British friends of Ireland

MarchDub

Pgibson wrote: »

I was a Train Guard on the London Underground in the 1970s.

There was ONE reason, and ONE reason only, why many English people became wary and sometimes hostile to Irish people.

That reason was the rain of bombs IRA terrorists unleashed on London.


Most London Irish hated the IRA even more than the Londoners did because all Irish working in London were made suspects.

.

.

I am not disputing this but see my previous post on the ignorance fostered by a silent press on the real state of things in Ireland - AND the fact that even British students were more concerned about Vietnam, for God's sake, than the actions of their own army. Britain was in a state of complete ignorance - denial - about Ireland and the role that they were playing.

I was at University before the start of the bombing - and right through the beginnings. The Brits were clueless about what was happening in Ireland. Bloody Sunday for example, did not even feature in anyone's narrative except the spin that they all swallowed unquestioning.

It is no wonder that blind anti-Irishness was rampant and a willingness to blame the Irish for a situation not of their making. As I said, British culpability was never mentioned in any part of the media.

Pgibson

MarchDub wrote: »

I am not disputing this but see my previous post on the ignorance fostered by a silent press on the real state of things in Ireland - AND the fact that even British students were more concerned about Vietnam, for God's sake, than the actions of their own army.

I was at University before the start of the bombing - and right through the beginnings. The Brits were clueless about what was happening in Ireland. Bloody Sunday for example, did not even feature in anyone's narrative.

It is no wonder that blind anti-Irishness was rampant and a willingness to blame the Irish for a situation not of their making. As I said, British culpability was never mentioned in any part of the media.

True.
The British were completely uninterested in Ireland.
They still are.
(How many Irish people are interested in Finnish or Latvian affairs?)

They regarded the Irish as two strange foreign tribes who were still fighting religious wars from centuries ago.

On the plane back to London from his first visit to Northern Ireland as home secretary,Reginald Maudling declared:
"For God's sake bring me a large Scotch. What a bloody awful country..........make that a double."

The Brits would have celebrated if Ireland had sunk without trace into the Atlantic.

(In surveys, Ian Paisley regularly topped the list of "Most Disliked Politician". Londoners never regarded Orangemen as "British".)

Today,the Brits are almost as self-serving and "forgetful" of their own actions as are whingeing Irish Republicans.

(They whinge when some call them "Shinners":

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/shinners-again-show-they-are-bitter-infants-1505001.html)

.

Fratton Fred

Pgibson wrote: »

(In surveys, Ian Paisley regularly topped the list of "Most Disliked Politician". Londoners never regarded Orangemen as "British".)

I think it would be fair to say most British people see no difference between Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley.

Most English and Welsh people would have no idea what the Orange order is all about either, there may be the odd lodge here and there, but outside of Scotland (Or most likely just Glasgow) it just doesn't exist over here.

getz

pigson in many ways . correct most people in the uk mainland know nothing about the irish-when the IRA started the terror campaign then ireland got noticed--but even then it was catholic/prodestant thing i was working in security in the british council in manchester a the time of the manchester bombing-information we had been told was to listen for anyone with a northern irish accent phone calls;-- its strange that the IRA wanted to bomb manchester because the leader of the IRA Tomas{slab}murphy was buying up houses as a investment in manchester at that time---he must of hated the british to want to live here

WAGS

MarchDub wrote: »

I am not disputing this but see my previous post on the ignorance fostered by a silent press on the real state of things in Ireland - AND the fact that even British students were more concerned about Vietnam, for God's sake, than the actions of their own army. Britain was in a state of complete ignorance - denial - about Ireland and the role that they were playing.

I was at University before the start of the bombing - and right through the beginnings. The Brits were clueless about what was happening in Ireland. Bloody Sunday for example, did not even feature in anyone's narrative except the spin that they all swallowed unquestioning.

It is no wonder that blind anti-Irishness was rampant and a willingness to blame the Irish for a situation not of their making. As I said, British culpability was never mentioned in any part of the media.

The British Army was not in Ireland it was in Northern Ireland, part of Great Britain. I actually agree the Army should never have been sent in because soldiers are trained to kill not to keep the peace, but they were anyway with the inevitable results. People have not learned either because similar tragedies still occur almost daily.

