Erin Go Brath wrote: » I fail to see how the last one is a fact. You have to remember Ireland was a piss poor country in these days. People joined up largely out of economic necessity, certainly not out of any loyalty to the King. It's ludicrous to imply such a thing.
purplengold wrote: » Fact: Ireland was part of the United Kingdom from 1801 to 1922; Northern Ireland is still part of the United Kingdom. Fact: A disproportionate number of Irishmen did go off to fight for king and country. Fact: if they had a problem with It they wouldn’t have joined up, there was no conscription.
csk wrote: » :D Dude are you serious?
PDN wrote: » Actually Paisley is a minister, member (and founder and much else) of the Free Presbyterian Church. He has not been a member of the Presbyterian Church for over 50 years. I am not, and never have been, a Presbyterian (Free or otherwise), but I just wanted to keep us accurate.
Fratton Fred wrote: » You get one extreme Protestant like Paisley who is a Presbytarian minister and all "Proddies" are suddenly anti Catholic which simply isn't true. Methodists, Baptists, Anglicans etc are all very different.
purplengold wrote: » [Originally Posted by Fratton Fred Ireland was not a colony, the act of Union incorporated it into the UK. Many of your forefathers had no problem with that, in fact a disproportionate number went off to fight for King and Country all over the world.Many of your forefathers had no problem with that, in fact a disproportionate number went off to fight for King and Country all over the world. QUOTE=csk;55130090]Actually most of them did have a problem with it. Even the ones who joined the British Army. The above statement is pure lies on your part.
Fact: Ireland was part of the United Kingdom from 1801 to 1922; Northern Ireland is still part of the United Kingdom. Fact: A disproportionate number of Irishmen did go off to fight for king and country. Fact: if they had a problem with It they wouldn’t have joined up, there was no conscription.
Erin Go Brath wrote: » Not knowing a whole lot about the different flavours of Protestantism, i'd be inclined to agree anecdotally from what i hear that the Presbyterians would be more militant and anti-catholic than the other Protestant religions, but i'd be open to correction on that. Certainly Paisley has never hid his hatred of Catholics, openly preaching it to devoted Unionists hanging on his every bigotted word.
Fratton Fred wrote: » Ireland was not a colony, the act of Union incorporated it into the UK. Many of your forefathers had no problem with that, in fact a disproportionate number went off to fight for King and Country all over the world.Many of your forefathers had no problem with that, in fact a disproportionate number went off to fight for King and Country all over the world.
Fratton Fred wrote: » McArmalitre's view on Ireland, 3 True irishmen, 3,999,997 west brits who do not believe the same ****e he does:D
Fratton Fred wrote: » Don't forget the CoI is very different from the Presbytarian church. Presbytarians (Who have a fairly well known reverand leading one of the parties in Stormont) can be a lot more militant than the CoI, so it is not unreasonable to presume that the CoI were going following what the Archbishop was preaching, whilst the Presbytarians, a different form of protestantism entirely, were busy trying to convert catholics.
Erin Go Brath wrote: » The CoI archbishop was surely duty bound to say these things, surely compassion should have been the most important thing especially from a man of God. I think the clergy both Catholic and Protestant let the people down for the most part during the famine. On the one hand you had a Protestant priest trying to convert dying Catholics with the promise of food, and on the other hand you had the Catholic priests telling them they'd go to hell if they accepted it.
McArmalite wrote: » " The oul chessnuts thread Britain and the famine Britain and the Death Camps in South Africa Britain and the Slave Trade Most British people I think would agree they could have done more for us in the famine so to keep dragging this one up time after time is lame in the extreme.". It's a HISTORY forum, what the hell are people supposed to talk about. If you don't like the subject, don't read it. " Death camps in South Africa - this one always plays well but whats less well known is the public outcry when details were published about conditions in the camps, back home in britain -the backlash lead directly to the end of the war. "Death camps - ? The Oxford Dictionary defines concentration camp as: a camp where non-combatants of a district are accommodated, such as those instituted by Lord Kitchener during the South African war of 1899-1902; esp. as organized by the Nazi regime in Germany before and during the war of 1939-45. The backlash DID NOT lead directly to the end of the war. The Boer War ended as the Boer men no longer had the heart to fight due to the immense death and suffering of their women and children in the concentration camps. They even feared that should the war continue, their'd be no future generation left such was the ferocity of the british. True their was an outcry among the british public but it was unfortunately due to the fact that britian's misconduct had been kept form them during the war. "Dont think the Germans had much of an outcry - oh thats right Irelands best pal at the time the German people didnt know what was going on. I can picture the scene - truck rolls up to the street - all the jewish people loaded up and driven off never to be seen again - yep nothing wrong there. " Don't see why Nazi Germany is brought in as an excuse for britian's misconduct. Anyway, it's was conviently brushed under the carpet by the 'allies' that 1/2 a million German socialists, trade unionists, etc were taken and thrown into concentration camps before the war ( such policy's were secretly very populiar with the ruling class of in many countries across Europe ). I wonder if you, or indeed any one of us were present witnessing such events, would we have shouted stop ?? I'm sure the few who did found themselves been beaten to pulp and off to you know where. "Britain and the slave trade - yep again the british did terrible things as well here and it was a deadfull trade.. but to their credit they were among the first to outlaw it and actively police any slave trading around the empire." As stated - And it's completely beyond me why the brits applaud themselves for abolishing their own evil practice. I mean, it's like a theif starting to fell guilty about mugging an old lady's etc and saying, I'm going to stop it, and then proclaiming how fair minded and great he is ?? "And if i hear that crap about drogheda again ill scream - thats all a load of oul bollix ". If i hear that crap about Enniskillen, Birmingham, Warrington etc, again ill scream - thats all a load of oul bollix. "No they were not perfect and have done a lot of bad things in their history - but show me a country that hasnt....But the republican crowd here live in a completely blinkered version of the past - Britain has been around for nearly a thousand years - they must be doing something right - get over it" "Britain has been around for nearly a thousand years 2 - The United Kingdom of Great Britain, came into existence in 1707 by the merger of the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England, under the Acts of Union 1707, to create a single kingdom encompassing the whole of the island of Great Britain. It's parliament and government, based in Westminster in London.The brits and West brit crowd here live in a completely blinkered version of the past - get over it
PDN wrote: » While some Protestants carried out famine relief out of a desire to win converts, it is factually incorrect to say that the CoI were only interested in this. Indeed, Richard Whately, CoI Archbishop of Dublin, specifically preached against such an attitude. He used the Good Samaritan as an example and argued that, as the Good Samaritan did not try to convert the man he helped, neither should the CoI attempt to convert those to whom they extended famine relief. As always, history is composed of many people of differing motives and character - any attempt to oversimplify it into goodies versus baddies is bad history.
