gormdubhgorm wrote: » I will answer that question with quote from a man from a border county. I would prefer if this martyrdom of the dead, who killed other people stopped. It is why Ireland is in the trouble it is in the first place. But if this is not possible. In order for it to be democratic a vote should be taken from all sides of the divide at the appropriate level - relative to the level of concern. If a qualified majority is reached two thirds, only then should a name change etc be accepted. In doing so far less controversial figures can be celebrated that both sides respect, or are at least not offended by.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » Raymond McCreesh was involved in the murder of 10 protestant work men is that not inflamatory enough? Maybe if it was 11 it might have tipped it over the edge? And I am aware how it was named on consensus that makes it seem even worse. The SDLP thankfully are coming to thier senses on it.https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/sdlp-leadership-backs-renaming-of-raymond-mccreesh-park-36815769.html How were they even 'legitimate targets' in SF speak?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsmill_massacre I think all the symbolism should be toned down or got rid of completely from both sides of it. All the Royal preffixs dropped. And sides stop naming places after people who murdered each other and dressed it up as war. If people like you have this unbending attitude FrancieBrady there will NEVER be a UI. I am not even a Unionist, and I find your attitude a bit sickening if I am honest. You say you want a UI but you don't really want inclusion you just hope the Unionists will know thier place and put up with it. You were the same fella who was up in arms over an RIC commemoration. Yet can see nothing wrong with naming places after fellas who killed unarmed civilians like McCreesh did. But I suppose the 'nobleness' of the republican hunger strike blinds you to any negative view?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Let's stop the bull**** and the onesided stuff here: Answer these questions and we'll see where we are at: 1: Should people be allowed to remember their dead (regardless of how you think of them) 2: If your answer to 1. is NO then how do you apply that democratically? I await your answers with bated breath.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » I would prefer if this martyrdom of the dead, who killed other people stopped. It is why Ireland is in the trouble it is in the first place..
downcow wrote: » Francie, I have total compassion for terrorists families. Absolutely they need to be able to remember them. But it needs to be done in private so as not to further traumatise their victims. That would seem like a very reasonable request. Actually I cannot see any reason a family would want to do it any other way. Sinn Fein are actually abusing the memory of these people. At child abusers family has every right to quietly and privately remember them, but when they do it publicly, and windup the people who were abused, then it is simply obscene
BloodyBill wrote: » The Dub Carson didnt murder anyone. He was a politician. This assertion that he re introduced the gun into Irish politics is a fair argument but he killed no one. The likes of the IRA 'heros' murdered unarmed innocent people . They deserve nothing and their families deserve nothing . How the people in NI put up with memorials to McCreesh ect .that I do not know. We wouldnt accept it down here.
FrancieBrady wrote: » So you would be in favour of taking down the statute of Carson if asked? And all the loyalist memorials as well? There are almost a 100 of them in Belfast alone. I don't have any time for it myself...so if it is all coming down then I am fine with that.
downcow wrote: » This is what sf are doing with victims compensation. We will never agree on the extremes so we need to reach agreement where we can. Could we not agree a good place to start would be slave traders, child abusers, rapists who have need up being publicly remembered, followed by those who we all agree went out in the dead of night, with no uniform and murdered and tortured people because of their religion or because the disagreed politically with them. And without majority support within even their own community Can we agree that there is no one in my list that does not fall into that category
FrancieBrady wrote: » Carson along with Craig raised a private militia and armed them...that 'terrorised' people and politicians, which is what was intended. He was a terrorist therefore. Are you in favour of a cross community ban on memorials to those who fought? This would include 'naming public infrastructure, statutes, monuments, murals, the wearing of Lillies or Poppies etc. It is either cross community or not at all IMO. I would be in favour of removing them all. However I am pragmatic about it, I think we can find a way to allow people to remember their dead with respect.
BonnieSituation wrote: » And then we'll have the bellows about taking down O'Connell and Parnell. I also think that the Carson statue should be removed from where it stands though. It's a very divisive place to have a divisive statue in front of a divisive building. But I'm definitely not for erasing history completely. Edit: also rename Craigavon
FrancieBrady wrote: » The usual kneejerkers don't realise how accommodating nationalists and republicans are to the trappings and iconography of a sectarian bigoted state. It's all around them in the north.
downcow wrote: » Can we agree that there is no one in my list that does not fall into that category
Junkyard Tom wrote: » Can we add any monuments honouring the British Army, UDR, USC and RUC seeing as they murdered lots of innocent men, women and children?
downcow wrote: » .... Absolutely, and we should never forget that there was one Catholic on the bus. They asked for Catholics to step forward and his Protestant workmates tried to shield and hide him as they thought he would be the target. Instead he was told to run away while all the Protestants were murdered. It is quite incredible that a playpark could be named after the person who done this. But clearly some people think that is okay
The report given to the Sunday World reveals how the RUC and British Army knew the IRA murderer was being treated in Louth county hospital in Dundalk but made no attempt to have him arrested and extradited. The failure to bring the Provo to justice has led to suspicions that the man – who has never been prosecuted despite extensive paramilitary involvement – was a British agent. The killer can't be named for legal reasons. 'P' is from the south Armagh village of Belleek but now lives in the Republic.
BloodyBill wrote: » So the counter is to name their pitches and parks after bomb makers and gunmen...that's sad.
jm08 wrote: » When you say innocent people, do you regard the British military, RUC, UDR etc. as fair game? Carson & Craig created the Ulster Volunteers, who supported armed insurrection against the British State. They have blood on their hands.
downcow wrote: » There is a lot of ducking and diving going on as usual. The tried and tested method of ‘let’s throw up a few grey areas as red herrings’. It’s a great way of avoiding the issues. Let’s try this! How about we try to name examples of people from our own community who participated in the ‘conflict’ and who we think it would be inappropriate to remember by putting up a statue, memorial stone or naming a play park after. Unless of course you think no one is beyond the pale with regard to publicly remembering? I will start the ball rolling. Michael Stone, Johnny Adair, Billy Hutchinson, And remember I fully respect their families right to remember them quietly and privately in whatever way they wish, but it should absolutely not be done publicly because of the many victims out there still alive. Over to you guys
RobMc59 wrote: » Agreed,and until SF North and South of the border and all the rest of the disgruntled extremist republicans cop on they'll remain shunned as pariahs as we've seen in the Dail today and by the decent moderate minded majority.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Very simple from me. I don't think anyone involved in the creation and maintenance of the sectarian bigoted statelet that caused the conflict or those involved in the conflict should be publicly commemorated.
downcow wrote: » Come on Francie. Have the balls to name a few names (just examples so as I can ground your thinking) that you think would not be appropriate to have them remembered publicly?
FrancieBrady wrote: » . Here's a wee tip for you downcow...think of the name of anyone involved in the conflict or the running of the sectarian bigoted state and you can ground my thinking.
downcow wrote: » You seem to be struggling with this Francie. It is a very very simple request. .... And your statement above does not ground it for me because it is in complete contradiction to what you seem to be implying about the playpark in Newry. So let's try again Francie and friends. Just have the balls to do what I have done, and give a few actual examples of people from your community, who participated conflict, who you think it would be inappropriate to publicly remember? As Capt Jones would have said - you don't like it up you
FrancieBrady wrote: » There is no contradiction. No prevarication. NOBODY involved in the conflict or the sectarian statelet should get a memorial. IF you wish to remove one...they should all be removed. Very simple and clear.
