using Ireland as a launching pad for mainland UK invasion, so there would have to have been something to provide for that. There could have been commercial arrangements agreed to. There could have been educational and cultural exchanges. How all that would have been codified whether as a dominion or something else is left to speculation. For centuries people had been traveling from Ireland to Britain and vice versa with many Irish having family in Britain and there were bonds to be preserved. The Irish revolution sundered that to the loss of both sides.

    “Alas it wasn’t to be and that cannot be blamed purely on the insurrectionist Republicans on the island.” Here I disagree. The insurrectionists brought bad blood to the relationship. They were responsible for attacking the Brits which caused the nasty separation. Who do you think was responsible if not them?

  137. Paul McMahon

    “The issue isn’t about accuracy it’s about the fact that you shallowly referred to the physical appearance of the female SF Pres & VP and then tried to present as some kind of figurative metaphor.” It is both an accurate statement and used allegorically. You object because the two of them look so dumpy.

    Re the 1918 election. There is no such thing as a retroactive approval of an anti-democratic action. Before the 1918 election historians agree the overwhelming majority of Irish people disapproved of IRA/IRB actions.

    Re Home Rule. Home rule was delayed not denied because of WWI. The Brits never said there will not be home rule, they said it was postponed because of the imminent war.

  138. Kurt

    “Oh god the knowledge gaps are so poor New Yorker.” Listen you mentally damaged intellectual midget with embarrassing personal problems you foolishly raise on a blog, shut up and wait to be called on before you say another thing.

  139. New Yorker – triggered hahaha – hit a raw nerve ..
    your journey of irish understanding is going to take a long time , offered you a short cut
    take the blinkers off and Good luck with it

  140. seimi , waste of time with New Yorker
    he’s only interested in playing the man and making childish insults and threats
    he lacks discipline and maturity.

  141. “It was important at the time for the UK to guard against enemy countries using Ireland as a launching pad for mainland UK invasion, so there would have to have been something to provide for that.”

    Why should Ireland care? The British should be allowed to keep Ireland in captivity to secure their own protection? How very hostage taker of them.

    “The insurrectionists brought bad blood to the relationship. They were responsible for attacking the Brits which caused the nasty separation.”

    The Brits, or the English in particular, attacked first in 1169. Relationship has been intermittently toxic ever since. The cause of the bad relationship has been in the insistence of the British to act as an overlord and master to Ireland, rather than as a good neighbour.

    “Re the 1918 election. There is no such thing as a retroactive approval of an anti-democratic action. Before the 1918 election historians agree the overwhelming majority of Irish people disapproved of IRA/IRB actions.”

    And? So you could make the point that all actions before 1918 were anti-democratic. You can’t make that point after 1918, when the actions were all democratic, and it was the British actions that were anti-democratic.

    And if actions without democratic mandate sour the future democratic mandate then I guess that also applies to the American revolution, where Patriots (or criminal terrorists in your thinking) stormed the Fort of William and Mary, killed soldiers at the Battle of Lexington and Concord, and then fought nearly two dozen battles against the British before the Second Continental Congress passed the Declaration of Independence? The (less than Irish) democratic Declaration of Independence cannot be used for retroactive approval of the previous actions? And because it cannot be used for retroactive approval it sullies any future actions? As such the American revolutionary war, and, as such, the entire existence of America, is a criminal conspiracy?

  142. “The Brits never said there will not be home rule, they said it was postponed because of the imminent war.”

    And the Third Home Rule Bill (or truth be told the Amending Bill (pulled due to World War I) to the Home Rule Act) also partitioned Ireland. So the Brits were effectively asking Ireland to choose between home rule (and partition) or no home rule. Actual home rule wasn’t on the table. Given that home rule was itself a compromise measure to further compromise it shows the callous nature that the British treated Ireland.

  143. I object because it’s a reference to the physical appearance of the SF leaders which has no bearing to the matter at hand, in other words, a cheap shot. Accuracy has no importance in the claims. As I’ve said, when Trump mocked a disabled man the accurate fact that the guy had a disability didn’t make it any less tasteless. What your comment was is a unionist and wider right wing staple, a vacuous, snarky attempted insult based on physical appearance.

    It seems that it is you who is retrospectively revising history (or alternatively you may just be ignorant or muddled on the issue). The Rising didn’t ‘grab power’. The Irish Free State was established in the wake of the War of Independence (1919 to 1921) in the wake of the 1918 Irish general election which Irish Republicanism received an overwhelming democratic mandate

    Home Rule was initially postponed because of WWI, it was then denied because of the threat of unionist terrorism therefore capitulation to negating the threat of the democratic process because of unionism threatening violence ensured that your naive notions of ‘organic evolvement’ are nothing more than pie in the sky smokescreens attempting to excuse the anti-democratic threats of unionism.

