Some people on here make me want to vomit out of my eyes.

aidan_walsh

One think this forum lacks is an Ignore Button so people don't feel compelled to be drawn into meaningless discussion with smart arses.

It does have one. Congrats, you just made it with this utterly painful tirade.

The Sweeper

Oh no, you can put whole USERS on ignore on boards.ie.

You still think I'm trying to talk to you about politics.

I'm still waiting for an answer on what your original post meant.

Do you understand the question?

dvega

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

Excellent.

"I DID NOT HEXPKLAIN MYSELF PURPURERLY, BUT JOO!!! JOO ARE toO STupiT to UnderSTNd N daTs all I SAYIN."

So you have no interest in being drawn into a dicussion with me is actually your way of saying you can't answer my question, isn't it.

This is why this site is been ridiculed,attack the thread not the poster and i do agree whith a previous poster if this op is so caught up on patroitism,go away and work for the leading party and do what he believes whats right,sitting on your arse and debating with other people whats right and wrong with ireland will really get us places.

dSTAR

Let me just say this one more time.

Go away.

The Sweeper

dvega wrote:

This is why this site is been ridiculed,attack the thread not the poster and i do agree whith a previous poster if this op is so caught up on patroitism,go away and work for the leading party and do what he believes whats right,sitting on your arse and debating with other people whats right and wrong with ireland will really get us places.

I am attacking the thread.

Specifically, I'm attacking dSTAR's post, especially the quote:

Its funny how many people harp on about how Oirish they are but how different are they to someone living in Liverpool, Birmingham or anywhere else in the UK?

I have asked dSTAR repeatedly to explain what that even means, but he or she is not interested.

If you read the last few posts, you'll see that dSTAR repeatedly avoids answering my query, eventually telling me to go away. He (or she) is also presuming I want to have a political debate with him.

I don't. I just want to know WHAT HE (or she) IS TRYING TO SAY.

It's the Zorro posting effect - you pop in, you make some flashy gesture, you sod off again. What's not supposed to happen is someone says "here, are you going to pay for this sack of grain/me shirt to be sewn up etc."

arybvtcw0eolkf

Saruman wrote:

WTF? Ripped in two? split?? When was there ever a united Ireland in the past... oh yes.. during British rule!! NEVER before British rule was there ever anythign even approaching a country called Ireland with one people and history/culture.
.

I take it then you support the state of Israel?. Given that the Palestinian people have never controlled their own destiny, don't have their own language, have never been an autonomous country... your saying the same thing.

Fact is we were oppressed by the British, if you want to turn a blind/selfish eye to that so be it, but thank god there's people who will never turn their backs on our history.

The Sweeper

oh hey wait - I think I've just realised what dSTAR is saying.

Basically, that people in the 26 counties of Ireland are the same as people in Liverpool, Birmingham or anywhere else in the UK, because of how anglacised Ireland has become.

I think he (or she) is trying to say that Ireland is basically now the same as England. Wow, no wonder he didn't want to explain that point further on this thread.

(I won't even start on the potential minefield of telling a bunch of scousers they're the same as mancunians, geordies or londoners... my tar brush won't write that dainty.)

dSTAR

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

I have asked dSTAR repeatedly to explain what that even means, but he or she is not interested.

You just don't get it do you?

I have told you I am not obliged to answer your questions. I am not sure why you are forcing the issue or pretending that you just want a simple answer from me.

I am not interested in communicating with you in this forum. You have shown yourself to be a trouble maker (flame baiter) while pretending in being interested in discussion.

I have told you already I no longer want to have any further discussions with you. If you cannot respect this maybe you shouldn't be here.

InFront

I don't know why people reply in order to tell you "I don't intend to reply"

OT

Originally posted by Mairt
"Fact is we were oppressed by the British, if you want to turn a blind/selfish eye to that so be it, but thank god there's people who will never turn their backs on our history."

Were is the important word here. The OP is talking about the here and now. Bygones, etc.

dvega

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

I am attacking the thread.

Specifically, I'm attacking dSTAR's post, especially the quote:



I have asked dSTAR repeatedly to explain what that even means, but he or she is not interested.

If you read the last few posts, you'll see that dSTAR repeatedly avoids answering my query, eventually telling me to go away. He (or she) is also presuming I want to have a political debate with him.

