British Royals to get invited to 'Celebrate' 1916 Rising.

Allyall

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this a bit odd?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/royals-to-get-1916-celebrations-invite-29561353.html

THE Irish Government will invite members of the British royal family to remember the Easter Rising at the centenary celebrations in three years time, Tanaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs Eamon Gilmore has confirmed.

Mr Gilmore issued the invitation last night at Queens' College, Cambridge, where Oliver Cromwell was educated. He told the British-Irish Association that he hoped the Irish Government "can host representatives of the royal family and the British government, along with the leaders of unionism, in Dublin in three years' time in remembering the Easter Rising."

Mr Gilmore added that three months after the Easter Rising commemorations he also hoped: "We can all respectfully remember those who gave their lives in British uniform at the Battle of the Somme."

Putting aside how many Irish may feel about it, I can't see why Liz, Charlie, the Grandkids and the UK Government would even want to come over here and 'Celebrate' the 1916 rising.

gobnaitolunacy

I'd say a polite 'thanks but no thanks' will be the reply.

I'd be very surprised if any of them turned up.

Allyall

I wouldn't mind seeing what seats they'd be given to watch the re-enactments.

To be honest celebrating the 1916 rising is a bad idea. They had no mandate and are no different to the PIRA/CIRA/RIRA.
We should be celebrating the 1919 election. Celebrate democracy or the war of independence

We are taught from childhood that the 1916 leaders were heroes. Brainwashed really.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Deleted User wrote: »

To be honest celebrating the 1916 rising is a bad idea. They had no mandate and are no different to the PIRA/CIRA/RIRA.
We should be celebrating the 1919 election. Celebrate democracy or the war of independence

We are taught from childhood that the 1916 leaders were heroes. Brainwashed really.

Ah, but what would that election have looked like without the Easter Rising?

I'm fairly ambivalent towards the whole thing anyway but the new narrative of they done really, really bad is just as brainwashed as the people who think they were god like heroes. Both are far too simplistic a narrative to subscribe to IMHO.

The thing is, the Easter Rising had it's place in bringing in our democracy and I think you'll find Ireland wasn't the first, nor the last to gain freedom/independence through the spilling of blood.

DEFTLEFTHAND

After Home Rule was passed in 1914 and it's implication suspended with the breakout of WW1 I find it hard to see why any British MP or Royal member would want to attend such an event. They hit them at the worst possible time. There was a peaceful solution to our strife, Home Rule would have led to Independence.

Irish men like John Redmond and John Dillon spent their lives trying to achieve what they did, that was all washed out in a sea of blood in 1916. Public opinion flipped after the British began executing the upstarts and the rest is history.

bleg

This is going to be hilarious.

The amount of hyperbole and posturing from sinn fein and "republicans" will be gas.

RoyalMarine

Maybe the British Army will come in their place.

war29

There is nothing to celebrate the country is still divided.

wazky

Maybe we could do a reenactment and get Lizzy behind the wheel on one of the old timey tanks?.

dublinbhoy88

The government has no business celebrating the rising never mind inviting the royals

Deedsie

I think it's only right, representatives of the heads of UK should be afforded an invitation. Wouldn't it be the best way to bring the entire British/Irish affair full circle? It would be the perfect symbolism to say the past is behind us. We move on together as allies and friends.

Imagine if the UK Queen or one of her family was sitting outside the GPO on the 24th of April 2016, possibly beside or near Gerry Adams who could well be in Government by then. Our next GE has to be held on or before April 8th 2016...

Potentially Tánaiste Adams if a coalition government excluding FG was formed. Just hypothetical, no one could possibly know what will happen. Opinion polls suggest a steady rise for FF and SF and stability for FG.

An FF/SF/~independents is a possible government come April 2016.

I'm not saying I want this to happen but I don't think a lot of people realize the potential for this happening in 32 months time.

FF/SF/~independents seems a lot more viable than FG/Labour/~independents do at this time. A crushed Labour Party will be loathe to share with FG again.

