Sean Russell statue

magpie

They want to replace the existing, vandalised, statue with a bust inside a bulletproof box. Oh, the irony.

DUBLIN Corporation is facing international pressure not to grant permission for the replacement of the statue in Fairview Park, Dublin, of IRA leader and Nazi collaborator Sean Russell.

The head and right hand of the statue was stolen over Christmas by a group which called Russell a fascist stooge.

Now the National Graves Association, which cares for IRA graves and memorials, wants to replace the statue with a bronze bust inside a bullet-proof glass box. An Irish flag was draped over the statue yesterday.

However, it will have to convince Dublin City Council of the worth of rebuilding a memorial to a man who died on board a German U-boat after plotting the invasion of Ireland by the Nazis.

Labour Councillor Mary Freehill, who chairs Dublin City Council's public arts committee, said the issue of the Russell statue had not been discussed to date but that, as a general rule, the Council was against the erection of commemorative statues and favoured works of art.

She said people seeking to commemorate a historical figure would do better to set up a charitable bursary.

Speaking to the Times of London last week, Dr Shimon Samuels of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Paris said the statue should be left unrestored as an enduring symbol of Ireland's "shame" at the IRA's wartime collaboration with the Nazis.

Mr Samuels said: "It's a blot on the history of Ireland - but blots have to see the public light. We're not iconoclasts, but I think the destruction of something like this has a meaning, and we would ask for it to be left there as a lesson of what Irish neutrality was all about."

Mr Samuels did not refer to the fact that Sinn Fein has been holding a commemorative ceremony at the statue for years and in October 2003 Sinn Fein MEP Mary Lou McDonald, alongside convicted IRA bomber Brian Keenan, addressed a meeting in front of the statue.

Sean Russell conspired with the Nazis to invade Ireland during the Second World War, but died from a perforated ulcer while he was being returned to Ireland on board a U-boat somewhere off the west coast of Ireland in August 1941.

from unison.ie

Sleepy

If the government spend my money on that ****ing thing, I'll find a way of getting through bulletproof glass.

A Dub in Glasgo

The National Graves Association are looking for public donations to repair the statue.

The Association is not in receipt of, nor have they ever applied for, state funding of any kind. They depend entirely on voluntary donations from nationally minded people, at home and abroad, and on annual subscriptions from Associate members.

You can sleep easy now sleepy

I have just donated some money to fund a repair

Sleepy

Where do I donate to have it removed?

And surely the council can deny the right to have the statue repaired.

magpie

I love any 'history' site that makes reference to the 'Tan War'. :rolleyes:

Sleepy: funny how the same people with a history of blowing up memorials (Nelson anyone?) are so keen to preserve other ones.

I think they should replace it with a statue of a proud 'freedom fighter' in balaclava making the nazi salute on a background of a swastika, with crossed u-boats and a mound of dead unter-menschen and 'free-staters'.

A Dub in Glasgo

LOL... have I just clicked the humour forum?

Sleepy

No, you've reached the thread where people realise that the maxim "mine enemy's enemy is my friend" is complete horse-sh:t if your enemy's enemy has commited worse crimes than the crimes you feel your enemy has commited.

Any involvement with Nazi Germany (other than fighting it) was a shameful thing. I'm ashamed that the statue was placed in that park in the first place. I'm proud of whoever defaced it and I'll be damned if you blindly nationalistic lunatics are allowed erect another statue to someone who consorted with one of the vilest cancers in human history.

A Dub in Glasgo

Sleepy wrote:

No, you've reached the thread where people realise that the maxim "mine enemy's enemy is my friend" is complete horse-sh:t if your enemy's enemy has commited worse crimes than the crimes you feel your enemy has commited.

Any involvement with Nazi Germany (other than fighting it) was a shameful thing. I'm ashamed that the statue was placed in that park in the first place. I'm proud of whoever defaced it and I'll be damned if you blindly nationalistic lunatics are allowed erect another statue to someone who consorted with one of the vilest cancers in human history.

You can feel shame all you want. I am not ashamed of it. Russell was not a Nazi or a fascist. This feels like deja vu as we went through all this stuff last week in the other thread!

What is your view of the President of Ireland who signed a book of condolence to one of the vilest cancers in human history?