I don't. I just want to know WHAT HE (or she) IS TRYING TO SAY.

It's the Zorro posting effect - you pop in, you make some flashy gesture, you sod off again. What's not supposed to happen is someone says "here, are you going to pay for this sack of grain/me shirt to be sewn up etc."

Obviously you had too many 'jack daniels',your talking about sacks of grain and shirts??Can we get back to the point?

arybvtcw0eolkf

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Here is a quick summation for anyone too lazy to read the full thread: RANT.

I'm in!.

The Sweeper

dSTAR wrote:

You just don't get it do you?
I have told you I am not obliged to answer your questions. I am not sure why you are forcing the issue or pretending that you just want a simple answer from me.

Because this is a bulletin board and you made a point and I'd like to know what you actually meant because it wasn't clear to me.

dSTAR wrote:

I am not interested in communicating with you in this forum.

Is that because I'm asking you a question you don't have an answer for?

dSTAR wrote:

You have shown yourself to be a trouble maker (flame baiter) while pretending in being interested in discussion.

No, I've just persistently asked you the same question which you've repeatedly avoided answering on the basis that you "don't want to". It's not like I've asked and had an answer which didn't suit me.

I have told you already I no longer want to have any further discussions with you. If you cannot respect this maybe you shouldn't be here.

Now, see, the problem is that discussion threads on internet forums don't really work like that. If you don't see that when you make a point, you should be prepared to defend it, then I don't think I'm the one missing the point.

Pighead

This whole "Just answer the fcuking question" malarkey reminds Pighead of Paxman trying his damndest to make Michael Howard come clean. Classic Paxman!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BklT7Qy07Is

Ruu_Old

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

Now, see, the problem is that discussion threads on internet forums don't really work like that. If you don't see that when you make a point, you should be prepared to defend it, then I don't think I'm the one missing the point.

Agreed, nothing more, nothing less.

Otherwise back on topic, lets not all get excited.

dvega

Meh,this entire thread is gone beyond a joke,just get back to the thread,it was a good disscussion

Lorax

In all fairness dlofnep, all of what you're saying (in my books) is insignificant to me. 1 in 3 ppl die of cancer, thats roughly 2 billion ppl alive on planet earth at the moment, why dont you rally for a cancer support group fundraiser or something.. instead of being concerned about a few thousand or whatever irish ppl killed by "DE BRITISHH". Cancer has already and will continue to kill more Irish people than "DE BRITISHH" ever will. so why dont you go marching against things that cause cancer, dangerous food additives, genetically modified agents, mobile phone masts, CFC products that burn the ozone layer and expose us more to THE SUN, etc. You could actually (maybe only very slightly, but significantly all the same) work to saving present/future Irish peoples lives this way. The british are no threat to us at the moment or visible future.

or is it just easier for u to sit behind your computer all day ranting about something "DE BRITISHH" did a few hundred years ago?

dSTAR

Pighead wrote:

This whole "Just answer the fcuking question" malarkey reminds Pighead of Paxman trying his damndest to make Michael Howard come clean. Classic Paxman!

Ha maybe I should have been a polly!

OK I will take the bait.

I made a statement that I didn't really see much difference between urban Irish and their English counterparts which seems to have riled one or two people. I still stand by that statement.

From an outsider point of view there really isn't any noticeable difference between Irish people and English people. Say for instance a Chinese person decided to do a trip around Europe and dropped into Dublin before going on to London.

I am sure through Chinese eyes there wouldn't be a great deal of difference between the two. How do you think that Chinese person would answer if asked what the difference was?

So far no-one has even bothered offering me a convincing reply as to these massive cultural differences between the two.

MooseJam

dSTAR wrote:

So far no-one has even bothered offering me a convincing reply as to these massive cultural differences between the two.

TK lemonade nuff said

Diogenes

I'm really confused here. Is the OP outraged at the general population of this country's lack of interest in our country's history, or in the present situation in the north.

If it's our history, it's taught as a subject complusory till the age of 15, and deals extensively with our past, from the plantations, to the flight of the Earls to the current "troubles". So think we are educated.

If it's the current political situation. SF has a growing base, the comings and goings and rise and fall of the peace process is covered in detail in our national press.

So I don't know what about the two of these things you've got a problem with.

