Posted on 01/01/2010 2:50:48 PM PST by DTogo
Who has Obama thrown out that is corrupt and evil?
Oliver was a plain spoken man, and probably would not have chastised them at such length.
You are defending a psychotic murderer who used religious persecution as a false pretext to commit genocide in Ireland. It would have been better if your ancestors were killed.
Drop dead.
I honestly can't think of what good Congress does unless it is doing nothing, and, although they do nothing very well, they don't do it often enough.
Yahoo Education states that only non Anglican protestants and Jews were considered OK during his leadership.
Indeed, and that baggage we do not need.
That it does!
youre right
I should just defend killing my relatives
Henry II was the first to place settlers in Ireland to try to hold it for England (you've heard of "the Pale"). Henry and Elizabeth made it worse, and things just snowballed from there. The Catholic Irish took advantage of the English Civil War to try to get the English out -- and Cromwell exterminated them relentlessly.
There is more than enough blame to go around, but Cromwell elevated what had been a nasty little civil war into something remarkably like genocide. Which is consistent with his practice -- he was engaging in "Total War" long before Sherman.
And I don't hold a brief for anybody, particularly, other than historical accuracy. I have ancestors on BOTH sides of the conflict -- what's more, I used to be Anglican and am now Catholic. "My father he was Orange, and my mother she was Green."
If we lived by the mode of life and precept of Our Lord and by the excellent teachings of the New Testament (I am not arguing for an unChristian utopianism, here, some Ivory Snow Pacifism, but for a better adherence to Apostolic example) --- we would not, all of us, have so much that grieves the Lord in our histories or in our lives.
I speak as a sinner who knows it.
He certainly suffered from depression (he consulted physicians on several occasions for what was then termed 'melancholia'). And his single-mindedness towards his goals certainly could be considered pathological. But he could not have been as effective as he was if he were psychotic.
He was an ends-justifies-the-means sort of man, and his means was a kind of total war that wasn't seen again until the 20th century. Not only against the Irish, but against the Royalists and even the outliers in his own party (like the Levellers and Fifth Monarchy Men). It took a hard man, completely convinced of the religious and moral rightness of his cause, to order the execution of God's Anointed.
‘Nearly wiped out all the people of Ireland?’
Don’t be ridiculous. Those who died at Drogheda and Wexford (not anywhere near ‘all the people of Ireland’) died because they refused to surrender, and according to the laws of war at the time, they were fair game for receiving no quarter. The actions of the Irish Confederates in slaughtering Protestants in Ulster in 1641 (Irish, English and Scottish) could be more appropriately refered to as an attempted genocide. Cromwell never sought the destruction of the Irish Catholic population, he just wanted to crush the Royalist and allied forces there.
It’s also pretty understandable that Cromwell’s soldiers weren’t in the mood to be merciful when assaulting a heavily entrenched city, which was incredibly dangerous to the point that the first ones to enter the city (the forlorn hope) were almost certain to die even if the assault was ultimately successful.
Cromwell destroyed forever the concept of Monarchical absolutism by giving Parliament victory in the Civil War, Which Charles’ Irish allies were fighting to uphold.
He is an English national hero, regardless of what those of Irish descent might think of him based on the laughable tosh that was related to them by their forefathers about him...
Say what you will about Cromwell, but he’d certainly know what to do about the muslims in England and he wouldn’t dawdle in his actions to remedy the problem.
Portadown
In sixteen hundred and forty one those Fenians formed a plan
To massacre us Protestants down by the River Bann
To massacre us Protestants and not to spare a man
But to drive us down like a heard of swine into the River Bann
Brave Porter fell a victim, because he did intend
To help his brother Protestants heir lives for to defend
The blood did stain the waters red, their bones lay all around
As they drove them down into the Bann that flows through Portadown
A lady living in Loughgall and with her children five
She begged for the sake of them to let her be alive
That she might go to England her husband there to see
And to live in peace and unity and far from Popery
But O they would not hear her cry, they placed her on the ground
And after having tortured her the six of them they bound
They said, “You are a heretic, the Pope you do defy
And its from this bridge in Portadown this day your doom to die.”
And after having tortured her to a pain she could not stand
Down through the streets of Portadown they dragged her to the Bann
O’Shane appointed as her guard to guide her on her way
And the thought of five young children was leading her astray
At least the hundred faithful souls in Portadown were slain
All were the deeds of Popery their wicked ords to gain
But god sent down brave Cromwell our Deliverer to be
And he put down Popery in this land us Protestants set free
King William soon came after him and planted at the Boyne
An Orange Tree there that we should bear in mind
How Popery did murder us Protestants did drown
The bones of some can still be seen this day in Portadown.
note: The incident occurred in 1641, when the town was taken bye rebels, led by Toole McCann, acting under the orders of Sir Phelim O’Neill.
If you did, you could expect righteous anger from the rest of humanity.
I don't expect everyone to loath the man, but I won't stand silent when people praise him. Please don't gloss over his crimes. It is offensive.
I, for one, had no problem seeing the point you were making.
For that single event in time, as represented so eloquently in the video, we can see, clearly, the metaphor (Two things that are not alike in most ways but are similar in one important way.) for those who rule us these days.
So who can stand and say the identical things just before the 2010 elections?
IMHO, absolutely no one currently in Congress!
Specifically, I stated that he engaged in end-justifieds-the-means 'total war' that was not seen again until the 20th century. I doubted that he was psychotic (psychotics are generally ineffective) but stated that he was probably 'pathological' - and that he killed members of his OWN party to get where he wanted to go.
If that's 'praise', I think any 'condemnation' would get me banned from FR.
Rightly so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.