Howard Juneau

I think we should have the biggest Pride Parade ever to celebrate and have the fantabulous! Gerry Adams as grand marshal

Sir Humphrey Appleby

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

The government has no business celebrating the rising never mind inviting the royals

Why?
And its more of a commemoration than a celebration.

Crooked Jack

bleg wrote: »

This is going to be hilarious.

The amount of hyperbole and posturing from sinn fein and "republicans" will be gas.

Yeah, like all the hyperbole and posturing from martin mcguinness when he met the queen. oh wait, he just shook her hand and that was that. grow up. the only hyperbole and posturing you ever see on this site is from the relentlessly dull anti-republican crowd who use and topic in any thread to have a pop at Sinn Fein and then feel all smug about it. there certainly are bitter people holding this country back but judging by the demographics on this site, it's not republicans

Victor

British Royals to get invited to 'Celebrate' 1916 Rising.

I think the word is 'commemorate', not 'celebrate'.

dublinbhoy88

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Why?
And its more of a commemoration than a celebration.

in todays terminology the rising would be classed as an act of terrorism as they had no mandate to do so,also the setting up of the British empire free state sold out the ideals of the proclamation,how many republicans has the state executed and jailed in the last 90 years,pile of hypocrisy

Sir Humphrey Appleby

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

in todays terminology the rising would be classed as an act of terrorism as they had no mandate to do so,also the setting up of the British empire free state sold out the ideals of the proclamation,how many republicans has the state executed and jailed in the last 90 years,pile of hypocrisy

No doubt it was an act of aggression although even by todays terms blocking yourself into building after declaring independence would not of itself constitute terrorism.
As for the rest of your post "British Empire Free State" etc you need to get over yourself.
The single biggest threat to the security of this state since its formation has been from so called "republicans".

Sir Osis of Liver.

Eamonn Glimore is the biggest letdown of a politician this country has ever seen.

dublinbhoy88

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

No doubt it was an act of aggression although even by todays terms blocking yourself into building after declaring independence would not of itself constitute terrorism.
As for the rest of your post "British Empire Free State" etc you need to get over yourself.
The single biggest threat to the security of this state since its formation has been from so called "republicans".

stop making excuses,of course they would be classed as terrorists,stop making excuses FFS

Sir Humphrey Appleby

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

stop making excuses,of course they would be classed as terrorists,stop making excuses FFS

No they wouldn't since the merely took control of several sites in the city and then declared independence, terrorism would require them to do a lot more than that.
Certainly the IRA of 1918-21 would meet that definition (as indeed would the Tans!).
Methinks you need to look deeper at both the definition of terrorism and at exactly what those ,in my view, misguided men and women did that Easter weekend!

dublinbhoy88

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

No they wouldn't since the merely took control of several sites in the city and then declared independence, terrorism would require them to do a lot more than that.
Certainly the IRA of 1918-21 would meet that definition (as indeed would the Tans!).
Methinks you need to look deeper at both the definition of terrorism and at exactly what those ,in my view, misguided men and women did that Easter weekend!

the tans and the bloody Sunday paratroopers and others also?

Jester252

There is nothing odd about inviting dignitaries from,our next-door nation, our largest trade nation, a nation in which we have a free movement agreement, commemorate an important date in our country history. I assume dignitaries from the US, EU states and other countries will be invited.
Also not inviting them might look a little bad especially since dignitaries from other countries will more than likely attend.

RoyalMarine

Sir Osis of Liver. wrote: »

Eamonn Glimore is the biggest letdown of a politician this country has ever seen so far.

FYP.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

the tans and the bloody Sunday paratroopers and others also?

Lol I don't there were any English Paratroopers in Dublin in 1916.
You really are hilarious though.:D

Eight Ball

If it means one single euro is spent on security for them from the taxpayers empty pockets its a big fat "F off" from me. Otherwise I could give two sh1tes.

dublinbhoy88

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Lol I don't there were any English Paratroopers in Dublin in 1916.
You really are hilarious though.:D

I never said there was

Sir Humphrey Appleby

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

I never said there was

Read the thread title kid, it is about commemorating the 1916 insurrection and the possible invitation of members of the UK Royals.

jugger0

RoyalMarine wrote: »

Maybe the British Army will come in their place.

