nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

RIC and DMP to be commemorated this month

ZuluDawn2020

Apparently a ceremony is going to be held attended by the Minister for Justice and Garda Commissioner to comemorate members of the DMP (Dublin Metropolitan Police) and RIC (Royal Irish Constabulary) killed during the Irish Revolution.

Does anyone else think this is grotesque?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Bishop of hope

extra gravy wrote: »

Loving all the keyboard warriors on here and on social media. My grandad was in the RIC and like most in it he wasn't a murderer or a traitor, he was just a regular guy trying to provide for his family. But of course, he should have taken the moral high ground, quit his job and let them starve. I'd like to see how many parents now would be prepared to put their country before the needs of their children. Not many I'd wager.

There were a great many that didn't let their children starve but didn't join the RIC.
I wonder how many did he starve by being at their evictions or imprisoning their fathers for fcuk all?

FrancieBrady

extra gravy wrote: »

Loving all the keyboard warriors on here and on social media. My grandad was in the RIC and like most in it he wasn't a murderer or a traitor, he was just a regular guy trying to provide for his family. But of course, he should have taken the moral high ground, quit his job and let them starve. I'd like to see how many parents now would be prepared to put their country before the needs of their children. Not many I'd wager.

So are you denying that the RIC stand guilty of multiple atrocities. Who committed these acts if it was the RIC, The DMP and their various connected side shoots of the Aux's and Black and Tans?

I suppose we also have Holocaust deniers so maybe it isn't that big a surprise that their are deniers of parts of our history too.

[Deleted User]

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Have you gone mad or are you just being provocative, the RUC was not a terrorist organisation so why are you saying that?

This thread seems to really just be a vent for anti British sentiment.

Collusion.

There doesn’t have to be any anti British sentiment to point out their ills. They are plentiful and easy to see.

[Deleted User]

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Have you gone mad or are you just being provocative, the RUC was not a terrorist organisation so why are you saying that?

This thread seems to really just be a vent for anti British sentiment.

The is plenty of evidence that the ruc colluded with terrorist organisations in the north.
A lot of members of the ruc were members of terrorist organisations.
This is fact.

extra gravy

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Maybe if he’d just done his job instead of terrorising innocents then. They’re all the one.

How the fück would you know what he did or didn't do? Just keep making assumptions and tarring them all with the same brush. Sure he'd be a saint if he had been on the other side murdering before and behind him in the name of "freedom".

[Deleted User]

extra gravy wrote: »

How the fück would you know what he did or didn't do? Just keep making assumptions and tarring them all with the same brush. Sure he'd be a saint if he had been on the other side murdering before and behind him in the name of "freedom".

Yes, our freedom. There’s too much of this “you approve of one thing so you must also approve of the other thing” going on in this new woketwitterverse we live in. Bollocks to that - whatever was done for our freedom was all good and **** the other side.

FrancieBrady

BarryD2 wrote: »

I expect all unionists might expect is a bit of honesty first up. You & others seem to suffer from some delusion that all the old IRB /IRA did was honorable and for the greater glory of mother Ireland. The 'Christian Brother' history of Ireland is nasty and corrosive.

Please address that to somebody who thinks that or who has argued that. No war/conflict is honourable or nice. That is why we should never allow them to be sanitised or actions that led to them or during them either.

For starters there must be very good reasons why the records of the Land Commission are still withheld from the public. Why, we'll wait & see but I fully expect from accounts I've come across that the boyos involved in the 'war of independence' were nicely looked after in terms of grand farms for themselves. Good old style ethnic cleansing. Were they fighting for the republican ideal or just because they had their eye on the neighbours land?

If that happened it was as wrong as the share out to planters. The decision was made to lock away a lot of records until those involved were dead, rightly or wrongly. I think it just exacerbated civil war politics as accusations could be made, like yours above, that were only designed to enflame.
Better to deal with these things openly and transparently and let the truth fall were it may.

s7ryf3925pivug

Sir Oxman wrote: »

It was the War of Independence or the Anglo-Irish War not a civil war as Lord Bruton and the likes would like you to think.
That's the Irish rebels versus the British forces which included the the British Army, RIC, DMP, RIC Special Reserves and the Auxiliaries.

The Civil War came after that.

Written history of the time is available for you to read and I think you'll find it encompasses everything from various viewpoints, imagine that!

It's there - go get it.

My point was that it was a civil war. It involved Irish people were fighting Irish people. I know The Irish Civil War was a separate conflict.

The RIC were just the police. They were disproportionately targeted by the rebels. The auxies were also largely Irish.

Republicanism had been a small movement, dwarfed by The Home Rule movement. The rebels were not generally popular at the start of the conflict. They weren't viewed as heroes and the British weren't viewed as villains (at least not before they carried out disproportionate responses).

