Posted on 07/13/2010 10:24:53 AM PDT by Stayfrosty
BELFAST, Northern Ireland (AP) — Northern Ireland leaders condemned Irish nationalist rioters Tuesday who wounded 82 police officers during two nights of street clashes sparked by the province's annual parades by the British Protestant majority.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
If someone believes that it is still being "played out in front of them" then they will soon find evidence to confirm that belief, and in retaliation, they will confirm the prejudices of the other side. And so it goes on. A self fullfilling prophecy. The more you believe, the more you see, the more you cause, which causes more people to believe and so on.
Gee, and how often did those Tunisian raiders attack Britain itself?
Quite a lot actually, not that it matters to the point I'm trying to make.
If English sailors were terrorized by the Spanish Inquisition, then it is doubtful the English would ever have taken to the sea in the first place. Spanish trials of non-spaniards were few and far between to say the least. Most English stories about the abuse of English sailors were invented propaganda. Anyone who has ever studied this topic knows it to be the case. http://www.jstor.org/pss/563285 If you read Henry Arthur Francis Kamen’s book, The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision, you would discover that after 1576, Spanish law saw English sailors as subject to the inquisition ONLY IF THEY DID SOMETHING WRONG AFTER ARRIVING IN SPAINISH PORTS.
Thank you for setting me straight - but I quite honestly wasn't trying to make anything of that, other than use it as an example of a past conflict which no longer affects my mentality. What I am trying to say is that I don't hold grudges from four hundred years back, or at least I know both logically and emotionally that it is wrong to do so.
But why let reality get in the way of some good anti-Catholic and anti-Spanish propaganda, right? Well I really honestly was not trying to make any kind of statement about the rights and wrongs of the inquisition and the Spanish Armada, so it wasn't propoganda at all. However, if you really need me to admit it, then I believe your reference absolutely. I accept that most of the alleged excesses of the Inquisition were nothing more than English propoganda, and I apologise fulsomely to yourself for any offence caused by the statement I made. It genuinely was not intended as a dig in any way.
Who cares who you do or do not despise? What would it matter anyway?
And yet you ask for complete empathy from people with what you despise, and agreement that it is of utter moment.
I have no idea of why you are prattling on uselessly like this.
As I said, I am outlining a series of conflicts from 400 years ago. I make no moral judgement on whether my people were in the right or the wrong with those disputes. I'm just simply saying that as far as I am concerned they are in the past now.
And who here is saying they are responsible for things that happened centuries ago? Certainly not me. I have no idea why you are going on and on rejecting something that no one is suggesting to you (or at least I am not).
Well you need to explain yourself more clearly then, because you come over as saying exactly that. Answer me this: What are your thoughts about the wishes of the current majority (I understand that might change in the future) in Ulster, mostly protestant, who do not wish to be part of a United Ireland?
No, it is irrefutably true.
It certainly is not. I don't consider it to be irrefutably true, and a lot of people in Ulster don't either.
The British are considered occupiers by a majority of teh Irish in Northern Ireland.
I presume that is a slip and you meant majority of Irish in Ireland?
Thus, it is only a matter of time before that view is held by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland.
There is no reason why a viewpoint held by one lot of people is neccesarily going to be accepted by another lot. It will need another factor for that to happen, like demographic change for example. In any case, they can hold that viewpoint as much as they like. It doesn't mean its true. A billion people think Mohammed is a prophet of Allah, but they're wrong. But as you imply, its all a matter of propoganda and demographics. The British are occupiers by 3.1 children per family to 1.8. What a great way to determine the truth of anything!
And before you get pedantic about it, I dont know the actual family sizes of people in NI. I just know that the Catholics are breeding faster.
Some?. You said it was ‘few’. Make up your mind....
A few?. If you actually learn some Irish history, you will see that its is estimated that at least 100000 Protestants and possibly as many as 300000 died. Unless you think 100000 or 200000 or 300000 just ‘some’...
