gormdubhgorm wrote: » Why does the poster have to get Irish citizenship to show 'commitment' to the Irish state? He/She maybe proud of the citizenship they hold and has been a residence and working in the ROI for a long period? Should all the Eastern Europeans in Ireland take out Irish citizenship for example? Your logic on what classes as 'commitment' sounds very indoctrinated and ideological.
munsterlegend wrote: » Says the apologist for state terrorism in Croke park.
munsterlegend wrote: » Are you for real? You keep telling us what real Irish ‘republicans’ should speak, wear and watch on tv. Perhaps you should practice what you preach with regards indoctrination and ideology.
jm08 wrote: » What makes you think that they would have the best interests of Ireland over these other countries? If Eastern Europeans want to have a say in changing the Irish Constitution, yes they need to become Irish citizens. They should have a right to vote in local and general elections.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » Exactly because it is nothing but fakery half plastic paddies who have lost thier culture. So thier main/last resort in pretending to be Irish, is to fall in with Republican groups or vote SF. Look and sound macho with all the paraphernalia that entails. As I have all ready said these people have more in common with working class British people in particular but fail to see it. I have already said because of this share culture Ireland really should be in the commonwealth at least. If a nation appropriates another's culture almost completely everything else is mere window dressing. I am free of old Republican indoctrination and dogma so it enables me to see this clearly and admit it openly.
jm08 wrote: » Actually, there are huge differences between Irish football fans and their counterparts in Britain. For instance, when it comes to football, in Ireland you don't need a couple of 1000 riot police to keep the peace between the supporters. In GAA all the fans happily mix together (even with the Dubs!). And fans of the Rep. of Ireland team are like and welcomed everywhere, unlike their British counterparts. Thats a huge cultural difference. How do you explain that one?
Yeah_Right wrote: » You are willing to pay €5000 a year towards unification. Fair play. I assumed that you one of those nationalists that would shout about leprechauns and shamrocks for everyone but never put any skin in the game.
Did you have a chance to find that "thorough response" you wrote previously? I'd love to read it. And I did laugh at "getting shirty". Such a quaint phrase. Very British.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » It was just an example. You are implying that people who do not become Irish citizens are letting 'the side down'. Maybe they are proud of the citizenship they hold and/or maybe they do not see a UI as an issue? So do not see the need to get Irish citizenship. Irish and British citizens who are resident in the ROI can vote in GE's for instance, why should a British citizen change if they do not feel the desire or need.
jh79 wrote: » There is an hooligan element within most of the Dublin teams. I've witnessed it myself and there are videos on youtube of the fights. BBC3 did a documentary on British Hooligans and the Spurs faction were invited over by Irish hooligans for one of the big Dublin derbies.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » This seems to be clutching at straws ignoring the major similarities and interests between Ireland and Britain. As for non hooligan Irish football fans: You only have to a quick search of Shamrock Rovers casuals and Bohemians 'firms' fighting to see how much Irish people can ape the British. Also it is not just in one sport alone in the 1984 AI football SF between Dublin and Tyrone for example. Groups of Dublin fans fought on Hill 16 among each other and the gardai had to intervene. Don't fool yourself into thinking that Irish people cannot behave like thugs at sporting events.
jm08 wrote: » A very small element. But iyou don't need riot police at any games. And certainly not at GAA games where everyone mixes freely and there is no segregated seating. I've seen a video of Michael D. jumping up and down on the terrace at a LOI game. Can't see the Queen or any of her offspring being able to do that.
jm08 wrote: » You are the one clutching at straws when you bring up two clubs who have a few gob****es attached to them, or some trouble at an All Ireland football game about 40 years ago!