Unless, and I'm guessing here. You're annoyed, that certain people look at our past and our present and you disagree how they interpertate them. You see our country "ripped in two" (actually 1/4) and get furious, and get furious at people who don't see things your way.

Now in the OP's opinion these people who make him "want to puke out his eyes" are ignorant or indifferent to the "struggle". It doesn't occur to him that the people he salutes who

These are the same people who sing, march and keep our history and culture vibrant through their unmatched passion for their country

The IRA killed more catholics than the British Army, RUC and Loyalist Paramilitaries combined. We've been getting mad as hell about this for a few centuries now, and all it's given us is decades of pain loss suffering and grief. I'm not indifferent, I'm one of the 92% of the citizens in this country who voted for the good friday agreement. We stood up and we said "We'll renounce our claim on NI, for the sake of no more bombs and no more killing"

If it takes another decade of talking to have elections in stormont, let them talk, let Adams rant his empty retoric about. Bitch about Paisley all you want, but it took SF a decade to recognise the police, Paisley is a nasty piece of work but Adams is the other side of the coin. But we're stuck with em both and we've got to make it work.

Dlofnep, before you start spluttering, at my plastic paddy bullsh*t I have been effected by the troubles, and I think if you ask anyone who has if they'd prefer the bad old days to this they'd tell you to away and shíte.

Oh and one final thing.

For those who shed a tear everytime they read our history and feel like they can not do enough, I salute you. For the others, other than tax - you've nothing to offer this country.

I'm fairly certain most of the wans who were so Irish and decided to object to the orange bastards last year, don't even contribute tax to this country.

biko

There has been a lot talked about the IRA and so I'd like to counter with some info on the other side: UDA and the DUP.

The DUP has often flirted with the UDA - in the Ulster Clubs in 1985, the strike in 1977 and the UWC strike in 1974. Even before then, Paisley was stoking the flames of sectarianism. In June 1959, at the corner of Percy Street and the lower Shankill, he said: 'You people of the Shankill Road, what's wrong with you? Number 425 Shankill Road - do you know who lives there? Pope's men, that's who! 'Fortes ice-cream shop, Italian Papists on the Shankill Road! How about 56 Aden Street? For 97 years a Protestant lived in that house and now there's a Papisher in it. Crimea Street, number 38! Twenty five years that house has been up, 24 years a Protestant lived there but there's a Papisher there now.'

IN 1977 the DUP once again allied themselves to the UDA during another UWC strike. The stoppage lacked support and so the UDA turned to intimidation, shooting dead a Citybus driver in Belfast, Protestant Harry Bradshaw, in an attempt to stop public transport.

Between 1971 and 1976 alone, the UDA and its cover organizations murdered 600 Catholics. Freddie Parkinson, a leader of the UDA, stated in 1984, that Paisley was "a tarantula who spreads the venom of further conflict and has been a major contributor to our prolonged tragedy."

The DUP set up a ‘Third Force’, a vigilante organisation in 1981, which operated illegal checkpoints and held rallies. In 1986 the DUP helped found Ulster Resistance, a paramilitary-style force whose members marched in military formation wearing red berets. There was the famous incident when Peter Robinson, armed with a firearm, led a loyalist mob across the border into the Republic in an attack on Clontibret Garda station.

John McKeague, a disciple of Free Presbyterianism and Mr Paisley, founded the murderous Red Hand Commandos.

Billy and Gusty Spence, founders of the UVF murder gang, and Ken Gibson, Tommy Heron and Davey Payne, leaders of the UDA, served as organizers at Paisley's rallies, In 1969, bombings around the North were falsely attributed to the IRA. Paisley's bodyguard, Sammy Stevenson turned Queen's evidence admitting he and Tommy McDowell, a Free Presbyterian, conspired to set off the bombs in loyalist districts in order to further incite the loyalist community.

Diogenes

biko wrote:

IN 1977 the DUP once again allied themselves to the UDA during another UWC strike. The stoppage lacked support and so the UDA turned to intimidation, shooting dead a Citybus driver in Belfast, Protestant Harry Bradshaw, in an attempt to stop public transport.

Just to throw something in there, the UWC started without much public support and must have been the first strike organised by Paramilitaries. Support was weak at the start but grew steadily, Wilson's "spongers" comments outraged the Protestant working and middle class. 1,000s of people turned up at a support rally at Stormont. Nearly all business was closed, and the strike lasted 14days, I really don't think you could effectively shut down NI for two weeks without widespread public support?