The Famine: A shared tragedy
‘One of the common myths that have been around for a long time is that the Great Hunger had little effect on the people of the nine counties of Ulster.
The people making such claims employ a number of arguments none of which stands up to any degree of historical scrutiny but has silenced any meaningful debate on the great hunger, within the Protestant community Another myth is the almost racist claim that the hard working Protestants of Ulster were spared the hunger and disease which was more or less confined to the Catholic community, who didn’t work.
Such myths, compounded by the fact that the real history of Ireland is rarely taught in schools, has had an undoubted impact upon peoples ability to put the Great Hunger today, in its proper historical context.’
‘Tens of thousands perished in Ulster and in her book, ‘when Hunger stalked the North’ Doreen Mc Bride quotes from A. Shafto Adair who claimed in 1947 that thousands around Ballymena died without being counted. Ballymena at that time would have been regarded as a prosperous district and today is the political heartland of Ian Paisley.
Paisley, like many Unionist is fixated by the history of the Battle of the Boyne, crossing ancient swords and muskets with Bertie Ahern during the recent opening of the Boyne Museum, yet the thousands of the ancestors of Ballymena’s present day inhabitants who perished during the Great Hunger, are not remembered by any of the cultural traditions to which Paisley lends his support.
Most of Ulster’s dead from the Protestant tradition lie united in death in pauper’s graves or in other sites long forgotten, their wretched lives and deaths cloaked under a veil of silence and political dishonesty.
Many who died from cholera are buried in a mound in Friars Bush Cemetery on the Stranmillis Road in Belfast, ignored by the majority of the Protestant community.’
http://www.sundayjournal.ie/mary-nelis/The-Famine-A-shared-tragedy.4118080.jp
‘The figure for the overall number of deaths
(Catholic AND Protestants) is still a matter of academic research and debate. So too is the figure for the number who emigrated. Those who hold a higher figure for emigration, hold a lower one for death, and vice versa.
Areas with large numbers of Protestants, like north-east Ulster, Dublin and East Leinster had a lower death rate than Connaught and Munster.
But Tyrone and Armagh, which also had big Protestant populations had a death rate equal to Tipperary. It is likely that the demographic pattern of those who emigrated and those who died were quite different. Most of those who
emigrated were the very poor who had previously survived on land of less than ten acres. Those who died covered a wider social spectrum. The main cause of death during the famine was not starvation but typhus, relapsing
fever and dysentery. (The 1851 census returns for those dying in the previous ten years recorded only 20,402 dying from starvation, and a further 22,384, from “dropsy” which was starvation related.) Typhus and relapsing
fever are not directly related to lack of food and spread across the social classes.’
(”The Famine in Ireland” by Mary E. Daly, Associate Professor of History, University College, Dublin, published by the Historical Association of Ireland 1986 again in 1994.)
‘AVERAGE ANNUAL EXCESS MORTALITY 1845-1851 BY COUNTY
Yearly deaths (per thousand)
‘There is no exact count of how many actually died or emigrated, the statistics you read here and in every historical source are an approximation, the figures are thought to be higher, but no one knows for sure how much higher.’
YEARLY DEATHS PER THOUSAND
50-60
Mayo
Sligo
Leitrim (western section of county)
40-50
Cavan
Leitrim
Roscommon
Galway
30-40
Clare
Cork
20-30
Fermanagh
Monaghan
Longford
Westmeath
Laois/Queens
Tipperary
Waterford
Kerry
10-20
Antrim
Donegal
Tyrone
Meath
Offaly/Kings
Limerick
Kilkenny
Wicklow
Armagh
0-10
Derry
Down
Louth
Dublin
Kildare
Carlow
Wexford
(This information taken from THE IRISH FAMINE by Peter Gray, THE FAMINE in ULSTER Edited by Christine Kinealy
and Trevor Parkill)
If you consider the map showing the distribution
of cholera between 1848-1850 at
http://www.wisc.edu/history/famine/cholera.html
you will learn that the occurences are as follows in towns of 2,000 inhabitants and upwards:
Londonderry 3 (Large Protestant majority)
Antrim 4 (Large Protestant majority)
Down 5 (Large Protestant majority)
Armagh 4 (Large Protestant majority)
Fermanagh 0 (Small Catholic majority)
Tyrone 0 (Small Catholic majority)
Donegal 0 (Large Catholic majority)
Monaghan 1 (Large Catholic majority)
Cavan 0 (Large Catholic majority)
Since we can assume that the cholera followed the blight, it is clear that Ulster was indeed not stricken by blight to the extent that the other Provinces were BUT the counties within Ulster that were stricken were predominantly the Protestant dominated dominated counties.