As far as the comments about the press are concerned and whilst in hindsight the actions of the Parachute Regiment were certainly unsupportable, in war one does not give aid and comfort to the enemy and that includes the press. Recriminations can only start when the enemy has been defeated.

There were many reasons for general anti-Irish feelings because just like the Irish like to remind others on this forum about long memories the British also remember things. The rise of the IRA reminded many of the treachery of this organisation during WW2 like directing Luftwaffe bombers towards Belfast. History also records the Irish Republic being somewhat unhelpful during the cold war as well which was well under way during this period of time.

I have no axe to grind and in the end I like most people on this planet couldn't care less one way or the other unless the bombers reappear.
My interest has been sparked by my research and work.
My disappointment comes from reading the deep seated bad feelings that still exist today and the excuses that fuel them, but I am still very proud of our Irish heritage. The two families that were joined together at our wedding came from opposite sides of the track, but all of our ancestors did what they needed to do to survive the times. My Irish ancestors left Ireland in 1808 never to return and my wife's left in 1846 also never to return.

But now it's time to move on and find new subjects to discuss.:cool:

By the way these kind of discussions have taken place elsewhere with very similar opinions being expressed.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1765036/posts

MarchDub

WAGS wrote: »

The British Army was not in Ireland it was in Northern Ireland, part of Great Britain. ...
As far as the comments about the press are concerned and whilst in hindsight the actions of the Parachute Regiment were certainly unsupportable, in war one does not give aid and comfort to the enemy and that includes the press. Recriminations can only start when the enemy has been defeated.

My work also involves much historical research. For one thing, "Northern Ireland" is part of the island of Ireland - and is not "Great Britain" but part of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". This was originally the designation for the whole island at the Act of Union and then modified by the Ireland Act of 1920. Ireland was never a part of "Great Britain".

As far as the British Press - they are a muzzled lot. I left England and went to do graduate work in the US and they were in the middle of their Vietnam chaos and what a different press did I discover! The US press brought down the presidency of Nixon and were the ones who put footage on TV screens concerning the atrocities of their own army. American citizens were - because of press exposure - then demanding withdrawal from Vietnam. A world away from the compliant and as I said, muzzled, British press and the simple minded anti-Irishness that I saw there.

I understand the putting aside of bitterness and the utter tragedy of the violence - never did I support the bloodshed of the IRA. The killing of innocent people can never be supported. But historical accuracy demands that we understand all aspects of the time - so as to avoid making the same mistake again.

I personally am not sure that the British ever have addressed the violence of their colonial past - and the tragic results of their violent incursions into so many parts of the world. The recent foolish sojourn into Iraq tells me that they have not learned any lessons.

WAGS

MarchDub wrote: »

I understand the putting aside of bitterness and the utter tragedy of the violence - never did I support the bloodshed of the IRA. The killing of innocent people can never be supported. But historical accuracy demands that we understand all aspects of the time - so as to avoid making the same mistake again.

I personally am not sure that the British ever have addressed the violence of their colonial past - and the tragic results of their violent incursions into so many parts of the world. The recent foolish sojourn into Iraq tells me that they have not learned any lessons.

We can never understand what went on before our own times. We can offer assumptions and opinion, but we weren't there so we cannot offer any true understanding.

What's historical accuracy? Based on what I have read I suspect many dispute the written accounts of the time. I have read that many Irish suggest that anything written by the British from 1167 to 2008 is nothing but propaganda. I doubt that the anti-Brit brigade would ever agree that anything the British nation has done in its past was justified so there will never be a balanced view. Just your view, my view and 6 billion others.
In any case it doesn't matter because the British people have nothing to come to terms with the British Empire is gone and nobody is responsible for the actions of others in the past, certainly not back to British colonial expansion. Nobody needs to apologise for the actions of their ancestors. None of us can pick their parents let alone their ancestors and we should only apologise when we do wrong.

If you personally hold people of today responsible for actions in the far distant past and are waiting for some kind of getting down on knees begging your forgiveness, I hate to disappoint you, but it ain't going to happen.

