Che Guevara Statue In Galway

Sleepy

Does this mean Cuba* will be opening again?

Wouldn't that be testament enough to the man?

Big Knox

Seachmall wrote: »

Also, didn't he execute people at a whim and loot their corpses?

He did...










... but then he took an arrow to the knee!!! :pac:

Hande hoche!

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Anyone else here read Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life?

No, worth the read?

old hippy

who the fug wrote: »

Kenya surely

He was born in Hawaii. Unless you're a birther conspiraloon, natch :P

dan1895

Sleepy wrote: »

Does this mean Cuba* will be opening again?

Wouldn't that be testament enough to the man?

I'd recommend it for a visit before it does

who the fug

old hippy wrote: »

He was born in Hawaii. Unless you're a birther conspiraloon, natch :P

Mind you it would explain why you did not get

a garland of flowers round my neck & a "welcome home"

fishy fishy

old hippy wrote: »

I don't doubt it. We are in thrall to the buck, which doesn't really stop here (bar Shannon). But just think of the faux outrage which will snowball over the statue... lend your ear to the shrill voices that whimper about losing American patronage/investment/tourists all because of some goshdarn half century dead bearded commie

Sometimes (just sometimes) I'm embarrassed by my US heritage

heh heh, a bit like the americans telling all the other countries that if they did business in cuba, they would be blacklisted by usa, they soon quietened down and realised they couldn't live without other countries, especially their nearest neighbour canada, who constantly deals with cuba. :D

fishy fishy

Sleepy wrote: »

Does this mean Cuba* will be opening again?

Wouldn't that be testament enough to the man?

you've obviously never been.

by "open" again, do you mean ruined by mcdonalds and burger king?

Sleepy

For the non Galwegians:

Cuba is a country.

Cuba* was a pub / nightclub that recently shut it's doors which was very popular during my college days.

goose2005

krudler wrote: »

makes it sound like somewhere Frodo stopped off on his way to Mount Doom.

One does not simply walk into Leitrim. Its black gates are guarded by more than just sheep. There is evil there that does not sleep. The great eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire, ash, and dust. The very air you breathe is a poisonous fume. Not with ten thousand men could you do this. It is folly.

Crooked Jack

FLOOPER wrote: »

I was replying to the poster's assertion that Che had "at least the conviction to fight for what he belived was right."

Can you see the comparison now??? :rolleyes:
There, using smiley correctly to denote obiviousness and ignorance of poster.

Why don't posters actually read posts before responding.

I did indeed read the posts, I've followed this thread quite closely actually.
The connection with Hitler and Stalin was preposterous for a number of reasons.
Firstly I dont think it could be said that either Hitler or Stalin were fighting for what they believed was right. They were clearly fighting for personal power and to increase their zone of influence. A charge that could not be laid at Che Geuvara's feet.
Secondly, it's quite obvious that you used the names of Stalin and Hitler to in some way equate Geuvara's action with theirs. This is a pathetic tactic that people use in an arguement when they dont know how to respond and instead try to claim the moral highground by invoking the spectre of past boogeymen. Hence, my link to Godwin's Law in my response.
Thirdly, nobody is suggesting a monument to either Stalin or Hitler be raised in Galway. This is about Che Geuvara, a man as much loved as he is loathed.
There are no comparisons to see.

and i stand by my statement on rolleyes

goose2005

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I did indeed read the posts, I've followed this thread quite closely actually.
The connection with Hitler and Stalin was preposterous for a number of reasons.
Firstly I dont think it could be said that either Hitler or Stalin were fighting for what they believed was right. They were clearly fighting for personal power and to increase their zone of influence. A charge that could not be laid at Che Geuvara's feet.
Secondly, it's quite obvious that you used the names of Stalin and Hitler to in some way equate Geuvara's action with theirs. This is a pathetic tactic that people use in an arguement when they dont know how to respond and instead try to claim the moral highground by invoking the spectre of past boogeymen. Hence, my link to Godwin's Law in my response.
Thirdly, nobody is suggesting a monument to either Stalin or Hitler be raised in Galway. This is about Che Geuvara, a man as much loved as he is loathed.
There are no comparisons to see.

and i stand by my statement on rolleyes

Not really; both saw themselves as making a better world. That doesn't make their actions any more justifiable.