Billy and Gusty Spence, founders of the UVF murder gang, and Ken Gibson, Tommy Heron and Davey Payne, leaders of the UDA, served as organizers at Paisley's rallies, In 1969, bombings around the North were falsely attributed to the IRA. Paisley's bodyguard, Sammy Stevenson turned Queen's evidence admitting he and Tommy McDowell, a Free Presbyterian, conspired to set off the bombs in loyalist districts in order to further incite the loyalist community.

Do we really want to get into a game of top trumps
UDA/UVF verus IRA/INLA psychopaths edition? I've got Slab Murphy but you've got Johnny Adair.

Both sides had brutal violent thugs who used the "struggle" to gain kicks, power, and money. Men who reveal in violence, and inflicting pain, men who'd kill in a heartbeat. Republican and Loyalist. Squabbling over petty tribal tit for tat killings.

Is in any wonder most of us turn our heads in shame from all that?

zoro

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

It's the Zorro posting effect - you pop in, you make some flashy gesture, you sod off again. What's not supposed to happen is someone says "here, are you going to pay for this sack of grain/me shirt to be sewn up etc."

Hey That's not fair

skywalker

Saruman wrote:

Oh and by the way... dont ever tell someone they have no values if they do not agree with you! If everyone held the values you hold dear... we would all be Union Jack burning Terrorists!! There are enough of them in the middle east, we do not need that type here. Whats the point of hating the British of today, who did not rape and pillage our country... probably do not even know most of what went on hundreds of years ago and quite frankly do not care.
I have values.. just not hate mongering ones like you. I tend to take people at face value and for who they are as individuals... not what some of their ancesters did centuries ago. Just like i do not categorise say... all Nigerians as scam artists because some of them do it in Nigeria.

Agree 100%, thats what pissed me off most reading this thread.

r3nu4l

dSTAR wrote:

I am sure through Chinese eyes there wouldn't be a great deal of difference between the two. How do you think that Chinese person would answer if asked what the difference was?

So far no-one has even bothered offering me a convincing reply as to these massive cultural differences between the two.

Right, so there's no difference berween Kiwis and Aussies or Koreans and Chinese? As an Irish person living in the UK I can tell you quite clearly that there are hundreds of subtle but significant differences between urban Irish and English people. To an outsider these are almost imperceptible but they do exist and were a huge influence in my looking for Irish forums populated by mostly Irish people.

Back on topic, I've already stated that I think the OP has a point in that we shouldn't forget what happened in the past to shape the nation as it is today but likewise we should be careful about how we celebrate our culture and history.

EDIT: Poor zoro I'm sure MAJD didn't mean you

dSTAR

r3nu4l wrote:

Right, so there's no difference between Kiwis and Aussies or Koreans and Chinese? As an Irish person living in the UK I can tell you quite clearly that there are hundreds of subtle but significant differences between urban Irish and English people. To an outsider these are almost imperceptible but they do exist and were a huge influence in my looking for Irish forums populated by mostly Irish people.

Of course there are hundreds of subtle differences between someone from say Castleknock and someone from Cambridge (not to mention the nuances in language which is an entire thread in itself). There are also hundreds of subtle differences between someone from Melbourne and someone from Mandurah. Thats not what I am talking about.

Its funny because it reminds of a time a number of years ago when I took my father (who is old school republican) out for a drink in Brunswick. He went up to the bar and asked the young bar tender in his best Dublin accent for a pair of drinks to which the bar tender replied no worries mate! What part of England are you from?

stovelid

Truth

(although Adair probably just shades it on taste grounds cos I will never, ever erase the image of his dog-in-rangers-top-swaying-to-"Simply-the-Best combo at Drumcree that year)

Diogenes wrote:

Both sides had brutal violent thugs who used the "struggle" to gain kicks, power, and money. Men who reveal in violence, and inflicting pain, men who'd kill in a heartbeat. Republican and Loyalist. Squabbling over petty tribal tit for tat killings.

Is in any wonder most of us turn our heads in shame from all that?