  144. New Yorker clearly has knowledge of Irish history but his main fault is that he sees everything through an RDE prism. A pantomime vision where the BrIts are sweet innocent kind patient loving grandparents exasperated by their juvenile mendacious grandchildren, ungrateful selfish and temperamental little green Irish horrors . I don’t think he is willing to take the blinkers off and realise pantomimes aren’t reality.

  145. Paul McMahon

    “I object because it’s a reference to the physical appearance of the SF leaders which has no bearing to the matter at hand, in other words, a cheap shot.” Their appearance fits into the allegory of them marching to the graveyard of discredited movements. I guess you did not get that.

    “The Irish Free State was established in the wake of the War of Independence (1919 to 1921) in the wake of the 1918 Irish general election which Irish Republicanism received an overwhelming democratic mandate.” Correct, but it historically recognized it started with the Rising.

    “Home Rule was initially postponed because of WWI, it was then denied because of the threat of unionist terrorism therefore capitulation…” What would be the point of Home Rule after the Irish revolution had begun?

  146. Seamus

    “Why should Ireland care? The British should be allowed to keep Ireland in captivity to secure their own protection? How very hostage taker of them.” That was said in the theoretical case there were negotiations or a similar arrangement when important issues of both sides would be considered. If you read it in context you will understand.

    “The Brits, or the English in particular, attacked first in 1169. Relationship has been intermittently toxic ever since.” That is a silly ahistorical propagandistic statement.

    “And? So you could make the point that all actions before 1918 were anti-democratic.” Before 1918 Irish members sat in Westminster which was considered a democratic institution by the standards of the day.

  147. “That was said in the theoretical case there were negotiations or a similar arrangement when important issues of both sides would be considered.”

    Why should the issues of Britain get in the way of the self-determination of the Irish people?

    “That is a silly ahistorical propagandistic statement.”

    Otherwise known as the truth.

    “Before 1918 Irish members sat in Westminster which was considered a democratic institution by the standards of the day.”

    You clearly didn’t understand the point I was making.

  148. Colm

    “his main fault is that he sees everything through an RDE prism.” I have read a few of RDE’s books among others by many authors. I know RDE’s weaknesses as well as her strengths. How many of RDE’s books have you read? How many by Gerry Adams? Maybe our prism is that of Gerry Adams?

  149. Seamus

    “Why should the issues of Britain get in the way of the self-determination of the Irish people?” You did not read it in context as I suggested. Therefore, there is no point in continuing the discussion with you. Stick to fact checking.

  150. What context could justify the issues of the British get in the way of the self-determination of the Irish people?

    “Therefore, there is no point in continuing the discussion with you.”

    Otherwise known as you don’t have an answer so you are going to run away like the pathetic little bitch that you are.

  151. ” I don’t think he is willing to take the blinkers off and realise pantomimes aren’t reality.”
    that one colm, key word “blinkers” as applied to N’Yorker there is a consensus on the thread that that is the truth ..
    A turning point was when the Queen laid a wreath at the republican cemetery in 2011
    RDE and her conort of bigots and snobs hated the symbolism of that , as I’m sure does the ill-informed eejit on this thread the yorkie bar kid ;(

  152. Seamus

    “What context could justify the issues of the British get in the way of the self-determination of the Irish people?” The context is the discussion on the issue above which you id not read. That is ignorance. Now, go check some facts, you know how to do that, just don’t think about the facts because demonstrably you are not good at that.

  153. You provided no context where the issues or wants of the British should be allowed to get in the way of self-determination for the Irish people. And now that you cannot think of a legitimate reason for it you are trying to pretend you have already answered it. It is yet another move by a coward.

  154. New Yorker

    I haven’t read any books by Gerry Adams. I have read one book by RDE “The Faithfull Tribe” and I have read many other articles and columns written by her. The only prism by which I view the history of Ireland is that of being a British person of Irish heritage who is not a Republican or Nationalist (I don’t and have never lived there) but I certainly don’t view Irish people as being developmentally inferior to the British as you clearly do. I also don’t take the simplistic and naive black and white view that ALL of the fault of the troubled and difficult relationship between the 2 countries rests squarely on the behaviour of the Irish Republican side.

  155. Seamus

    Read my 3:28AM above. That is the context referred to which you lazily did not read.

