David McKittrick; These protests are NOT over the flag.

SoulandForm wrote: »

Loyalists and Unionists make no apologies; and we see with the whole fleg movement that they want to drag the place back, or at least a significant amount of them do, to the old Orange state.

Republicanism and Loyalism have radically different visions and goals. Loyalism because its based on a sense of racial superiority and religious sectarianism cant really win over Nationalists to its side because that would be defeating its purpose wouldnt it? Moderate Unionism might be able to at least argue that it can offer peace and a shared future but with Loyalism wandering around in the background thats not going to happen anyway.

The people behind the Ulster Covenant were crazed fanatics and extreme bigots. There is no way around that. Putting them up as people to be admired is not going to help matters.

I´d say forget about apologies because the Republicans aren´t inclined to apologies themselves for their deeds. That´s no point at all and takes no one further. So better to get over it and look forward.

In every society one can find a minority of radicals and extremists, therefore it´s important to keep them as a minority and strenghten the moderates to weaken the radicals. This applies for Republicans as well as for Unionists. There´s no other way to achieve a better society but to get the moderates in power and keep them in power and above all it´s the society itself who should take care that the peace process will not be jeopardised by radicals. To maintain this one needs stability and when it is not carried by the majority of the peaceful people it will always be fragile.

It´s time that these moderate powers from both sides stand together and stand up against these backward minded people for the sake of peace and prosperity.

I´d be careful on matters of admiration of historical events and persons because you can´t avoid that some people may take offence on such things at all. As you´re discomforted by the Unionists "traditions" so they are by the "Commemorations of the Easter Rising 1916" for instance.

The best thing would be (although I admit that this sounds upotian) to bring them both together and have a "joint celebration of their cultures and commemorations" but such imaginations only work in fantasy and to have it in reality it would be a great leap forward but demands mutual tolerance and respect, as well as none of them taking offence by the other.

What about yourself, do you consider yourself being more moderate or radical? I don´t know the answer and I won´t make any assumptions on that. I´m clearly a more moderate person on this and other matters. Tolerance is important but that doesn´t mean that being tolerant I´ve to agree with everything but the least I can do is to respect different opinions and way of life, as long as it doesn´t turn into violence.

As Winston S. Churchill said "In Peace: Goodwill" (taken from "the Morale of the book The Second World War"). I know he´s not the person you´d give some credit, but he is to me the greatest Englishman (or Briton) that ever lived. This doesn´t make me an Unionist either. I´ve also the same admiration towards great persons in Irish History, like Michael Collins. This doesn´t make me an Republican as well. I´m none of these, because my own individuality doesn´t need such extremes.
I like the UK as much as I like Ireland. I like to listen to the Scottish Bagpipe music as dearly as listen to traditional Irish music and I also like to sing "Rule Britannian" and all the other British patriotic songs. What is not so much of my music taste is that flute and drum music the Orangemen are playing on parade. This all sounds to me all of the same, with some excemptions when they play "The British Grenadier March". But I can respect their culture and I wouldn´t take offence on that. Then there are some Irish Rebell songs that I also like to listen to. There´s no contradiction to me in this at all, because what counts to me is - in re to historical persons - the character these people had and what they achieved in their lifetime for themselves and their country and as far as countries and cultures are concerned what they have to learn from it. I guess in your view I´d rather have no point at all. Having said that, I might be damned by you, but culture and music have much more to offer than by clinging to one side, it´s just that one has to be open minded for different cultures to experience and learn from that without political blinkers.

Goodwill and tolerance on a mutual basis is what NI needs and not always looking back and stirring up the past. As one said "that´s the problem with the Irish, they never forget". This applies for both sides. At least there are more people now in NI to work on the peace process and maintain what has been achieved then ever before. They belong to the future and hopefully they will prevail.

"If one always looks back to the past, one forgets about to look at the present and can´t win the future."

Lingua Franca wrote: »

There was a unionist right here in this thread who didn't know that the IRA weren't active from the early 1950s to 1969 and believed that the British army were brought in to quell an IRA murder spree.