However, it's odd for the lefties to be praising a guy who was pretty much a racist and a homophobe.

RichieC

goose2005 wrote: »

Not really; both saw themselves as making a better world. That doesn't make their actions any more justifiable.

However, it's odd for the lefties to be praising a guy who was pretty much a racist and a homophobe.

Who was a racist? Che? the man who made an impassioned speech against the Apartheids of the US and south Africa to the UN?

Maybe he was a homophobe, but I think everyone was back then. Most men are men of their time. It's okay to laud Thomas Jefferson even though he was a slave owner.

fishy fishy

goose2005 wrote: »

Not really; both saw themselves as making a better world. That doesn't make their actions any more justifiable.

However, it's odd for the lefties to be praising a guy who was pretty much a racist and a homophobe.

ya, you keep believing that goosey

FLOOPER

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I did indeed read the posts, I've followed this thread quite closely actually.
The connection with Hitler and Stalin was preposterous for a number of reasons.
Firstly I dont think it could be said that either Hitler or Stalin were fighting for what they believed was right. They were clearly fighting for personal power and to increase their zone of influence. A charge that could not be laid at Che Geuvara's feet.
Secondly, it's quite obvious that you used the names of Stalin and Hitler to in some way equate Geuvara's action with theirs. This is a pathetic tactic that people use in an arguement when they dont know how to respond and instead try to claim the moral highground by invoking the spectre of past boogeymen. Hence, my link to Godwin's Law in my response.
Thirdly, nobody is suggesting a monument to either Stalin or Hitler be raised in Galway. This is about Che Geuvara, a man as much loved as he is loathed.
There are no comparisons to see.

and i stand by my statement on rolleyes

My only point, and the one that was intended, was that indeed Hitler and Stalin thought what they were doing was right. i.e. they didn't do what they did against their own will. They did what they did to an end. I don't believe for a moment that what they did gave them sleepless nights. It was like mowing grass to them. For anyone to think otherwise that they had a conscience would be naieve in the extreme I believe. They were lacking in compassion, empathy and sanity.


I can't see how you could argue with that. I'm not quite sure what end of the stick you got when you read my response to the argument that ah it's ok to erect a statue because what the man did was for the right reasons in his own head.

So pulling Godwin's Law into this is a bit out of place when it's obvious that my response was that this criteria shouldn't apply to everyone.

fishy fishy

FLOOPER wrote: »

My only point, and the one that was intended, was that indeed Hitler and Stalin thought what they were doing was right. i.e. they didn't do what they did against their own will. They did what they did to an end. I don't believe for a moment that what they did gave them sleepless nights. It was like mowing grass to them. For anyone to think otherwise that they had a conscience would be naieve in the extreme I believe. They were lacking in compassion, empathy and sanity.


I can't see how you could argue with that. I'm not quite sure what end of the stick you got when you read my response to the argument that ah it's ok to erect a statue because what the man did was for the right reasons in his own head.

So pulling Godwin's Law into this is a bit out of place when it's obvious that my response was that this criteria shouldn't apply to everyone.

hitler and stalin are as far away from che guevara as you can get. your examples have no relevants. You could say the same about the pope -he sided with hitler didn't he?

I think first of all people must read up the history of cuba, and not just spout out what they see on the westernised news. Cuba is a socialist country, not a communist country - they have no problem with people visiting them including Americans - its the US that has a problem with cuba dating back over 50 years, yet they had no problems shaking the hands of the russians. Wake up and smell the cuban coffe people - learn the history - you're too old to be spoonfed.

Crooked Jack

Hande hoche! wrote: »

No, worth the read?

yup. its excellent, very dense though

McTigs

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

lol only in ireland would we invest tax payers money on a statue during harsh austerity cuts

Only in after hours would somebody make a comment like that without knowing who is putting up the money.

not the tax payer btw

fishy fishy

McTigs wrote: »

Only in after hours would somebody make a comment like that without knowing who is putting up the money.

not the tax payer btw

is it members of the labour party in galway that want to do this - if so it is laughable. They are as far removed from che guevara as one could possible be. It's definitely a "look what I did" move, probably to cover up their inadequacies in what the labour party are doing at the minute, and to convince themselves that they are "for the people". Laughable. Let someone who really is on the side of the people erect the statue. Not someone looking for notoriety.