  156. Colm

    ” I certainly don’t view Irish people as being developmentally inferior to the British as you clearly do.” I don’t think Irish people as individuals are developmentally inferior but the history of l920-1980 clearly shows as a nation they were.

    “I also don’t take the simplistic and naive black and white view that ALL of the fault of the troubled and difficult relationship between the 2 countries rests squarely on the behaviour of the Irish Republican side.” The troubled relationship in the 1910s and 1920s was because the Irish republicans revolted. If you think that is simplistic and naive, you must so consider most historians. The facts speak for themselves and are well established.

  157. colm i think NY’er thinks its 1836, when young Benjamin Disraeli wrote:

    [The Irish] hate our order, our civilisation, our enterprising industry, our pure religion. This wild, reckless, indolent, uncertain and superstitious race have no sympathy with the English character. Their ideal of human felicity is an alternation of clannish broils and coarse idolatry. Their history describes an unbroken circle of bigotry and blood.”

    seeing ireland in that

    blinkered

    way explains the writings or RDE too

  158. “Read my 3:28AM above. That is the context referred to which you lazily did not read.”

    I did read it. It still provides no context as to why the wishes or needs of Britain should overrule the self-determination of the Irish people.

    ” The troubled relationship in the 1910s and 1920s was because the Irish republicans revolted.”

    On September 1912, over 200,000 men signed the Ulster Covenant committing themselves to terrorism to prevent Home Rule. In January 1913 the terrorist organisation called the Ulster Volunteer Force was formed. All of this years before the Easter Rising.

    “The facts speak for themselves and are well established.”

    And completely contradict your bullshit.

  159. The troubled relationship in the 1910s and 1920s was because the Irish republicans revolted

    yes they should have waited another 100 years and pursued Home Rule, like the Americans did, like the French did, and sucked up to the Brits and said please a bit more, that’s what caused ALL the trouble .. ahh I get it now , wow i never knew !

  160. New Yorker – Most historians definitely do not take the simplistic analysis you do. The idea that the historic frictional and painful relationship between Britain and Ireland was the fault entirely of the Irish for failing to smile and passively accept London’s command is very much a niche minority view, a small club to which you clearly belong.

  161. // The troubled relationship in the 1910s and 1920s was because the Irish republicans revolted.//

    What a bizarre ill-informed statement.

    Unionists had set the ball rolling by defying the British government and the rule of (British) law.

    They set up an illegal army to fight British law if need be. They imported large quantities of arms to that effect. They were supported by the Conservative party in all of this.

    Rules on importing arms were relaxed which allowed the UVF obtain weapons.
    Then when the Irish Volunteers were formed, the laws on importing arms were quickly reintroduced. (about 2 weeks after the IV were formed)

    The British didn’t move to prevent UVF gun-running. When the IV imported a fraction of the weapons stock the UVF had, the army moved in a shot people dead in the streets of Dublin.

    When they thought they’d have to move against Ulster to enforce British law, practically the entire officer class in the Irish command resigned. They were later reinstated without censure.

    Later Ulster rebels were appointed to the war cabinet in London.

    All of this was well before Republicans fired a single shot or “revolted”.

  162. I guess New Yorker will reply that the Unionist insurrectionists weren’t responsible for the conflicts because they didn’t have to use their weapons. If your threats are surrendered to you aren’t to blame )

  163. Noel

    “What a bizarre ill-informed statement.” I am well aware the Brits sided with the UVF and other unionists. But that relationship was not troubled in the eyes of most Brits. The UVF and other unionists did not attack the Brits. The trouble was with the revolutionaries in Dublin and other areas.

  164. Seamus

    “I did read it. It still provides no context as to why the wishes or needs of Britain should overrule the self-determination of the Irish people.” Hint: The context is the discussion not the issue of self-determination. If you actually read it then you are simply thick.

  165. Colm

    “I guess New Yorker will reply that the Unionist insurrectionists weren’t responsible for the conflicts because they didn’t have to use their weapons. If your threats are surrendered to you aren’t to blame ). Almost right. The unionists did not attack the Brits, the IRA/IRB did. The unionists and the Brit government were in bed together and that was not a troublesome thing to the Brits. Whereas the IRA/IRB opened up a hot war with the Brits starting with the Rising.

    BTW, name the historians who disagree with this interpretation of which side caused trouble in the 1910s and 1920s.