http://www.ulsterheritage.com/maps/famine_1847.gif
I trust you are joking.
Omagh ?
Harrods bombing ?
Birmingham pub bombings ?
Manchester ?
Washington ?
Must be a hundred dead civilians dead there and a thousand injured, bombs in civilian shopping areas aimed at civilians.
Not that the scum in the udf / uda were much better but at least they did’nt have well meaning fools thousands of miles away funding them
You said...
Is shooting civilians tending to their wounded an act of terrorism?
I’d say it would be an act of murder. That day probably marked one of the lowest points in our post war history.
I do believe that the paras thought they were under attack at the outset but the reaction was out of all proportion.
You wrote:
“If someone believes that it is still being “played out in front of them” then they will soon find evidence to confirm that belief, and in retaliation, they will confirm the prejudices of the other side. And so it goes on. A self fullfilling prophecy. The more you believe, the more you see, the more you cause, which causes more people to believe and so on.”
True enough - especially when they really are still being played out today.
“Quite a lot actually, not that it matters to the point I’m trying to make.”
No, actually not quite a lot.
“Thank you for setting me straight - but I quite honestly wasn’t trying to make anything of that, other than use it as an example of a past conflict which no longer affects my mentality. What I am trying to say is that I don’t hold grudges from four hundred years back, or at least I know both logically and emotionally that it is wrong to do so.”
I don’t believe this is about grudges. It is about a still unfolding problem.
“And yet you ask for complete empathy from people with what you despise, and agreement that it is of utter moment.”
No, actually I have done no such thing.
“As I said, I am outlining a series of conflicts from 400 years ago. I make no moral judgement on whether my people were in the right or the wrong with those disputes. I’m just simply saying that as far as I am concerned they are in the past now.”
Alright, I can see that, but what if they were not just in the past but in reality just the beginning of a continuing problem?
“Well you need to explain yourself more clearly then, because you come over as saying exactly that.”
No, actually I don’t. Show me where I have.
“Answer me this: What are your thoughts about the wishes of the current majority (I understand that might change in the future) in Ulster, mostly protestant, who do not wish to be part of a United Ireland?”
I think their feelings in that regard they are largely imaterial. In other words, if they wish to be British, they can move to England, or Scotland or Wales. This is the sad state of things for invaders who do not both win a war and make a legitimate peace with the conquered.
“It certainly is not. I don’t consider it to be irrefutably true, and a lot of people in Ulster don’t either.”
Not yet.
“I presume that is a slip and you meant majority of Irish in Ireland?”
Nope. No slip at all.
“There is no reason why a viewpoint held by one lot of people is neccesarily going to be accepted by another lot. It will need another factor for that to happen, like demographic change for example. In any case, they can hold that viewpoint as much as they like. It doesn’t mean its true. A billion people think Mohammed is a prophet of Allah, but they’re wrong. But as you imply, its all a matter of propoganda and demographics. The British are occupiers by 3.1 children per family to 1.8. What a great way to determine the truth of anything!”
They picked the system. They could have simply been just to the Irish from the beginning. If the English had been then none of this probably would have ever happened.
“And before you get pedantic about it, I dont know the actual family sizes of people in NI. I just know that the Catholics are breeding faster.”
