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

Should we be offended by the term ‘Free State government’?

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    El Alamein. wrote: »
    A big reason why they will never get into power in the Irish Republic. No rational, sensible person will vote for them in large enough numbers to get them running the place. They just shoot themselves in the foot all the time. Never has it been a better time to play on the fears of people and make a run for it to get into power and they just can't help themselves by playing to the worst elements within Irish Republicanism.

    Its almost like a disease. They want to be seen to be moving forward and get into power in the Irish Republic but they just can't get the slime off them.

    Yeah, instead of exploiting people's fears they stick to their principles. bastards.


  • Options
    #93
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Indeed it is but now you are going into objective policies. It's impossible for you to say what policies would or would not be deemed to be in violation of article 3 by the supreme court.
    Same with any breach of a Constitutional provision; I don't see the relevance. The Government are just as obligated not to act against re-unification as they are not to allow elective abortions.
    Like I said reunification is a long way down the governments list of priorities and our concern for the well being of Irish citizens in the UK is no more extensive then our concern for Irish citizens in the US or Australia.
    Well, perhaps the difference is Ireland has never had to take a case against the US or Australia to a supra-national court to win human rights for its citizens, as it did in Northern Ireland.


  • Options
    #94
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    Same with any breach of a Constitutional provision; I don't see the relevance. The Government are just as obligated not to act against re-unification as they are not to allow elective abortions.
    Well Jaysus if you don't see the relevence I certainly don't since you brought it up. :rolleyes:

    And no on that second point, in theory yes the government can't legislate against unification just as they can't legislate for elective abortion but in practice the latter is much easier to clarify then the former. In practice as long as the government pays lip service to Northern Ireland and claims this or that piece of legislation will further unification then it will be very hard for the supreme court to turn around and basically call the government liars.

    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    Well, perhaps the difference is Ireland has never had to take a case against the US or Australia to a supra-national court to win human rights for its citizens, as it did in Northern Ireland.
    The difference is pre GFA we didn't respect the United Kingdoms borders. We held onto an illegal claim in our constitution to someone else's land. Now we do and our claim to that land has been severely lessened and confirmed by a democratic mandate from both countries on this island.


  • Options
    #95
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The difference is pre GFA we didn't respect the United Kingdoms borders.
    No, that is not an answer to what I said. You said " our concern for the well being of Irish citizens in the UK is no more extensive then our concern for Irish citizens in the US or Australia." The reality is we have never had, and are unlikely to have any reason to have any concern for the welfare of our citizens in, say, Australia.

    On the other hand, it is a matter of historical record that Ireland has never had to take a case to the ECtHR or any other supra national court to establish the human rights of its citizens in a foreign jurisdiction but the United Kingdom.

    It is also a matter of historical record that Ireland has had to make representation of its concerns for the welfare of its citizens to the British Government more than any to other Government worldwide, by quite some margin. Most recently in the case of Marian Price.

    It is further a matter of fact that are there may be circumstances in which Ireland can be liable for breaches of the human rights of Irish citizens when those citizens' human rights are impugned in the North. Given the historical relationship of the United Kingdom with citizens who identify as Irish in the North, as alluded to above, this affords Ireland a special relationship with its citizens in the six counties.


  • Options
    #96
    Dunrum Arbella.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8 ✭Dunrum Arbella.


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Yeah, instead of exploiting people's fears they stick to their principles. bastards.
    They won't get into Government with such contempt for the Irish constitution.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Dunrum Arbella. wrote: »
    They won't get into Government with such contempt for the Irish constitution.

    Ya never know. FF, FG and Labour all got into power while showing contempt for the Irish people.
    Anyway, they dont have contempt for it, they just want to see it applied to the whole nation.


  • Options
    #98
    Dunrum Arbella.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8 ✭Dunrum Arbella.


    Living in a fantasy land, it isn't going to happen.


  • Options
    #99
    Seanchai
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,401 ✭✭✭Seanchai


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Seanchai, please deal with poster's arguments rather than using ad hominems and flame bait. Your contribution to not turning the thread into a trainwreck would be appreciated.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw

    If the poster using the name pablomakaveli calls people who describe Ireland as the "Free State" "treasonous", as he did, it is very relevant to point out that the same poster has elsewhere on this website confessed to being a serving member of the British Army's Royal Irish Regiment (formerly known as the UDR and, before that, the B Specials). [I even provided the link, to show I wasn't making this up]

    Your censorship of this very relevant context for his personal attack on the integrity of people who do not share his pro-British politics is so obviously wrong that it can only indicate your own political bias. Censorship, plain and simple. When people are made aware of his political actions, they can make their own decisions. Censoring all mention of his political record is truly incredible.

    I have just taken this blatant censorship of a very relevant fact to Feedback here.