Good to see your view firmly nailed to the mast with your endorsement and delight in vandalism :rolleyes:

Sleepy

Good to see your view firmly nailed to the mast with your endorsement and delight in faschism and ignorance. :rolleyes:

A Dub in Glasgo

I am not a fascist or ignorant... seems like someone just woke you up to Irish History and some of the threads here where this has been discussed since last week.

true

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I am not a fascist or ignorant...

LOL. A provo supporter claims he is not a fascist or ignorant. You seem like a fascist to me, Dub in Glasgow, who thrives on all things republican and anti-British. It is sick you could support a statue put up to such an ally of the Nazis. You insult all of Hitlers victims in Europe.

toiletduck

My enemy's enemy is still my enemy....

A Dub in Glasgo

true wrote:

LOL. A provo supporter claims he is not a fascist or ignorant. You seem like a fascist to me, Dub in Glasgow, who thrives on all things republican and anti-British. It is sick you could support a statue put up to such an ally of the Nazis. You insult all of Hitlers victims in Europe.

First up true, I would be grateful if you could link to some of my postings which show I am a Fascist. I have republican leanings. I am not anti-British people. Please show my ignorance of things while your at it

Sick to want a statue that was vandalised repaired? If you think that, you are in for a rude awakening in the real world.

I insult none of the victims of Hitler and your last statement is quite a naive and immature one.

sceptre

All of you: stop acting like children.

Pesky kids, grow up. Or at least pretend while you're still here. You may not be here tomorrow.

FTA69

Sleepy wrote:

I'll be damned if you blindly nationalistic lunatics are allowed erect another statue to someone who consorted with one of the vilest cancers in human history.

Calm down a bit before you strap on the semtex and kamikaze headband Sleepy. The memorial was erected in memory of IRA Volunteers in general, including those executed by the Free State government and those who died on hunger-strike, it was not solely to do with Russell.

Perhaps you might want to review the following quote from Russell himself; "I am not a Nazi. I am not even pro-German. I am an Irishman fighting for the independence of Ireland" - Sean Russell

Hardly the talk of a "facist" is it? Russell's only motive was the rearming of Óglaigh na hÉireann, in my opinion it was short-sighted and naieve but it most definitely was not the evil incarnate as some people here would portray it.

The IRA always sought external aid, Pa Murphy of the IRA sought aid and arms from Stalin in 1927, was he a Stalinist? Roger Casement imported arms from Germany in 1916, was he a monarchist?

Sometimes "the enemy of my enemy..." tactic is successful, other times it is not. Russell's actions were a classic example of it being unsuccessful, the man was neither a facist or a Nazi sympathiser.

jbkenn

FTA69 wrote:

Calm down a bit before you strap on the semtex and kamikaze headband Sleepy.

Cant see him laying his hands on that too easily, unless your mates can help him

The memorial was erected in memory of IRA Volunteers in general, including those executed by the Free State government and those who died on hunger-strike, it was not solely to do with Russell.

There's that "Free State" $hit again

Perhaps you might want to review the following quote from Russell himself; "I am not a Nazi. I am not even pro-German. I am an Irishman fighting for the independence of Ireland" - Sean Russell

Whatever

Hardly the talk of a "facist" is it? Russell's only motive was the rearming of Óglaigh na hÉireann,

The Minister and Department of Defence were working on that, and I cant find any reference to them requesting his assistance in this matter.

Sometimes "the enemy of my enemy..." tactic is successful, other times it is not. Russell's actions were a classic example of it being unsuccessful, the man was neither a facist or a Nazi sympathiser.

Just another IRA gob$hite, who of course, knew better than anyone else what this country needed, in those dark and dangerous times

jbkenn

AmenToThat

Looking forward to making a donation to commemorate and Irish patriot but I dont think it will be an issue.
20mil+ in sterling just laying there so I reckon a bigger statue is in order.

true

Yeah, its not as if they would want to give the stolen 20 million to their victims , to the widows and children, to the people with legs blown off, to those whose lives they destroyed. Oh no, to add insult to injury, a bigger statue is in order. Maybe they could make it by buying all the old spectacle frames from Auchwitz and melting them down?

AmenToThat

true wrote:

Maybe they could make it by buying all the old spectacle frames from Auchwitz and melting them down?

No need as theres plenty of money in the coffers but thanks for the suggestion.

elivsvonchiaing

Speaking to the Times of London last week, Dr Shimon Samuels of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Paris said the statue should be left unrestored as an enduring symbol of Ireland's "shame" at the IRA's wartime collaboration with the Nazis.