Millionaire only not

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Drew Harris is from the north and he is sorting out the guards finally.

Heard he likes the men alright

Sir Oxman

Nathaniel Greasy Warrior wrote: »

My point was that it was a civil war. It involved Irish people were fighting Irish people. I know The Irish Civil War was a separate conflict.

The RIC were just the police. They were disproportionately targeted by the rebels. The auxies were also largely Irish.

Republicanism had been a small movement, dwarfed by The Home Rule movement. The rebels were not generally popular at the start of the conflict. They weren't viewed as heroes and the British weren't viewed as villains (at least not before they carried out disproportionate responses).

You really need to read more, just for a basic understanding.
The armed militia going by the name of the RIC were at the forefront of stopping the push for independence on behalf of a foreign power.
The 1918 election following 1916 changed everything away from Home Rule and it is that that gave legitimacy to the IRA to fight for our independence.
I really don't give a fck about the Irish who remained in the RIC (except for the spies) on behalf of the British and opposed our men and women.

Christ Almighty.

contrary_devil

It is my opinion that this event should not have been even suggested let alone organised. My opposition to it isn't based on whether individual members were good or bad people but solely on what the RIC as an organisation represented, it was the policing arm of an occupying nation given the task of forcibly implementing the laws of that nation on this country quite too often in a brutal manner. I think the ideology of the RIC was to serve and protect the interests of the occupiers rather than the general population of this country who had little or no democratic say in the making of those laws or how they were implemented.

FTA69

extra gravy wrote: »

How the fück would you know what he did or didn't do? Just keep making assumptions and tarring them all with the same brush. Sure he'd be a saint if he had been on the other side murdering before and behind him in the name of "freedom".

Yeah yeah. Your grandad in the RIC was a great lad and the people fighting for independence were reckless murderers. Yawn. Whatever about human expressions of empathy for people involved in conflict, this is just political expression as extreme as any of the so called “barstool Republicans” here just touting for the other (and wrong) side.

I hate to break it to you but the RIC and their colleagues in the Black and Tans were also murderers, people who were paid to murder in order to maintain empire and colonialism. Your grandfather might have been a normal enough man, but the force he was a part of and it’s raison d’etre was repugnant I’m afraid.

contrary_devil

BarryD2 wrote: »

I expect all unionists might expect is a bit of honesty first up. You & others seem to suffer from some delusion that all the old IRB /IRA did was honorable and for the greater glory of mother Ireland. The 'Christian Brother' history of Ireland is nasty and corrosive.

For starters there must be very good reasons why the records of the Land Commission are still withheld from the public. Why, we'll wait & see but I fully expect from accounts I've come across that the boyos involved in the 'war of independence' were nicely looked after in terms of grand farms for themselves. Good old style ethnic cleansing. Were they fighting for the republican ideal or just because they had their eye on the neighbours land?

I call that bull of the highest order, for a fact I know my grandfather wasn't looked after as you suggest and a few other men I know of weren't either.

AudreyHepburn

Just for a clarity as regards who is who in all this;https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/news/explainer-the-ric-the-black-and-tans-and-their-legacy-in-ireland-38841668.html

I think a lot of the anger at this is coming from misunderstanding who it actually is who is being commemorated.

I made the same mistake myself at first.

If I understand correctly it’s the RIC and the Auxiliaries being commemorated not the Black and Tans.

Probably not the governments brightest move but neither is it as bad as is being out.

FTA69

Nathaniel Greasy Warrior wrote: »

My point was that it was a civil war. It involved Irish people were fighting Irish people. I know The Irish Civil War was a separate conflict.

The RIC were just the police. They were disproportionately targeted by the rebels. The auxies were also largely Irish.

The Auxiliaries were not “largely Irish”, very few. A percentage of the Tans were Irish but even then a minority of 10-20%.

FTA69

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Just for a clarity as regards who is who in all this;https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/news/explainer-the-ric-the-black-and-tans-and-their-legacy-in-ireland-38841668.html

I think a lot of the anger at this is coming from misunderstanding who it actually is who is being commemorated.

I made the same mistake myself at first.

If I understand correctly it’s the RIC and the Auxiliaries being commemorated not the Black and Tans.

Probably not the governments brightest move but neither is it as bad as is being out.

The Auxiliaries were the worst of all as they were tasked with counter-insurgency. The Black and Tans and the Auxiliaries were part of the RIC by the way.

Millionaire only not

Why are people posting there people were in the ric , keep it quiet u should be ashamed of urselfs !

weldoninhio

saabsaab wrote: »

That may be true of some but not all. As said before many were friends with Michael Collins and joined the GS on establishment.

About 4% joined AGS. Hardly many.