MarchDub

WAGS wrote: »

In any case it doesn't matter because the British people have nothing to come to terms with the British Empire is gone and nobody is responsible for the actions of others in the past, certainly not back to British colonial expansion. Nobody needs to apologise for the actions of their ancestors. None of us can pick their parents let alone their ancestors and we should only apologise when we do wrong.

If you personally hold people of today responsible for actions in the far distant past and are waiting for some kind of getting down on knees begging your forgiveness, I hate to disappoint you, but it ain't going to happen.

Actually the best way to not make the same mistakes for anyone - and nations - is to address the mistakes of the past. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. That is why I referenced Iraq. Same old, same old...

I would not expect people who had behaved cruelly and arrogantly in the past to suddenly develop a sense of morality about it, so, no. I have no such expectations. I am sure the Africans, the Asians, the descendants of slaves are not likewise holding their breath on that one. But Tony Blair did acknowledge British failure in Ireland during the Famine time:

" Those who governed in London at the time failed ...through standing by while a crop failure turned into a massive human tragedy. We must not forget such a dreadful event.”

I’ll take it for a start.

WAGS

MarchDub wrote: »

Actually the best way to not make the same mistakes for anyone - and nations - is to address the mistakes of the past. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. That is why I referenced Iraq. Same old, same old...

I would not expect people who had behaved cruelly and arrogantly in the past to suddenly develop a sense of morality about it, so, no. I have no such expectations. I am sure the Africans, the Asians, the descendants of slaves are not likewise holding their breath on that one. But Tony Blair did acknowledge British failure in Ireland during the Famine time:

" Those who governed in London at the time failed ...through standing by while a crop failure turned into a massive human tragedy. We must not forget such a dreadful event.”

I’ll take it for a start.

The people who behaved cruelly in the past related to events in Ireland are mostly dead. It's very difficult for them to develop a sense of morality when they are six foot under. How do you know that at least some of the ones who are still living have not repented for what they did? I wonder how many of the "Provisional or Real IRA" have ever repented and apologised for their actions?

Whilst I totally agree when you say that the Irish famine should not be forgotten, you do understand that in the scale of things taught in school history lessons it's not high on most school curriculum outside of Ireland. In most other countries there are more important things to be taught. My children know nothing about the Irish famine and they are in their 20s.

However, I am truly fascinated by your statement "you will take this for a start." I am not trying to be rude, I am just trying to understand what makes you so special. What else do you want? Why do you want it? What difference will it make? Your family survived the famine, they had enough food to eat, so what are people actually apologising to you for?
Nobody would deny that the British Government, most of the Irish landowners and the Merchant establishment of the time failed to protect the Irish from the effects of famine, but shouldn't any apology to made to the dead, not the descendants of survivors? Only one of my wife's gggrandmother's family from County Clare survived the famine yet she holds no grudges.

Sadly we are doomed to repeat many mistakes of the past. Collective stupidity always overwhelms common sense. There have been many famines far more devastating than the last Irish one, and none of us did anything to help. Where are the food shipments to North Korea, its people are starving? What about the people of Darfur, Somalia and Sudan? What were we doing when the people of Bosnia were being slaughtered?
We all collectively did nothing and this is what makes the arguments found on some of these forums very trivial. "Let him who has not sinned cast the first stone."

MarchDub

WAGS wrote: »

Whilst I totally agree when you say that the Irish famine should not be forgotten, you do understand that in the scale of things taught in school history lessons it's not high on most school curriculum outside of Ireland. In most other countries there are more important things to be taught. My children know nothing about the Irish famine and they are in their 20s. ...


Sadly we are doomed to repeat many mistakes of the past. Collective stupidity always overwhelms common sense. There have been many famines far more devastating than the last Irish one, and none of us did anything to help. Where are the food shipments to North Korea, its people are starving? What about the people of Darfur, Somalia and Sudan? What were we doing when the people of Bosnia were being slaughtered?
We all collectively did nothing and this is what makes the arguments found on some of these forums very trivial. "Let him who has not sinned cast the first stone."

You are [thankfully] wrong about the Famine not being taught outside of Ireland. It is a subject now in most US state schools and in US Catholic schools .... I have been involved in some of this so I know about it first hand. US Colleges also have courses on Ireland that involve a study of the Famine. I have a German colleague - in Berlin - who taught it as part of a core curriculum on Ireland. But you are right that the UK system cares nothing about it. I won't comment any further on this but leave it up to you to ponder.