  • Options
    #100
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    Seanchai wrote: »
    If the poster using the name pablomakaveli calls people who describe Ireland as the "Free State" "treasonous", as he did, it is very relevant to point out that the same poster has elsewhere on this website confessed to being a serving member of the British Army's Royal Irish Regiment (formerly known as the UDR and, before that, the B Specials). [I even provided the link, to show I wasn't making this up]

    Your censorship of this very relevant context for his personal attack on the integrity of people who do not share his pro-British politics is so obviously wrong that it can only indicate your own political bias. Censorship, plain and simple. When people are made aware of his political actions, they can make their own decisions. Censoring all mention of his political record is truly incredible.

    I have just taken this blatant censorship of a very relevant fact to Feedback here.

    I'm not in the Royal Irish. I'm Royal Artillery. And am i not entitled to my own opinion. I've been accused of treason and of being a traitor on this site by Republican before and i didnt go complaining.


  • Options
    #101
    Seanchai
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,401 ✭✭✭Seanchai


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    I'm not in the Royal Irish. I'm Royal Artillery. And am i not entitled to my own opinion. I've been accused of treason and of being a traitor on this site by Republican before and i didnt go complaining.

    Yes, you are obviously entitled to your own opinion (why the strawman?) - but accusing Irish republicans of "treason" in a post where you do not admit that you have joined the British Army and have taken an oath of loyalty to the British monarch is hypocrisy in the extreme. That I am censored for pointing this important double standard out is patently unfair.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    Seanchai wrote: »
    Yes, you are obviously entitled to your own opinion (why the strawman?) - but accusing Irish republicans of "treason" in a post where you do not admit that you have joined the British Army and have taken an oath of loyalty to the British monarch is hypocrisy in the extreme. That I am censored for pointing this important double standard out is patently biased.

    I haven't committed treason so how is it hypocrisy? The UK and Ireland are not at war and nothing i do could even be remotely considered as hostile to Ireland.


  • Options
    #103
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,226 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    Seanchai wrote: »
    If the poster using the name pablomakaveli calls people who describe Ireland as the "Free State" "treasonous", as he did, it is very relevant to point out that the same poster has elsewhere on this website confessed to being a serving member of the British Army's Royal Irish Regiment (formerly known as the UDR and, before that, the B Specials). [I even provided the link, to show I wasn't making this up]

    Your censorship of this very relevant context for his personal attack on the integrity of people who do not share his pro-British politics is so obviously wrong that it can only indicate your own political bias. Censorship, plain and simple. When people are made aware of his political actions, they can make their own decisions. Censoring all mention of his political record is truly incredible.

    I have just taken this blatant censorship of a very relevant fact to Feedback here.

    MOD REMINDER. OUR CHARTER CLEARLY STATES NO DISCUSSION OF MODERATION IN-THREAD (see below quote). It should be further noted that most forums on the boards.ie site do not allow discussion of moderation in-thread.
    Dr Galen wrote: »
    No discussion of moderation. If you need clarification of this Charter, or wish to discuss actions taken that pertain to violations, PM the moderator.


  • Options
    #104
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Black Swan wrote: »
    MOD REMINDER. OUR CHARTER CLEARLY STATES NO DISCUSSION OF MODERATION IN-THREAD (see below quote). It should be further noted that most forums on the boards.ie site do not allow discussion of moderation in-thread.


    I'd also add from the charter:
    This is an anonymous board - it's perfectly possible for someone to pretend they are a PS worker posting on work time, a private sector worker doing the same, or to do either and deny that that's what's happening - you have no way of knowing what the truth is.

    Posters shouldn't focus on somebodies job, particularly when it is frowned on dragging up posts from another forum on boards.ie, we even frown on dragging stuff over from separate threads on this forum.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #105
    donaghs
    Registered Users Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭donaghs


    wolfpawnat wrote: »
    So some people don't feel like they should accept what was accepted by Collins and Co in the 20's and that means they are sinister and untoward. :confused:

    I see it as the Free-State, it is not what Ireland fought for, sentimental I know, but it is missing six counties so to me, it is not Ireland. I see us all as one. Forgive me if that is sinister, to see Irish people north of Louth as foreign to me is the sinister act.

    Worth remembering that the Civil War wasn't fought over partition, but over the Republic status (the oath of allegiance etc). Neither side in the Civil War saw partition took partition seriously, and Collins even aided the 6 country IRA's campaign in the midst of the 26 county Civil War. It was acceptance of Free State status, that lead to the first use of the term "Free Staters".

    Of course, De Valera and co did eventually enter the Dail, saying the Oath was meaningless. Pity all the people had to die before they realised this.


  • Options
    #106
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    donaghs wrote: »
    Worth remembering that the Civil War wasn't fought over partition, but over the Republic status (the oath of allegiance etc).
    In fairness all he said was that there is non-acceptance of what Collins accepted. Fianna Fáil's subsequent position is of doubtful interest, since as you say, they too came to accept it.

    On a separate issue, I see Ruairí O Brádaigh has died. A controversial figure even amongst Republicans, he showed many undesirable characteristics, but maintained an honesty and selfless dedication to his beliefs which in itself is a commendable trait
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/republican-sinn-féin-founder-ruair%C3%AD-o-bradaigh-dies-1.1418035

    His speech at the 1986 SF Ard Fheis
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjXVJoUMVVc


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement