Help!! [Archive]

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 22:05

Wow thats a lot of replies! I don't pretend to represent loyalism but I'll do my best to respond to your posts.

LOL, loyal4life thinks that PUP are Marxist-Leninist! Epic fail.

PUP are social democrats and Royalists to boot. What is he playing at? And frankly calling that cover for drug dealing and extortion even social democrats if being far to nice.

They are Democratic Socialists, not social democrats, and their roots are ml, trust me. They are not royalist, not all loyalists love the queen any more than all republicans love the pope, that attitude should have died in 1690.

Loyalism is based on raw sectarianism (just look at how the UVF, UDA, etc targeted any old Roman Catholic, look at the Shankill Butchers, look at the fact that loyalists started the Troubles in a hate filled mad reaction to the civil rights movement) and the worst type of British Imperialism chauvinism. Its has always been right wing. That is just the way it is. The loyalist parties the DUP and TUV say it, as does the absolute failure of PUP. Pretending that it can be progressive or socialist is a joke.

Firstly loyalism is not encompassed by the UDA and UVF any mroe than Irish Nationalism is encompassed by the IRA. Secondly the IRA hijacked the civil rights movement to their own political ends and started the troubles, ie bombing indiscriminately, the UDA and UVF had some pretty questionable intelligence in trying to eliminate IRA members, and as the troublkes progressed sadly turned to killing civilians in tit-for-tat sectarian murder.

Stormfront idiots going to a loyalist forum, how bizzare. Why did Enoch Powell after he was kicked out the Tories join the Ulster Unionist Party, who by the way are much more progressive than any loyalist whether TUV, DUP or PUP??

If looked at clearly your average BNP supporter may well be worth arguing with. Not so a Loyalist. Yet if someone said that they supported the BNP wouldnt they get banned from here?

Stormfront idiots also go to IrishNationalist.net. Why did Eamon De Valera after his membership of the 'socialist' IRA go on to send his condolences after the death of Hitler? Do you really want to start this cherrypicking fiasco, because remember the IRA fought for the actual nazis.. ;)

http://www.pulseresources.org/forums/showthread.php?39506-Why-not-socialism&p=480022&posted=1#post480022

Looks like loyal4life has been told to go away to a fenian forum! :laugh:

And you'll no doubt be over the moon, you;d just love to see the orange order marching up the garvaghy road killing jews, muslims and catholics, waving swastikas and goose-stepping. How very antifascist of you! :rolleyes:

Again epic fail, the idea that you have be Irish Republican to realize Loyalists are scum is just wrong, plenty of people who have no time for Irish Republicanism you know can see it, is just bizzare.

How can people 'realise loyalists are scum' when they maybe haven't met any? Even if they disagree with loyalists defending themselves from attack it doesn't mean they necessarrily tar them all with the same brush. A lot of people here are anti Serbian paramilitaries for example, nobody would suggest Serbs are 'all scum' because its just not that simple.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:11

They are Democratic Socialists, not social democrats, and their roots are ml, trust me. They are not royalist, not all loyalists love the queen any more than all republicans love the pope, that attitude should have died in 1690.

There were any Irish Republicans in 1690, what does the term Loyalist mean? It means someone Loyal to the British crown.

They are social democrats and not democratic socialists. Look at their manifestos, I have. And they do not have their roots in Marxism-Leninism, where did you get that strange idea? Remember Unionist leaning members of Communist Party of Ireland were more than happy to label the Paisleyites fascist. The Communist Party of Ireland Marxist-Leninist believed in the out right suppression of all Unionism. Are you refering to BICO? A small cult run from Cork by an ex-Jesuit who bigged Loyalism for a time in the early 70s? I dont trust you. I think you are making that up.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:15

How can people 'realise loyalists are scum' when they maybe haven't met any? Even if they disagree with loyalists defending themselves from attack it doesn't mean they necessarrily tar them all with the same brush. A lot of people here are anti Serbian paramilitaries for example, nobody would suggest Serbs are 'all scum' because its just not that simple.

The actions and opinions of loyalists down the through years illustrate it very well thats why, I have never met a Kahanist, does that mean I should withhold judgement on them?

Loyalists defending themselves from attack? What is that all about? Is murdering and torturing people not involved in politics defending yourself from attack??? Were Loyalists actually under attack? Not really. It was the security forces. We know where you stand now. Lenny Murphy.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:19

Stormfront idiots also go to IrishNationalist.net. Why did Eamon De Valera after his membership of the 'socialist' IRA go on to send his condolences after the death of Hitler? Do you really want to start this cherrypicking fiasco, because remember the IRA fought for the actual nazis.. ;)

I see you are trying to change the subject. Irishnationalist.net is a bunch middle class weridoes. Its doesnt represent a popular movement such as Loyalism and pulse do. Stormfront types dont go to IrishRepublican.net now do they? DeValera had ceased to be progressive which he was for most of the 1930s at that time and Germany was a friendly country (to the Irish Free State). Its hardly strange. And I also dont give a fuck about DeValera.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:21

People can go and snoop around PULSE for themselves. Just dont believe this person with his ideas of PUP having their roots in Marxism-Leninism, funniest thing I have heard in ages.

Sadena Meti

24th April 2011, 22:22

Northern Ireland is part of Ireland, as satellite images can prove.

I actually used to be passionate on this subject. Don't care now, just enjoy the baiting.

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 22:22

No, actually that was directed at DummyDrummer.

(EDIT) - No, you were right, it was directed at loyal4life

See what I have to put up with? From both sides! :D

There were any Irish Republicans in 1690, what does the term Loyalist mean? It means someone Loyal to the British crown.

It means loyal to the Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, hence the more common term Unionist. The loyalists fought against the British Crown at the Boyne

They are social democrats and not democratic socialists. Look at their manifestos, I have. And they do not have their roots in Marxism-Leninism, where did you get that strange idea? Remember Unionist leaning members of Communist Party of Ireland were more than happy to label the Paisleyites fascist.

Its fairly well known, I'm not digging out any references because you seem to have made your mind up regardless. Ian Paisley was the DUP, not PUP. Now the DUP are in a power-sharing Government with Sinn Fein, so I suppose that makes them fascists by extension.

The Communist Party of Ireland Marxist-Leninist believed in the out right suppression of all Unionism. Are you refering to BICO? A small cult run from Cork by an ex-Jesuit who bigged Loyalism for a time in the early 70s? I dont trust you. I think you are making that up.

I don't have a clue what you're talking about now sorry.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:23

Sadena Meti

24th April 2011, 22:24

funniest thing I have heard in ages.

Guy buys a parrot. The parrot won't stop swearing. Nothing the guy tries works. Eventually he gets so fed up he grabs the parrot and puts it in the freezer.

After a few minutes he opens the door and lets the parrot out. The parrot is quiet, and then says "May I ask what the chicken did?"

Marxach-LÃ©inÃnach

24th April 2011, 22:26

Secondly the IRA hijacked the civil rights movement to their own political ends and started the troubles, ie bombing indiscriminately, the UDA and UVF had some pretty questionable intelligence in trying to eliminate IRA members, and as the troublkes progressed sadly turned to killing civilians in tit-for-tat sectarian murder.

So the IRA started the Troubles, despite the fact that the UVF had been killing people for four years by the time the Provos got their first kill?

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:27

Its fairly well known, I'm not digging out any references because you seem to have made your mind up regardless. Ian Paisley was the DUP, not PUP. Now the DUP are in a power-sharing Government with Sinn Fein, so I suppose that makes them fascists by extension.

Yes the PUP is a front group for drug dealers and extortionists who tried to muster a "left wing" Unionist party. There manifestos never mentioned socializing all the means of production and distribution, they were advocating a nicer capitalism and the idea that they believe in some Marxist-Leninist dictatorship of the proletariat is bizzare.

Provisional Sinn Fein are an opportunistic socially liberal social democratic party who are in a coalition with right wing socially conservative populists as part of a "peace process" because the six counties are such a mess.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:28

So the IRA started the Troubles, despite the fact that the UVF had been killing people for four years by the time the Provos got their first kill?

The IRA barely existed in 1969, they had only a few rusty guns. It was loyalist reaction to the civil rights movement that flooded the IRA with volunteers because people decided that the Orange statelet was unreformable.

Manic Impressive

24th April 2011, 22:29

They are Democratic Socialists, not social democrats, and their roots are ml, trust me. They are not royalist, not all loyalists love the queen any more than all republicans love the pope, that attitude should have died in 1690.
Most do still worship the Queen, not all protestants do but loyalists certainly do

Stormfront idiots also go to IrishNationalist.net. Why did Eamon De Valera after his membership of the 'socialist' IRA go on to send his condolences after the death of Hitler? Do you really want to start this cherrypicking fiasco, because remember the IRA fought for the actual nazis.. ;)
There is a history between Germany and the struggle for a united Ireland that pre-dates fascism. For instance Germany sending rifles to the IRA during the first world war. Fascists also tried to manipulate the struggle for there own gain see Oswald Mosley raising the issue of the Black and Tans in parliament. But you are going to have to source your claim about De Valera and your previous claims that the Nazis were somehow helping the IRA you failed to do that before.

And you'll no doubt be over the moon, you;d just love to see the orange order marching up the garvaghy road killing jews, muslims and catholics, waving swastikas and goose-stepping. How very antifascist of you! :rolleyes:
troll response

How can people 'realise loyalists are scum' when they maybe haven't met any? Even if they disagree with loyalists defending themselves from attack it doesn't mean they necessarrily tar them all with the same brush. A lot of people here are anti Serbian paramilitaries for example, nobody would suggest Serbs are 'all scum' because its just not that simple.
Loyalists are reactionary but as I said there is a huge distinction between being a loyalist and being a protestant. Catholics were and are systemically discriminated against by loyalists do you not think they have a right to defend themselves from state run terror?

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:30

Its fairly well known, I'm not digging out any references because you seem to have made your mind up regardless.

Its not fairly well known. The only fairly well known people who claimed to Marxist-Leninist were BICO. Who you have never heard of. So you are obviously just dreaming.

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 22:31

The actions and opinions of loyalists down the through years illustrate it very well thats why, I have never met a Kahanist, does that mean I should withhold judgement on them?

You can judge their policies, but it seems here you have very much misjudged fundamental policies. If you're calling for every leftist to demand death to the brits then forget it, there's way more important issues to deal with.

Loyalists defending themselves from attack? What is that all about? Is murdering and torturing people not involved in politics defending yourself from attack??? Were Loyalists actually under attack? Not really. It was the security forces. We know where you stand now. Lenny Murphy.

Same goes for the IRA. Are you going to defend them? Because I'm certainly not defending the UDA or UVF here, I'm trying to bring back some historical perspective.

I see you are trying to change the subject. Irishnationalist.net is a bunch middle class weridoes. Its doesnt represent a popular movement such as Loyalism and pulse do. Stormfront types dont go to IrishRepublican.net now do they? DeValera had ceased to be progressive which he was for most of the 1930s at that time and Germany was a friendly country (to the Irish Free State). Its hardly strange. And I also dont give a fuck about DeValera.

I'm not trying to change the subject, you seem to be making wildly disjointed and somewhat hypocritical attacks. Pulse does not represent the loyalist community, it hardly even represents the glasgow rangers supporters community of whom its majority are members.

People can go and snoop around PULSE for themselves. Just dont believe this person with his ideas of PUP having their roots in Marxism-Leninism, funniest thing I have heard in ages.