The Jews are not a race but a religious/cultural collective - can't say nation - 4 party coalition in the knesset - sorry. On this basis the French a$$hole should have studied French history first, then Jewish history in France, then Irish history.

This has all the arrogance and self-righteous bigotry of the Dreyfus affair imho!

true

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

The Jews are not a race but a religious/cultural collective - can't say nation - 4 party coalition in the knesset - sorry. On this basis the French a$$hole should have studied French history first, then Jewish history in France, then Irish history.

This has all the arrogance and self-righteous bigotry of the Dreyfus affair imho!

Ok , so the Jews are not a race, sez you. Did he say the Jews were a race ? What difference does it make to the topic - the Russell statue ? Anyway, what race / country is a race? The melting pot is getting well mixed up over the centuries now.

And talking about arrogance and bigotry, I think the victims of the IRA and the Nazis would have more to say about that than you.

sceptre

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

The Jews are not a race but a religious/cultural collective - can't say nation - 4 party coalition in the knesset - sorry. On this basis the French a$$hole should have studied French history first, then Jewish history in France, then Irish history.

I'm missing your point and its relevance. I've a feeling when you explain "not a race but a religious/cultural collective" and explain why this is relevant I'll disagree with you anyway, you come across as smarter than the average bear so I rather hope it's more whan "why the jews aren't worth it". So, er, what you talking about Willis?

This has all the arrogance and self-righteous bigotry of the Dreyfus affair imho!

With my comment above in mind, don't make me say J'accuse as I'm no Zola and neither are you.

(I may be misreading your post but I try to do the reasonable man thing when readnig them, particularly as on again off again moderator and a reasonable man might well wonder WTF, that guy's angry about something, who knows what it is but it doesn't sound all that unagendaic)

elivsvonchiaing

sceptre wrote:

I'm missing your point and its relevance. I've a feeling when you explain "not a race but a religious/cultural collective" and explain why this is relevant I'll disagree with you anyway, you come across as smarter than the average bear so I rather hope it's more whan "why the jews aren't worth it". So, er, what you talking about Willis?


With my comment above in mind, don't make me say J'accuse as I'm no Zola and neither are you.

Think Adolf Hitler's premise was the Jews were a race - they are not. Early 20th century (late 19th ???) Jewish thinking divided them into 3 classifications - still many races - Sephardic (Iberian) - Ashkenazic (Germany + eastwards)- Edot Ha'Misrach (Eastern Jews - Ethiopia, Silk road Jews etc).

The point being I see the "accuser" of belonging to a "fictional" race and ignoring the fact that he is in fact French, could be Israeli dunno - it's just where this came from - and I think this should have been thought through before such comments were made - I would not have objected so strongly to this coming from Israel tbh!

This post was semi-cerebral and no other part of me had anything to do with it - please don't address my private part in future! Only g/f s get to call him Willis ffs! :rolleyes:

elivsvonchiaing

true wrote:

Ok , so the Jews are not a race, sez you.
See previous post.

true wrote:

And talking about arrogance and bigotry, I think the victims of the IRA and the Nazis would have more to say about that than you.

Would totally agree - but wtf has that to do with this post

sceptre

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

Think Adolf Hitler's premise was the Jews were a race - they are not. Early 20th century (late 19th ???) Jewish thinking divided them into 3 classifications - still many races - Sephardic (Iberian) - Ashkenazic (Germany + eastwards)- Edot Ha'Misrach (Eastern Jews - Ethiopia, Silk road Jews etc).

The point being I see the "accuser" of belonging to a "fictional" race and ignoring the fact that he is in fact French, could be Israeli dunno - it's just where this came from - and I think this should have been thought through before such comments were made - I would not have objected so strongly to this coming from Israel tbh!

So apart from your estimation that he has no (or may not have) locus standi to be making such remarks, presumably as you estimate that the organisation he represents has no locus standi to have a position on the issue (given that he's representing them rather than speaking on his own behalf as a French or Israeli or anywhere else jewish person/member of a tripartite whatever to judge from the article) and regardless of what colour his pinkies are (in other words, discussing the actual existence of his locus standi elsewhere and leaving the horse outside the tent), got any views on his views about Russell being having an involvement with a group of people who killed people systematically and repeatedly for whatever reason (the Nazis in this case but you can talk about the IRA if you feel the need) and on what state his statue should be left in?