FrancieBrady

contrary_devil wrote: »

It is my opinion that this event should not have been even suggested let alone organised. My opposition to it isn't based on whether individual members were good or bad people but solely on what the RIC as an organisation represented, it was the policing arm of an occupying nation given the task of forcibly implementing the laws of that nation on this country quite too often in a brutal manner. I think the ideology of the RIC was to serve and protect the interests of the occupiers rather than the general population of this country who had little or no democratic say in the making of those laws or how they were implemented.

I think that is were most stand on this. There is also nobody stopping families and groups remembering these people if that is what they want to do.
The line was drawn when the 'state'(or Charlie Flanagan Josepha Madigan and Leo Varadkar it seems, acting as the state, without wider discussion) decided to commemorate these 'organisations'.
In fairness they did jump back behind that line promptly given their stubbornness and eventual capitulation on other issues.

AudreyHepburn

FTA69 wrote: »

The Auxiliaries were the worst of all as they were tasked with counter-insurgency. The Black and Tans and the Auxiliaries were part of the RIC by the way.

Both worked predominantly as independent organizations. The RIC were just a police force.

Besides this is a commemoration not a celebration. We can’t just pretend any of the three were never here, they were all hugely important parts of our history. We can’t just write them out of it.

But again this probably shouldn’t ever have been organized.

extra gravy

Millionaire only not wrote: »

Why are people posting there people were in the ric , keep it quiet u should be ashamed of urselfs !

I'm more ashamed to be the same nationality as the likes of you.

[Deleted User]

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Both worked predominantly as independent organizations. The RIC were just a police force.

Besides this is a commemoration not a celebration. We can’t just pretend any of the three were never here, they were all hugely important parts of our history. We can’t just write them out of it.

It’s neither as it’s cancelled.

Would you apply the same logic to Jews commemorating the Nazis? Big part of their history after all...

SilverKrest

Anyone ever see Germany commemorating the SS?

weldoninhio

extra gravy wrote: »

How the fück would you know what he did or didn't do? Just keep making assumptions and tarring them all with the same brush. Sure he'd be a saint if he had been on the other side murdering before and behind him in the name of "freedom".

“My grandad was in the RIC and like most in it he wasn't a murderer or a traitor“ - as per above “How the fcuk would you know what he did or didn’t do?”

McMurphy

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Just for a clarity as regards who is who in all this;https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/news/explainer-the-ric-the-black-and-tans-and-their-legacy-in-ireland-38841668.html

I think a lot of the anger at this is coming from misunderstanding who it actually is who is being commemorated.

I made the same mistake myself at first.

If I understand correctly it’s the RIC and the Auxiliaries being commemorated not the Black and Tans.

Probably not the governments brightest move but neither is it as bad as is being out.

That's like saying we should have a national Garda day.

But not for the Roads policing cos they don't count.

[Deleted User]

weldoninhio wrote: »

About 4% joined AGS. Hardly many.

A lot of their families joined AGS

FrancieBrady

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Both worked predominantly as independent organizations. The RIC were just a police force.

Besides this is a commemoration not a celebration. We can’t just pretend any of the three were never here, they were all hugely important parts of our history. We can’t just write them out of it.

But again this probably shouldn’t ever have been organized.

Who is writing anybody out?

You clearly have not read what is written in copious accounts what the RIC and the Tans did here. And please stop trying the revisionism of separating them. There are actual adverts printed in England looking for recruits to join the RIC - 'the finest police force in the world'.

contrary_devil

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think that is were most stand on this. There is also nobody stopping families and groups remembering these people if that is what they want to do.
The line was drawn when the 'state'(or Charlie Flanagan Josepha Madigan and Leo Varadkar it seems, acting as the state, without wider discussion) decided to commemorate these 'organisations'.
In fairness they did jump back behind that line promptly given their stubbornness and eventual capitulation on other issues.

It seems from the snippet I heard on a news item that this commemoration was decided upon against the advice of people appointed to advise the said politicians.

I also think that Mr Flanagan was a little untactful when he spoke about RIC members being murdered, "killed in the line of duty" might have been a little better and given the opposition he should have cancelled the event rather than defer.

AudreyHepburn

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It’s neither as it’s cancelled.

Would you apply the same logic to Jews commemorating the Nazis? Big part of their history after all...

They’re two entirely different things and you know it.

The Nazis committed systematic mass murder on an industrial scale. There is no comparison.

corner of hells

Millionaire only not wrote: »

Why are people posting there people were in the ric , keep it quiet u should be ashamed of urselfs !

Why should I be ashamed of my family being in the RIC ?
I'm proud of all my family, including those who fought in the Civil War on both sides, War of Independence, served and are still serving as Gardai and soldiers , even those who fought in WW1.

It hasn't dawned on you , that the final chapter of history is never written and we cant eradicate our past.