  166. New Yorker. The IRA caused trouble in the post WW1 war of independence. The British forces caused trouble, as did the ‘Black and Tans’ as did the Unionist mobs launching pogroms in Belfast with tacit state approval. A lot of factions caused trouble that is what the vast majority of historians will agree. Perhaps you should name Reputable historians with verifiable quotes who lay all moral responsibility and blame for violence and conflict on Irish Republicans alone.

  167. “Which side caused trouble” is not a combination of words likeky to be uttered by an historian, for many very good reasons.

  168. He’s not concerned Colm that the Brits allowed an illegal terrorist militia to develop and thrive in Ulster .
    Blinkered is when you focus only on one side .
    Poor guy I’d hate to be that dumb

  169. Colm

    “The British forces caused trouble, as did the ‘Black and Tans.” The British forces of various kinds were responding to attacks from the IRA/IRB, they did not cause the trouble. The fight was started by the IRA/IRB not the Brits. Both sides were guilty of fighting but one side started it. That is what history documents. You can read about it Charles Townsend’s books.

  170. New Yorker

    The IRA/IRB were responding to the threats posed by the planned insurrection of the Unionist minority supported by the British govt. and their failure to respect the expressed will of the Irish people in the 1918 election. They did not cause the trouble. The fight was started by the Brits not the IRA. Both sides were guilty of fighting but one side started it. That is what history documents. You can read about it in a thousand different books and then phrase it as you choose which is what we have both done here.

  171. // The trouble was with the revolutionaries in Dublin and other areas.//

    The revolutionaries in Dublin didn’t cause any trouble 1910 – 1914. The trouble all came from Unionist rebels, who refused to accept British law and British rule.

    As for what happened after 1914, the republican rebels, in fact every Irishman, was perfectly entitled to take up arms against British misrule in Ireland. The previous few years had just added more reasons to the mountain of injustices that already justified war.

  172. Their appearance fits into the allegory of them marching to the graveyard of discredited movements. I guess you did not get that.

    No I got that, it was your sneering reference to the women’s physical shape which had nothing to do with the issue I was referring to. SF soon to be the largest party in the North and taking almost 25% of first prefs in the 26 takes care of your ‘discredited movement’ rubbish.

    Correct, but it historically recognized it started with the Rising.

    Is it? There were three full years between the Rising and War of Independence. You stated that they ‘grabbed power without a mandate’ That is historically inaccurate and you were wrong.

    What would be the point of Home Rule after the Irish revolution had begun?

    The fulfillment of the democratic process? The non capitulation to the threat of armed unionist terrorism? The avoidance of the War of Independence? The avoidance of the deaths of 714 British forces and 500 IRA men etc?

    Everyone above is correct and you are wrong. It’s that simple.

    The genesis of this was when the UVF smuggled 25,000 rifles into Ireland 1n 1914 to fight Parliamentary Democracy and the democratic will of the Irish people. It’s called terrorism today and it was threatened by unionists like you. Rather than face this terrorism down the British rewarded it by granting them their own state.

  173. ” The context is the discussion not the issue of self-determination. If you actually read it then you are simply thick.”

    Except the question I asked was what context should the issues of the British matter. The context you provide doesn’t provide any evidence to suggest that the issues of the British should matter. But you don’t want to engage with the wider point because you have no issue in debating the actual issues. You have one role on threads like this and that is to cunt the thread up with your cunty ways. You really are the epitome of the CunTroll.

  174. ” The British forces of various kinds were responding to attacks from the IRA/IRB, they did not cause the trouble.”

    The IRA responded to attacks. Ireland voted for the Dáil. The Dáil declared independence, and was the sole source of lawful authority on the island of Ireland. The RIC, the Black and Tans etc… were nothing but terrorists dedicated to the overthrow of the only lawful authority in Ireland. And so Dáil set up the IRA to respond to this provocation.

  175. Seamus

    “Except the question I asked”. Who cares what question you asked. You do not know how to read or engage on a blog.

  176. Colm

    “The IRA/IRB were responding to the threats posed by the planned insurrection of the Unionist minority supported by the British govt. and their failure to respect the expressed will of the Irish people in the 1918 election.” The fighting started in 1916, well before the 1918 election.

    “The fight was started by the Brits not the IRA.” Who was in the GPO?

  177. Noel

    “As for what happened after 1914, the republican rebels, in fact every Irishman, was perfectly entitled to take up arms against British misrule in Ireland.” Wrong. There were constitutional and legal avenues to deal with the issues. There was no justification to taking up arms.

    The great majority of people did not take up arms. Why was that?

  178. //There were constitutional and legal avenues to deal with the issues. There was no justification to taking up arms.//

    There were no constitutional or legal avenues to deal with British favouritism towards Unionism and general anti-Irish bigotry. The British behaviour in Easter Week showed that yet again and vindicated the rebels analysis.

