Protestors disrupting World War 1 commemoration at Glasnevin

Jesus.

Cruais, can you help me out with my query?

An Claidheamh

tomwaterford wrote: »

loyalists were more or less an arm of british intelligence and were used to commit killings that would have been politically impossible for the british army to get away with....innocent family members/friends of republicans
(see murder triangle,collusion)
...this was a total shameful act carried out by britin in Ireland....so far removed from what people arelead to believe it being an upstanding army...it got bogged down in an unwinnable war and resorted to despicable tactics that will never be 100% admitted to
that being said they should be left to remember there wardead in Dublin etc...just ignore them and let them at it...like I wouldn't attend/have anything to do with it

the same people who are so desperate for them war dead to be remembered are regulary around here at easter time to openly sneer at republicans for remembering there dead in the cause of irish freedom

I agree with all your saying tomwaterford, only that the huge numbers in the Irish division of WW1 do not belong to Britain.

They're our war dead. Conned by lies IMO.

If however, there were those who joined the British army following the State, well then the British can feel free to have them among their associations or whatever.

Re: Irish freedom dead. Unfortunately I think you're right!

An Claidheamh

LordSutch wrote: »

AVIVA STADIUM, Dublin = Maximum capacity 50.000
http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/02/26/f9/cb/filename-110820-avivastadium.jpg

That's how many Irish soldiers lost their lives in the Great War 1914-1918, and that's what Glasnevin was about.

A sombre and sobering event. Long overdue.

You mean since last year?

Does a "Duke" have to be at these things to get some people to notice? Doesn't say much about them.

cruais

Jesus. wrote: »

Cruais, can you help me out with my query?

As far as I know it was both a mixture from the irish and british army band.

Fratton Fred

An Claidheamh wrote: »

You mean since last year?

Does a "Duke" have to be at these things to get some people to notice? Doesn't say much about them.

The Duke is head of the commonwealth war graves commission, the organisation that is responsible for looking after those graves in Glasnevin.

Jesus.

cruais wrote: »

As far as I know it was both a mixture from the irish and british army band.

What, the pipe band was mixed between IDF and RIR? I'd be very surprised by that considering they were all wearing the same uniform!

Are you takin' the Mick?

An Claidheamh

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Duke is head of the commonwealth war graves commission, the organisation that is responsible for looking after those graves in Glasnevin.

I know FrattonFred, but there are commemorations every year. Shown on tv and newspapers.

Many people, (usually those who don't seem to know much about that conflict), keep saying they've never happened before ...I was thinking they just must have never noticed them before.

Fratton Fred

An Claidheamh wrote: »

I know FrattonFred, but there are commemorations every year. Shown on tv and newspapers.

Many people, (usually those who don't seem to know much about that conflict), keep saying they've never happened before ...I was thinking they just must have never noticed them before.

Maybe it's got something to do with Monday being the 100th anniversary of Britain entering wwi?

Just guessing.

An Claidheamh

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe it's got something to do with Monday being the 100th anniversary of Britain entering wwi?

Just guessing.

Well then you guessed wrong :rolleyes:, because I've read here and elsewhere that many "experts" genuinely think there has never been commemorations in Ireland.

Fratton Fred

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Well then you guessed wrong :rolleyes:, because I've read here and elsewhere that many "experts" genuinely think there has never been commemorations in Ireland.

I'll confess, I wasn't guessing. Monday actually is the 100th anniversary of Britain entering the war.

An Claidheamh

Happyman42 wrote: »

:D Oh please! Don't you remember the howls of protest and derision in Britain when Cameron said he wanted to 'celebrate' WW1 similar to the Queens Jubilee?
How he wrote the following
and blithely ignored The Spanish Civil War, WW2 and the Holocaust, Northern Ireland, the countless wars across the globe many of which Britain waded into, riding shotgun for her ally America, and how he himself weas stopped from bombing Syria by his own parliament? The world has been perpetually at war in the 100 years since.
The British engage in the 'glory' of combat to keep their armed forces numbers up, because they have to.



Foolishly misguided and sadly, pointless cannon fodder. It was a monumental waste of life and I am only half way through the histories I want to read.

Oh I'm sure, the British public are clued into the facts of World War One, really we're the uneducated Fenian fools -Oh Wait ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-one/10929137/One-in-five-Britons-thinks-the-country-fought-Hitler-in-World-War-I.html

One in five Britons thinks the country fought Hitler in World War I ...

:cool:

Happyman42

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Oh I'm sure, the British public are clued into the facts of World War One, really we're the uneducated Fenian fools -Oh Wait ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-one/10929137/One-in-five-Britons-thinks-the-country-fought-Hitler-in-World-War-I.html

One in five Britons thinks the country fought Hitler in World War I ...