Just because its been revised from wikipedia does not make it untrue, I doubt you know any PUP members but maybe you should start by asking some? I'm not a member yet so I don't qualify.. :crying:

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:32

Loyalists are reactionary but as I said there is a huge distinction between being a loyalist and being a protestant. Catholics were and are systemically discriminated against by loyalists do you not think they have a right to defend themselves from state run terror?

There is also a huge difference between being a Loyalist and being a Unionist. Left wing Alliance types wouldnt go near a forum like Pulse and would consider murdering random people because of their religious backgrounds as "defending themselves".

Marxach-LÃ©inÃnach

24th April 2011, 22:33

The IRA barely existed in 1969, they had only a few rusty guns. It was loyalist reaction to the civil rights movement that flooded the IRA with volunteers because people decided that the Orange statelet was unreformable.

But you're forgetting the civil rights movement was actually just a front for Roman Catholic gunmen all along :rolleyes:

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 22:36

Same goes for the IRA. Are you going to defend them? Because I'm certainly not defending the UDA or UVF here, I'm trying to bring back some historical perspective.

Just because its been revised from wikipedia does not make it untrue, I doubt you know any PUP members but maybe you should start by asking some? I'm not a member yet so I don't qualify.. :crying:

The IRA didnt target people because of their religious background.

So you learnt it originally from wikipedia? Not always the best source. The fact is that manifestos dont call for the socialization of the means of production, let alone a dictatorship of the proletariat, all Marxist-Leninists through Ireland Britian reject strongly loyalism, they show no evidence at all of being influenced by Marxism-Leninism.

Anyway they are an irrevelant. Small party gradually disappearing.

Are you going to tell me that the TUV are influenced by syndicialism next.

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 22:43

Outside of a tiny group in Cork all Marxist-Leninist organizations in Ireland and Britain supported Irish Republicanism. Why do you think that was loyal4life? Why do you think that it was only fascists on the mainland who supported your friends?

Outside of a tiny group of republican volunteers many ex IRA fought for Franco, why do you think that is? What Fascists on the mainland supported 'my friends'?

So the IRA started the Troubles, despite the fact that the UVF had been killing people for four years by the time the Provos got their first kill?

Source?

Yes the PUP is a front group for drug dealers and extortionists who tried to muster a "left wing" Unionist party. There manifestos never mentioned socializing all the means of production and distribution, they were advocating a nicer capitalism and the idea that they believe in some Marxist-Leninist dictatorship of the proletariat is bizzare.

They were at the heart of the Ulster Workers strike and reacting to the bourgeouis imposition of Irish 'home rule'.

Provisional Sinn Fein are an opportunistic socially liberal social democratic party who are in a coalition with right wing socially conservative populists as part of a "peace process" because the six counties are such a mess.

Yes

The IRA barely existed in 1969, they had only a few rusty guns. It was loyalist reaction to the civil rights movement that flooded the IRA with volunteers because people decided that the Orange statelet was unreformable.

You conveniently fail to mention the fact that the IRA were at the heart of the civil rights movement, although many within that movement completely rejected their presence, in fact modern sinn fein and pira split from them some time ago.

Sadena Meti

24th April 2011, 22:46

The IRA barely existed in 1969, they had only a few rusty guns. It was loyalist reaction to the civil rights movement that flooded the IRA with volunteers because people decided that the Orange statelet was unreformable.

As I recall in a book by Gerry Adams there was a point where their arsenal was one rusty revolver.

Marxach-LÃ©inÃnach

24th April 2011, 22:48

Source?

The year 1966 marked the 50th anniversary of the 1916 Easter Rising — when Irish republicans seized key buildings in Dublin and declared an independent Irish Republic. On 8 March 1966, a group of ex-Irish Republican Army (IRA) volunteers planted a bomb that destroyed Nelson's Pillar in Dublin. On 17 April, large republican parades took place in Belfast to mark the anniversary. Some unionists and loyalists feared there would be a "revival" of the IRA. Since 1964 there had also been a growing campaign for equality reforms in Northern Ireland. This was led by groups like Campaign for Social Justice (CSJ), which became the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association (NICRA). They sought to end the discrimination suffered by Catholics in housing, employment and through gerrymandering. Prime Minister Terence O'Neill was willing to accept some of the demands. The unionists, who were overwhelmingly Protestant, feared losing their grip on power.

On 7 May, a group of loyalists led by Gusty Spence petrol bombed a Catholic-owned pub on Shankill Road, Belfast. Fire also engulfed the house next door, killing the elderly Protestant widow who lived there.[5] On 21 May, the group (calling itself the "Ulster Volunteer Force") issued a statement:

From this day, we declare war against the Irish Republican Army and its splinter groups. Known IRA men will be executed mercilessly and without hesitation. Less extreme measures will be taken against anyone sheltering or helping them, but if they persist in giving them aid, then more extreme methods will be adopted . . . we solemnly warn the authorities to make no more speeches of appeasement. We are heavily armed Protestants dedicated to this cause.[6]

On 27 May, four UVF men were sent to kill an IRA volunteer, Leo Martin, who lived on Falls Road. Unable to find their target, the men drove around in search of a Catholic. They shot dead John Scullion, a civilian, as he walked home.[7] Spence later wrote "At the time, the attitude was that if you couldn't get an IRA man you should shoot a Taig, he's your last resort".[7]

On 26 June, the group shot dead a Catholic civilian and wounded two others as they left a pub on Malvern Street, Belfast.[5] Two days later, the government of Northern Ireland declared the UVF illegal.[5] The shootings led to Spence being arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment with a recommended minimum sentence of twenty years.[8]
There you go. 1966, three years before the Provos had even formed, let alone started killing people

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 22:55

There is also a huge difference between being a Loyalist and being a Unionist. Left wing Alliance types wouldnt go near a forum like Pulse and would consider murdering random people because of their religious backgrounds as "defending themselves".

I don't go near pulse either, or at elast I haven't for a while because of some of the ahoels they have there. But Alliance would be welcome there to discuss issues, as would republicans (there are a few who can debate civilly and honestly)

But you're forgetting the civil rights movement was actually just a front for Roman Catholic gunmen all along :rolleyes:

No they were busy in the border campaign or burning orphanages in Galway

The IRA didnt target people because of their religious background.

:rolleyes:

So you learnt it originally from wikipedia? Not always the best source. The fact is that manifestos dont call for the socialization of the means of production, let alone a dictatorship of the proletariat, all Marxist-Leninists through Ireland Britian reject strongly loyalism, they show no evidence at all of being influenced by Marxism-Leninism.

I doubt even the Communist Party GB would put 'dictatorship' in their manifesto.

Anyway they are an irrevelant. Small party gradually disappearing.

Are you going to tell me that the TUV are influenced by syndicialism next.

Are you going to tell me that Republican Sinn Fein are pacifist?

Sadena Meti

24th April 2011, 22:58

Are you going to tell me that Republican Sinn Fein are pacifist?

They are now. They have completely renounced all violence. Few years ago in fact.

BTW, the thread this thread was started about seems to have died. I did my best.

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 23:03

There you go. 1966, three years before the Provos had even formed, let alone started killing people

The year 1966 marked the 50th anniversary of the 1916 Easter Rising — when Irish republicans seized key buildings in Dublin and declared an independent Irish Republic. On 8 March 1966, a group of ex-Irish Republican Army (IRA) volunteers planted a bomb that destroyed Nelson's Pillar in Dublin. On 17 April, large republican parades took place in Belfast to mark the anniversary. Some unionists and loyalists feared there would be a "revival" of the IRA. Since 1964 there had also been a growing campaign for equality reforms in Northern Ireland. This was led by groups like Campaign for Social Justice (CSJ), which became the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association (NICRA). They sought to end the discrimination suffered by Catholics in housing, employment and through gerrymandering. Prime Minister Terence O'Neill was willing to accept some of the demands. The unionists, who were overwhelmingly Protestant, feared losing their grip on power.

On 7 May, a group of loyalists led by Gusty Spence petrol bombed a Catholic-owned pub on Shankill Road, Belfast. Fire also engulfed the house next door, killing the elderly Protestant widow who lived there.[5] On 21 May, the group (calling itself the "Ulster Volunteer Force") issued a statement:

Where is that from?

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 23:06

They are now. They have completely renounced all violence. Few years ago in fact.

BTW, the thread this thread was started about seems to have died. I did my best.

Thanks guys! You don't know how much I appreciate that! :)

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 23:14

Outside of a tiny group of republican volunteers many ex IRA fought for Franco, why do you think that is? What Fascists on the mainland supported 'my friends'?

They were at the heart of the Ulster Workers strike and reacting to the bourgeouis imposition of Irish 'home rule'.

Both statements are patently false. Those who were part of Duffy's Blueshirt brigade did hardly any fighting in spain and were told to go home, because frankly they were not seasoned fighters, the IRA had fought continually with Duffy's Blueshirts on the streets of the Free State. Duffy represented militant anti-Republican pro-treaty forces who could not trace their roots back to the fenians and the IRB.

Also the Connolly column was not tiny and fought with great distinction.

The "Ulster Workers Strike" was not aimed at stopping Irish "home rule", it was aimed at power sharing. What is in place now.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 23:16

I don't go near pulse either, or at elast I haven't for a while because of some of the ahoels they have there. But Alliance would be welcome there to discuss issues, as would republicans (there are a few who can debate civilly and honestly)

No they are not. People with IP addresses in the Free State are banned unless they can prove they belong to a lodge.

Also Loyalists dont really do honesty. They do lies and hysteria.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 23:20

You conveniently fail to mention the fact that the IRA were at the heart of the civil rights movement, although many within that movement completely rejected their presence, in fact modern sinn fein and pira split from them some time ago.

Yes Republicans and Communists were involved in the Civil Rights movement, but it contained no demands for national liberation, just the same civil rights that people had in England, the IRA had been run down to nothing and anyway the idea at that time among Republicans and Communists was that you couldnt launch an armed struggle against the occupation until you had brought together the two communities in the north. Do you believe that the presence of Black nationalists in the Civil Rights movement in the USA justified the attacks on it by white southerns? Your logic here would suggest that you do.

Ele'ill

24th April 2011, 23:25

Hi. Not a big deal or anything but here's a very friendly mod reminder that we don't allow 'forum invasions' or the organizing of trollish activity regardless of the other site. I post this in advance because the rule isn't well remembered by users.

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 23:33

Both statements are patently false. Those who were part of Duffy's Blueshirt brigade did hardly any fighting in spain and were told to go home, because frankly they were not seasoned fighters, the IRA had fought continually with Duffy's Blueshirts on the streets of the Free State. Duffy represented militant anti-Republican pro-treaty forces who could not trace their roots back to the fenians and the IRB.

Also the Connolly column was not tiny and fought with great distinction.

The "Ulster Workers Strike" was not aimed at stopping Irish "home rule", it was aimed at power sharing. What is in place now.

Eoin O'Duffy had been Chief of Staff of the IRA, and his greenshirts numbered 700 (although there were many more volunteers who had been deemed unfit). There were 250 volunteers for the republicans, including Frank Ryan who later accompanied IRA Chief of Staff Sean Russell to Berlin to discuss invasion plans with the Nazis. There's still a statue of Sean Russell in Dublin I believe. Anyway I digress, the COnnolly column broke off from the British Battalion because of disagreements over the irish question, for instance one member of the British Battalion was a jewish former member of the black and tans.

No they are not. People with IP addresses in the Free State are banned unless they can prove they belong to a lodge.

I don't know anything about that, if its true though its pretty narrow-minded, not everyone in the Republic of Ireland is a militant Republican thankfully.