As regards your comment about other famine situations - the utter tragedy and outrageousness of the Irish Famine is that the government in charge - Westminster - shielded themselves behind Laissez Faire economics and refused to help. This was not the carelessness or indifference of a far off power - it was the government in charge.

Trevelyan's report is sickening to read. His contempt for the Irish people on every page of his report is palpable - and for this he was knighted! Somehow that speaks for itself.

WAGS

MarchDub wrote: »

You are [thankfully] wrong about the Famine not being taught outside of Ireland. It is a subject now in most US state schools and in US Catholic schools

I actually said most schools outside of Ireland and I genuinely believe that all the world's tragedies deserve to be taught, but I was shocked reading things like this:

"Irish Great Famine taught along side Jewish Holocaust:
New Jersey law used as model for nation:
The Irish Action Coalition is engaged in recruiting activists to appeal to state representatives to introduce and pass a Holocaust Education Law, mandating the teaching in public school of the Genocide of the Irish people during the Great Irish Famine alongside the teaching of the Jews' Holocaust. Currently, New Jersey is the only state that has passed this law.
New Jersey Gov. Christie Whitman signed a bill into law last April that expanded the state's Holocaust Commission's mission to prepare school materials "of a wide range of genocides. The coalition, along with members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians and the American Irish Political Action Committee have formed an ad hoc committee of teachers, scholars and authors, to put together a curriculum on the Irish Famine to be presented to the Holocaust Commission for implementation in public schools in 1996. "We would like to see every school, in every state in the union, teaching this curriculum," said Helen McClafferty, co-chairwoman of the IAC.
To this end, McClafferty has mailed literature to thousands of Irish Americans across the country, urging them to contact their state representatives to pass legislation that would result in the "Irish Holocaust" being taught in the states' public schools.
The IAC is willing to help any group or activist who wants to undertake this project in their state."

And then there is this, a more recent production.

http://www.noraid.com/Holocaust.htm

There's no hope in this situation that I can see.
I came to this forum to see for myself and to learn the current situation. Through the postings I have been directed in certain directions to see things that I possibly would never have found otherwise and I appreciate the assistance. I wanted to see where things really stood and to see today if I applied a balanced way to my current projects, tried to tell both sides of the story, would this make any difference. Conclusion: Nope!
Good luck all of you in your future, but I am sincerely wasting mine and your time being here.

MarchDub

WAGS wrote: »

I actually said most schools outside of Ireland and I genuinely believe that all the world's tragedies deserve to be taught, but I was shocked reading things like this:

"Irish Great Famine taught along side Jewish Holocaust:
New Jersey law used as model for nation:
The Irish Action Coalition is engaged in recruiting activists to appeal to state representatives to introduce and pass a Holocaust Education Law, mandating the teaching in public school of the Genocide of the Irish people during the Great Irish Famine alongside the teaching of the Jews' Holocaust. Currently, New Jersey is the only state that has passed this law.
New Jersey Gov. Christie Whitman signed a bill into law last April that expanded the state's Holocaust Commission's mission to prepare school materials "of a wide range of genocides. The coalition, along with members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians and the American Irish Political Action Committee have formed an ad hoc committee of teachers, scholars and authors, to put together a curriculum on the Irish Famine to be presented to the Holocaust Commission for implementation in public schools in 1996. "We would like to see every school, in every state in the union, teaching this curriculum," said Helen McClafferty, co-chairwoman of the IAC.
To this end, McClafferty has mailed literature to thousands of Irish Americans across the country, urging them to contact their state representatives to pass legislation that would result in the "Irish Holocaust" being taught in the states' public schools.
The IAC is willing to help any group or activist who wants to undertake this project in their state."

And then there is this, a more recent production.

http://www.noraid.com/Holocaust.htm

There's no hope in this situation that I can see.
I came to this forum to see for myself and to learn the current situation. Through the postings I have been directed in certain directions to see things that I possibly would never have found otherwise and I appreciate the assistance. I wanted to see where things really stood and to see today if I applied a balanced way to my current projects, tried to tell both sides of the story, would this make any difference. Conclusion: Nope!
Good luck all of you in your future, but I am sincerely wasting mine and your time being here.

