Northern Ireland 2125?

 Nice try at calling Carson a terrorist but Carson, who kept his Irish accent his whole life, was the Attorney General and Solicitor General for England, Wales and Ireland, as well as the First Lord of the Admiralty for the Royal Navy. His authority as an MP and unionist leader saw him elevated to the British War Cabinet as a Minister.

No doubt if there was a U.I. the statue to him ( which was erected by his followers) would be torn down. Maybe a needle or something equally bland put in its place.

Would you agree with Joe Brolly ( who we now know is not the "game changer" standing for SF in the Presidential elections!) when he says

It's nobody's business if GAA clubs are named after dead republican paramilitaries'"

You telling me I am "clearly not in a place to have those conversations" about commemorations in Ireland, although I am from and live in the 26 counties,, is a bit like the arrogance of Brolly saying "It's nobody's business if GAA clubs are named after dead republican paramilitaries". In other words it is conly republicans business. Others are "clearly not in a place to have those conversations"

Are you talking about his army, the Ulster Division, that fought in WW1 against the Germans? But good to know that in this utopia of a U.I you promise, that ALL memorials will be on the table, not just the ones you do not like, and you will consider replacing the spire with a replica of Nelsons column, call Connolly station by its original name etc.

Be as coy as you wish about which army, you are not fooling anyone.

If you want to talk about memorials everything is on the table…from Nelson to Poppy Day to the Easter lily to Gerry Adams

You think you know but in actual fact you don't.

I have a consistent approach to all this that recognises both sides will commemorate and both sides will at times attempt to use commemoration to taunt.

That is why we need a conversation about how we allow all sides to commemorate with respect.

You just want to attack one side, showing you are not ready or mature enough to be in that conversation.

Rubbish. I condemn both sides of paramilitaries involved in the conflict and do not agree with either side commemorating dead terrorists. Not very many on the loyalist / unionist side do, with some exceptions eg. the relatively little known Star of Shankhill or Shankill Star band or whatever they are called being associated with someone there shot by the British army. If he had not been shot by the B.A. you would be screaming about collusion. If he was a nationalist shot by the B.A. you would be complaining about a shoot to kill policy, calling for a public inquiry costing millions etc.

On the nationalist side up North we get GAA grounds, memorials, SF offices etc named after dead terrorists, and well to do, educated people like Brolly defending this?

Like you, he insinuates it is none of my business. But if grounds up North were named after a loyalist terrorist I would equally condemn that.

Incidentally, thinking of him, have you, that may have inside info, heard any rumours who the "game changer" was who pulled out of last Saturdays announcement? Ah, you'd prefer not to talk about that fiasco, fair enough.

Define "publically commemorated". I had not heard of it but it is a parade, and according to your own link " the Orange Order said it is not a parade it has sanctioned."

I disagree with it just the same as I disagree with any events commemorating Republicans. And Republicans have had plenty of events too named after them.

However what has that to do with GAA grounds, memorials, SF offices etc named after dead terrorists, and well to do, educated people like Brolly defending this? One thing commemorating someone with an 50th anniversary event, over in half an hour, but perhaps another thing naming sports grounds after them?

The IRA men that the GAA grounds in question, the IRA memorials in question , and the SF offices in question were named after were armed para-militaries operating outside the law. That fits most peoples definition of terrorists.

A terrorist is an individual or group ( often secret as they operate outside the law) that employs calculated violence or the threat of violence to generate fear and achieve political or ideological goals, aiming to coerce a population or government into action or inaction.

Yes I know the old saying one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Tell that to the victims of the UFF ( Ulster Freedom Fighters).

P.S. there are quite a few British commemorative items around Dublin - mostly from the victorian era.

"respectful ways to do it." Nail on the head there. In America for example, nobody objects to them remembering their fallen of WW2. That is respectful. But most people there would be offended if those who carried out the 9/11 twin towers attacks were publically commemorated. Supposing a football ground beside some Mosque in New York was named after one of the hijackers / one of those who flew the planes in to the twin towers?