Also Loyalists dont really do honesty. They do lies and hysteria.

Funnilly enough they say the same of Republicans. Maybe if you actually talked to some and didn't call them liars and scum they'd be more receptive of your vision of a United Ireland?

Sadena Meti

24th April 2011, 23:34

Viet Minh

24th April 2011, 23:44

Yes Republicans and Communists were involved in the Civil Rights movement, but it contained no demands for national liberation, just the same civil rights that people had in England, the IRA had been run down to nothing and anyway the idea at that time among Republicans and Communists was that you couldnt launch an armed struggle against the occupation until you had brought together the two communities in the north. Do you believe that the presence of Black nationalists in the Civil Rights movement in the USA justified the attacks on it by white southerns? Your logic here would suggest that you do.

The Offiical IRA was Marxist and split from the more active and popular Provisional IRA. The working class in Northern Ireland had the same lack of rights that the working class in England did, this has been discussed previously.

The situation in the USA was too different to bear comparison, and frankly to compare the Irish struggle to the African American one may be seen as somewhat offensive, I don't know I'm not African American. Its offensive because although no doubt socially Catholics were discirminated against, for example by Harland and Wolff, legally they had the same rights as Protestants. Incidentally in the Free State Protestants were initially forced to live under catholic laws, such as abortion being illegal and homosexuality outlawed. The way to bring people together is to bring them together, not set off bombs or shoot civilians as both sides have done.

Hi. Not a big deal or anything but here's a very friendly mod reminder that we don't allow 'forum invasions' or the organizing of trollish activity regardless of the other site. I post this in advance because the rule isn't well remembered by users.

Okay sorry about that, I've removed the link now.

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 23:45

Eoin O'Duffy had been Chief of Staff of the IRA, and his greenshirts numbered 700 (although there were many more volunteers who had been deemed unfit). There were 250 volunteers for the republicans, including Frank Ryan who later accompanied IRA Chief of Staff Sean Russell to Berlin to discuss invasion plans with the Nazis. There's still a statue of Sean Russell in Dublin I believe. Anyway I digress, the COnnolly column broke off from the British Battalion because of disagreements over the irish question, for instance one member of the British Battalion was a jewish former member of the black and tans.

No he hadnt. They were called blueshirts. 700 hundred of them did not go over to Spain. They may have numbered 700 in total, but that seems to be stretching it even. They didnt do any fighting in Spain aswell.

Sean Russell who was a Protestant had gone to Stalin before he went to Hitler. He was completely apolitical outside of Irish national liberation, what he did was criminally stupid but it was to get guns and not discuss invasion plans. He presuaded the Germans to get Frank Ryan who had been tortured, gone blind and starved to the point of maddness from a prison in Spain. Torture had broken Ryan. He was a shadow of his former self.

No it didnt break off from the British Battalion, the CPGB and most hard English leftists supported Irish Freedom. Where are you getting these things? And so someone who had been part of a mercenary force that raped, tortured, burned houses to the ground and pillaged 20 or more years after the fact does something else? Are you saying that his presence in the International Brigade means that the Black and Tans were basically okay???

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 23:48

The Offiical IRA was Marxist and split from the more active and popular Provisional IRA. The working class in Northern Ireland had the same lack of rights that the working class in England did, this has been discussed previously.

The situation in the USA was too different to bear comparison, and frankly to compare the Irish struggle to the African American one may be seen as somewhat offensive, I don't know I'm not African American. Its offensive because although no doubt socially Catholics were discirminated against, for example by Harland and Wolff, legally they had the same rights as Protestants.

Black nationalists in the USA have done it. You have no idea just how repressive, violent and discriminatory the Orange state really was. I doubt you have any interest in finding out also.

The Provisionals SPLIT from the Official IRA which was NOT Marxist at the time though became so latter, the Provisionals split over taking seats in the Free State...Also the Official IRA remained more active and more popular until it foolishly called its ceasefire in 1972.

And no it didnt have the same rights. Thats just a lie. Indeed one of their slogans was "The same rights for Derry as for Derby"!

RedSunRising

24th April 2011, 23:52

Incidentally in the Free State Protestants were initially forced to live under catholic laws, such as abortion being illegal and homosexuality outlawed. The way to bring people together is to bring them together, not set off bombs or shoot civilians as both sides have done.

Incidentally homosexuality and abortion were illegal in England at time. The only place where they were legal was the USSR. You realize that Irish Republicans have always rejected the legitimacy of the Free State? You cant bring people together when there was the level of insitutional sectarianism that existed in the six counties, they were perfectly right that that had to go first.

Ele'ill

24th April 2011, 23:54

Okay sorry about that, I've removed the link now.

I didn't follow the link btw, I assumed you just wanted people's opinions on the conversation. My post was a general advisory not to organize trolling of that other site as it could be a potential 'thing to do' in the near future.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 00:02

No he hadnt. They were called blueshirts. 700 hundred of them did not go over to Spain. They may have numbered 700 in total, but that seems to be stretching it even. They didnt do any fighting in Spain aswell.

Take it up with Wikipedia
:tongue_smilie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenshirts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eoin_O%27Duffy#Spanish_Civil_War

Sean Russell who was a Protestant had gone to Stalin before he went to Hitler. He was completely apolitical outside of Irish national liberation, what he did was criminally stupid but it was to get guns and not discuss invasion plans. He presuaded the Germans to get Frank Ryan who had been tortured, gone blind and starved to the point of maddness from a prison in Spain. Torture had broken Ryan. He was a shadow of his former self.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRA_Abwehr_World_War_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se%C3%A1n_Russell#Arrival_in_Berlin_May_1940

No it didnt break off from the British Battalion, the CPGB and most hard English leftists supported Irish Freedom. Where are you getting these things? And so someone who had been part of a mercenary force that raped, tortured, burned houses to the ground and pillaged 20 or more years after the fact does something else? Are you saying that his presence in the International Brigade means that the Black and Tans were basically okay???

No please stop reading stuff into my posts, I am trying my best to discuss the issues you raise and give my perspective (although I feel a little on the defensive). There were leftists who supported the loyalist movement, although nowadays of course none do. George Orwell was one such leftist. Earlier the whigs could be described as the 'left' political party (in favour of abolishing slavery for example) while the toraidhs were to the right.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 00:14

Black nationalists in the USA have done it. You have no idea just how repressive, violent and discriminatory the Orange state really was. I doubt you have any interest in finding out also.

Black Nationalists have done what? Compared their ethnic nationalism to that of Ireland? I can sympathise with both African Americans and Irish Republicans but ethnic/ national/ religious seperatism is not the way forward. I know how repressive the British State can be, I live here, I am mainly responding to your posts about loyalists not the British State.

The Provisionals SPLIT from the Official IRA which was NOT Marxist at the time though became so latter, the Provisionals split over taking seats in the Free State...Also the Official IRA remained more active and more popular until it foolishly called its ceasefire in 1972.

Yeah if only they'd killed more people, Northern Ireland would be at peace now and it would all be rainbows and sunshine. [/sarcasm]

And no it didnt have the same rights. Thats just a lie. Indeed one of their slogans was "The same rights for Derry as for Derby"!

Source?

Incidentally homosexuality and abortion were illegal in England at time. The only place where they were legal was the USSR. You realize that Irish Republicans have always rejected the legitimacy of the Free State? You cant bring people together when there was the level of insitutional sectarianism that existed in the six counties, they were perfectly right that that had to go first.

Yes kill people, that'll end sectarianism. But seriously how did they plan to unite the six counties where the majority were allegedly sectarian bigots and the Free State where there was also little support for the IRA?

Gorilla

25th April 2011, 00:54

There were leftists who supported the loyalist movement, although nowadays of course none do. George Orwell was one such leftist.

Lolz.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 01:12

No please stop reading stuff into my posts, I am trying my best to discuss the issues you raise and give my perspective (although I feel a little on the defensive). There were leftists who supported the loyalist movement, although nowadays of course none do. George Orwell was one such leftist. Earlier the whigs could be described as the 'left' political party (in favour of abolishing slavery for example) while the toraidhs were to the right.

He was critical of Irish nationalism (and some of his criticisms were correct, a lot of Republicans would have agreed with them) but that is a stretch to saying that he actually supported Loyalism, which has all the failings of Irish nationalism (which isnt the same as Irish Republicanism) only worse and with others. Can you name others? Also given that he was a colonial Police man, militantly anti-Communist to the point of spying on people for the British state later on..He isnt the best example of a "leftist".

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 01:15

Black Nationalists have done what? Compared their ethnic nationalism to that of Ireland? I can sympathise with both African Americans and Irish Republicans but ethnic/ national/ religious seperatism is not the way forward. I know how repressive the British State can be, I live here, I am mainly responding to your posts about loyalists not the British State.

It was Loyalists not the British state burning down houses and attacking peaceful protesters. It was Loyalists who would go on regular sectarian rampages and kept the the RC population in fear not the British state. The British state stood by its true but I would rather deal with an English police man or even a soldier than someone like a Loyalist.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 01:20

Source?

Yes kill people, that'll end sectarianism. But seriously how did they plan to unite the six counties where the majority were allegedly sectarian bigots and the Free State where there was also little support for the IRA?

NICRA called for "British Rights for British Citizens" thats sourcable... http://www.pearsonhighered.com/assets/hip/us/hip_us_pearsonhighered/samplechapter/1405801352.pdf

Ill check the other thing out tomorrow, Im surprised that you havent come it across, but its clear that outside of Loyalist propaganda you dont know much about Ireland, its politics or history.

NICRA wasnt setting out to kill people you muppet, the IRA had sold off most of its weapons. It was the Loyalist response to NICRA that started the Troubles.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 01:50

If you're just gonna insult me I'm off to bed! :lol: I'm too tired for this shit we can waste our time debating tomorrow.

Sadena Meti

25th April 2011, 02:03

Also given that he was a colonial Police man, militantly anti-Communist to the point of spying on people for the British state later on... he isn't the best example of a "leftist".

He was an anti-Stalinist, not an anti-Communist per se.

Tim Finnegan

25th April 2011, 03:46

Why did Eamon De Valera after his membership of the 'socialist' IRA go on to send his condolences after the death of Hitler?
To wind up the Brits, just like everything else he did between the 1937 Constitution and the Republic of Ireland Act 1948. Anyone who knows anything about Devalera should've been able to figure that one out.

Can you name others? Also given that he was a colonial Police man...
And James Connolly was in the British Army. The sum of a man is not what employment he finds in his early 20s.

Sadena Meti

25th April 2011, 03:50

To wind up the Brits, just like everything else he did between the 1937 Constitution and the Republic of Ireland Act 1948. Anyone who knows anything about Devalera should've been able to figure that one out.

And James Connolly was in the British Army. The sum of a man is not what employment he finds in his early 20s.

Fallacy: Poisoning the Wells.

Just using something I learned back in AP Lit

Sadena Meti

25th April 2011, 03:51

duplicate post

Tim Finnegan

25th April 2011, 03:59

Fallacy: Poisoning the Wells.
Nah, pal, I'm pro-Nat all the way- you think I'd be strutting around with a username like "Tim Finnegan" if I wasn't? ;)

Sadena Meti

25th April 2011, 04:05

Nah, pal, I'm pro-Nat all the way- you think I'd be strutting around with a username like "Tim Finnegan" if I wasn't? ;)

No, Poisoning the Wells is an argument / debate tactic and fallacy. It sets up a statement so that you preempt any response or refutation, usually with an ad hominem attack. "Anyone who doesn't know this is an idiot." You "poison" the "well" of responses.