McTigs

fishy fishy wrote: »

is it members of the labour party in galway that want to do this - if so it is laughable. They are as far removed from che guevara as one could possible be. It's definitely a "look what I did" move, probably to cover up their inadequacies in what the labour party are doing at the minute, and to convince themselves that they are "for the people". Laughable. Let someone who really is on the side of the people erect the statue. Not someone looking for notoriety.

i don't think Labour have anything to do with it it either, where did you hear that from?

fishy fishy

McTigs wrote: »

i don't think Labour have anything to do with it it either, where did you hear that from?

I could be wrong but I think I read it in either the advertiser or the indo that it was labour councillors that wanted this.

again, I have no objection to the statue, but I would suggest that labour maybe rethink, and erect a thatcher statue - that would be more in line with their actions.

I stand to be corrected on my first paragraph tho.

Crooked Jack

FLOOPER wrote: »

My only point, and the one that was intended, was that indeed Hitler and Stalin thought what they were doing was right. i.e. they didn't do what they did against their own will. They did what they did to an end. I don't believe for a moment that what they did gave them sleepless nights. It was like mowing grass to them. For anyone to think otherwise that they had a conscience would be naieve in the extreme I believe. They were lacking in compassion, empathy and sanity.


I can't see how you could argue with that. I'm not quite sure what end of the stick you got when you read my response to the argument that ah it's ok to erect a statue because what the man did was for the right reasons in his own head.

So pulling Godwin's Law into this is a bit out of place when it's obvious that my response was that this criteria shouldn't apply to everyone.

I'm saying I disagree. I dont believe Hitler or Stalin thought what they were doing was right. In their own particular situations they always ensured that they were at the centre of the movement. THey were it's figureheads. and once they got in power they made continuous efforts to increase their personal power. It seems to me Hitler and Stalin were fighting or themselves and their own egos, not anything they thought was "right." These are not claims that can be made about Geuvara.

as you say they were indeed lacking in compassion, empathy and sanity, but once again these are not things that can be said of Che. A quick read through his diaries shows his inner torment between being a soldier or a doctor.

Godwin's Law states that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." Therefore it seems to apply perfectly in this situation, you quite clearly attempted to draw a comparison between Geuvara and Hitler

McTigs

fishy fishy wrote: »

I could be wrong but I think I read it in either the advertiser or the indo that it was labour councillors that wanted this.

again, I have no objection to the statue, but I would suggest that labour maybe rethink, and erect a thatcher statue - that would be more in line with their actions.

I stand to be corrected on my first paragraph tho.

I have no idea whose idea it was to be honest, but it's being funded by the Argentinian and Cuban embassies according to this... looks more like a monument than a statue.

http://www.galwaynews.ie/24569-%E2%80%98che%E2%80%99-statue-salthill-prom-sparks-outcry

fishy fishy

McTigs wrote: »

I have no idea whose idea it was to be honest, but it's being funded by the Argentinian and Cuban embassies according to this... looks more like a monument than a statue.

http://www.galwaynews.ie/24569-%E2%80%98che%E2%80%99-statue-salthill-prom-sparks-outcry

I know it's not being funded by the council, but what I am saying is that I think the original idea and work was done by labour councillors at meetings - i stand to be corrected on this. but if it is true, it is laughable.

They have no business really, in proposing this - they are as far removed from che guevara as can possibly be.

unless of course, there is a statement underneath the statue which reads

"this statue is the brainchild of the labour party in galway, who are selling their own people down the swanny -ironic, isn't it"..

KeithAFC

Cameron Poe wrote: »

Che Guevara wasn't a racist.

Stop reading Stormfront.

I suppose you didn't read his quotes then.

galah

I really don't know what the people in the council are smoking these days to allow this sh*te to even be mentioned. Don't care either way for Che as such - but the 'monument' itself is an absolute eye-sore, apart from the fact that it's entirely unoriginal - it's not a fantastic or inspiring picture to begin with...