    Redmond on the other hand was shown up to be a complete British dupe and fool. He had trusted the British, then marched off a generation of young Irishmen to be mixed with the mud in Flanders. They walked with him off the page of Irish history. Ireland was well rid of him.

    //The great majority of people did not take up arms. Why was that?//

    The great majority of Americans did not take up arms in WW2. Why was that?

  179. “There were constitutional and legal avenues to deal with the issues.”

    As there were in 1776. I await your condemnation of the American founding fathers.

    “The great majority of people did not take up arms. Why was that?”

    Likewise an estimated 10% of Americans took up arms during the Revolutionary War.

  180. New Yorker

    History did not start in 1916. Its very easy to pick a convenient date and claim “that’s when the trouble started” . I am referring to the totality of conflict and the behaviours and morality of all engaged parties to which none come out squeaky clean. Choosing a starting date is a game everyone can play. When did ‘The Troubles’ start ?

    1169 ? 1690 ? 1798 ? 1801 ? 1845 ? 1880 ? 1916 ? 1922/3 1956 ? 1968/9 ? – take your pick.

  181. “Who cares what question you asked. You do not know how to read or engage on a blog.”

    As I said you don’t want to engage with the wider point because you have no interest in debating the actual issues. You have one role on threads like this and that is to cunt the thread up with your cunty ways. You are the CunTroll.

  182. Paul McMahon

    “it was your sneering reference to the women’s physical shape which had nothing to do with the issue I was referring to.” What you call sneering I call accurate. Your subjective interpretation is your own business.

    BTW, I don’t think you got the allegory. If you did, what is it?

    “Is it? There were three full years between the Rising and War of Independence.” That was in response to: “Correct, but it historically recognized it started with the Rising.” See the word start? It means begin and not during.

    “The avoidance of the War of Independence?” The war of independence began in 1916 when the real war was raging. The Irish did not wait for WWI to end for home rule. During a world war they attacked one of the major Allied powers. They were friendly with the Germans, so that was not a surprise.

  183. “That was in response to: “Correct, but it historically recognized it started with the Rising.” See the word start? It means begin and not during.”

    Where is it “historically recognized (sic)” that all of Ireland’s troubles started with the Easter Rising?

  184. ” They were friendly with the Germans, so that was not a surprise.”

    Was that a bad thing at that point in time?

  185. Noel

    “There were no constitutional or legal avenues to deal with British favouritism towards Unionism and general anti-Irish bigotry.” There were many capable Irishmen in Westminster. There was local government in Ireland. There were hundreds of Catholic solicitors and barristers at the time. You seem to be of the school that it is always best to reach for the gun and construct the bomb.

    “He had trusted the British, then marched off a generation of young Irishmen to be mixed with the mud in Flanders.” People can disagree about WWI, but at the time those who fought believed in the causes they were fighting for, no matter what we might
    think today.

    “The great majority of Americans did not take up arms in WW2. Why was that?” WW2 was not a popular uprising as was the rising in Ireland. The comparison is invalid.

  186. Seamus

    Savant noun

    a person affected with a developmental disorder (such as autism or intellectual disability) who exhibits exceptional skill or brilliance in some limited field

  187. In 1916 Ireland was occupied by an Allied power that claimed it was fighting for the self determination of people elsewhere.

  188. Colm

    “History did not start in 1916. Its very easy to pick a convenient date and claim “that’s when the trouble started” The Irish revolutionary period started in 1916 and that is the subject under discussion.

  189. Mahons

    “In 1916 Ireland was occupied by an Allied power that claimed it was fighting for the self determination of people elsewhere.” Wrong. In 1916 Ireland was in the UK.

  190. “The Irish revolutionary period started in 1916 and that is the subject under discussion.”

    Where does it say the Irish revolutionary period started in 1916?

    “Wrong. In 1916 Ireland was in the UK.”

    And? That doesn’t negate Mahons statement. It was forced, against its will, to be part of the UK.

  191. What you call sneering I call accurate. Your subjective interpretation is your own business

    As I told you before, accuracy is irrelevant here. When Trump mocked a disabled individual the fact that the individual had a disability didn’t make it any more tasteless. Your comment on the physical appearance of the female SF leaders is in the same Trump comment vein.

    The rest of your comment is convoluted historical revisionism and is not worthy of discussion. To summarise, everyone else commenting above is correct and you are simply incorrect.