Tim Finnegan

25th April 2011, 04:12

No, Poisoning the Wells is an argument / debate tactic and fallacy. It sets up a statement so that you preempt any response or refutation, usually with an ad hominem attack. "Anyone who doesn't know this is an idiot." You "poison" the "well" of responses.
Oh, I misunderstood; I thought that you were suggesting that my "poisoning" was direct at Devalera. Clearly, I'm need of a few lit classes meself, get a proper grip of this stuff.

Mind, given that Loyal4life was trying to set Dev up as a Nazi-sympathise, I'm pretty sure that I'm sitting lower on the Ad Hominen scale than he is. ;)

El Chuncho

25th April 2011, 10:33

I find it unfortunate that supporting republicanism has to mean that we support the IRA. The IRA (not the original IRA) are far too Catholic for my tastes, which is why I support the INLA instead.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 12:54

He was critical of Irish nationalism (and some of his criticisms were correct, a lot of Republicans would have agreed with them) but that is a stretch to saying that he actually supported Loyalism, which has all the failings of Irish nationalism (which isnt the same as Irish Republicanism) only worse and with others. Can you name others? Also given that he was a colonial Police man, militantly anti-Communist to the point of spying on people for the British state later on..He isnt the best example of a "leftist".

Thats pure semantics, Irish Nationalism is the same thing as Irish Republicanism, only they have shied away from the former word because of its associations with racism, xenophobia etc.

It was Loyalists not the British state burning down houses and attacking peaceful protesters. It was Loyalists who would go on regular sectarian rampages and kept the the RC population in fear not the British state. The British state stood by its true but I would rather deal with an English police man or even a soldier than someone like a Loyalist.

Well thats a very blinkered view to take, if you look at the history objectively you'll come to realise as I did that neither side is exactly blameless. I'm not in any way condoning loyalist atrocities, but it seems you are very much condoning republican ones.

NICRA called for "British Rights for British Citizens" thats sourcable... http://www.pearsonhighered.com/assets/hip/us/hip_us_pearsonhighered/samplechapter/1405801352.pdf

Hard-line loyalists saw these reforms as an appeasement of a republican-dominated civil rights movement and resented London's interference in the internal affairs of northern ireland. Republicans, however, saw the growing crisis as an opportunity to reopen the question of partition and campaign for a united Ireland. Violence escalated rapidly - in 1969 there were 18 deaths due to the conflict, by 1972 there were 496 deaths.

Ill check the other thing out tomorrow, Im surprised that you havent come it across, but its clear that outside of Loyalist propaganda you dont know much about Ireland, its politics or history.

NICRA wasnt setting out to kill people you muppet, the IRA had sold off most of its weapons. It was the Loyalist response to NICRA that started the Troubles.

In 1969 there were 12 people killed. Republicans killed 3 protestant civilians, loyalists killed 3 people, one IRA youth member, one RUC member and one UVF member. The rest were killed by the British security forces you love so much.

To wind up the Brits, just like everything else he did between the 1937 Constitution and the Republic of Ireland Act 1948. Anyone who knows anything about Devalera should've been able to figure that one out.

Well maybe we can write off Johnny Adairs communiques with the national front as a 'wind up' against the Irish, because there's a lot of republicans use that as 'evidence' of all loyalists being nazis. I personally think he is a nazi bastard, being an idiot is no excuse.

Most do still worship the Queen, not all protestants do but loyalists certainly do

Since you feel qualified to speak for loyalists I will speak for the enitre republican community and say they worship the Pope and the Vatican.

There is a history between Germany and the struggle for a united Ireland that pre-dates fascism. For instance Germany sending rifles to the IRA during the first world war. Fascists also tried to manipulate the struggle for there own gain see Oswald Mosley raising the issue of the Black and Tans in parliament. But you are going to have to source your claim about De Valera and your previous claims that the Nazis were somehow helping the IRA you failed to do that before.

I think I posted the sources since then, I missed this post sorry.

troll response

No its not, I genuinely think some Republicans have a vested interest in violence to further their political goals. Not all but some.

Loyalists are reactionary but as I said there is a huge distinction between being a loyalist and being a protestant. Catholics were and are systemically discriminated against by loyalists do you not think they have a right to defend themselves from state run terror?

'Catholics' want to reconstruct a united ireland, a nation that arguably didn't even exist before Cromwell, thats about as reactionary as it gets, rather like Zionists claims to the Southern Levant purely on the basis of the existence of Israel and Judah centuries ago. Protestants were routinely discriminated against in the republic, even until recently, did they have the right to defend themselves and establish a united Britain?

I find it unfortunate that supporting republicanism has to mean that we support the IRA. The IRA (not the original IRA) are far too Catholic for my tastes, which is why I support the INLA instead.

Just take the view that the majority in Northern Ireland now take, that all paramilitaries are reactionary, divisive and self-serving.

PhoenixAsh

25th April 2011, 13:43

I am going to interject that loyalists here have the same position as reps on another forum...and:

Hell yes there are IRA sympathising fascists and neo's.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 15:27

I am going to interject that loyalists here have the same position as reps on another forum...and:

Hell yes there are IRA sympathising fascists and neo's.

Thanks Hindsight. I'm genuinely not interested in mudlsinging, i've said it before I'll say it again I'm sick and tired of the number of fascist idiots amongst loyalism, I genuinely believe it doesn't have to be that way. I also admire many progressive Republicans, who have done much to eradicate blatant sectarianism from Irish Republicanism. What I don't admire is the point-scoring, which I admit I've been doing here rather defensively. So I apologise for any offence caused, I just find it sad that many peoples ideas of loyalism come from republicans, the vast majority of books on the troubles in ireland are written from a republican perspective for example. There's nothing wrong with that but I wish loyalists would try to represent themselves sometimes instead of the obstinate 'no surrender' and insular attitude they take. This is why its so easy for every skinhead to call themselves a loyalist, little realising what that actually means. Ironically although I posibly am ignorant of a lot of loyalist history most of my information has come from Republican sources, for instance books by Tim Pat Coogan etc al who are unashamedly pro-republican and imo sometimes fairly biased.

Anyway thanks to the guys who helped me out with that little debate on the other side, sadly I don't think we got through to the fash but we shut them up for now so good work! :cool:

As for Red Sun Rising don't worry the republican monopoly of the left is very much still in place ;) I may well be banned if it makes you feel any better, but if you come across another non-nazi loyalist be kind to them as we are an endangered species :D

El Chuncho

25th April 2011, 19:20

Thanks Hindsight. I'm genuinely not interested in mudlsinging,

http://media.superpimper.com/graphics/Funny/funny-100.jpg

Gorilla

25th April 2011, 19:30

I am going to interject that loyalists here have the same position as reps on another forum...

There are many liberal forums on the internet. Despite the best efforts of anti-anti-imperialists and the pathetic fact we have not restricted the Libya bomber squad, this is still not one of them.

Hell yes there are IRA sympathising fascists and neo's.

There are Klansmen who are union members but we don't restrict trade unionists, we do restrict union-busters.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 20:24

I find it unfortunate that supporting republicanism has to mean that we support the IRA. The IRA (not the original IRA) are far too Catholic for my tastes, which is why I support the INLA instead.

Oh boy, the original IRA, the IRA of the Tan war was far more Roman Catholic than the Provisionals. The time that the IRA was most reactionary was the 1950s and early 1960s. All that said Irish Republicanism in general has always been anti-clerical, partly in all fairness because of the RC hierarchy's love affair with the British Empire and fear of socialism in anything that would improve conditions for ordinary people.

By the time the 80s came along several people in the Provisional movement were campaigning for abortion and gay rights. The RC rosary bead brigade left the Provisionals in 1986 outside of a few people with no power.

The INLA has been stood down by the way so there is nothing to support.

However the largest Loyalist Party was founded by a clergy man and remains very socially conservative.

If you want to oppose religion being mixed with politics maybe start with the "For God and Ulster" brigade!

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 20:30

Thats pure semantics, Irish Nationalism is the same thing as Irish Republicanism, only they have shied away from the former word because of its associations with racism, xenophobia etc.

Since you feel qualified to speak for loyalists I will speak for the enitre republican community and say they worship the Pope and the Vatican.

Given that the Roman Catholic hierarchy ex-communicated the Fenians, attempted to ex-communicate those who fought on the Republican side in the civil war, ex-communicated the IRA after the civil war when it was in a weaker position and repeatedly condemned the Provisionals, Sticks and INLAs that would be a rather stupid comment to make wouldnt it?

You are the one denying that Loyalism isnt British nationalism arent you? Well plenty of people can take an anti-Imperialist and anti-sectarian position without being nationalist per se. Irish nationalism means something spefic and very few Irish Republicans would fall within it.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 20:37

'Catholics' want to reconstruct a united ireland, a nation that arguably didn't even exist before Cromwell, thats about as reactionary as it gets, rather like Zionists claims to the Southern Levant purely on the basis of the existence of Israel and Judah centuries ago. Protestants were routinely discriminated against in the republic, even until recently, did they have the right to defend themselves and establish a united Britain?

All Ireland was pretty socially conservative, are you telling me that northern Presies and even worse Free Ps were all for social-liberalism? Forgetting the fact of the huge loyalist "Keep Ulster Free from Sodomy" campaign? Remember that abortion is illegal in the British occupied part of the north of Ireland? So please that play that card. Its pathetic.

And if Protestants were routinely discriminated in the south how come that per capita they remained the most likely to have large amounts of wealth, and also were TDs and Presidents out of proportion to their numbers.

The idea also that Ireland didnt exist until Cromwell is just amazing. What were the High Kings doing? Outside of bigoted Loyalist sites do you know anything about Irish history at all? You raw hatred for anything Irish is really coming out, but than again, you arent a Unionist, you are a Loyalist.

El Chuncho

25th April 2011, 20:37

Oh boy, the original IRA, the IRA of the Tan war was far more Roman Catholic than the Provisionals.

Maybe, yeah, but they were needed even more than they are now, I mean the whole of Ireland was under the thumb of the British government.

The time that the IRA was most reactionary was the 1950s and early 1960s.

Yeah, I probably agree with you there, though I hated them in the 90s, because they blew a lot of shit up near me, which pissed me off because it seemed more like an attack on the English people than the British government.

All that said Irish Republicanism in general has always been anti-clerical, partly in all fairness because of the RC hierarchy's love affair with the British Empire and fear of socialism in anything that would improve conditions for ordinary people.

The INLA has been stood down by the way so there is nothing to support.

Actually, the INLA, or Arm Saoirse Náisiúnta na hÉireann, have probably not stood down for ever, I am sure they'll pursue their goals again in a similar way to before. But I support all the atheist communist groups to the IRA, even if the IRA might be anti-clerical.

If you want to oppose religion being mixed with politics maybe start with the "For God and Ulster" brigade!
[/B]

I have never mentioned any support for any Ulster Unionists, and I support Republicanism entirely, just not in the hands of the IRA, who do not seem (to me, of course) to be the right people to lend support to.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 20:40

Hell yes there are IRA sympathising fascists and neo's.

Yes there, but fascists and less so by a long shot neo-nazies, but not in Ireland. Anti-Fascist Action here is made up basically of Republicans and Ciaran Murphy an ex-Real IRA Prisoner of War does benefit does gigs for them.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 20:43

I have never mentioned any support for any Ulster Unionists, and I support Republicanism entirely, just not in the hands of the IRA, who do not seem (to me, of course) to be the right people to lend support to.