At least, if it absolutely HAS to be a monument to Che Guevara (even though I still struggle with the link to Galway and why it would have to be put up along the prom - give the seagulls something else to p** on?), put up something new and innovative, or, go all out and make a bronze statue...

I can't see how this will attract more tourists either - who would think 'oh, let's go to Galway, there's a lovely Che Guevara statue I absolutely MUST see'. Bullsh*t. Even another famine ship or a statue of the Children or Lir or a nice Galway hooker would be a better choice and keeping in the theme. Or a memorial to people who had to emigrate, present and past. Something a little more inspired...

meh.

RichieC

galah wrote: »

I really don't know what the people in the council are smoking these days to allow this sh*te to even be mentioned. Don't care either way for Che as such - but the 'monument' itself is an absolute eye-sore, apart from the fact that it's entirely unoriginal - it's not a fantastic or inspiring picture to begin with...

At least, if it absolutely HAS to be a monument to Che Guevara (even though I still struggle with the link to Galway and why it would have to be put up along the prom - give the seagulls something else to p** on?), put up something new and innovative, or, go all out and make a bronze statue...

I can't see how this will attract more tourists either - who would think 'oh, let's go to Galway, there's a lovely Che Guevara statue I absolutely MUST see'. Bullsh*t. Even another famine ship or a statue of the Children or Lir or a nice Galway hooker would be a better choice and keeping in the theme. Or a memorial to people who had to emigrate, present and past. Something a little more inspired...

meh.

Che's family traces back to Galway. I assumed it was Jim Fitzpatrick who was the galwegian but I can't seem to find where he's from, only that he went to school in Meath.

fishy fishy

galah wrote: »

I really don't know what the people in the council are smoking these days to allow this sh*te to even be mentioned. Don't care either way for Che as such - but the 'monument' itself is an absolute eye-sore, apart from the fact that it's entirely unoriginal - it's not a fantastic or inspiring picture to begin with...

At least, if it absolutely HAS to be a monument to Che Guevara (even though I still struggle with the link to Galway and why it would have to be put up along the prom - give the seagulls something else to p** on?), put up something new and innovative, or, go all out and make a bronze statue...

I can't see how this will attract more tourists either - who would think 'oh, let's go to Galway, there's a lovely Che Guevara statue I absolutely MUST see'. Bullsh*t. Even another famine ship or a statue of the Children or Lir or a nice Galway hooker would be a better choice and keeping in the theme. Or a memorial to people who had to emigrate, present and past. Something a little more inspired...

meh.

or we could do moulds of people who have to immigrate now, while the council labou/FG/FF watch idly by. We could even put little monuments up in the houses that people were kicked out of.

Crooked Jack

KeithAFC wrote: »

I suppose you didn't read his quotes then.

If you're referring to the quotes i think you are (even though you have yet to produce them) they are always cited by right wing loolas in an attempt to paint Geuvara as a racist. They are always taken out of context without producing the entirety of what he wrote or the situation he was in when he wrote it.
There are many charges could be arguably put against Che, racism is not one of them.

Crooked Jack

galah wrote: »

I really don't know what the people in the council are smoking these days to allow this sh*te to even be mentioned. Don't care either way for Che as such - but the 'monument' itself is an absolute eye-sore, apart from the fact that it's entirely unoriginal - it's not a fantastic or inspiring picture to begin with...

At least, if it absolutely HAS to be a monument to Che Guevara (even though I still struggle with the link to Galway and why it would have to be put up along the prom - give the seagulls something else to p** on?), put up something new and innovative, or, go all out and make a bronze statue...

I can't see how this will attract more tourists either - who would think 'oh, let's go to Galway, there's a lovely Che Guevara statue I absolutely MUST see'. Bullsh*t. Even another famine ship or a statue of the Children or Lir or a nice Galway hooker would be a better choice and keeping in the theme. Or a memorial to people who had to emigrate, present and past. Something a little more inspired...

meh.

what is there to struggle with? his grandmother was from Galway. If he was still about he'd be eligible to play for the Irish soccer team for ****'s sake