As you see the Famine is being treated alongside the Jewish Holocaust in many US schools - and rightfully so in my opinion.


What you have learned is invaluable and you may come to appreciate this - that at times there are not two equal sides to a situation. And what has to be accepted is that sometimes there really are victims.

walrusgumble

for f*ck sake, the same old sh*&e.

the purpose of this thread was to discuss people of great britain/ uk (call you what it will) who are seen in good light in the eyes of ireland. british people who have contributed to this country, british people who might have made some irish people think , well not all british are bad skins.

but no, it started with mcarmlite (sp) hopping on the republican trail, in parts completely right on what he said but completely irrelevant and completely misinterpreted the purpose of the thread. now we got some nonsense about how the irish were treated in the uk and the famine. pitty he could not read the bloody first post correctly.

they are all fine and well, but they are not what this thread was about.

the thread is going down a road that was not suppose to, a thread that actually does not rehash (as in state the same things over and over from other threads in history and heritage) the same auld retoric. by the wat please do not be under any allusion that i am of teh opinion of "ya feck it, that was years ago" , no, i believe the truth must be discussed whatever it is, nor was this thread to be a glorified "aren't the bitish great, lets go back to the union" , mr mcarmliete had you read the original post it would have being clear that examples used clearly should that the thread was not going that way.



this thread was to be kept simple.

with that, i ask the mods to close this thread

ejmaztec

walrusgumble wrote: »

for f*ck sake, the same old sh*&e.

the purpose of this thread was to discuss people of great britain/ uk (call you what it will) who are seen in good light in the eyes of ireland. british people who have contributed to this country, british people who might have made some irish people think , well not all british are bad skins.

but no, it started with mcarmlite (sp) hopping on the republican trail, in parts completely right on what he said but completely irrelevant and completely misinterpreted the purpose of the thread. now we got some nonsense about how the irish were treated in the uk and the famine. pitty he could not read the bloody first post correctly.

they are all fine and well, but they are not what this thread was about.

the thread is going down a road that was not suppose to, a thread that actually does not rehash (as in state teh same things over and over from other threads in history and heritage) the same auld retoric.

with that, i ask the mods to close this thread

I think that a thread should be started on the subject of "The History of The Shoulder Chip".

No matter what thread is started, on whatever subject, they all seem to head off down into the cul de sac of whinging oblivion.

neil_hosey

I cant believe the sh*t on this forum. I've only started reading History and Heritage the last few days and it's rediculous how many threads get hijacked by a bunch of fools, if you want to talk about that, start your own thread. Will yous have some respect for the OP and answer the original question or else feck off!

Is there even a mod on this forum???

joke. :mad:


OP:

Robert McAlpine - jobs and all that during times of immigration

Paul and Linda McCartney - 'Give Ireland Back to the Irish', suppose it was the best they could muster, but a valiant effort at that.

Shutuplaura

Not sure if he's been mentioned but Robert Graves of Goodbye to All That and I Claudius fame. He was briefly stationed in Ireland in 1918 and used common sencse to avoid a confrontation with the local IRA in BallyLongford. He also attempted in the 1970's to get the BBC to cease using Lillibullero as a signiture tune due to the lyrics anti Irish nature. In fairness to the BBC though, they only played an instrumental version and it is qute catchy.

I believe he was of partial Irish extraction so perhaps that has something to do with his attitude.

ScumLord

I remember back in the day my grandpappy did shot tans right in he face. But one day the Tansd did give my grandmammy a half crown bless her heart. The feckin' RA took it off her. Queer thing my half crown" aw the storie gies. So giv the Tsn backstards somee cred like/

Pgibson

ScumLord wrote: »

I remember back in the day my grandpappy did shot tans right in he face. But one day the Tansd did give my grandmammy a half crown bless her heart. The feckin' RA took it off her. Queer thing my half crown" aw the storie gies. So giv the Tsn backstards somee cred like/

That has to be the funniest posting ever on "Boards.ie"

Keep it up Scumlord!

.