In other words, obviously the guy belongs to a race and regardless of which one it might be (because it's not necessarily all that relevant), what did you think of what he had to say?

AmenToThat

sceptre wrote:

got any views on his views about Russell being having an involvement with a group of people who killed people systematically and repeatedly for whatever reason (the Nazis in this case but you can talk about the IRA if you feel the need)

Or the British or the Americans.................the list goes on and on.

sceptre

AmenToThat wrote:

Or the British or the Americans.................the list goes on and on.

Yeah, Russell's involvement with the Americans and British is well documented. Deal with the subject at hand (I'm not pushed about which side of the fence you place yourself on as long as it's coherent) or bugger off.

elivsvonchiaing

sceptre wrote:

So apart from your estimation that he has no (or may not have) locus standi to be making such remarks, presumably as you estimate that the organisation he represents has no locus standi to have a position on the issue (given that he's representing them rather than speaking on his own behalf as a French or Israeli or anywhere else jewish person/member of a tripartite whatever to judge from the article) and regardless of what colour his pinkies are (in other words, discussing the actual existence of his locus standi elsewhere and leaving the horse outside the tent), got any views on his views about Russell being having an involvement with a group of people who killed people systematically and repeatedly for whatever reason (the Nazis in this case but you can talk about the IRA if you feel the need) and on what state his statue should be left in?

In other words, obviously the guy belongs to a race and regardless of which one it might be (because it's not necessarily all that relevant), what did you think of what he had to say?

There is always an edge to where something comes from - I'm not denying his locus standiHowever, I believe it would leave a better taste in the mouth if the origin was Berlin, recently emigrated from Israel, and their name was Herzog (we could pretend - Jaysus must be a relation - of course we woulnd't even be bothered to google (to see if was a relation)- and then again our backs wouldn't be up over this (well mine anyhow) - hiss!)

Sleepy

FTA69 wrote:

Calm down a bit before you strap on the semtex and kamikaze headband Sleepy. The memorial was erected in memory of IRA Volunteers in general, including those executed by the Free State government and those who died on hunger-strike, it was not solely to do with Russell.

If you must celebrate republicanism and IRA Volunteers surely a better person can be chosen to represent your cause than one who collaborated with such an evil regime?

Perhaps you might want to review the following quote from Russell himself; "I am not a Nazi. I am not even pro-German. I am an Irishman fighting for the independence of Ireland" - Sean Russell

Hardly the talk of a "facist" is it? Russell's only motive was the rearming of Óglaigh na hÉireann, in my opinion it was short-sighted and naieve but it most definitely was not the evil incarnate as some people here would portray it.

The man was a opportunist that couldn't see past the fact that in defending themselves Britain were also protecting us from invasion (because we surely would have been next had Operation Sealion been successful). As I keep stating, when the crimes of your enemy's enemy are worse than the crimes your enemy has committed the maxim of "mine enemy's enemy..." has no validity.

The IRA always sought external aid, Pa Murphy of the IRA sought aid and arms from Stalin in 1927, was he a Stalinist? Roger Casement imported arms from Germany in 1916, was he a monarchist?

Sometimes "the enemy of my enemy..." tactic is successful, other times it is not. Russell's actions were a classic example of it being unsuccessful, the man was neither a facist or a Nazi sympathiser.

I think the word you should choose there is "legitimate" instead of successful.

At the time of Russell's involvement with the Germans, they had already annexed or invaded Belgium, Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Norway. Even a small child would be able to see that it was only a matter of time before they had invaded us unless Britain, France and their allies at the time could stop them.

So, let me clarify your position on this. You think the man was short-sighted and naieve yet still worthy of celebration? Should we take this to mean that short-sightedness and naieveté are worthy of celebration in Republican circles? If so, it would certainly explain your deification of Bobby Sands, who whilst I would consider him to have been incredibly naieve and quite stupid, even I would deem him to be more worthy a subject of a commemorative statue than someone who essentially betrayed his country to another purely to annoy the English.

Sleepy

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Good to see your view firmly nailed to the mast with your endorsement and delight in vandalism :rolleyes:

Just to bring this up again. Are you telling me that you considered the IRA bombing of Nelson's Column vandalism?

ionapaul

true wrote:

You seem like a fascist to me, Dub in Glasgow, who thrives on all things republican and anti-British.

Let's not go overboard here. Dub in Glasgow (I imagine) lives in Britain and pays his taxes to Her Majesty's Government. Or draws the dole so generously provided by the taxes of British citizens. He might even be a British citizen, ffs!