:cool:

There is a very fuzzy line that is maintained by the British by glorifying the sarcrifice of WW1 and the British public seem to be mute in the face of it. Because to criticise a soldier is to demean that massive sacrifice of men and women and a generation.
The solemn parade through Wooton Basset of dead, young men is an example of this. It is very much informed by a WW1 guilt, nobody ever seems to get angry with the government in an electoral sense. Every campign by the British army is inexorably for the 'greater good' and most of those who vote in Britain buy into that.
We should very clearly say in our commemorations that we respect the dead but their sarcrifices where not for the 'greater good'. Just as current British activity isn't.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

There is a very fuzzy line that is maintained by the British by glorifying the sarcrifice of WW1 and the British public seem to be mute in the face of it. Because to criticise a soldier is to demean that massive sacrifice of men and women and a generation.
The solemn parade through Wooton Basset of dead, young men is an example of this. It is very much informed by a WW1 guilt, nobody ever seems to get angry with the government in an electoral sense. Every campign by the British army is inexorably for the 'greater good' and most of those who vote in Britain buy into that.
We should very clearly say in our commemorations that we respect the dead but their sarcrifices where not for the 'greater good'. Just as current British activity isn't.

Do you know of any country that behaves any differently ?

Mosby61

FTA69 wrote: »

Omagh wasn't the Provos.

Enniskillen was. Carried out by Republican lunatics living in some fantasy world who think bombing innocent people would create a United Ireland.

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

Do you know of any country that behaves any differently ?

Did I say they didn't?
We 'officially' behave cowardly, we never tell Britain..'You are wrong, and you where wrong' and 'officially' we apologise for Irish men and women who stood up and did something about the wrongs Britain did here. We separate in death those who died for us from those who died for Britain. 'Officially' there is still a division.
What we should be commemorating are those who died to free all people from imperialist, royalist shackles. The British myth that WW1 was about a 'greater good' is just that...a myth.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

Did I say they didn't?
We 'officially' behave cowardly, we never tell Britain..'You are wrong, and you where wrong' and 'officially' we apologise for Irish men and women who stood up and did something about the wrongs Britain did here. We separate in death those who died for us from those who died for Britain. 'Officially' there is still a division.
What we should be commemorating are those who died to free all people from imperialist, royalist shackles. The British myth that WW1 was about a 'greater good' is just that...a myth.

It is implied in the gist of your posts , maybe not intentionally, but it is there.

And who is this 'we' you speak of and what qualifies you to speak for them more than say the elected President of Ireland ?

Strazdas

Jesus. wrote: »

What, the pipe band was mixed between IDF and RIR? I'd be very surprised by that considering they were all wearing the same uniform!

Are you takin' the Mick?

I think the band and pipers were from the Irish Army, but some of the flag bearers were from the British Army.

You're right, that was a beautiful tune they played (didn't recognise it).

Correction : that was the No.1 Army Band and the Band of the Corps of Royal Engineers (so the OP was correct in fact)

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

It is implied in the gist of your posts , maybe not intentionally, but it is there.

There are a few other countries where the phenomena exists, America being one. The 'soldier' is never criticised. although Vietnam is the exception because the public came to see how wrong their leaders where...BECAUSE OF PROTEST!. So it can happen
Something made men queue up to go to WW1, 'something' that I believe no longer exists. Do you think 'conscription' would work in modern Britain?

And who is this 'we' you speak of and what qualifies you to speak for them more than say the elected President of Ireland ?

I speak for more than I, of that I have no doubt.

Michael D (somebody I respect as a man) speaks for the government at occasions like this, a career move I would advised him against. But, sure who am I?

feargale

Soldiers on all sides are kindred spirits, and soldiers have a code which requires that they show a degree of respect to enemy soldiers. However, don't expect that to be understood by those who are affiliated to organisations that are little more than a cover for the lowest forms of crime, from drug dealing to organising protection money etc. in the guise of pursuing " national objectives." Parity of esteem indeed!
In the past they have been fond of quoting the 1918 national mandate, but are strangely silent on the 1996 mandate, one endorsed by every significant community in Ireland.

Karl Stein

Mosby61 wrote: »

Enniskillen

The PIRA lost a lot of support in the wake of that atrocity and rightly so.

Loyalists murderers, on the other hand, are celebrated for their massacres of innocent people - 'here lies a soldier' is written on the UVF headstone of a Shankill Butcher.

Happyman42

feargale wrote: »

Soldiers on all sides are kindred spirits, and soldiers have a code which requires that they show a degree of respect to enemy soldiers.