Diogenes

stovelid wrote:

Truth

(although Adair probably just shades it on taste grounds cos I will never, ever erase the image of his dog-in-rangers-top-swaying-to-"Simply-the-Best combo at Drumcree that year)

Ah but do you know how Slab got his nickname? Dropping Slabs of concrete on people's kneecaps as a punishment beating. Neither men are exactly going to win an all Ireland Mr Sweetness and Light award any time this lifetime.

csk

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote:

It is a fact that Ireland did not become a Republic in 1922. Or am I bull****ting?

*sigh* I knew some one would bite and prove my point.

Jeremiah 16:1, Please read what I wrote. Please read what I wrote carefully. Here it is reprinted for your convienence.

csk wrote:

Just before I go I'll say two things, firstly the Republic of Ireland won it's Independence in 1922 there is absolutely no concrete evidence to suggest we would have gotten Independence peacefully at a later stage. Any suggestion otherwise is counter factual bullsh!t.

Do you see the difference between the country described as the Republic of Ireland winning its Independence in 1922 and the country described as the Republic of Ireland becoming a republic in 1922 ?

Sorry that's a silly question of course you don't.:rolleyes:

No where in the above did I say Ireland became a republic in 1922 merely that the state known as the Republic of Ireland won it's Independence in 1922.

Of course, me knowing something about this subject called history would tell you that the country known as the Republic of Ireland formally became a republic in 1949 not 1922.;)

Gatster

Just to kick off with a statement, I love this country and have since the moment I got here, despite it's (obvious [non-political]) faults :rolleyes:

The OP seems to feel he's been subjected to some sort of attitude (twice in a London pub?), but how many times have you been to London? I've lived here 8 years and have had three minor, and one more severe incident of this kind of thing directed against me, which for the time I've been here I think shows that there is only minority that think this way.

I wouldn't subject myself to being associated with anything to do with a nation of Imperialists

This quote from the OP smacks of this attitude IMO, as Britain is no longer run by Imperialists and I very much doubt that more than 0.0005% of the British population consider themselves Imperialist.

The lessons History teaches are invaluable, but shouldn't be dwelled upon, terrible acts have been committed in the names of numerous causes and they are only seen as right or wrong because of individual perspective. My wife is Irish, most of my friends are Irish, but I would never apologise for what Britain has done (or not done) as it's confined to the past. I'm proud to be British and I'm very happy that I live in an Ireland where the populace is proud to be Irish.

Diogenes

csk wrote:

Just before I go I'll say two things, firstly the Republic of Ireland won it's Independence in 1922 there is absolutely no concrete evidence to suggest we would have gotten Independence peacefully at a later stage. Any suggestion otherwise is counter factual bullsh!t.

Actually thats just specious reasonings.

There's no way to prove this definitively either way.

However theres no way to prove that Ireland would have had to fight for independence.

However we can look at the recent history of the British empire, and how former colonies were treated, and see that the case that Ireland could have won indepedence peacefully does have historical precedences to back it up.

Ireland had already won home rule. The act was delayed by the outbreak of war. Now you could maintain that Britain could have revoked the act at the end of hostiles. However you've no evidence to support this. History shows us that after the war Britain gave independence to large portion of it's former Colonies. Why would Britain reverse a worldwide thread only with Ireland?

The terms of the treaty were not much better than the terms of the fourth home rule act. In fact they were essentially the same. In the third home rule act the North was only going to be partition temporarly, the terms of the treaty made that permenant. The necessary steps to move from independence (basically home rule) to republic were achieved dipolmatically. Without bloodshed.

Most of these former colonies maintained close ties to England. As did Ireland, we only left the commonwealth in 1949, so there's no reason to suggest Ireland, after WW2 could not have again acted in the same manner as we did post treaty. Using things like the abidication of Edward to remove aspects of British control, leading to eventual total independence, in essentially the same manner, as we actually did.

Now again this isn't "counter factual bullshít" as you claim, it's arguing a theoretical.

I submit that you are arguing a theoretical as well, that violence was a necessary stage in our independence. I submit you don't have any evidence to support your claim that this was the necessary path for our independence. Your claim is speculative.

I will admit that my comments are speculative as well, however I am examining historical precedences from other countries who ceded from the UK with a minimum of bloodshed, in the same time period. Along with the necessary diplomatic steps used by us to secure the republic.

So ahem, if anyone is using "counter factual bullshít", I'd say its you csk.