RobMc59 wrote: » Strange,as I recall you thought it was ok for assassination squads to murder civilians because they were working for the British
gormdubhgorm wrote: » It is just an example there are more recent ones as well trouble on the hill between Kerry and Dublin supporters 2019. Mix drink and young fellas it can happen anytime. I saw a Dublin fella going around stabbing people after one game off his head on drugs.
jh79 wrote: » Big security operations every year for Bohs v Rovers.https://m.herald.ie/news/riot-fears-led-to-lifting-of-garda-overtime-ban-for-bohs-rovers-derby-38539067.html
munsterlegend wrote: » And you don’t deny it. It doesn’t get much lower for a govt agency to go into a football field and shoot at men, women and children. What civilians are you talking about?
munsterlegend wrote: » Will you stop talking nonsense. The amount of trouble at gaa games is virtually non existent. When you look at games in Britain where security forces have to keep everyone apart then you have an actual problem.
RobMc59 wrote: » That's correct,also the word 'hooligan'is Irish origin to describe rowdy Irish people.
But the term “hooligan” used in English today does not come from an Irish word meaning “troublemaker,” “vandal,” or anything associated with soccer. Instead, it is widely believed to come from an Irish surname, either Houlihan or O’Hooligan. Whichever it was, the name was used in Victorian England as a byword for ethnic stereotypes of the Irish as disreputable low-lives. That usage is thought to have been spread through the music halls of the time, where vaudevillians acted out comic sketches and songs. A character named “Hooligan” or “O’Hooligan” regularly appeared in these performances as such a stereotype. One show featured a “Mr. Patsey O’Hooligan, whose appearance is as disreputable as his conduct is discreditable,” explained The Era, a British weekly paper that came to be known for its theater coverage, in 1894. It adds that one actor is “exceedingly comical as the wild Irishman, O’Hooligan.” Following that, “hooligan” begins to be used in England as a general term for a ruffian. That meaning appears to have been helped along by a gang that called itself “Hooligans,” as an 1898 report from the Daily News writes.
munsterlegend wrote: » One/two games a year hardly indicates a problem.
jm08 wrote: » As of now, even though you are eligible, you have not shown commitment to the Irish State or its people by ''bothering to do the paperwork''. By not ''bothering'' to do the paperwork, you have decided yourself that you have no say and are indeed a foreigner in Ireland. Nothing to do with me. I personally welcome all people who chose to make Ireland their home and show commitment to the Irish State and its people by taking out citizenship.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » Well you can look it up if you do not believe me. But if that is supposed to be a main cultural difference between Irish and British people as a whole. It is laughable to pick. Irish people and British people are way more alike than different. No matter what your local 'RA head in the pub tells ya.
jm08 wrote: » Actually, its origins were an ethnic slur on Irish people.
Yeah_Right wrote: » I own property in Ireland, have lived, worked and paid taxes in Ireland for over a decade, I married an Irish girl and voted in general elections yet I'm not committed to Ireland in your eyes. I reckon that even if I took out Irish citizenship, you would still tell me to stay out of it as I wouldn't understand the issues like a "real" Irishman.
RobMc59 wrote: » I don't know what happened in croke park exactly as there are conflicting accounts and neither do you,it was a hundred years ago. Regarding the civilians murdered by assassination squads,it was on the same day as events at croke park.
The Times, which during the war was a pro-Unionist publication, ridiculed Dublin Castle's version of events,[41] as did a British Labour Party delegation visiting Ireland at the time. British Brigadier Frank Percy Crozier, technically in command that day, later resigned over what he believed was the official condoning of the unjustified actions of the Auxiliaries in Croke Park. One of his officers told him that, "Black and Tans fired into the crowd without any provocation whatsoever".[7] Two military courts of inquiry into the massacre were held, and one found that "the fire of the RIC was carried out without orders and exceeded the demands of the situation." Major General Boyd, the officer commanding Dublin District, added that in his opinion, "the firing on the crowd was carried out without orders, was indiscriminate, and unjustifiable, with the exception of any shooting which took place inside the enclosure." The findings of these courts of inquiry were suppressed by the British Government, and only came to light in 2000.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4b1a2e86cedae1628937f4503f2281da.svg)