  192. New Yorker

    You don’t decide the timeframe parameters and the subject topic. This is a thread on a post which started as a discussion about a modern day Irish funeral and morphed into a general discussion on the history of Anglo-Irish relations and the rights and wrongs of how various factions pursued their aims through history. You are not the headmaster deciding to tell his pupils the criteria for today’s classroom talk 🙂

    PS – The Irish revolutionary period did not start in 1916. Ever heard of the United Irishmen or the Fenian Brotherhood, the uprisings Cromwell repelled or the various bomb and gun attacks that were enacted in England during Queen Victoria’s reign ?
    Yes a pivotal event in the history of Ireland occurred in 1916 but it wasn’t the start of Irish violent opposition.

  193. They were friendly with the Germans, so that was not a surprise

    Where did unionists import those 25,000 rifles to arm themselves to fight against Parliamentary Democracy and the democratic will of the Irish people from?

  194. Almost 200 comments, Mahons. The thread wasn’t a dud after all 😉

  195. Paul

    I think we also have to than New Yorker and his “Waddling Molls” comment for the success of this thread 🙂

  196. ..have to thank..

  197. Indeed.

    Such comments however are a unionist/ right wing staple.

  198. Ireland was part of the UK in the same was occupied France was part of Germany.

  199. A far right unionist staple is that home rule was a done deal in 1914 (ironic as their ideological forefathers all opposed even home rule). It was on the statute books thanks to the diligence of the IPP and their Liberal allies. But it was far from clear if it could ever be implemented in full – as the Curragh mutiny and the threats of civil disobedience (and possibly war) from Bonar Law showed.

  200. Paul McMahon

    “As I told you before, accuracy is irrelevant here.” Accuracy is always relevant.

  201. Colm

    “PS – The Irish revolutionary period did not start in 1916. Ever heard of the United Irishmen or the Fenian Brotherhood, the uprisings Cromwell repelled or the various bomb and gun attacks that were enacted in England during Queen Victoria’s reign ?
    Yes a pivotal event in the history of Ireland occurred in 1916 but it wasn’t the start of Irish violent opposition.” OK. The modern (twentieth century) period for pedants.

  202. Mahons

    “Ireland was part of the UK in the same was occupied France was part of Germany.” Wrong again. Ireland was not occupied in 1916; it was in the UK and the troops were UK troops.

  203. Accuracy is always relevant

    Did the fact that the disabled guy Trump mocked had a disability make the mocking anymore less pathetically trashy? Likewise with your own comment.

  204. MourneReg

    “It was on the statute books thanks to the diligence of the IPP and their Liberal allies. But it was far from clear if it could ever be implemented in full. I agree. There were too many variables at play to make a judgment on the outcome after WWI.

  205. “Wrong again. Ireland was not occupied in 1916; it was in the UK and the troops were UK troops.”

    Okay, so was Alsace-Lorraine occupied in 1940? Because it was legally at that point part of the German Reich.

  206. Paul McMahon

    “Did the fact that the disabled guy Trump mocked had a disability make the mocking anymore less pathetically trashy.” There is no equivalency between what Trump said and I wrote.

    Have you ever seen a svelte babe? Are those two svelte babes? Are they overweight? Do they walk leaning to one side then the other side?

    What happened at crematorium? Did SF muscle their way and force the other families out? That would be a practiced SF modus operandi.

  207. Seamus

    Savant noun

    a person affected with a developmental disorder (such as autism or intellectual disability) who exhibits exceptional skill or brilliance in some limited field.

  208. I take it you don’t have an answer for whether or not Alsace-Lorraine was occupied in 1940.

  209. Your comment was on the physical appearance of the female SF leaders and was as irrelevant to the issue and was as pathetic and pitiful as Trump’s was.

  210. // it was far from clear if it could ever be implemented in full – as the Curragh mutiny and the threats of civil disobedience (and possibly war) from Bonar Law showed.//

    Exactly, if the Conservative-Unionist party had got into power at the end of the war, their completely bigoted and illegal behaviour prior to the war, and their closer alliance with Unionist rebels since, showed that they could have easily dropped the whole idea. They weren’t interested in democracy or sovereignty – they were interested only in imperial dominance.

    Besides, Ireland had a right to defy and refuse the crumbs granted very relunctantly from an English table. England had consistently – all the time until 1921 – denied them the freedom to decide what kind of country they wanted.
    There was no democracy in Ireland prior to 1916, and in that case nobody need go looking for a democratic mandate to fight unwanted foreign rule.