Breeding? So now they are like animals to you?
‘I think their feelings in that regard they are largely imaterial. In other words, if they wish to be British, they can move to England, or Scotland or Wales. This is the sad state of things for invaders who do not both win a war and make a legitimate peace with the conquered.’
So people who have been Irish for 403 years (since 1607) have to ‘go home’?. To countries where their families havent lived since the 17thC?.
You also do realise that the Ulster Protestants whose ancestors were Lowland Scots are in fact the descendants of the ancient Celtic tribe known as the Cruthin, whose kingdom stretched over both what is modern day Ulster and parts of the West of Scotland?. So many NI protestants in fact live in the country of their forefathers.
The Cruthin.....find out more about them.
Also, again, I will point out that the ‘native’ Irish you are so fond of are nothing of the sort. The Gaels were and are invaders who invaded Ireland in ancient times and subjugated and frankly annihilated the original inhabitants, the Beaker People. So the people screaming for Brits Out are themselves the descendants of a Celtic tribe who brutally conquered Ireland.
Add to that the English, Scots and Viking blood they have....the Vikings having conquered much of Ireland and the Scots blood from the Scottish mercenaries who fought from the 1200 to the late 1500’s for Ireland, many of whom stayed and intermarried with the Irish. Most famously the West Highland mercenaries known as the ‘gallowglasses’ (Irish Gaelic for ‘redlegs’), although that term came to mean any Scotsman who fought for Ireland against the English in medieval times.
“A few?. If you actually learn some Irish history, you will see that its is estimated that at least 100000 Protestants and possibly as many as 300000 died. Unless you think 100000 or 200000 or 300000 just ‘some’...”
When you compare it to the number of Catholics who died it is only “some”.
You wrote:
“So people who have been Irish for 403 years (since 1607) have to ‘go home’?. To countries where their families havent lived since the 17thC?.”
They’ve never been Irish. Ask them if they are. Overwhelmingly they say they are not. You do realize that, right?
As a former soldier I'd say murder doesn't quite cover it. Shooting an unarmed civilian waving a white hanky while he tends to another wounded civilian is more than murder one would think.
But the point I'm trying to make is that there are bad actors on every side, see Lt. Calley on my side for instance. Acts like Bloody Sunday just give those bad actors more power.
If an IRA bad actor murders civilians in pursuit of his policy goals and is rightly labeled a terrorist how does wearing a uniform exempt one from the same label?
I will pray for you.
You make the classic mistake of thinking because the Protestants wish still to be part of Britain that they therfore deny their Irishness. They dont. They are proud to be British, but equally and fiercely proud of their Ulster identity, just as I can be proud to be Scottish and also British. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Remember that the Catholic pop in NI votes every election to stay in the UK, yet do they deny one iota of their Catholic Irish identity?. Not a bit of it.
If you had ever been to NI, you’d realise this and realise that the identities there are more complex than myth and the media portray.
I too, for you.
But that is the point I am trying to make. They are still being played out today because neither side will let go of it. They are essentially still fighting out the arguments of 400 years ago. The actual differences between the two sides now are minimal in comparison to what they were then, and certainly much less than their similarities now.
I don’t believe this is about grudges. It is about a still unfolding problem.
I think you're wrong.
No, actually I have done no such thing.
Ok. So who cares what you think about Ireland? It's none of your business and you don't know enough about it anyway.
Alright, I can see that, but what if they were not just in the past but in reality just the beginning of a continuing problem?
Well you have said many times that the problem began with the transplantation starting in the 1600's and accelerating in the 17th 18th century, although I note you make no mention of the various relaxations of the unjust laws in Ireland in the late 19th century (courtesy W Gladstone). I digress. If this all started 400 years back, how can it be the beginning of a continuing problem? Come to think of it, how can anything be a "beginning of a continuing problem"? Actually, that may be the nub of it. Everything in northern Ireland is always the "beginning of a continuing problem." It's a problem that never goes away because there are interested parties who dont want it to, so there's always a "new beginning", another stage in the dispute.