I dont particularly like or trust the various IRAs now because for one I think they will take the Provo route of compromising with southern nationalism which is a road to absolutely nowhere. However they are actually quite opposed to the Roman Catholic Church. There are lots of reasons not to support them, but being religious isnt one.

Unionists are one thing, the guy I was arguing is a Loyalist. They are different substanially.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 20:46

The most socially conservative and religious party in the whole of Ireland is the Traditional Unionist Voice followed by the Democratic Unionist Party. The only party in the south that is on the same level with them is the tiny Christian Solidarity Party which has NO seats in councils or Parliment. Loyal4Life most know this and yet he fails to mention it. Or maybe he doesnt know it and so maybe shouldnt comment on Irish politics.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 22:12

The problem with the six county statelet is the level of state repression which pre-dates the Troubles (a South African police man in the 50s expressed regret that he had nothing like the Special Powers Act in Northern Ireland) which had gotten better but is now slipping back into the bad old days which is why there has been a massive increase in "dissident activity" and the level of sectarian discrimination which though things have improved on that front is still pretty frightening. If those things were not there than I wouldnt have a problem with the Union. The reason to be of Loyalism is insure sectarian discrimination continues in there sides favour and to attack anything they see as Irish whether its the Irish language or even sports such as hurling and gaelic football. I dont have a problem with Alliance supporters and the moderates in the Ulster Unionist Party. I do however have a massive problem with people like Loyal4Life.

Tim Finnegan

25th April 2011, 22:13

I find it unfortunate that supporting republicanism has to mean that we support the IRA. The IRA (not the original IRA) are far too Catholic for my tastes, which is why I support the INLA instead.
Why support any of them? Defending Catholics against repression á la the Stickies is one thing, but all the later groups went far beyond that. They're all objectively anti-working class, whatever particular flavour of bluster they may adopt. My sig (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSYPecZI_AI) ain't just there for show, ken.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 22:15

Given that the Roman Catholic hierarchy ex-communicated the Fenians, attempted to ex-communicate those who fought on the Republican side in the civil war, ex-communicated the IRA after the civil war when it was in a weaker position and repeatedly condemned the Provisionals, Sticks and INLAs that would be a rather stupid comment to make wouldnt it?.

Publicly maybe, but there were even priests who were members of the IRA. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/24/claudy-bombings-cover-up-report

You are the one denying that Loyalism isnt British nationalism arent you? Well plenty of people can take an anti-Imperialist and anti-sectarian position without being nationalist per se. Irish nationalism means something spefic and very few Irish Republicans would fall within it

'British Nationalism' :rolleyes: For a start Britain is made up of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, not to mention the Commonwealth and increasingly the EU. Secondly there are a huge number of immigrant communities in the UK, British Nationalism is possibly a stupider ideology than anarcho-capitalism. The only British Nationalist parties are the BNP (who propose a united Ireland as part of the British Isles) and the National Front who want Independence for Northern Ireland from the UK and Ireland. I don't think either of those parties have actually stood for election in NI though. I don't think you understand what imperialism is, its trying to take control of a region and or its people by force against their will.

All Ireland was pretty socially conservative, are you telling me that northern Presies and even worse Free Ps were all for social-liberalism? Forgetting the fact of the huge loyalist "Keep Ulster Free from Sodomy" campaign? Remember that abortion is illegal in the British occupied part of the north of Ireland? So please that play that card. Its pathetic.

Homosexuality was legalised in 1982 in Northern Ireland, 1993 in the Republic. Irish groups organising St Patricks day parade banned a gay rights group from attending only a few years ago. Your idea that Irish republicans are incapable of bigotry is a little naive I have to say, I'm not dissing Ireland or the Irish, or even Irish Republicans I'm just highlighting the hypocrisy of painting loyalists as fascist nazis and republicans as socialist antifa, its just not that simple.

And if Protestants were routinely discriminated in the south how come that per capita they remained the most likely to have large amounts of wealth, and also were TDs and Presidents out of proportion to their numbers.

How come an orphanage was brunt down and 41,000 Protestants fled the Free state from 1921?
Graham Norton once said the only thing harder than being gay in Ireland was being a protestant.

The idea also that Ireland didnt exist until Cromwell is just amazing. What were the High Kings doing? Outside of bigoted Loyalist sites do you know anything about Irish history at all? You raw hatred for anything Irish is really coming out, but than again, you arent a Unionist, you are a Loyalist.

I do not hate Ireland, please stop inventing stuff or projecting your obvious hatred of some loyalist strawman onto me. I am answering your increasing number of random disjointed rantings as best I can, though its now very obvious you do not wish to discuss anything this is simply a character assasination. I make thes points about Ireland because you seem to be advocating Northern Ireland being governed by the Republic, as a Unionist and indeed a loyalist I disagree. If you think criticism of a country is some form of racism, then you are guilty of it too the way you talk about NI.

However the largest Loyalist Party was founded by a clergy man and remains very socially conservative.

If you want to oppose religion being mixed with politics maybe start with the "For God and Ulster" brigade!

Of course as a loyalist I automatically support Ian Paisley and the DUP? No I don't I think they are bigoted homophobic reactionary superstitious troublemakers, at least halfway responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people in Northern Ireland. Whats more they ousted one of the most progressive politicians of modern times in their flame-fanning rabble rousing pseudo religious scaremongering bollocks. I've said before I support the PUP.

The most socially conservative and religious party in the whole of Ireland is the Traditional Unionist Voice followed by the Democratic Unionist Party. The only party in the south that is on the same level with them is the tiny Christian Solidarity Party which has NO seats in councils or Parliment. Loyal4Life most know this and yet he fails to mention it. Or maybe he doesnt know it and so maybe shouldnt comment on Irish politics.

TUV are a joke, they wouldn't fill a bus shelter. As I said before I am no fan of the DUP either, but finally the republicans have agreed to power sharing, so I hold some tentative hope for peace in the future for NI.
I don't care too much about Irish politics but its my underestanding that Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are also fairly conservative.

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 22:40

The problem with the six county statelet is the level of state repression which pre-dates the Troubles (a South African police man in the 50s expressed regret that he had nothing like the Special Powers Act in Northern Ireland)

This is a fallacy. There are many reasons Northern Ireland is incomparable to South Africa. 1. There were no laws in place discriminating against catholics. 2. in SA the minority ruled over the majority, there was no democracy. 3. The ANC did not embark on a killing campaign to further their political goals. If we're just going to randomly compare NI to different regimes, lets say the IRA were very similar to the KKK using terror to fight against the Union soldiers who had occupied 'their lands' after they tried to secede. They used bombs and gunbs and terror to acheive their political ends in a war of ethnic nationalism. Obviously this is a load of crap so lets just stick to the issue at hand and not complicate matters.

which had gotten better but is now slipping back into the bad old days which is why there has been a massive increase in "dissident activity" and the level of sectarian discrimination which though things have improved on that front is still pretty frightening. If those things were not there than I wouldnt have a problem with the Union. The reason to be of Loyalism is insure sectarian discrimination continues in there sides favour and to attack anything they see as Irish whether its the Irish language or even sports such as hurling and gaelic football. I dont have a problem with Alliance supporters and the moderates in the Ulster Unionist Party. I do however have a massive problem with people like Loyal4Life.

What sorts of discrimination are you referring to? What attacks have there been on Irish culture? You need to be more specific, unless you want to go down that road and I can start talking about hundreds of years of Irish Nationalists attempting to ethnically cleanse the British immigrants and we're into the realms of pure fantasy.

Tim Finnegan

25th April 2011, 22:46

'British Nationalism' :rolleyes: For a start Britain is made up of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, not to mention the Commonwealth and increasingly the EU. Secondly there are a huge number of immigrant communities in the UK, British Nationalism is possibly a stupider ideology than anarcho-capitalism. The only British Nationalist parties are the BNP (who propose a united Ireland as part of the British Isles) and the National Front who want Independence for Northern Ireland from the UK and Ireland. I don't think either of those parties have actually stood for election in NI though. I don't think you understand what imperialism is, its trying to take control of a region and or its people by force against their will.
I don't think that you understand what "nationalism" actually means, which is to say, as an ideological descriptor, rather than a rhetorical device. The far-right may be the only ones who openly label themselves "British nationalist", but everyone from Labour rightwards is firmly in that camp- wasn't "Britain Day" a Brown project?

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 22:56

I don't think that you understand what "nationalism" actually means, which is to say, as an ideological descriptor, rather than a rhetorical device. The far-right may be the only ones who openly label themselves "British nationalist", but everyone for Labour rightwards is firmly in that camp- wasn't "Britain Day" a Brown project?

Okay but by that standard everyone whose ever flown a flag or written their nationality on something is a nationalist, because we live in a World of nations. I don't think you udnerstand what Britain day was about, but thats another thread. What I'm referring to is ethnic nationalism, which is what I assume Red Sun was accusing me of supporting. British is a nationality yes, but its a very wide range of cultures. I myself am of West Country, Scottish Borders, Scottish Highlands and Islands, and way back when Moorish stock. My extended family includes British Dutch, British Greek, British Black South African, and more. The loyalist culture Red Sun was talking about includes Egytptians, black Africans, native Americans, Black Britons, Afro Carribeans and historically Germans, Dutch, Jews, Highland Scots, Lowland and border Scots, English..

PhoenixAsh

25th April 2011, 23:14

Viet Minh

25th April 2011, 23:28

For anybody who did not get my refering to another forum....

I meant SF.

A while back they had a big internal row between the Irish republicans and the unionists supported by the British members. The republicans basically were told to shut the hell up or get the hell out.

The point is...without getting into the debate too deeply...that there are aborrations on both sides who deviate from the norm.

I'll be the first to admit there is far more fascism amongst loyalists than republicans, but to suggest republicanism is by default socialist antifascist human civil rights etc while loyalism is fascist nazi racism etc is nonsense, its just part of the war of words and propaganda and fascist opportunism.

Here is a right wing Irish Nationalist perspective. As with all racist rants its mostly bullshit but some facts check out.
http://cwnaf.informe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=114&t=703

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 23:48

Why support any of them? Defending Catholics against repression á la the Stickies is one thing, but all the later groups went far beyond that. They're all objectively anti-working class, whatever particular flavour of bluster they may adopt. My sig (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSYPecZI_AI) ain't just there for show, ken.

I have a lot of time for the Stickies which could get me into trouble here, and not much respect for the Provisionals at all in the 1970s, in the 80s though they took a left-turn and it looked for a time that they were genuinely revolutionary socialist, they certainly had a lot of genuine revolutionary socialists amongst them. However the Stickies in reaction to Billy Mc Kee (who was a sectarian murdering scumbag)'s "purge" of them in Belfast seriously dropped went mad, endorsing the RUC for instance, plus after a whole lot of very good people left to form the IRSP/INLA in 75 the creepy Eoghan Harris wing took over and ended up destroying the Workers Party at the height of their sucess in the south.

Im not a fan of the Provisionals, but they were a very complex thing, and also very much a product of the sick situation that was created by partition.

Im open to an internal solution but sorry not one involving people like loyal4life, I have relations like him, I know to them well. They are a danger full stop.

RedSunRising

25th April 2011, 23:55

I'll be the first to admit there is far more fascism amongst loyalists than republicans, but to suggest republicanism is by default socialist antifascist human civil rights etc while loyalism is fascist nazi racism etc is nonsense, its just part of the war of words and propaganda and fascist opportunism.