Doubt they'd want to come back after the hiding they got at mount street bridge.

dublinbhoy88

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

Read the thread title kid, it is about commemorating the 1916 insurrection and the possible invitation of members of the UK Royals.

I know what the thread is about

Fratton Fred

Deedsie wrote: »

I think it's only right, representatives of the heads of UK should be afforded an invitation. Wouldn't it be the best way to bring the entire British/Irish affair full circle? It would be the perfect symbolism to say the past is behind us. We move on together as allies and friends.

Imagine if the UK Queen or one of her family was sitting outside the GPO on the 24th of April 2016, possibly beside or near Gerry Adams who could well be in Government by then. Our next GE has to be held on or before April 8th 2016...

Potentially Tánaiste Adams if a coalition government excluding FG was formed. Just hypothetical, no one could possibly know what will happen. Opinion polls suggest a steady rise for FF and SF and stability for FG.

An FF/SF/~independents is a possible government come April 2016.

I'm not saying I want this to happen but I don't think a lot of people realize the potential for this happening in 32 months time.

FF/SF/~independents seems a lot more viable than FG/Labour/~independents do at this time. A crushed Labour Party will be loathe to share with FG again.

That is one of the scariest posts I have ever read on boards.

Nodin

Allyall wrote: »

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this a bit odd?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/royals-to-get-1916-celebrations-invite-29561353.html

With an FG led government, not at all. I'd expect an almost apologetic tone from them. Were Bruton in charge, I'd be unsuprised by an actual apology.

shopaholic01

We'll need another bailout to pay for the security if they accept the invitation.

Deedsie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That is one of the scariest posts I have ever read on boards.

Just to be clear, I was only highlighting a possible scenario... What could potentially happen in the next few years. A lot could change between now and then. I think it will be 2021 before SF get into government.

Gerry Adams and his generation will be in their 70's by then. I think a lot more people will accept SF in politics after they go. I am saying that as someone neutral on SF.

Crooked Jack

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That is one of the scariest posts I have ever read on boards.

Hey bleg! Told ya so.

freevoice

Can't we have just one national event without inviting them , are we that fearful we would offend them by celebrating our Nationalistic and military past on our own.
Personally, I think it would be in poor taste to the memory of the leaders of the 1916 rising for them to be there, as many of them were shot by firing squad (some strapped to a chair ) by crown forces . It would be uncomfortable for all if they were involved in the celebration.
Gilmore should be more concerned with the 200,600 Irish people that emigrated this country since 2008 than what royal he should invite over.

wow sierra

Deleted User wrote: »

To be honest celebrating the 1916 rising is a bad idea. They had no mandate and are no different to the PIRA/CIRA/RIRA.
We should be celebrating the 1919 election. Celebrate democracy or the war of independence

We are taught from childhood that the 1916 leaders were heroes. Brainwashed really.

It would be nice if someone on this thread had corrected the year of the 1918 election - I assume that is what you are referring to?

Fratton Fred

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Hey bleg! Told ya so.

In English?

Icaras

Near where I am in England there is a memorial for the British soldiers who died in the 1916 rising.
I know its off topic but I only found out this weekend and think its very strange.

Judgement Day

Icaras wrote: »

Near where I am in England there is a memorial for the British soldiers who died in the 1916 rising.
I know its off topic but I only found out this weekend and think its very strange.

Why?

Nodin

Icaras wrote: »

Near where I am in England there is a memorial for the British soldiers who died in the 1916 rising.
I know its off topic but I only found out this weekend and think its very strange.

There are memorials for those killed in the 1857 Indian uprising.