  211. You repeatedly make a fool of yourself on Irish issues NYer.

  212. Noel

    “There was no democracy in Ireland prior to 1916, and in that case nobody need go looking for a democratic mandate to fight unwanted foreign rule.” People voted for representatives to Westminster. Is that not democracy?

  213. Paul McMahon

    What happened at crematorium? Did SF muscle their way and force the other families out? That would be a practiced SF modus operandi.

    You are a cheerleader so you must know what happened. Please let us know.

  214. “People voted for representatives to Westminster. Is that not democracy?”

    Firstly the majority didn’t. Before 1918 in fact the majority of people in Ireland couldn’t vote. Secondly, the majority of people in Ireland who could vote voted for self-rule. It was refused, repeatedly by the British. Thus there was no democracy.

  215. You are a cheerleader so you must know what happened.

    I’m not a ‘cheerleader’ and my knowledge of what happened at the funeral is gleaned from what I read, just like yours’ (presuming you didn’t hear it from an old man in a bar).

    However, why are you now attempting to change the subject? Your comments on the physical appearance of the female SF leaders were irrelevant to the issue and as vacuously base as Trump’s were, another trait like doubling down that you seem to share with him.

  216. The troops that occupied Ireland did so against the wishes of the majority of the Irish people. You can’t change the historical fact that they were there to impose British rule.

  217. Mahons

    “The troops that occupied Ireland did so against the wishes of the majority of the Irish people. You can’t change the historical fact that they were there to impose British rule.” What is the evidence they did so against the wishes of the majority of the Irish people? Over 40% of the troops were Irish.

  218. Paul McMahon

    Your comments indicate you are a SF cheerleader. Don’t try to squirm out of it.

    I saw two middle-aged overweight women and described them as such. You valiantly defend what you see as their pulchritude. Can nobody characterize the two princesses? They are public representatives and fair game. You have a hang-up on this for some mysterious reason. Fair game, fairly characterized.

  219. Your comments indicate you are a SF cheerleader. Don’t try to squirm out of it.

    Do they? Which ones specifically?.

    My comments are based on factual observation and if such factual observation makes me a ‘cheerleader’ then so be it although it probably says more about the facts themselves than anything else.

    I’m not ‘hung up’ on your ‘two corpulent waddling molls’ comment apart from much like the Trump mocking a disabled person, you referred to the physical appearance of someobe as a cheap jibe which had no bearing on the issue whatsoever.

  220. // What is the evidence they did so against the wishes of the majority of the Irish people?//

    The evidence is that a large majority of Irish people had voted for a separation from the UK for generations. Remember that “democratic” thing you were talking about?

    You fail or are unable to grasp certain fundamental things.

    One: There is no way of knowing what form of government the Irish people wanted for the centuries before 1921, simply because they were never asked. One thing we can be pretty certain of, however, is that they did not want continued British rule.
    That they voted for the Home Rule party does not even say that Home Rule was their preferred option. What the Irish in general apparently wanted was simply the greatest possible degree of freedom. Home Rule (they thought at the time) was the best they could get from a dominant and oppressive Britain. Even Parnell, who almost attained it, realised HR was not what a free people aspire to.

    As soon as a Republic – total separation from Britain – looked like a feasible option, they then voted for that by a huge majority. Then, when they thought the Republic was no longer attainable, they chose the next best thing – a Free State, which was still much more than any Home Rule the Irish could have got after 1918. Later when a Republic once again became possible, they strongly supported that freedom again and haven’t looked back since.

    Two: I hope you were joking when you said Dublin corporation etc showed that a legal way was possible. Dublin corporation could vote to extend or refuse a welcome address to a visiting British monarch; that’s about it as far as sovereignty goes. And we saw how elected Mayors fared when Britain didn’t like their politics: Thomas Mac Curtain was murdered by British brigands in cold blood in front of his family; and his successor as Lord Mayor was arrested 4 times before dying on hunger strike.

  221. Well at least anyone not familiar with Irish history will get a quite speedy update on it reading thiss thread (as long as they skip past New Yorker’s contributions) 🙂

  222. Noel

    “The evidence is that a large majority of Irish people had voted for a separation from the UK for generations. Remember that “democratic” thing you were talking about?” What years and what is the evidence?

    “One: There is no way of knowing what form of government the Irish people wanted for the centuries before 1921, simply because they were never asked. One thing we can be pretty certain of, however, is that they did not want continued British rule.” Are you contending people did not vote or were not represented? You make very broad claims based, it seems, on wishful thinking.