Here is a right wing Irish Nationalist persepctive. I do not post this to insult Republicans (or Loyalists) I post this as a leftist who wants to fight fascism wherever I find it, not indirectly encourage it for the sake of political point-scoring.

http://cwnaf.informe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=114&t=703

Republicans did not support the random murder of people because of their religious background. All Republicans that I know have even called the Tullyvallen and the Eniskillen actions sectarian which I dont like the Communist Party of Ireland Marxist-Leninist see that they were. Loyalists did support the murder of people because of their religious backgrounds. The fact is that Eirigi and the IRSP, the largest Republican groups, are militantly anti-fascist, have taken part in anti-racist and anti-fascist work. Loyalism is sectarianism and miltant "British" chauvinism, in essence.

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 00:02

Republicans did not support the random murder of people because of their religious background. All Republicans that I know have even called the Tullyvallen and the Eniskillen actions sectarian which I dont like the Communist Party of Ireland Marxist-Leninist see that they were. Loyalists did support the murder of people because of their religious backgrounds. The fact is that Eirigi and the IRSP, the largest Republican groups, are militantly anti-fascist, have taken part in anti-racist and anti-fascist work. Loyalism is sectarianism and miltant "British" chauvinism, in essence.

Their preferred method was to detonate bombs, these were undoubtedly targetted mainly at protestants even though there were many ctaholic victims as well. Loyalists targetted mebers of the catholic community in revenge attacks to IRA bombs killing british citizens. There was no religious motivation as such, its just that the majority of British citizens are Protestant and the majority of 'Irish' are Catholic. Its like saying Palestinians attacking Israelis are anti-Jewish, they're not they're anti-Zionist. The fact is loyalists fought en masse against fascism and naziism, the IRA supported the Nazis. Militant Republicanism is in essence a celtic ethnic nationalism targetting uslter scots immigrants. What, I thought this was sweeping statements hour? :rolleyes:

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:03

This is a fallacy. There are many reasons Northern Ireland is incomparable to South Africa. 1. There were no laws in place discriminating against catholics. 2. in SA the minority ruled over the majority, there was no democracy. 3. The ANC did not embark on a killing campaign to further their political goals. If we're just going to randomly compare NI to different regimes, lets say the IRA were very similar to the KKK using terror to fight against the Union soldiers who had occupied 'their lands' after they tried to secede. They used bombs and gunbs and terror to acheive their political ends in a war of ethnic nationalism. Obviously this is a load of crap so lets just stick to the issue at hand and not complicate matters.

The Special Powers was there when there was virtually NO IRA activity. The Roman Catholic minority in the gerrymandered statelet which took in two counties with a "nationalist" majiority was terrorized both by loyalist mobs and by the B-Specials.

And I dont know what history you have been reading but the ANC was a LOT more brutal than the Provisional IRA. Quite happy to use no warning bombs.

Look you have a ton of ethnic nationalism if you support Loyalism, if you said a plague on both their houses I could understand, but dont be a Loyalist and come out with "ethnic nationalism".

Also prior to the Orange Order and Ne Temere people mixed. Lots of Protestants spoke Irish as a first language. Adams is hardly a pure Gaelic name is it? Division was fostered carefully after 1798, the Presbetyerians taken in from cold and you spew out reasons for division and call in progressive? Loyalism as it is stands was created to divide and conquer. Your bigotry to anything Irish shines through.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:06

Their preferred method was to detonate bombs, these were undoubtedly targetted mainly at protestants even though there were many ctaholic victims as well. Loyalists targetted mebers of the catholic community in revenge attacks to IRA bombs killing british citizens.

Says it all for anyone who has eyes to read.

No the percentage of IRA victims compared to British State in its legal fronts of civilian causalities was less. Also the IRA targetted members of the security forces or those who were co-operating with them. Not Protestants. They killed more Roman Catholic than Protestant ones as informers, etc.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:09

Their preferred method was to detonate bombs, these were undoubtedly targetted mainly at protestants even though there were many ctaholic victims as well.

All their bombs had warnings, the warnings for Bloody Friday were deliberately ignored as exposed in The Sunday Times six months later. Claudy and Le Mon were a mess up. Its not easy waging armed struggle and mistakes happen. Random murder of RCs or people from that background wasnt a mistake. It was Loyalists doing what they do.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:10

Militant Republicanism is in essence a celtic ethnic nationalism targetting uslter scots immigrants. What, I thought this was sweeping statements hour? :rolleyes:

Sands is a very celtic name, as is Adams, so is Hughes.

Catch yourself on.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:13

Do you have an actual connection with Ireland Loyal4Life or are you just dancing on another's man wound?

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 00:17

The Special Powers was there when there was virtually NO IRA activity. The Roman Catholic minority in the gerrymandered statelet which took in two counties with a "nationalist" majiority was terrorized both by loyalist mobs and by the B-Specials.

Gerrymandering > bombing people for political ends, on some level you must realise that? The same goes for internments, and yes there was a lot of IRA and republican activity in the 20's.

Look you have a ton of ethnic nationalism if you support Loyalism, if you said a plague on both their houses I could understand, but dont be a Loyalist and come out with "ethnic nationalism".

I do I have and I will, fuck all paramilitaries. Its YOU whose condoning their actions on the basis of this supposed supression of innocent civilians (which in fact did happen but you have yet to show one actual case)

Also prior to the Orange Order and Ne Temere people mixed. Lots of Protestants spoke Irish as a first language. Adams is hardly a pure Gaelic name is it? Division was fostered carefully after 1798, the Presbetyerians taken in from cold and you spew out reasons for division and call in progressive? Loyalism as it is stands was created to divide and conquer.

Before the troubles Catholics had no problems watching the Orange walks, joining in, drinking and socialising with loyalists. Then groups like PIRA stirred up the same shit you are now and a few decades of violence erupted. History is repeating itself as RIRA try to incite conflict once again, they thrive on it, but the majority of people of both sides are sensible and will not rise to the bait.

Your bigotry to anything Irish shines through.

Your desperation to find bigotry where it doesn't exist shines through, but thanks for your patronising effort to tell everyone to judge me by your blinkered standards. People can make their own mind up but hopefully some will see what I do, me being verbally attacked and simply trying to respond, yes I rose to your bait but after 3 pages of propaganda aimed at ones people I'm sure most users here would react similarly.

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 00:22

Says it all for anyone who has eyes to read.

No the percentage of IRA victims compared to British State in its legal fronts of civilian causalities was less. Also the IRA targetted members of the security forces or those who were co-operating with them. Not Protestants. They killed more Roman Catholic than Protestant ones as informers, etc.

I never condoned them, you made the implication that the loyalists simply killed catholics for their own amusement, the fact is they were fighting back trying to end the violence, albeit in the stupidest way possible.

All their bombs had warnings, the warnings for Bloody Friday were deliberately ignored as exposed in The Sunday Times six months later. Claudy and Le Mon were a mess up. Its not easy waging armed struggle and mistakes happen. Random murder of RCs or people from that background wasnt a mistake. It was Loyalists doing what they do.

So in short, bomb people, cool, shoot back, uncool. Got ya! :rolleyes:

Sands is a very celtic name, as is Adams, so is Hughes.

Catch yourself on.

So is Adair. There were catholics in the UDA as well btw

Do you have an actual connection with Ireland Loyal4Life or are you just dancing on another's man wound?

Based on your posts so far I'm telling you dick! :D But yes, I do. Do you?

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:26

Before the troubles Catholics had no problems watching the Orange walks, joining in, drinking and socialising with loyalists. T[/B]hen groups like PIRA stirred up the same shit you are now and a few decades of violence erupted. History is repeating itself as RIRA try to incite conflict once again, they thrive on it, but the majority of people of both sides are sensible and will not rise to the bait.

Thats crap. It is really is one of the massive lies that Loyalist militants like to come out and just so untrue, infact everytime I read it I want to scream. My great aunt on my dad's side who was a northern Protestant would hit you if you would have had the guts to say it to her face. The IRA and the Republican movement was miniscule in the north. It was Loyalists who brought an renewed irrupution and you cant deal with that fact can you?

The Real IRA have a hell of a lot of support. People vote for Sinn Fein and support, just like many people voted SDLP and supported the Provos in the 70s. They exist because of real material conditions. You obviously have no insight at all into the northern "nationalist" community and their experiances and experiance. You dont want to have do you though? You see "Irish" people as subhuman.

This is from the BCC...Hardly Republican propaganda...It explains the situation at the time...Very different from Loyal4Life's twisted views.

qcpE-jJ14pQ

Tim Finnegan

26th April 2011, 00:28

Do you have an actual connection with Ireland Loyal4Life or are you just dancing on another's man wound?
There's a lot of ideological spillover from the Northern Irish conflict in Scotland, a product of our long history of ethno-religious sectarianism. You'll find a lot who have some opinion or other on the situation, on both sides.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:29

So is Adair. There were catholics in the UDA as well btw

Psychopathetic criminals, the Loyalist death squads being tied into criminals across Ireland. Killing innocent people to end violence that people like them started? Croppy lie down?

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:31

There's a lot of ideological spillover from the Northern Irish conflict in Scotland, a product of our long history of ethno-religious sectarianism. You'll find a lot who have some opinion or other on the situation, on both sides.

The Church of Scotland have banned the Orange Order from using their grounds. I have met a good few people from the Church of Scotland. I correspond with one of their Ministers and they are NOTHING near Ulster Loyalists. Thugs who support Rangers like what Im arguing with surely are nothing like most Scots?

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 00:32

Thats crap. It is really is one of the massive lies that Loyalist militants like to come out and just so untrue, infact everytime I read it I want to scream. My great aunt on my dead's side who was a northern Protestant would hit you if you would have had the guts to say it to her face. The IRA and the Republican movement was miniscule in the north. It was Loyalists who brought an renewed irrupution and you cant deal with that fact can you?

The facts are there for all to see, republcians killed over 1000 people trying to unite Ireland, all they did was divide it further.

The Real IRA have a hell of a lot of support. People vote for Sinn Fein and support, just like many people voted SDLP and supported the Provos in the 70s. They exist because of real material conditions. You obviously have no insight at all into the northern "nationalist" community and their experiances and experiance. You dont want to have do you though? You see "Irish" people as subhuman.

Wrong, people from both communities united in an unprecedented demonstration for peace and unity. The RIRA have very very few votes even form the most Republican areas like the Ardoyne. The SDLP have no connectiosn to paramilitarism, you really haven't a clue what you're talking abotu ehre do you? Just spewing random propaganda you've read on irish Republican sites. Have you ever been to Northern Ireland?

This is from the BCC...Hardly Republican propaganda...It explains the situation at the time...Very different from Loyal4Life's twisted views.

qcpE-jJ14pQ

I'll maybe watch your ten minute video tomorrow, I don't have high hopes for any BBC production though going by their previous records.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:33

I never condoned them, you made the implication that the loyalists simply killed catholics for their own amusement,

NO they did it insure sectarian supremacy and to keep the repressive Orange state.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:36

The facts are there for all to see, republcians killed over 1000 people trying to unite Ireland, all they did was divide it further.

They pushed back a lot of sectarianism, not nearly enough which is why we see the rise of the so-called "dissidents", and like bigots like your friends would become decent human beings by people being nice to them. The provisionals were a product of the nightmare created by partition. James Connolly said it would be a carnival of reaction and so it was.

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 00:38

There's a lot of ideological spillover from the Northern Irish conflict in Scotland, a product of our long history of ethno-religious sectarianism. You'll find a lot who have some opinion or other on the situation, on both sides.

