Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Cowen calls on unionist leaders to mark 1916

  • 21-05-2010 06:20PM
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭


    As the title says.

    Link- http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0521/1224270804241.html

    It actually occurred to me that while this obviously isn't a massive deal, it would be a nice gesture from the unionists in the North to agree to commerate 1916. An agreement from the UUP would be especially helpful, and would go some in making up for their disgraceful foot-dragging over the policing and justice powers. A DUP backing would also help seal how far we have come over since the Troubles started. I think unionist backing for this commemoration would be nothing but helpful.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,033 ✭✭✭Winty


    They will mark it as its an important part of shared history


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 462 ✭✭SlabMurphy


    As the title says.

    Link- http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0521/1224270804241.html

    It actually occurred to me that while this obviously isn't a massive deal, it would be a nice gesture from the unionists in the North to agree to commerate 1916. An agreement from the UUP would be especially helpful, and would go some in making up for their disgraceful foot-dragging over the policing and justice powers. A DUP backing would also help seal how far we have come over since the Troubles started. I think unionist backing for this commemoration would be nothing but helpful.
    Well your intentions are well meaning and I'm not trying to belittle you but I have a better chance of getting a date with Cameron Diaz than the unionists honouring 1916.

    I remember reading a book about Terence McSweeney's daughter Máire who was actually married to Cathal Brugha's son Ruairí. Anyway they were at a discussion in some university in England on some aspect of Irish history back in the 70's. John Hume was there along with ' moderate ' unionist David Trimble. Hume tried to introduce Máire and Ruairí Brugha to Trimble. But Trimble refused to shake Ruairí Brugha's hand saying he would not shake hands with the son of a murderer :mad:. THAT is the real face of unionism.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭maynooth_rules


    Detest everything about Cowen and his shambolic government, but I agree 100% with this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    The Unionists are dead right.

    1916 has nothing to do with them.

    Why would they get involved.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,968 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Did Unionists call on Bertie et al to join in the 200th anniversary of the 1801 Act of Union on New Years Day 2001?

    I can't remember....


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    SlabMurphy wrote: »
    Well your intentions are well meaning and I'm not trying to belittle you but I have a better chance of getting a date with Cameron Diaz than the unionists honouring 1916.

    I remember reading a book about Terence McSweeney's daughter Máire who was actually married to Cathal Brugha's son Ruairí. Anyway they were at a discussion in some university in England on some aspect of Irish history back in the 70's. John Hume was there along with ' moderate ' unionist David Trimble. Hume tried to Máire and Ruairí Brugha to Trimble. But Trimble refused to shake Ruairí Brugha's hand saying he would not shake hands with the son of a murderer :mad:. THAT is the real face of unionism.

    In fairness, Trimble was always re-knowned for his unbelievable, and often ridiculous, pettiness, so I wouldn't pay him or his actions too much heed.

    The Unionists are dead right.

    1916 has nothing to do with them.

    Why would they get involved.

    First of all the unionists haven't said anything either way so how can you say that they're "dead right" when they haven't even responded?

    They should get involved because it would be a good gesture to the nationalist community and it would show that they've grown up a bit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 462 ✭✭SlabMurphy


    In fairness, Trimble was always re-knowned for his unbelievable, and often ridiculous, pettiness, so I wouldn't pay him or his actions too much heed.
    The ' moderate ' Trimble was an bigoted insulting little c*nt - just like all the rest of the unionists.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    In fairness, Trimble was always re-knowned for his unbelievable, and often ridiculous, pettiness, so I wouldn't pay him or his actions too much heed.




    First of all the unionists haven't said anything either way so how can you say that they're "dead right" when they haven't even responded?

    They should get involved because it would be a good gesture to the nationalist community and it would show that they've grown up a bit.


    I was referring to Trimble's actions.

    Grown up? I think both extreme sides of the idiocy up there should perhaps grow up.

    The people who have 'grown up' are the people who get on with their daily lives and ignore this kind of stupid stuff.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    I was referring to Trimble's actions.

    No, you weren't. Stop backtracking. Why did you put the sentence in plural and present tense then?

    Grown up? I think both extreme sides of the idiocy up there should perhaps grow up.

    The people who have 'grown up' are the people who get on with their daily lives and ignore this kind of stupid stuff.

    No, the guys who have grown up are the guys who, like Winty says, can commemorate such events as part of our shared history.

    And I don't think goodwill from unionists to nationalists or commemorating the past is "stupid stuff".


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    No, you weren't. Stop backtracking. Why did you put the sentence in plural and present tense then?



    No, the guys who have grown up are the guys who, like Winty says, can commemorate such events as part of our shared history.

    And I don't think goodwill from unionists to nationalists or commemorating the past is "stupid stuff".


    I was referring to the real face of unionism comment pal.

    So you are in favour of nationalists commemorating 1690?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    I was referring to the real face of unionism comment pal.

    That's even worse so.Let me get this straight-you think Trimble was correct not to shake hands with Ruairi Brugha just because he was the son of what Trimble viewed as a "murderer"?
    So you are in favour of nationalists commemorating 1690?

    Come back to me in 80 years and I'll have an answer for you.;)

    This thread is just about unionists and 1916 anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,505 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    Honestly with the present state of the country does anyone really care who celebrates it?
    As for Cowen I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire..as far as I'm concerned he's a traitor to this country.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    Berkut wrote: »
    Honestly with the present state of the country does anyone really care who celebrates it?
    As for Cowen I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire..as far as I'm concerned he's a traitor to this country.

    I think it's always important to remember the past.Just my POV.