If you think that the kind of people who riot are all historians, on either side, then you are being very generous to them. The signing of the Ulster covenant isn't on the school curriculum. And most of them are too young to remember the troubles, even.

Take this guy for instance:

Perhaps the City Hall is a solemn place to him because it was there that the Ulster covenant was signed. Perhaps. But it's also not a stretch to believe that he if asked where it was signed that he might answer in Stormont, or Belfast Castle.

I´ve seen this guy already on the BBC News website and again, the interview is difficult to follow because what he said has some interruption by the traffic noise from the street. So I couldn´t hear whether he has been asked any question re the relation of the flag issue to the signing of the Ulster Covenant at City Hall in 1912.

It doesn´t have to be on the school curriculum to learn about the signing of the Ulster Covenant, their parents take care that they will know it, as equally with other things that inherites "Unionist / Loyalist" creed and culture.

I´m barely thinking that all rioting people on either side are historians. One point in this is that on September 28th, 2012 the Unionists / Loyalists surely either celebrated or at least remembered the centenary of that event. The decision of the City Council took place on December 3rd, 2012 which is less than three months between these two dates. Therefore this historical event was more likely to be fresh in their minds than when the City Council had placed their decision at a time more previous or afterwards of that date.

I don´t think that all those people rioting on the streets are "just morons" without any knowledge of their culture they pretend to "defend" by their actions. Some of them are rioting just for fun and taking the opportunity to freak out by violent protests. Others wanted to protest peacefully and where caught up in the riots. That´s the problem and the difficulty in this, one can´t tell one from another when such riots are taking place by "professional rioters hijacking" the protests. In as far some of them peaceful protesters might became inspired to take part in the riots is another difficult question. They won´t tell you if not caught and brought to justice.

Some other poster came up with another theory, quite recently today. It´s also worth to be considered. The whole thing is a "b****y" mess.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Wrong.

You seem to be wandering about a lot trying to make sense of it all without the proper info or facts. Maybe do some research.

Right then you could be so kind and recommend me the place where to find them.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Google is good I've heard.

I find some that suites:


http://www.thejournal.ie/mcguinness-dismisses-report-of-ira-apology-505871-Jul2012/

Speaking on RTÉ’s Saturday Night with Miriam, Northern Ireland’s Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness said he did not know where the SBP story was originating from “because the IRA are gone; I don’t know who’s going to [apologise]“.

However, he indicated that he believes a ‘collective’ apology should be issued by all parties involved, including the British government:

It is absolutely heartbreaking that we have been through almost 100 years of partition in the North, decade after decade of conflict – and a very bitter conflict that lasted 25 years in which an awful lot of people lost their lives. How could you not be sorry that all that happened?
But if people are going to say sorry, then everybody should say it collectively, in my mind. And that includes the British government. The British government cannot exclude themselves from the debate that we’re seeking to have which I think will be good for all of us. We have come a long way, but there is still an awful long way to go.

That means all together.

That is what turned up on google:

http://www.google.ie/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=irish+republican+apologizes&oq=irish+republican+apologizes&gs_l=hp.3...10905.11644.1.12379.6.6.0.0.0.3.179.692.3j3.6.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.BpujH7GEpdc&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41524429,d.Yms&fp=56672abf00662e34&biw=1344&bih=650

Some sources say they apologized, Mr McGuinness says the IRA is gone. So what is to be taken for granted?

I agree with the opinion of Mr McGuinness. A very capable and good man, Mr McGuinness. What he says makes more sense than what many Republicans have said and still are saying. If there is any politician in NI from the very few that I know among them through the media, who is capable to bring NI forward until the peace process in NI is accomplished than it is him. I would even go that far to say that once in the proper circumstances he might be the one who leads NI into unification with the RoI.

Probably I "seem to be wandering about a lot trying to make sense of it all without the proper info or facts", do I?