I doubt he is running around draped in a tricolour and cursing 'those murderous Brits!' and 'the treasonous Free-staters' for driving him from his native soil. Being anti-British while living in Britain would be fairly idiotic...though that one-handed terrorist supporter in London got away with it for years.

true

Actually, Dub in Glasgow actually wrote once that he is indeed from Dublin, and he intends to return here after some time in Glasgow. I made the comment above given his pro-IRA statements in the past , among other things. All of which does not change hiis stance or my stance on the Russell statue.
I still think the Russell statue is offensive to the vast majority of Irish, British and European people.

FTA69

jbkenn wrote:

There's that "Free State" $hit again

The 26 County state did not declares itself a Republic until 1949, the Volunteers in question were executed prior to this so even by your own logic my terminology is correct.

The Minister and Department of Defence were working on that, and I cant find any reference to them requesting his assistance in this matter.

Óglaigh na hÉireann does not come under the remit of that government by any stretch of the imagination.

jank

Well IBM made money from the Nazis and the holocoaust itself, but i dont see one word of anger expressed against them.

In other words this thread is just another excuse to bash Sinn Fein. People are entitled to what they believe in but some are just fooling themsleves if they think the world is that black and white

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/jun2001/ibm-j27.shtml

http://news.com.com/2009-1082-269157.html

http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

Another example of the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" can be seen in WW2 itself.. well why was stalin on the side of the allies and even Churchill(sp?) said himself that Stalin was no better than Hitler. And USA siding with a communist socialist dictator :eek:

They all recognised that Hitler was the main danger to peace in europe so they banded togethor to fight it out another day. It was called the cold war

Which leads to another use of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" eh Iraq vs Iran...we all know about that so lets not go into it.

Or even USA supplying Osama Bin Laden with 2 billion dollors of CIA aid to fight the Russians in afghanistan. And i do believe the late Ronald Reagan used the very same words "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

So history has a tend for factions to use each other for there own gain even though they might hate each other.

IRA = Nazi's ..No

IRA = Opportunits alas yes.

sceptre

FTA69 wrote:

The 26 County state did not declares itself a Republic until 1949, the Volunteers in question were executed prior to this so even by your own logic my terminology is correct.

Er, no. We changed the name of the country in 1937 (it made all the newspapers and everything) so you're only correct with regard to people shot before then.

jbkenn

FTA69 wrote:

The 26 County state did not declares itself a Republic until 1949, the Volunteers in question were executed prior to this so even by your own logic my terminology is correct.

Grand, at least you accept it is a Republic.

Óglaigh na hÉireann does not come under the remit of that government by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh yes it does see here Óglaigh na hÉireann
Reality check, the problem is your imigination and that of your fellow travellers

jbkenn

FTA69

Many IRA Volunteers were executed prior to that period as well, 77 in the years 1922-23 in fact.

sceptre

FTA69 wrote:

Many IRA Volunteers were executed prior to that period as well, 77 in the years 1922-23 in fact.

Aye, I think many of us have a vague notion of the history of our own country but it'd be nice if you straightened up your dates as it just makes it look like you don't.

FTA69

Sleepy wrote:

If you must celebrate republicanism and IRA Volunteers surely a better person can be chosen to represent your cause than one who collaborated with such an evil regime?

All IRA Volunteers are equal within the Army regardless of their seniority. That statue was to commemorate fallen Volunteers in general and that was embodied by the Army's recently deceased Chief of Staff, Seán Russell.

The man was a opportunist

Correct, but so was Roger Casement and the men of 1916 who tried to import German arms while England was at war, so were the United Irishmen who exploited French ambition for a strategic base so as to encourage an invation. Irish Republicanism, owing to its weak military position, was never afraid to exploit precarious situations.

As I keep stating, when the crimes of your enemy's enemy are worse than the crimes your enemy has committed the maxim of "mine enemy's enemy..." has no validity.

True enough, and that is why I think Russell's policy was wrong.

So, let me clarify your position on this. You think the man was short-sighted and naieve yet still worthy of celebration?

As I said, the monument is a memorial to all IRA Volunteers who were killed. The IRA Border Campaign during the 50s was short sighted and unsuccesful too, but the Volunteers who died during it are commemorated all the same. Why? Because they died in the pursuit of breaking parition.