Also family ties, but I'm not giving any more details here! :D

Psychopathetic criminals, the Loyalist death squads being tied into criminals across Ireland. Killing innocent people to end violence that people like them started? Croppy lie down?

Same could be said for any paramilitary, and frequently has. By me.

The Church of Scotland have banned the Orange Order from using their grounds. I have met a good few people from the Church of Scotland. I correspond with one of their Ministers and they are NOTHING near Ulster Loyalists. Thugs who support Rangers like what Im arguing with surely are nothing like most Scots?

I volunteered in a Church of Scotland which ran a program helping asylum seeker families, most members generally agreed with my political views, some didn't. The Minister there was from NI, he was a celtic fan, I criticised Ian Paisley and I was very surprised when he jumped to his defence!

NO they did it insure sectarian supremacy and to keep the repressive Orange state.

And the Zionist greyliens running the NWO funded the IRA to discredit communism in Western Europe and amongst Amercian Irish Catholics.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:40

Wrong, people from both communities united in an unprecedented demonstration for peace and unity. The RIRA have very very few votes even form the most Republican areas like the Ardoyne. The SDLP have no connectiosn to paramilitarism, you really haven't a clue what you're talking abotu ehre do you? Just spewing random propaganda you've read on irish Republican sites. Have you ever been to Northern Ireland?
.

Yeah according to the Orange Lodge the BCC are Dirty Fenian Bastards!

http://sluggerotoole.com/2010/10/06/one-of-the-mantras-of-the-peace-process-is-that-dissident-republicans-have-no-support%E2%80%A6/

You know nothing about the so-called "nationalist" population if you think they have NO support.

What unprecedented demonstrations for peace and unity, sure didnt we see them organized by the yellow Unions nearly every week during the troubles?

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 00:40

They pushed back a lot of sectarianism, not nearly enough which is why we see the rise of the so-called "dissidents", and like bigots like your friends would become decent human beings by people being nice to them. The provisionals were a product of the nightmare created by partition. James Connolly said it would be a carnival of reaction and so it was.

Yes bigotry died overnight when the IRA started bombing people and calling them nazis.

http://emotibot.net/pix/713.jpeg

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:42

Same could be said for any paramilitary, and frequently has. By me.

Because Loyalists always want to seem lily white and hate admitting support for "their" gunmen. Its pretty obvious though for those of us you can read that you are supportive of their "peace making efforts". Lenny Murphy.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:43

Yes bigotry died overnight when the IRA started bombing people and calling them nazis.

Do you admit that you are a bigot?

Tim Finnegan

26th April 2011, 00:44

The Church of Scotland have banned the Orange Order from using their grounds. I have met a good few people from the Church of Scotland. I correspond with one of their Ministers and they are NOTHING near Ulster Loyalists. Thugs who support Rangers like what Im arguing with surely are nothing like most Scots?
Oh, certainly, I'm not saying that we have the same levels of institutionalised sectarianism that we used to, or that still exist in Northern Ireland, just observing that these currents are still found in Scottish society. To be quite honest, it's mostly something you'll find in the older generations, who actually remember the Troubles; anything more than a vague adherence to a certain received wisdom is quite unusual for somebody under 30.

Also, to be fair, not everyone who supports Rangers is in the loyalist set- for a lot of Glasgow it's just one of a number of local teams, like Man Utd is in Manchester. It's only when you get out of the Clyde Valley that an eyebrow can be raised as a matter of course.

Also family ties, but I'm not giving any more details here! :D
Aye, there's some of that too. I've got a great-aunt and uncle over in Belfast, and a lot of other folk have similar.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:54

Also, to be fair, not everyone who supports Rangers is in the loyalist set- for a lot of Glasgow it's just one of a number of local teams, like Man Utd is in Manchester. It's only when you get out of the Clyde Valley that an eyebrow can be raised as a matter of course.

You are right, that was unfair of me.

But what I am hearing from Loyal4Life is stuff that only comes out of hardcore Loyalists, not decent Unionists. The whole thing about RCs loving Orange marches so very creepy. Other stuff he said too that would slip past your eye unless knew something about Loyalism and Unionism.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 00:56

Yes bigotry died overnight when the IRA started bombing people and calling them nazis.

Insitutional sectarianism has been pushed back. And Loyalists know that they cant be as psycho as they used to be.

Sadena Meti

26th April 2011, 01:11

Doesn't really apply to the discussion but I though I'd throw this in.

My first college girlfriend, Karen, was Irish. She was born and raised in West Belfast. Her father was a republican, possibly a militant, that was never made clear. Her mother was murdered when Karen was 13 by Unionists/Loyalists/Whatever. She and her father fled to America.

So she told me about her homeland, and over break in 1997 we took a trip there (she had money, I didn't). We spent a week hanging around where she grew up. This was the first time she had been back too. She showed me her home, her school, her church, her mother's grave and the house her mother had been killed in.

Her opinion of the troubles? "Nuke the whole damn country so neither side can have it."

Despite that I became a republican sympathizer. I'm half Irish anyway.

Tim Finnegan

26th April 2011, 01:16

Doesn't really apply to the discussion but I though I'd throw this in.

My first college girlfriend, Karen, was Irish. The was born and raised in West Belfast. Her father was a republican, possibly a militant, that was never made clear. Her mother was murdered when Karen was 13 by Unionists/Loyalists/Whatever. She and her father fled to America.

So she told me about her homeland, and over break in 1997 we took a trip there (she had money, I didn't). We spent a week hanging around where she grew up. This was the first time she had been back too. She showed me her home, her school, her mother's grave and the house her mother had been killed in.

Her opinion of the troubles? "Nuke the whole damn country so neither side can have it."
As much as I sympathise with her loss, that's one bloody silly conclusion. I'd say my signature has something more productive to offer without falling to one breed of sectarianism or the other.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 01:16

Doesn't really apply to the discussion but I though I'd throw this in.

My first college girlfriend, Karen, was Irish. The was born and raised in West Belfast. Her father was a republican, possibly a militant, that was never made clear. Her mother was murdered when Karen was 13 by Unionists/Loyalists/Whatever. She and her father fled to America.

So she told me about her homeland, and over break in 1997 we took a trip there (she had money, I didn't). We spent a week hanging around where she grew up. This was the first time she had been back too. She showed me her home, her school, her mother's grave and the house her mother had been killed in.

Her opinion of the troubles? "Nuke the whole damn country so neither side can have it."

Despite that I became a republican sympathizer. I'm half Irish anyway.

I can understand the plague on both your houses attitude, and respect it. I can moderate Unionism, and respect it. I understand Loyalism also and thats why I have no time for it.

Tim Finnegan

26th April 2011, 01:30

Don't know if anyone's ever seen this, put it's been floating around those sections of the internet frequented by Scots:

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/wp-content/uploads/p16a.jpg

Bit of optimistic fresh air needed in this thread, I'm thinking. :)

Sadena Meti

26th April 2011, 01:33

As much as I sympathise with her loss, that's one bloody silly conclusion.
I kind of liked it. It was like dealing with two children fighting over a toy. You take it away from them. The 1957(67?) UN plan for Israel and Palestine had the same solution for Jerusalem. Make it a free city, neither side gets it.

Tim Finnegan

26th April 2011, 01:35

I kind of liked it. It was like dealing with two children fighting over a toy. You take it away from them.
That analogy only really works if one of the "children" is a fully grown adult with a Bowie knife. :confused:

Sadena Meti

26th April 2011, 01:50

That analogy only really works if one of the "children" is a fully grown adult with a Bowie knife. :confused:
No, both sides behave (politically) like children. The analogy stands. Strength for strength, violence for violence, they were matched, they were mirrors.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 02:04

No, both sides behave (politically) like children. The analogy stands. Strength for strength, violence for violence, they were matched, they were mirrors.

Its a lot more complicated than out. The Troubles were basically futile and shouldnt have dragged on as long as they did. Thatcher of course didnt help and the "No Surrendur" brigade didnt either. The question is what is a workable solution?

Sadena Meti

26th April 2011, 02:12

Devolution I guess. Integration of schools.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 02:17

Devolution I guess. Integration of schools.

The present situation isnt working. Its been a giant paper overing of the cracks and they beginning to show through. Plus you have this, mostly coming out of the HET investigations in which the British state is basically trying to round up Loyalists for stuff they did years ago because they see them as a problem.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/loyalist-terror-group-plans-march-through-belfast-15143867.html#ixzz1JwBSgoMM

Plus the fact that peace walls have doubled in the last five years. The leadership of Provisional Sinn Fein and the DUP have done very well for themselves though.

Plus confidence in and liking for Provisional Sinn Fein has evapourated in the Republican heartlands even if people still vote for them.

Tim Finnegan

26th April 2011, 02:33

No, both sides behave (politically) like children. The analogy stands. Strength for strength, violence for violence, they were matched, they were mirrors.
If one ignores the role of the British state and bourgeoisie in the proceedings, perhaps. I find that too simplistic model to work with.

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 12:28

Despite that I became a republican sympathizer. I'm half Irish anyway.

Being half Irish is a very good reason to support Irish Republicanism, but also a very good reason to detest the IRA.

Yeah according to the Orange Lodge the BCC are Dirty Fenian Bastards!

http://sluggerotoole.com/2010/10/06/one-of-the-mantras-of-the-peace-process-is-that-dissident-republicans-have-no-support%E2%80%A6/

You know nothing about the so-called "nationalist" population if you think they have NO support.

What unprecedented demonstrations for peace and unity, sure didnt we see them organized by the yellow Unions nearly every week during the troubles?

Slugger O'Toole, that most neutral of sources! :laugh: After the Massereene shootings and the murder of Stephen Carroll huge numbers of people from across NI gathered to demonstarte for peace on scale not seen before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Massereene_Barracks_shooting#Reaction
A definite and imo positive sign that the majority of people are moving forward and rejecting violence.
PS using that word is offensive, regardless of having a great auntie on your fathers side who was a protestant from Northern Ireland.

Because Loyalists always want to seem lily white and hate admitting support for "their" gunmen. Its pretty obvious though for those of us you can read that you are supportive of their "peace making efforts". Lenny Murphy.

I'm not a supporter of the UDA, by any stretch of the imagination. It seemed to me you were suggesting the IRA were righteous heroes of the people and the UDA just sectarian death squads. Although that is the popular misconception is just isn't as simple as that. A long time ago I met an older guy who supported Celtic, he had fought in WW2 for the British paratroopers, and earlier had been a leader of the Maryhill fleet gang. I told him I hated the Nazis and he said some of them were nice people, and some of the British soldiers were nasty bastards. You just can't judge an individual based on their political beliefs.

Do you admit that you are a bigot?

No. I have Irish and Scottish Catholic friends, some Republican die-hards, some who detest them from personal experience. I do not judge anyone by their religion (other than to state for the record religions are bogus as a whole) I don't even judge people by their political beliefs, if the people of Northern Ireland vote for a united Ireland then I support that and good luck to them. What I don't support is violence to further political goals, except of course bashing the fash, which is merely pre-emptive striking. :cool:

Oh, certainly, I'm not saying that we have the same levels of institutionalised sectarianism that we used to, or that still exist in Northern Ireland, just observing that these currents are still found in Scottish society. To be quite honest, it's mostly something you'll find in the older generations, who actually remember the Troubles; anything more than a vague adherence to a certain received wisdom is quite unusual for somebody under 30.

Most people who remember the Troubles are supportive of the power-sharing agreement and the relative peace and stability it has brought. Its only 14yr olds on the itnernet that glorify the loyalist/ republican death squads not realising the actual impact they have.