Pgibson

Shutuplaura wrote: »

Lillibullero as a signiture tune due.

I believe that Lillobullero and Green Sleeves are the oldest known English tunes.

Possibly 1500 year old Saxon.

Lyrics,usually political, have been on them down though the centuries but the tunes remain intact...and beautiful.

.

Ireland_ke

Hello, I come from Germany and I am currently working on a school project about Ireland! I think my topic fits to this thread, because my topic is "The Troubles" (conflict between Englishmen and Irishmen). I prepared a questionnaire and I would be very grateful if you answer the questions. You would be a great help and it takes only 1 minute!!
This is the link:

http://home.pages.at/questionnaire/index.html

Thank you very much in advance!

McArmalite

Pgibson wrote: »

True.
The British were completely uninterested in Ireland.
They still are.

No they were uninterested until some of their lovely lads were blown to pieces by the Provos or the Provos were blowing up pubs in Birmingham, Guildford etc or executing british criminals like Mountbatten etc. Then they became very interested in Ireland

(How many Irish people are interested in Finnish or Latvian affairs?)

We were not occupying, murdering and terrorising the people of Latvia or Finland. The fact that the brit public only gave notice to what was going on in Ireland when they received a peice of their own medicine - should be forever to their shame.

They regarded the Irish as two strange foreign tribes who were still fighting religious wars from centuries ago.

On the plane back to London from his first visit to Northern Ireland as home secretary,Reginald Maudling declared:
"For God's sake bring me a large Scotch. What a bloody awful country..........make that a double."

The Brits would have celebrated if Ireland had sunk without trace into the Atlantic.

(In surveys, Ian Paisley regularly topped the list of "Most Disliked Politician". Londoners never regarded Orangemen as "British".)

Today,the Brits are almost as self-serving and "forgetful" of their own actions as are whingeing Irish Republicans.

(They whinge when some call them "Shinners":

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/shinners-again-show-they-are-bitter-infants-1505001.html)

But it's just the typical reaction the british have to the deaths of Irish people, north or south, Protestant or Catholic. Because in their mindset, their all just " Paddy's ".

I remember reading a letter regarding the Birmingham pub bombings. The writer stated how the Paddy joke had been resurrected with the troubles and jokes were been constantly told on TV and radio about sort of " These 2 Paddys were at a pub/bus stop/shop/whatever with a bomb or machine gun etc, etc "

Naturally british soldiers were never part of the joke, with the butt of the joke and victims of the explosion or whatever been " Paddy's " ofcourse.

However then one night two pubs went off in Birmingham in 1974 killing 21 people. Not surprisingly, people been killed by " Paddys " was no longer a laughing matter. Says a lot about the morality and attitude of the british public.

Can you just imagine though, if the following morning someone appeared on Irish radio or TV cracking jokes about " This fella left a bomb in a pub in Birmingham...... " the screams of horror and indigantion of the people of the 'mainland' ??

getz

McArmalite wrote: »

No they were uninterested until some of their lovely lads were blown to pieces by the Provos or the Provos were blowing up pubs in Birmingham, Guildford etc or executing british criminals like Mountbatten etc. Then they became very interested in Ireland



We were not occupying, murdering and terrorising the people of Latvia or Finland. The fact that the brit public only gave notice to what was going on in Ireland when they received a peice of their own medicine - should be forever to their shame. But it wouldn't be, because the brits JUST LOVE THEMSELVES.




But it's just the typical reaction the british have to the deaths of Irish people, north or south, Protestant or Catholic. Because in their mindset, their all just " Paddy's ".

I remember reading a letter regarding the Birmingham pub bombings. The writer stated how the Paddy joke had been resurrected with the troubles and jokes were been constantly told on TV and radio about sort of " These 2 Paddys were at a pub/bus stop/shop/whatever with a bomb or machine gun etc, etc "

Naturally british soldiers were never part of the joke, with the butt of the joke and victims of the explosion or whatever been " Paddy's " ofcourse.

However then one night two pubs went off in Birmingham in 1974 killing 21 people. Not surprisingly, people been killed by " Paddys " was no longer a laughing matter. Says a lot about the morality and attitude of the british public.