No, actually I don’t.
Yes, actually you do.
Show me where I have.
Well the following paragraph for a start off.
I think their feelings in that regard they are largely imaterial. In other words, if they wish to be British, they can move to England, or Scotland or Wales. This is the sad state of things for invaders who do not both win a war and make a legitimate peace with the conquered.
Many of them who wanted to be British have already left. The ones who are left want to be British, and they don't want to move. And frankly, I don't see why they should.
They could have simply been just to the Irish from the beginning. If the English had been then none of this probably would have ever happened.
I dont believe that for one second.
You wrote:
“You make the classic mistake of thinking because the Protestants wish still to be part of Britain that they therfore deny their Irishness. They dont.”
Incorrect. I made no error at all. This was already posted in the thread. I guess you were not paying attention:
A survey in 1999 showed that 72% of Northern Irish Protestants considered themselves “British” and 2% “Irish”, with 68% of Northern Irish Catholics considering themselves “Irish” and 9% “British”.[22] The survey also revealed that 78% of Protestants and 48% of all respondents felt “Strongly British”, while 77% of Catholics and 35% of all respondents felt “Strongly Irish”. 51% of Protestants and 33% of all respondents felt “Not at all Irish”, while 62% of Catholics and 28% of all respondents felt “Not at all British”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_and_politics_of_Northern_Ireland
Thus, only 2% - that’s TWO PERCENT consider themselves Irish. TWO PERCENT. 51% felt “Not at all Irish”. That means 49% might feel somewhat Irish, but still only 2% consider themselves Irish. I made no mistake at all.
“They are proud to be British, but equally and fiercely proud of their Ulster identity, just as I can be proud to be Scottish and also British. The two are not mutually exclusive.”
They apparently are for a huge portion of the Northern Irish population - if you believe them. I guess you could assume they are lying about their feelings. Will that be your theory?
“Remember that the Catholic pop in NI votes every election to stay in the UK, yet do they deny one iota of their Catholic Irish identity?. Not a bit of it.”
Actually they do not vote to stay in the UK. They vote for representatives to a government which clearly most of them do not wish to be subjects of. Again, “62% of Catholics and 28% of all respondents felt “Not at all British”.”
“If you had ever been to NI, you’d realise this and realise that the identities there are more complex than myth and the media portray.”
I am not relying on any myths or MSM media at all. You were wrong again.
You wrote:
“But that is the point I am trying to make. They are still being played out today because neither side will let go of it. They are essentially still fighting out the arguments of 400 years ago. The actual differences between the two sides now are minimal in comparison to what they were then, and certainly much less than their similarities now.”
Apparently they don’t believe so.
“I think you’re wrong.”
It doesn’t matter. They seem to believe exactly what I am saying.
“Ok. So who cares what you think about Ireland? It’s none of your business and you don’t know enough about it anyway.”
I apparently know more than you - that seems clear - and apparently you care about what I think about Ireland because you keep posting to me.
“Well you have said many times that the problem began with the transplantation starting in the 1600’s and accelerating in the 17th 18th century, although I note you make no mention of the various relaxations of the unjust laws in Ireland in the late 19th century (courtesy W Gladstone).”
No relaxation solved the problems. If they did, you would not be having this conversation.
“I digress. If this all started 400 years back, how can it be the beginning of a continuing problem? Come to think of it, how can anything be a “beginning of a continuing problem”?”
Problems begin and end. In between the beginning and the end they are “continuing”. Are you really saying you did not realize that?
“Actually, that may be the nub of it. Everything in northern Ireland is always the “beginning of a continuing problem.” It’s a problem that never goes away because there are interested parties who dont want it to, so there’s always a “new beginning”, another stage in the dispute.”