Happyman42 wrote: »

You said: 'Republicans where not inclined to apologise'
That is wrong, the IRA apologised for the deaths of non-combatants, early in the process and SF have consistently called for a Peace and Reconcialtion commission to deal with acts carried out by ALL sides, this would include FULL DISCLOSURE of all activities and would lead to he collective apology that McG is talking about.
Guess who have trenchantly resisted that process?

OK, I withdraw my saying "Republicans where not inclined to apologise". I also won´t to be a "pain in the a.." by stirring this up any further. I´ve recently read in a book "The Course of Irish History" that most of the peace process, i.e. the initiative that has brought it into reality is on the credit of the former US President Bill Clinton. Of course I do not forget about Gerry Adams as the one who was very close involved in the set up of the process, among other politicians which were drawn to this.

Obviously to "guess who have trenchantly resisted that process" isn´t quite hard, we all know who. The "big Reverent Ian Paisley".

Thomas_I wrote: »

Obviously to "guess who have trenchantly resisted that process" isn´t quite hard, we all know who. The "big Reverent Ian Paisley".

Wrong again, the British have refused to get involved in one.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Wrong again, the British have refused to get involved in one.

It would be very helpful if you would state to which time you´re referring to by all this confusing statements of yours.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Nothing confusing in the facts, if you look for them.
Have a read for starters, use the bibliography for further research.
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/estudiosirlandeses/mailhes05.pdf[/QUOTE]

I know that website and I also browsed there in the last couple of days. So I´ve had a look on these pages from your link. It´s not the "facts" that confuses me, it´s rather your recent posts. They do and as I´ve told junder, I´m almost done with this thread and therefore I´m off.

When I see some videos on youtube, recorded last year I just think in the terms of that old wellknown English song "It´s a long way to Tipperary", It´s a long way to peace for NI, it´s indeed a long way to go and I don´t know how long the road is yet.

Anyway we might meet again on another place on these boards. Bye then till the next time.

OCorcrainn wrote: »

The reality was in regards to the GFA, I don't think the Loyalists would have went along with it Gusty Spence and David Ervine.

What choice did they have? Who was the enemy when the IRA went on ceasefire? Not that their sectarian murder campaign had any impact on the IRA anyway with only 4% of their killings being Republicans in spite of collusion.

junder wrote: »

The British directed the whole process, they schooled republicans in how to sell the gfa they sacrificed the uup and sdlp just to get the two extremes the DUP and Sinn Fein right into the center of the process allowing the real politick to effectively hamstring both party's who are now well into the process of stealing the uup and sdlp's clothes leaving them almost defunct. The best both the sdlp and uup can hope for now is to hung on to the coat tails of the DUP and sdlp

What absolute nonsense, the British deserve credit for finally coming to the table but the FACT is they almost collapsed it severval times with ridiculous demands. Like Major insisting the IRA disarm before SF would be let take part:rolleyes: They quietly dropped that when the IRA said an emphatic No but not before retarding the whole process. Schooled Republicans? Yeh right!:rolleyes:
The SDLP where a spent force long before the GFA. Hume also deserves credit but he was always going to be periperhal to the resolution because he and his party where peripheral to the conflict.

One thing which has been overlooked is the reaction of the media in Britain to this.

If 100 police were injured in Britain, some nearly killed (when they petrol bombed the car) numerous riots, houses attacked with petrol bombs, plastic bullets and watercannon used (remember these were not used during the london riots because it was deemed too severe) during a protest which has lasted months rather than weeks or days it would be frontpage headline news and talked about loads. t would dominate headlines, this is unrest in a supposedly integral part of the UK. Instead it is barely reported at all

British as finchly? ha! British people and Britain itself don't seem to care at all what the Irish are getting up to

Happyman42 wrote: »

You been reading the Guardian GRMA?:D
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/25/great-britain-northern-ireland-belfast-rioting

Britian isn't that bothered and never has been, even when they have been hauled into the violence, is the harsh answer. There is no appetite to learn about the reasons, most British just refer to it as an Irish problem.

Britains finest newspaper imo... puts our rags to shame... although thats not saying much.

Read the article elsewhere but there was no link to the source.