Should we take this to mean that short-sightedness and naieveté are worthy of celebration in Republican circles? If so, it would certainly explain your deification of Bobby Sands, who whilst I would consider him to have been incredibly naieve and quite stupid

You have demonstrated before your lack of understanding regarding the Hunger Strike of 1981 so I haven't become offended by that statement at all. You should also take note that the majority of people disagree with your assertion though.

even I would deem him to be more worthy a subject of a commemorative statue than someone who essentially betrayed his country to another purely to annoy the English.

Republicans don;t seek to annoy England, we seek to free Ireland, there's a difference. He also did not "betray the country" by seeking foriegn aid, to continue that logic would make the men of 1916 traitors.

true

Quote FTA69 : "All IRA Volunteers are equal within the Army regardless of their seniority. That statue was to commemorate fallen Volunteers in general ".

Ah, but as in the old Soviet Union are some not more equal than others? Have some not had lavish lifestyles and holiday homes , considering their legitimate income?

If you want to commemorate fallen volunteers in general, are there not other monuments, like at Milltown cemmetry in Belfast ? Why have a monument to terrorism , a monument to an ally of Nazism ( he described himself as a soldier, and he died on a german u-boat did he not ) in a Dublin residental suburb ? Would you like a monument to a UVF terrorist who sided with Nazism ? I would not either.

If the IRA was serious about peace, it would have thought this one through more.

Sleepy

FTA69 wrote:

All IRA Volunteers are equal within the Army regardless of their seniority. That statue was to commemorate fallen Volunteers in general and that was embodied by the Army's recently deceased Chief of Staff, Seán Russell.

So, essentially you agree that you're celebrating short sightedness and, frankly, stupidity.

Correct, but so was Roger Casement and the men of 1916 who tried to import German arms while England was at war, so were the United Irishmen who exploited French ambition for a strategic base so as to encourage an invation. Irish Republicanism, owing to its weak military position, was never afraid to exploit precarious situations.

Yet for some reason, Republicans have never been able to see that "weak military position" as a lack of a genuine mandate to carry out their terrorism. Surely if the majority of the country backed the IRA, their military position would be far from weak? But that's another thread...

True enough, and that is why I think Russell's policy was wrong.

So, why represent those you regard as 'heroes' with his image?

As I said, the monument is a memorial to all IRA Volunteers who were killed. The IRA Border Campaign during the 50s was short sighted and unsuccesful too, but the Volunteers who died during it are commemorated all the same. Why? Because they died in the pursuit of breaking parition.

You see FTA69, when a group chooses a representative of their organisation to be commemorated in such a fashion, it usually makes sense to choose one that isn't so easily dismissed as a lunatic.

You have demonstrated before your lack of understanding regarding the Hunger Strike of 1981 so I haven't become offended by that statement at all. You should also take note that the majority of people disagree with your assertion though.

I'd be surprised if a majority of people even have an opinion on the hunger strikers to be honest. Sure, I'm in a minority in thinking they were idiots, that doesn't invalidate my position though does it? Or does the fact you're in the minority in supporting terrorists actions in the north invalidate your position? I wouldn't call it a lack of understanding either, I've read a considerable amount of your own party's propoganda on the subject and just have a different opinion of it than you do.

Republicans don;t seek to annoy England, we seek to free Ireland, there's a difference. He also did not "betray the country" by seeking foriegn aid, to continue that logic would make the men of 1916 traitors.

I'm, sorry, I'd call inviting the German army to invade us being a traitor to the country. Maybe your definition of the word is different.

Lemming

Pardon me for asking. but what exactly did Sean Russell do that was so noble as to require a memorial statue of the man? Pearse, Connolly, Collins you can understand statues being erected of. But what did Sean Russell do for this country exactly that marks him out for greatness?

Besides collaborate with what (at the time would have been known) was a racist and aggressively expansionist government?

Sleepy

Lemming, I think it's also fair to say that it was well known that Hitler was also a war-monger...

Lemming

Sleepy wrote:

Lemming, I think it's also fair to say that it was well known that Hitler was also a war-monger...

Allow me to requote what I said Sleepy ....

lemming wrote:

aggressively expansionist government

AmenToThat

Lemming wrote:

Besides collaborate with what (at the time would have been known) was a racist and aggressively expansionist government?

As apposed to his fight against the lovely kindhearted British who never infered in the affairs of peoples or nations around the world.............