"At the nearby town of Fatehpur, a mob had attacked and murdered the local European population. On this pretext, Neill ordered all villages beside the Grand Trunk Road to be burned and their inhabitants to be killed by hanging. Neill's methods were "ruthless and horrible"[98] and far from intimidating the population, may well have induced previously undecided sepoys and communities to revolt."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857

"In terms of sheer numbers, the casualties were much higher on the Indian side. A letter published after the fall of Delhi in the "Bombay Telegraph" and reproduced in the British press testified to the scale of the Indian casualties:

.... All the city's people found within the walls of the city of Delhi when our troops entered were bayoneted on the spot, and the number was considerable, as you may suppose, when I tell you that in some houses forty and fifty people were hiding. These were not mutineers but residents of the city, who trusted to our well-known mild rule for pardon. I am glad to say they were disappointed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857

...in total, you're talking somewhere from 100,000 up to 500,000 dead as "reprisals". Once you realise the basic inherent criminality of Empire, the perversity of its celebration becomes very apparent.

MadsL

Perhaps they could cut the ribbon on the restored site of the surrender at 16 Moore Street. Yeah, like that will even happen.

If ever there was more compelling evidence how much the Irish Nation don't give toss about 1916, it is the current state and ownership of 16 Moore Street.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2454/4026111807_69bd2639d7_o.jpg

National disgrace.

Howard Juneau

Nodin wrote: »

There are memorials for those killed in the 1857 Indian uprising.

"At the nearby town of Fatehpur, a mob had attacked and murdered the local European population. On this pretext, Neill ordered all villages beside the Grand Trunk Road to be burned and their inhabitants to be killed by hanging. Neill's methods were "ruthless and horrible"[98] and far from intimidating the population, may well have induced previously undecided sepoys and communities to revolt."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857
In terms of sheer numbers, the casualties were much higher on the Indian side. A letter published after the fall of Delhi in the "Bombay Telegraph" and reproduced in the British press testified to the scale of the Indian casualties:

.... All the city's people found within the walls of the city of Delhi when our troops entered were bayoneted on the spot, and the number was considerable, as you may suppose, when I tell you that in some houses forty and fifty people were hiding. These were not mutineers but residents of the city, who trusted to our well-known mild rule for pardon. I am glad to say they were disappointed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857

...in total, you're talking somewhere from 100,000 up to 500,000 dead as "reprisals". Once you realise the basic inherent criminality of Empire, the perversity of its celebration becomes very apparent.

You have a point? And please quote sources, not wiki tyvm

Icaras

Judgement Day wrote: »

Why?

Because in my head its a memorial for people who died opressing another country and having it for the day that the country generally regards it as the day (or at least start of) of their independence.
I suppose I just consider it to be bad taste.

MadsL

Icaras wrote: »

Because in my head its a memorial for people who died opressing another country and having it for the day that the country generally regards it as the day (or at least start of) of their independence.
I suppose I just consider it to be bad taste.

Which war was in good taste?

Allyall

MadsL wrote: »

Which war was in good taste?

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-ukrainian-chocolate-ban/25060451.html

Nodin

Howard Juneau wrote: »

You have a point?

....that monuments to those killed in 1916 are not strange when you consider the way those involved in far worse acts of mass butchery are often honoured there.

Howard Juneau wrote: »

And please quote sources, not wiki tyvm

It gives sources in the footnotes. Are you saying there weren't reprisal massacres?

Howard Juneau

Nodin wrote: »

....that monuments to those killed in 1916 are not strange when you consider the way those involved in far worse acts of mass butchery are often honoured there.




It gives sources in the footnotes. Are you saying there weren't reprisal massacres?

Quoting wiki is an automatic fail, would have thought you knew that, and you're off topic, so I shan't engage you in your meanderings.

Icaras

MadsL wrote: »

Which war was in good taste?

The memorial to be in bad taste.

Any war we're involved in would be very far away from good taste - mismatching uniforms, dirty tactics, tea being drank out of mugs instead of fine china, Cork people thinking their in charge... oh the shame!

Nodin

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Quoting wiki is an automatic fail, would have thought you knew that, and you're off topic, so I shan't engage you in your meanderings.

"shan't" you? It must be poison the well sunday.

enniscorthy

oh wonderful just what need hehe see u all there anyway have the date in my diary already will be there with laptop in hand broadcasting the whole thing live on cam4 if any of u cant make it regards brian