"Belfast" vs "Good Friday" agreement

Duke of Marmalade said:
Worst case is that they have decided that such a ceremony would not be universally popular and potentially open to demonstrations which would greatly detract from the purpose and in particular be upsetting to the RIC descendants (see I do care).
Click to expand...

And you don't think that's an issue?

Once upon a time we criminalised homosexuality, we shunned and ostracised unmarried mothers, etc.

Nowadays we just pour scorn on the memories of long dead Irish police officers who, in the main, their biggest crime was following the orders of their paymasters.
That there is a more than significant element of our political class that still cannot move to try shed our bloody and divisive past is sinister.
I wouldnt be so much worried about SF getting into power on that regard, the people who think this way are already in power.
You must be worried? Although somehow I don't get that from you.
 
WolfeTone said:
Up until 1998 this State laid claim under its Constitution to the territory of the whole island. In effect, the State deemed the presence of British military and political institutions as a foreign occupation.
Click to expand...
No. It regarded, and unfortunately many still do, the Protestant people of Northern Ireland as foreign occupiers.
 
@WolfeTone getting back to the hypocrisy slur. Of course as a duke I get many offensive comments so it is water off a duke's back. But, more seriously, I see big dangers in your argument. I see many in FF in particular who will be seduced by the faux moral comfort in this line of thought as they position for coalition with SF. This to me is the greatest threat to our democracy; I can't see SF and the Looneys* ever mustering enough strength without FF.

* note of clarification. By Looneys I refer to the People before Logic folk and their ilk but I definitely do not include SF. Nothing looney at all about the SF/IRA machinations.
 
Last edited:
PMU said:
No. It regarded, and unfortunately many still do, the Protestant people of Northern Ireland as foreign occupiers.
Click to expand...

Really? Can you point to the part of the Constitution that states that or infers that?
 
@WolfeTone, do you see the Shinners refusal to attend a commemoration for two murdered members of the Gardaí as a positive or negative development?
Do you think there was more to it than one member just not turning up?
 
Purple said:
do you see the Shinners refusal to attend a commemoration for two murdered members of the Gardaí as a positive or negative development?
Click to expand...

It's a negative.

Purple said:
Do you think there was more to it than one member just not turning up?
Click to expand...

Not really. I'm guessing the individual is of the same frame of mind as the FF TD who announced he would not attend a commemoration for RIC.

I'm pretty used to seeing SF elected representatives attend commemorations for British War dead.
The RIC commemoration was badly managed, it rolled into a big hot potato and all the media headlines about attending or not attending is pure bluster by politicians, including SF, trying to hold political ground in the republican base.
It's part of the political immaturity of the Irish political class down here. They are all for peace and reconcilliation up north, but cannot put away a 100yr grudge.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
getting back to the hypocrisy slur.
Click to expand...

Well let me extend you an olive branch, Im not calling you a hypocritical person. I'm saying the viewpoint of encouraging SF into government up north, but 'they are not fit for government' in South is a hypocritical position.
Obviously, from a purely political point of view, they 'not being fit' is a legitimate view to hold if one thinks that.
But if the electorate does ever give them that mandate into power I expect that political opposition will accept that mandate.
 
It occurs to me that I have been getting my files mixed up as recent posts probably belong to the Zapponegate thread.

The more I think of it the more ridiculous this State commemoration of the RIC just to balance the books seems. Why not the UVF? Weren't they Irishmen caught up in the torment of the times and fighting for a cause they believed in?
 
Last edited:
PMU said:
No. It regarded, and unfortunately many still do, the Protestant people of Northern Ireland as foreign occupiers.
Click to expand...
Many of the Protestant people of NI regard themselves this way.

Many (though by no means all) see themselves as British and not Irish, and they regard their attachment to their place as arising out of military victory. The occupation at the time of the plantations, defeat of the 1641 rebellion against that, and the copper fastening of their position at the Battle of The Boyne.
 
The same can be said for white people in the America's and Australia. They arrived there and took the land from the locals. The American's even have Columbus Day. Should they all go 'home'?
I'm of Norman descent. My Irishness started with a military victory and the conquest of the locals. My ancestors fundamentally changed what it was to be Irish.
A Welshman called Patrick changed what it is to be Irish more than anyone else in history. How do unpick that one?
 
WolfeTone said:
I didn't understand question, or rather the context that you derived it from.
Click to expand...
The Unionists have been here for hundreds of years. They are just as Irish as the rest of us but their Irishness is different from ours. Theirs includes a British identity. I've no problem with that identity (it's god-bothering and bigotry that I don't like) but I don't share it.
 

I know, they question was "should they all go home?".
This is their home.
 
Purple said:
The Unionists have been here for hundreds of years. They are just as Irish as the rest of us but their Irishness is different from ours.
Click to expand...
Many of the Unionist people in NI would not agree with you.

Many consider themselves British and not Irish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register