AmenToThat

sceptre wrote:

Yeah, Russell's involvement with the Americans and British is well documented. Deal with the subject at hand (I'm not pushed about which side of the fence you place yourself on as long as it's coherent) or bugger off.

You quiet sure about that?
I dont remember anyone else on here being talked to in the same way for going a little of topic....................


For the record I was just pointing out that the Nazi's and the IRA didnt have monopoly on violent or terrorizing tactics when dealing with what they deemed to be enemies, surely relevent to this thread I would have thought?

Lemming

AmenToThat wrote:

As apposed to his fight against the lovely kindhearted British who never infered in the affairs of peoples or nations around the world.............

His "fight" against the British? Exactly *what* did he do is what I'm asking. And so far nobody has been able to give me an answer other than the above espoused typical "management"-style speech.

We had our own governing body and the British had withdrawn their troops from the country previously - so exactly what did Sean Russell do? Come on people - tell me why we have this man's statue today!!!

Allow me to ask the question again, in a more direct manner:

"What the f*ck did Sean Russell do that deserved a statue to sit alongside the likes of Pearse, Parnell, Connelly, etc. What was his contribution exactly? Did he discover a cure for hangovers or something? What did he do?"

FTA69

jbkenn wrote:

Grand, at least you accept it is a Republic.

I never denied it was a republic in its institutions, it isn;t however, the Republic declared in 1916. The Republic to which I as a Republican aspire to.

Oh yes it does see here Óglaigh na hÉireann
Reality check, the problem is your imigination and that of your fellow travellers

Óglaigh na hÉireann ie the IRA never dispanded or re-constituted in any way. By your logic the term "IRA" is also the preserve of the Free State Army.

jbkenn

monument

Correct me if I'm wrong didn’t Russell fight in the Spanish civil war against the Franco's fascist side?... was Franco not allied with the Nazis and Italian fascists? So wasn’t he fighting against fascists, and against a Nazi ally?

The IRA of the day had a little talk with that guy Stalin of the Soviet Union, I think the SU were communist, oh that must mean the republicans are communist as well? Does that not conflict with what you guys are calling them?... Oh, it must not you lot wouldn’t lie or distorted the truth.

The current heightened campaign against SF (whether highly organized, or not) here on boards, in the letters pages of newspapers, and on the air waves started around the time of the last election results, not around the time of any killings or robberies, but at a time where SF were turning more and more to politics, AND doing well at such. The number of lies or distortions have being told in the campaign is questionable, Russell may have used the used the Nazis as a means to the end he wanted (not something I'd agree with), but calling him a fascist or a Nazi is complete rubbish.

The attack on the monument (not me! THE monument) and the aftermath where he becomes labeled as Nazi, rather then somebody who used any means of freeing they country fully (which is wrong), has only made him into a present day martyr and allowed him to be viewed thought rose-tinted windows – and has just like most ranting attacks on SF it’s probably very counter-productive – so please continue.

Redleslie2

monument wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong didn’t Russell fight in the Spanish civil war against the Franco's fascists side... was Franco not allied with the Nazis and Italian fascists? So wasn’t he fighting against fascists, and against a NAZI ally?

No Russell didn't fight in the spanish civil war. Frank Ryan (who was on the same Uboat as Russell) did. Ryan was captured by the fascists and sentenced to death but DeValera got him off and he was whisked off to Germany. The church and Fine Gael founder Eoin O'Duffy supported the fascists in the spanish civil war and urged people to join them (700 did and Ireland is the only country in the world that had more volunteers fighting for the fascists rather than the government). The IRA for the most part supported the government side or were neutral (Tom Barry banned any members from going to fight) So how about smashing up a few churches and Fine Gael offices?

Sand

Theres been an idea circulating, and I find it quite fitting, to replace the ruin of Sean Russells memorial to Nazi collaboration with a statue of Jean McConville, as a memorial to all the innocent victims of the Northern Irish terrorist groups.

Id certainly find it quite agreeable and would contribute happily, but Ive no doubt, given the fear in Ireland to be seen as anything less than blindly pro-republican, Sean Russells statue will be restored so that Ireland can once again be proud of his attempts to assist the lufftwaffe in bombing war time Britain - viewed so favourably by the Nazis that they sent him back using a U-boat which was a signficant show of faith given their cost and degree of usefulness elsewhere - and of his perverted belief that he could cut a deal with one of the most repellant doctrines in history.