Only difference between those who carried out the 9/11 attacks and those who bombed Birmingham, Enniskillen, Le Mons, Manchester, Docklands, Brighton etc is one of scale. Terrorists can be remembered by their friends / family but should not have football grounds, political offices, football competitions, etc named after them.

The US is multicultural and the pilots who flew the planes, full of aviation fuel so they were in effect flying bombs, in to the twin towers on 9/11 were trained in America. The IRA bombers who blew up Manchester, Birmingham, London etc were also from a different country to England. So you have no point.

Must be very embarrassing for you. Terrorists should not be commemorated by having football grounds, competitions, political offices etc named after them.

So do you think it would be respectful if the bombers of 9/11 put up memorials to the 9/11 bombers, or named  football grounds, competitions, political offices etc after the terrorists of 9/11, in the same jurisdiction? Yes or no?

In the USA you would not get terrorists being commemorated by naming football grounds, competitions, political offices, memorials etc. Yes they commemorate the dead of WW2 etc. They are different to those who bombed the twin towers, Le Mons, Enniskillen, Manchester, Birmingham etc.

Are you talking about the muslims agains? You say "In Ireland we have a divided society that has a history of blood letting by an invading force". Ah now, they may behead people in their own countries, and thousands or tens of thousands may have come here, but to call the poor auld immigrating Muslims a blood letting or an invading force is surely a bit much?

Even in America, if you say the Muslims who caused 9/11 were an invading force who blood let the infidels, what about white man ( including plenty of Irish ) who surely caused far more blood letting a few hundred years ago among the Native American population? You have not clearly thought things through.

Back to who society should be respectful to by building memorials , naming football grounds etc.

I'll ask you again. Do you think it would be respectful if the bombers of 9/11 put up memorials to the 9/11 bombers, or named  football grounds, competitions, political offices etc after the terrorists of 9/11, in the same jurisdiction? Yes or no.

Then why should IRA bombers have memorials or football grounds named after them, given the only difference between 9/11 and Enniskillen, Le Mons, Manchester etc is one of scale? The 9/11 bombers caused many more deaths than they thought they would - they did not expect the steel to melt / the buildings collapse. The biggest IRA bomb in Britain was a one ton bomb : it could have caused as many casualties, in a worst case scenarion, if it pre-maturely exploded as the 9/11 planes did if the buildings did not collapse? What possible difference can you see between the IRA bombers and the 9/11 bombers? Total death toll of each is not that different if you add up Enniskillen, Omagh, Le Mons, Birmingham, Bloody Friday etc etc

Do you think the 9/11 bombers should be publically honoured? Seems you do if you want that to apply to IRA bombers?

I'll ask you again. Do you think it would be respectful if the bombers of 9/11 put up memorials to the 9/11 bombers, or named  football grounds, competitions, political offices etc after the terrorists of 9/11, in the same jurisdiction? Yes or no.

Would you accuse those who raised their eyebrows at a football ground beside a Mosque in New York state named after a 9/11 bomber as being "not capable of discussing the topic of respectful commemoration and remembrance in a divided but equal society." After all, America is a divided society too, should'nt the Muslims be allowed to commemorate 9/11 bombes too?

What a hill for you to die on.

Of course I care about all communities and what they endured. That is why some people care about what the victims of IRA bombings, and their families and communities endured. I care about the victims of all terrorism / unlawful activity.

You will not answer if you think it would be respectful if the bombers of 9/11 put up memorials to the 9/11 bombers, or named  football grounds, competitions, political offices etc after the terrorists of 9/11, in the same jurisdiction. You cannot therefore think it would be respectful if football grounds, GAA competitions etc were named after IRA bombers.

I would also care if loyalist communities named football grounds after loyalist paramilitaries, or football competitions, or named constituency offices after dead paramilitaries.

I would also care if muslim communities named grounds after the 9/11 bombers, or football competitions, or named constituency offices etc.

But yet you think such carry on is ok for some others.