No. There was a problem in Ireland with the British occupation. Now there isn’t. For there are no British soldiers in Ireland except for the North (where the other problems continue). Thus, a problem that began centuries ago, and continued for centuries, has ended COMPLETELY in 26 counties of Ireland. Do you see how that works? Problems can be ended. They cannot be ended when people pretend they don’t exist.
“Yes, actually you do.”
No, actually I don’t.
“Well the following paragraph for a start off. I think their feelings in that regard they are largely imaterial. In other words, if they wish to be British, they can move to England, or Scotland or Wales. This is the sad state of things for invaders who do not both win a war and make a legitimate peace with the conquered.”
You have failed - again. In post 195, I asked: “And who here is saying they are responsible for things that happened centuries ago? Certainly not me. I have no idea why you are going on and on rejecting something that no one is suggesting to you (or at least I am not).”
What you posted doesn’t even come close to what you are suggesting.
“Many of them who wanted to be British have already left.”
Then taht proves what I said is correct.
” The ones who are left want to be British, and they don’t want to move. And frankly, I don’t see why they should.”
I think they should stay - but I think Ireland should be reunited. So do the Irish.
“I dont believe that for one second.”
Then you don’t believe common sense. If the English were more just to the Irish and had not murdered them in the thousands, stole their land, banned their language and religion and otherwise brutalized them, there would be no reason to believe the Irish would still be fighting the English.
Firstly, I have more experience of NI than you, who seems to rely on wikipedia polls. I have been there, I have relatives there (as I do the ROI), so I know how the identities mesh into one another, or dont. Have you ever been to NI, or the ROI or even Britain or Europe?.
Secondly, you miss an obvious point: what type of ‘Irish’ identity the respondents responded to. And for over 150 years since the days of Daniel O Connell, ‘Irish’ has meant an obvious Catholic identity (in fact the naked bigotry of much of the Irish Nationalist/Republican identity, which ignores and degrades the Ulster Protestant identity) dates back to that time, as O Connell declared only those who were Catholic and Irish were true Irish, a sad bigoted idea many still hold in the Nationalist/Republican community.
So should we be surprised that many NI Protestants instinctively reject such an identity?. It would be the same as say asking Scots or Welsh to say yes to a British identity that was very heavily English, with little Scots-Welsh input.
Again, I will say that whilst proudly British, the NI Protestants are first and foremost Ulstermen and celebrate their Ulster heritage and culture, from its history to its language and literature. So they DO define themselves as Irish, and celebrate an Irish identity, but not in the strict and cliched Irish identity you have alluded to.
‘Actually they do not vote to stay in the UK. They vote for representatives to a government which clearly most of them do not wish to be subjects of’.
47% of Catholics in 2009 wished to stay in the UK as opposed to 40% who wanted a United Ireland. With another 5% wanting an independent NI. So thats 52% of NI Catholics who reject a United Ireland, with another 8% possibly to be added to that total.
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2009/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html
Thank You. I need it. :)
You wrote:
“Firstly, I have more experience of NI than you, who seems to rely on wikipedia polls.”
It was not a wikipedia poll. The sources should look familiar to you since you yourself cite the SAME SOURCE:
22.^ “Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey, 1999. Module:Community Relations. Variable:NINATID”. Ark.ac.uk. 2003-05-09. http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/1999/Community_Relations/NINATID.html. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
23.^ “Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey, 1999. Module:Community Relations. Variable:BRITISH”. Ark.ac.uk. 2003-05-12. http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/1999/Community_Relations/BRITISH.html. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
24.^ “Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey, 1999. Module:Community Relations. Variable:IRISH”. Ark.ac.uk. 2003-05-09. http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/1999/Community_Relations/IRISH.html. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
“I have been there, I have relatives there (as I do the ROI), so I know how the identities mesh into one another, or dont. Have you ever been to NI, or the ROI or even Britain or Europe?.”
Irrelevant. Your anecdotal info is worth zilch.
Different year, same source - I should have said.
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.