Can you just imagine though, if the following morning someone appeared on Irish radio or TV cracking jokes about " This fella left a bomb in a pub in Birmingham...... " the screams of horror and indigantion of the people of the 'mainland' ??

i take it you have never been to england or even seen uk tv ,stop quoting old IRA sayings ,all the irish jokes i have listened to about the terrorists bombings have been told by the irish not the english non of which talks about killings-anyway if you go into a pub in birmingham you would be very lucky to meet a englishman but i take as you have been you would not know

McArmalite

neil_hosey wrote: »

I cant believe the sh*t on this forum. I've only started reading History and Heritage the last few days and it's rediculous how many threads get hijacked by a bunch of fools, if you want to talk about that, start your own thread. Will yous have some respect for the OP and answer the original question or else feck off!

It's a discussion forum - " consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc " , people can agree or disagree with an opinion.

Robert McAlpine - jobs and all that during times of immigration

Paul and Linda McCartney - 'Give Ireland Back to the Irish', suppose it was the best they could muster, but a valiant effort at that.

Linda McCartney was American.

getz wrote: »

i take it you have never been to england or even seen uk tv ,stop quoting old IRA sayings ,all the irish jokes i have listened to about the terrorists bombings have been told by the irish not the english non of which talks about killings-anyway if you go into a pub in birmingham you would be very lucky to meet a englishman but i take as you have been you would not know

Yes I have been to England, London a few times as my brother was a foreman over there for a while and I must say I thought it a great city.
As for the rest of your post, in a word, fiction.

getz

McArmalite wrote: »

It's a discussion forum - " consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc " , people can agree or disagree with an opinion.



Linda McCartney was American.



Yes I have been to England, London a few times as my brother was a foreman over there for a while and I must say I thought it a great city.
As for the rest of your post, in a word, fiction.

try manchester or liverpool we are all of irish ancestors and love both england and ireland and dont have hangups

Fratton Fred

getz wrote: »

i take it you have never been to england or even seen uk tv ,stop quoting old IRA sayings ,all the irish jokes i have listened to about the terrorists bombings have been told by the irish not the english non of which talks about killings-anyway if you go into a pub in birmingham you would be very lucky to meet a englishman but i take as you have been you would not know

If you demonise a nation, it is easier to live with yourself when you slaughter innocent people.

its the provos "The Brits are all bastards so who cares if we blow up their children, we are doing the world a favour" attitude.

MarchDub

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If you demonise a nation, it is easier to live with yourself when you slaughter innocent people.

Out of the mouths of babies....

SirHenryGrattan

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Bishopsgate bombing was in 1993, five years before the GFA. If the IRA had held their ceasefire then the GFA would most likely have come about sooner.

I know the IRA like to think they played a big part in getting it signed, but the framework was there and it was happening. The Anglo Irish agreement, whilst flawed, kicked the whole thing off. The Baltic Exchange and Bishopsgate bombs, if anything, delayed the process as the general opinion in the UK was **** em, they obviously don't want peace so it would not have been prudent for a British PM to start negotiations again. It also meant SF/IRA were kept out of Stormont talks.

Not sure I would agree with this. The big issue back in the early 90s was whether the Government should negotiate with terrorists or their representatives i.e Sinn Fein before a ceasefire. Major consistently refused and the IRA kept bombing until the first ceasefire in 94. They resumed bombing in 1996(Docklands and Manchester) when talks stalled. That's when the City told Major to start making progress or else.

It was generally accepted by the main stream media that Sinn Fein had "bombed their way to the negotiating table".

Fratton Fred

SirHenryGrattan wrote: »

Not sure I would agree with this. The big issue back in the early 90s was whether the Government should negotiate with terrorists or their representatives i.e Sinn Fein before a ceasefire. Major consistently refused and the IRA kept bombing until the first ceasefire in 94. They resumed bombing in 1996(Docklands and Manchester) when talks stalled. That's when the City told Major to start making progress or else.

It was generally accepted by the main stream media that Sinn Fein had "bombed their way to the negotiating table".

I think that is one of those things I guess we will never know. I doubt anyone is going to admit defeat. I doubt anygovernment will admit negotiating with terrorists because they bomder their way to the negotiating table either.