Fratton Fred wrote: » Other than your own prejudice, do you have anything to back that up, because I would have thought that Spain, France and the US would have had similar numbers of slaves. Give me St George in my heart keep me singing Give me St George in my heart I pray Give me St George in my heart keep me singing We Won't surrender to the IRA. I'm sure I can find a load more, but lets refrain from quoting nationalist songs shall we, it is a bit pointless.
Fratton Fred wrote: » Other than your own prejudice, do you have anything to back that up, because I would have thought that Spain, France and the US would have had similar numbers of slaves.
Erin Go Brath wrote: » The COI were only interested in giving food to starving Catholics if they renounced their faith, and joined the COI. To many people who were deeply religious at the time we have to remember, this would be seen as blasphemy and they would go to hell, so they would rather die instead.
McArmalite wrote: » Never said britian created slavery, anyone knows the Romans etc were at it, but they undoubtably enslaved more poeple than any other state in histroy. No doubt about.
Quis Separabit wrote: » Yes, the same famine which affected the north, but curiously the more organised Presbyterians in the north, many of whom had smaller plots of land to grow food on,less affection for drink, fewer children and tennants orgs survived it.
Quis Separabit wrote: » Britain did not create slavery in Africa it was always there. Britain actually led the way in abolishing it. Did the republic not use "concentration camps"(an emotive term for temporary military camps with barbed wire, nothing like Nazi death camps) in the civil war ?
Quis Separabit wrote: » The reality is the wealth we have today, that inclues Ireland, has its origins in the global capitalist economy created by the empire. The modern stock markets whos function we rely on is a modern extension of this. Our culture and economies are products of the British empire. Britain led the way in bringing civilsation to places like India, pity the empire is still not around today, the world would be a much more stable place.
Quis Separabit wrote: » .....You mean British (most likely Irish Catholic) soldiers protected gombeen Catholic storekeepers from potential rioters as well as food from being stolen, lets get the facts straight. Didnt see the Catholic church doing much either. Aid came from the church of Ireland and Queen Victoria.
McArmalite wrote: » " A country does not build up a huge empire by being nice to people and inviting them round for tea and scones. ", which is a bit like saying, a notorious serial killer doesn't become a notorious serial killer by being nice to people and inviting them round for tea and scones. Creating millions of African slaves, forcing the Chinese to buy Opium even though the consumption of it in britain was banned, the use of poisionous gas on 10,000's of people in Iraq in the 20's, concentration camps used decades before the Nazi's, the list of war crimes perpetrated by it is almost endless. They even succeded in something the Nazi's falied to do, wiping out a whole race of people - the Tasmanian Aborigines. All this twisted scheme to yield an enormous amount of money for the british aristocracy. Oh yes, a history to be proud of indeed.
Erin Go Brath wrote: » Its an undisputed fact that British regiments took food from starving Irish people during the Great Famine. Cheerleading and defending these lowlifes is quite contemptible. A great wrong has been done, and only recently a lot of information has come into the public domain about the extent of Britains involvement in it. One million dead in a callous act of genocide, yet people constantly come on and defend, and downplay as much as possible Britains role in all this. The Empire got rich by inflicting misery and pain around the world, mostly on small nations such as ourselves, yet its leaders get awarded medals and suchforth for bravery. I for one am glad the Empire has fallen asunder!
Erin Go Brath wrote: » I love 'The Field'. The Bull McCabe sure showed those Brits. :D:D Croppy this is a post of yours from the famine thread: You should hang your head in shame. Your slavish attitude towards our former colonial masters is an embarassement. Over a million of your countrymen were killed by Britain and the free trade policy they inflicted on this country. All you can do is say "What are we supposed to do? Track down the relatives of British soldiers during the famine and kill them or something??". Nuff said.....