    And no matter how much you might hate Cowen, surely you accept that this is a good idea?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    That's even worse so.Let me get this straight-you think Trimble was correct not to shake hands with Ruairi Brugha just because he was the son of what Trimble viewed as a "murderer"?



    Come back to me in 80 years and I'll have an answer for you.;)

    This thread is just about unionists and 1916 anyway.

    What do you mean even worse?

    Trimble is right to stand by HIS beliefs in a non violent way.

    Unionists are right to ignore 1916 if that is their beliefs.

    What you people need to understand is that not everyone holds the same views as you do.

    And you are perfectly entitled to hold those views, but don't expect everyone to agree or take the same outlook;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    What do you mean even worse?
    I meant that that's even worse than what I thought you originally meant re the unionist being "dead right".

    Trimble is right to stand by HIS beliefs in a non violent way.
    I'll ask you again-do you think Trimble was correct not to shake hands with Ruairi Brugha just because he was the son of what Trimble viewed as a "murderer"?If you don't mind me saying, what a ridiculous "belief" to have!


    Unionists are right to ignore 1916 if that is their beliefs.

    Do you not agree that it would be a helpful gesture of goodwill to make?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I was referring to the real face of unionism comment pal.

    So you are in favour of nationalists commemorating 1690?

    I believe that there was a joint commemoration there some years ago with the then Taoiseach and Ian paisley.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    I think I have been plain enough to be honest.

    Up to you to interpret my posts, but I can't put it any plainer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,505 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    I think it's always important to remember the past.Just my POV.

    And no matter how much you might hate Cowen, surely you accept that this is a good idea?

    A good idea? Trying to get unionists to celebrate 1916? How many ppl were on here when the Love Ulster parade was mooted and were saying to hell with them.
    And what's wrong with just ourselves celebrating it?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    I think I have been plain enough to be honest.

    Up to you to interpret my posts, but I can't put it any plainer.

    You haven't really been "plain enough" in all fairness.You've sidestepped all my questions.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    Berkut wrote: »
    A good idea? Trying to get unionists to celebrate 1916? How many ppl were on here when the Love Ulster parade was mooted and were saying to hell with them.

    Just think it would be a gesture of goodwill and would show that they've grown up a bit.

    And I find it hard to bear grudges against any men who disagree with Willie Frazer, tbh.That said, What happened that day was not representative of my beliefs.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Berkut wrote: »
    A good idea? Trying to get unionists to celebrate 1916? How many ppl were on here when the Love Ulster parade was mooted and were saying to hell with them.

    The people behind the "love ulster" parade would not be representative of the Unionist community in general.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,524 ✭✭✭owenc


    Nodin wrote: »
    The people behind the "love ulster" parade would not be representative of the Unionist community in general.

    Yes they are just bigots out of the uda in the orange order. They should not be involved only civilised people


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,505 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    Just think it would be a gesture of goodwill and would show that they've grown up a bit.

    And I find it hard to bear grudges against any men who disagree with Willie Frazer, tbh.That said, What happened that day was not representative of my beliefs.

    You see....this is why we have wars/murder etc...
    Because someone wants someone else to do something against their will.
    If the unionists don't want to celebrate let them off. It's not going to hurt anyone is it? But no..someone will make a big deal out of it...come closer to the time then and someone will get hurt over this..whether it's a unionist or one of us...makes no difference in the end.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,069 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    Just think it would be a gesture of goodwill and would show that they've grown up a bit.

    The whole idea of celebrating 'Easter 1916' is an athema to Unionists, for in their eyes (and many others), the events of that week did nothing to bring them into the fold, and indeed, many would argue that what Cowan & Co plan to celebrate in Easter 2016 actually copper fastened a lasting division on this island, that stands to this day!

    The 1916 rising flew in the face of Unionism, (it was also very unpopular in Dublin), so I see no reason why today's Unionists should celebrate it :cool:

    No suprise, I won't be celebrating it either.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    owenc wrote: »
    Yes they are just bigots out of the uda in the orange order. They should not be involved only civilised people

    Not quite sure what thats meant to mean. I was referring to the rather notorious Willie Frazer.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,524 ✭✭✭owenc


    Nodin wrote: »
    Not quite sure what thats meant to mean. I was referring to the rather notorious Willie Frazer.

    so your saying the orange order aint bigoted?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    owenc wrote: »
    so your saying the orange order aint bigoted?

    The whole Orange order all over the world? No, it isn't.

    The north certainly has a fair few in its ranks, but we can't throw out the good with the bad.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    I don't think anyone expects unionists to start extolling the virtues of Pearse and co. What Cowen meant I think, that is in the run up to 1916 anniversary, statements from prominent unionists perhaps referring to the rebels as bood-thirsty terrorists might be perhaps seen as unhelpful.

    Not would many down here consider the Ulster Covenant a great thing either. That said our ministers will attend the commemoration should there be one in the North. They will keep their views on those people to themselves should they hold them.

    Its a case of being polite and being seen to be polite is what's important.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 410 ✭✭trapsagenius


    Camelot wrote: »
    many would argue that what Cowan & Co plan to celebrate in Easter 2016 actually copper fastened a lasting division on this island, that stands to this day!

    I'd say what copper-fastened the divisions was the discriminatory and gerrymandered statelet set up in NI.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,556 ✭✭✭Riddle101


    I think Cowen should shut up and leave the unionist alone. The unionist don't have to do anything about 1916 since they didn't have anything to do with it. Not to mention the unionists back in 1916 were against the rising and opponents to the Irish Volunteers


Advertisement