    “That they voted for the Home Rule party does not even say that Home Rule was their preferred option. What the Irish in general apparently wanted was simply the greatest possible degree of freedom. Home Rule (they thought at the time) was the best they could get from a dominant and oppressive Britain. Even Parnell, who almost attained it, realised HR was not what a free people aspire to.” Home Rule was within the Empire. How do you know “in general apparently wanted”? Are you sure you are not reading your beliefs into what people in the late 19th and early 20th century preferred? Do you have a statement of Parnell’s to back up your assertion?

    “Two: I hope you were joking when you said Dublin corporation etc showed that a legal way was possible. Dublin corporation…” That was said in reference to issues of bigotry and also states there were hundreds of Catholic solicitors and barristers. The point is that there were law courts and professionals to represent you. There was also a degree of democracy in local government.

    Your 10:04PM comment exhibits overconfidence and a republican bias resulting in a skewed version of Irish history. You cannot back up most of your assertions and thus they are mere opinions. Believe what you like but I do not subscribe to “The Men Behind The Wire” school of interpretation.

    Your views are not uncommon and they are problematic for the Republic into the current day. But there is hope as fewer and fewer people hold such antediluvian and sectarian opinions.

  223. Paul McMahon

    Still don’t get the allegory dimension, I see.

    The appearance of political leaders is quite important. It is part of a party’s image which can attract or revolt voters. The two we are discussing are overweight and poorly clothed. It should be reported on and commented on.

  224. New Yorker

    Why comment upon the weight and clothing only of the females in the group ?

  225. The allegory is two SF leaders taking the party membership into a cemetery.

    As I said, SF soon to become the biggest party in the North and taking almost 25% of first prefs in the 26 shows your analogy to be rubbish.

    Trump mocked a disabled person because of their appearance, as did you. Your pathetically frivolous comment was in exactly the same vein.

    To paraphrase, everyone above is correct and you are wrong.

  226. New Yorker is very critical of Trump, and comments on him often, but he has never once written about his appearance or his clothes.
    New Yorker is just a liar, who has had his ass handed to him by multiple posters on this post, but he won’t admit he is wrong. Like Trump, he will double down on his lies and inaccuracies, and will continue to hand out insults to all around him. He should stick to American politics, and leave Irish history and politics to those who know what they are talking about.

  227. Colm

    “Why comment upon the weight and clothing only of the females in the group ?”

    They are the two leaders of SF.

  228. Seimi Literate

    Hey Crybaby – I guess you are one who knows what he is talking about. You don’t even know Belfast. You are a pretend provo – but nobody should say so. You have a problem with the English language – but we should ignore that. You claim things were posted – then a ghost stole them. Runaway Crybaby.

  229. Paul McMahon

    SF have no vision. SF has policy positions nobody cares about then they change them. SF no leaders except those behind the scenes. SF get no cross party votes. SF have a deficit of young members. SF have never attracted educated voters. SF are marching to the graveyard of discredited movements which is down along Bobby Sands Boulevard.

  230. Hey New Yorker

    You’re a liar, and a shameless one at that. I have a proposition for you. The next time you’re in NI, come to Belfast. Let’s you and me meet up, for a coffee, a pint, or whatever you’d like. I think that, other than an exchange of email addresses, might be the only way that I can communicate to you the seriousness of the allegations you falsely made about me, back in October 2019.

    You claim things were posted – then a ghost stole them.

    I still have them, New Yorker. As do the management of the site, so stop being an asshole.

    So, how about it? Instead of acting like you’re some sort of intellectual giant on here, why not meet me, face to face? I’ll even show you west Belfast, though I can’t guarantee we’ll find Bobby Sands Boulevard.

  231. SF have no vision.

    Yes they do. Perhaps you should read up on them a bit.

    SF has policy positions nobody cares about then they change them.

    Such as?

    SF no leaders except those behind the scenes.

    Evidence? Who are these ‘behind the scenes’ leaders? And who told you about them? The old man in the pub?

    SF get no cross party votes.

    Totally incorrect. If you have evidence to show otherwise, please present it. It’s already been shown that merely your word means nothing here.

    SF have a deficit of young members.

    Quite the opposite.

    SF have never attracted educated voters.

    Prove it. Bet you can’t.

    SF are marching to the graveyard of discredited movements which is down along Bobby Sands Boulevard.

    Don’t hold your breath.

  232. NYer, having been metaphorically slapped down on the shallowness of his comments on physical appearance and his convoluted historical revisionism now enters full troll mode.
    See my comments above re SF soon to become the largest party in the North and taking almost 25% of first prefs in the 26 as a rebuttal of your rantings.