Oh please! Hollywood is that way >>>>>>>>

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

There are a few other countries where the phenomena exists, America being one. The 'soldier' is never criticised. although Vietnam is the exception because the public came to see how wrong their leaders where...BECAUSE OF PROTEST!. So it can happen
Something made men queue up to go to WW1, 'something' that I believe no longer exists. Do you think 'conscription' would work in modern Britain?

I speak for more than I, of that I have no doubt.

Michael D (somebody I respect as a man) speaks for the government at occasions like this, a career move I would advised him against. But, sure who am I?

Celebrating past military glory exists in 99% of countries , Britain is the rule and not the exception .

Up until a few years ago we were the exception and free of all that cant until the bould Bertie introduced it , more's the pity.

Yes , that is what I am asking , who are you ? Michael D and the government were elected .

feargale

Happyman42 wrote: »

Oh please! Hollywood is that way >>>>>>>>

Hollywood my arse! If that's the best you can do to counter the post it's pathetic. Nobody has to say that the cause they fought for is just. But a bit of basic decency wouldn't go astray, a recognition that each of them was some Irish mother's son and that what most of them endured was horrific.
The right to protest peacefully does not give a right to try to disrupt a ceremony in the usual bullyboy fashion.
Those disrupting yobs are pseudo-republicans, in that they show utter contempt for the people and for actions and gestures made by the representatives of the people. And it would be interesting to know how many of them had an ancestor who took the King's shilling.
Good night.

Strazdas

Happyman42 wrote: »

There is a very fuzzy line that is maintained by the British by glorifying the sarcrifice of WW1 and the British public seem to be mute in the face of it. Because to criticise a soldier is to demean that massive sacrifice of men and women and a generation.
The solemn parade through Wooton Basset of dead, young men is an example of this. It is very much informed by a WW1 guilt, nobody ever seems to get angry with the government in an electoral sense. Every campign by the British army is inexorably for the 'greater good' and most of those who vote in Britain buy into that.
We should very clearly say in our commemorations that we respect the dead but their sarcrifices where not for the 'greater good'. Just as current British activity isn't.

President Higgins said in his (excellent) speech yesterday that WW1 was a catastrophe for Europe, was futile and a needless loss of life.

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

Celebrating past military glory exists in 99% of countries , Britain is the rule and not the exception .

There is a uniqueness about colonists and expansionists and those who see themselves as the world's policemen though.

Up until a few years ago we were the exception and free of all that cant until the bould Bertie introduced it , more's the pity.

Yes , that is what I am asking , who are you ? Michael D and the government were elected .

I am pretty sure the last time I looked that this is a democracy, I don't have to agree with what my government does. Shame the majority in Britain don't realise that, the world would be a much better place if they did have the power to change. But they seem to never be able to break the stranglehold of the establishment because of their electoral system...wonder why that is?

Happyman42

feargale wrote: »

Hollywood my arse! If that's the best you can do to counter the post it's pathetic. Nobody has to say that the cause they fought for is just. But a bit of basic decency wouldn't go astray, a recognition that each of them was some Irish mother's son and that what most of them endured was horrific.
The right to protest peacefully does not give a right to try to disrupt a ceremony in the usual bullyboy fashion.
Those disrupting yobs are pseudo-republicans, in that they show utter contempt for the people and for actions and gestures made by the representatives of the people. And it would be interesting to know how many of them had an ancestor who took the King's shilling.
Good night.

I think you'll find that the British generals who sent millions to a needless and pointless death was more 'contemptible' of the people than a few guys shouting and roaring at a PR excercise.

Crooked Jack

fleet_admiral wrote: »

I tolerated the shinners before today, now I absolutely hate them

Why? It had nothing to do with Sinn Fein. Perhaps you should look at more than just the headline of a story before getting all indignant and pointing fingers.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

There is a uniqueness about colonists and expansionists and those who see themselves as the world's policemen though.



I am pretty sure the last time I looked that this is a democracy, I don't have to agree with what my government does. Shame the majority in Britain don't realise that, the world would be a much better place if they did have the power to change. But they seem to never be able to break the stranglehold of the establishment because of their electoral system...wonder why that is?

I have no idea what the relevance of any of the above has to anything I said .

Happyman42

Strazdas wrote: »

President Higgins said in his (excellent) speech yesterday that WW1 was a catastrophe for Europe, was futile and a needless loss of life.

Did he say part of the blame lies at Britain's door and that they are still engaged in sending youth to futile deaths?

Davarus Walrus

Celebrating the blood sacrifice of young men is only an issue it seems if they died while fighting under an imperialist flag. Even SF are dispensing with the maudlin revisionist perspective on the 'volunteers'. Not good for Mary and Pearse and the Young Turks. Down to the online and barstool warriors to keep that sh1te up.