Also, to be fair, not everyone who supports Rangers is in the loyalist set- for a lot of Glasgow it's just one of a number of local teams, like Man Utd is in Manchester. It's only when you get out of the Clyde Valley that an eyebrow can be raised as a matter of course.

Yes thats quite a fair point. Religion in football is just plain stupid, politics as well imo. There was a study done recently that showed there were more Catholics who supported Rangers than Protestants who supported Celtic. I think to their credit they have moved on from the days of refusing to sign catholic players, in fact a great number of Scotland's Italian community support Rangers. When I was in Catholic school there was a definiate divide between Irish and Italians and a few of the latter supported Rangers, although they kept it quiet! :D

You are right, that was unfair of me.

But what I am hearing from Loyal4Life is stuff that only comes out of hardcore Loyalists, not decent Unionists. The whole thing about RCs loving Orange marches so very creepy. Other stuff he said too that would slip past your eye unless knew something about Loyalism and Unionism.

That I can't source, it was actually a Republican told me that in another argument, he was saying some catholics in NI regularly went to watch the celebrations on the twelfth with their friends and it was all fairly good humoured until the troubles arose.

Insitutional sectarianism has been pushed back. And Loyalists know that they cant be as psycho as they used to be.

I think everyone has calmed down. Not to mention with the police state you can't move without the authorities knowing it. Power-Sharing has been a miracle for NI, its still nowhere near perfect but we are making progression, and finally the working class communities can live relatively more safely.

Doesn't really apply to the discussion but I though I'd throw this in.

My first college girlfriend, Karen, was Irish. She was born and raised in West Belfast. Her father was a republican, possibly a militant, that was never made clear. Her mother was murdered when Karen was 13 by Unionists/Loyalists/Whatever. She and her father fled to America.

So she told me about her homeland, and over break in 1997 we took a trip there (she had money, I didn't). We spent a week hanging around where she grew up. This was the first time she had been back too. She showed me her home, her school, her church, her mother's grave and the house her mother had been killed in.

Her opinion of the troubles? "Nuke the whole damn country so neither side can have it."

Despite that I became a republican sympathizer. I'm half Irish anyway.

I would support the idea off NI independence as a fair compromise, ie no rule from london or dublin. Unfortunately its only been the Unionist community who have so far backed the idea and without strong republican support they'd just feel more threatened by the republic looming without the backup of the UK.

I can understand the plague on both your houses attitude, and respect it. I can moderate Unionism, and respect it. I understand Loyalism also and thats why I have no time for it.

How do you define loyalism? Within the loyalist community there's no universal definition. In fact its a running joke that unionists are anything but united! And as for being loyal to the British state :D well ahem, lets just say there have been a few stray bullets hit the RUC/ PSNI.

I kind of liked it. It was like dealing with two children fighting over a toy. You take it away from them. The 1957(67?) UN plan for Israel and Palestine had the same solution for Jerusalem. Make it a free city, neither side gets it.

See above re: Independence for NI

Its a lot more complicated than out. The Troubles were basically futile and shouldnt have dragged on as long as they did. Thatcher of course didnt help and the "No Surrendur" brigade didnt either. The question is what is a workable solution?

Thatcher is about as popular as Gaddafi in NI for signing the Anglo-Irish agreement.

Devolution I guess. Integration of schools.

Thats the first priority. The Scottish Unionist Party used the term 'religious apartheid in schools' which i feel is no exaggeration.

The present situation isnt working. Its been a giant paper overing of the cracks and they beginning to show through. Plus you have this, mostly coming out of the HET investigations in which the British state is basically trying to round up Loyalists for stuff they did years ago because they see them as a problem.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/loyalist-terror-group-plans-march-through-belfast-15143867.html#ixzz1JwBSgoMM

Plus the fact that peace walls have doubled in the last five years. The leadership of Provisional Sinn Fein and the DUP have done very well for themselves though.

Plus confidence in and liking for Provisional Sinn Fein has evapourated in the Republican heartlands even if people still vote for them.

Although the peace walls are an ugly reminder of our past, they also prevent the same thing happening all over again. In loyalist communities they feel they are protected to some degree by the walls, likewise in some republican communities which were previously subject to sporadic sectarian attacks.

Don't know if anyone's ever seen this, put it's been floating around those sections of the internet frequented by Scots:

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/wp-content/uploads/p16a.jpg

Bit of optimistic fresh air needed in this thread, I'm thinking. :)

Thats a pisstake done by Partick Thistle fans, there's a general consensus amongst the rest of Scottish football that the 'Old Firm' or 'bigot brothers' are fuds, and should fuck off to the EPL. Partick Thistle have a cheek calling anyone bigots though, their songs about the Pope and the Queen are offensive to catholics and the church of england! :ohmy: :lol:

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 12:46

For anybody who did not get my refering to another forum....

I meant SF.

A while back they had a big internal row between the Irish republicans and the unionists supported by the British members. The republicans basically were told to shut the hell up or get the hell out.

The point is...without getting into the debate too deeply...that there are aborrations on both sides who deviate from the norm.

White nationalists siding with loyalists! :lol: Its a good thing they never saw the 12th in Belfast last year, every ethnic minority under the sun, some marching with the bands. There are orange lodges in Ghana, Togo, Nigeria, one Mohawk lodge in Canada. There's a lodge in Manchester of nearly all black members, the guy who leads a liverpool band is black. The UDA's Shoukri brothers are mixed race (half Egyptian) Louis Scott was a mixed race UDA man from the Shankill, sent by Andy Tyrie to make arms deals wth C18 (to make a point they weren't interested in racial politics) Even back in the 1800's a black guy called George Henry Thompson was part of a mob in the Shankill. And don't even get me started on the jew-loving shenanigans, from Chaim Herzog to Gustav Wilhlem Wolff..
And besides I thought the Nazis hated Masonic types? :confused:

PhoenixAsh

26th April 2011, 13:23

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 14:43

Well...please continue the interesting debate. I just about understand half of it and nothing is really getting any clearer.

Any online literature which acts like a kind of: troubles explained for dummies?

Personally I think NI should be independent. England should GTFO. Everybody should be equal and have the same status. What happens after that or what should happen after that...I have no idea.

Its sort of pointless arguing about it here, by the end of this loyalists and republicans will be b& from revleft as a matter of course :lol: I'm up for open debate but I get really p**** when people start that 'loyalists are scum' type shit, like any civil war there's no right and wrong, there are two sides to the argument and bad people on both sides who use the situation to their advantage. And of course innocent people caught in the crossfire. If the problems could be solved by calling each other bigots and other names they would have been solved hundreds of years ago.

There is a wealth of material on the subject, although most writings come from a Republican perspective. The BBC used to be very anti-Republican but in recent times have been accused by both sides of being bias towards the other, so maybe they're the most neutral source. And they a lot of journalists in NI as well. For a more Irish perspective look at RTE or something similar. Wikipedia is not always reliable and is subject to constant edit wars but generally I find they give a good overview.

Historically of course Britain was very very much in the wrong, from the time of Cromwell and the plantations (dispossesion of Irish landowners and general imperialistic opression). But since the partition of Ireland the issues changed somewhat. Some Republicans accepted the partition (Northern Ireland remained British because of the large majority of Unionists) and some didn't. The pro and anti-treaty forces fought a civil war, the pro treaty forces eventually winning.

Nowadays there is no real border as such between NI and the Republic, people can come and go as they please pretty much. And the social conditions are fairly similar too. The arguments of opression of the working class are arguments for britain as a whole, and for that matter the World. I don't think things will necessarily improve under irish rule rather than British. In fact the worry is the loyalists will simply become the rebels then, and there's more of them and according to red sun far more violent. I am in agreement with a Socialist republic, but I am sceptical as to why it needs to be a united Ireland as such, and also why its has such a strong Irish identity, rather than an inclusive Irish/ Ulster Scot culture. England doesn't have a huge influence over NI, in fact some 'loyalists' hate England in the same way Scots do. Ultimately though it has to come down to the people, and the only fair way to decide is through the ballot.

Che a chara

26th April 2011, 17:28

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 17:47

I haven't had the opportunity to read through the whole thread yet, but PULSE :eek: that place is like Stromfront. It's impossible to have a reasoned and rational debate with any user. The total pig ignorance, intolerance and bigotry is astounding. Many suffer from what is known as an artificial siege mentality, while others are more open about their sectarian and fascist tendencies.

Unfortunately social and economic conditions don't really come into their equation when discussing alternatives about the possibility of a united future.

*edit - good name change loyal :D

Thanks! :cool: I stopped posting on there because of that kind of asshole, they think they can dictate policy by insulting anyone they disagree with, and treat it like a pissing contest. But its not like Stormfront, just to be clear, they ban people who make racist remarks. IMO they are far too 'tolerant' of the obvious BNP *****s on there, if it was up to me I'd ban them outright. loyalistfm when it was still going was much more progressive, and tended to be actually people from NI rather than glasgow rangers fans and misguided BNP skinheads. As such I won't miss PULSE when it goes soon (allegedly) there were some good people there but by allowing fascists a voice they were severely dragged down. It became like reading the daily mail, only worse sometimes. Like I said there are many right wing conservative loyalists, some even outright nazis or fascists, but its unfair to tar them all with the same brush.

Viet Minh

26th April 2011, 17:48

I haven't had the opportunity to read through the whole thread yet..

Also, please don't, let this die in peace! :crying: :lol:

psgchisolm

26th April 2011, 18:05

I don't understand half the shit said here. But I'm going for Loyal. Good old long ass posts that force me to skim through for the good old sectarian shit talking by supposed Socialists. Support the double standard! This is one time the "lesser evil" is actually good :rolleyes:. Anyway, I'm a reactionary shithead so just take this as a bit of an ego boost. Solidarity for the guy who doesn't alienate others from leftist ideology who is surprisingly not leftist.:laugh:

PhoenixAsh

26th April 2011, 20:08

I am in agreement with a Socialist republic, but I am sceptical as to why it needs to be a united Ireland as such, and also why its has such a strong Irish identity, rather than an inclusive Irish/ Ulster Scot culture. England doesn't have a huge influence over NI, in fact some 'loyalists' hate England in the same way Scots do. Ultimately though it has to come down to the people, and the only fair way to decide is through the ballot.

Given my tendency I am naturally opposed to all states. The only solution to many problems can be reached by ultimately dissolving such things as nations and nationalities all together.

So given that...I think there should be no real question other than what the inhabitants of a specific region want...without treading on the autonomy of others....so long as this stage is not reached.

For that to become clear all forms of imperialism and colonialism or remains of these should be withdrawn from any area in the world...its continued existence hampers people to freely make up their minds seeing as it confuses and complicates matters to no limit.
(That offcourse is aside from the obvious economic exploitation that goes hand in hand with both)

In Ireland the religious devide is another obvious factor which complicates matters. Again...religions need to be absolved, especially from any government which still remains...untill these institutions also are dissolved.

Now....as far as I can see...the major problems which pose the biggest issue are territorial integrity....and religious division.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 20:24

In Ireland the religious devide is another obvious factor which complicates matters. Again...religions need to be absolved, especially from any government which still remains...untill these institutions also are dissolved.

Now....as far as I can see...the major problems which pose the biggest issue are territorial integrity....and religious division.

We shouldnt make to much of the religious divide, as the Communist Party of Ireland Marxist-Leninist pointed out the divide wasnt about religion but about loyalty or disloyalty to British Imperialism, religious identity serving as a significator for that and guaranting job placement and/or better jobs, though genuinely religious Protestants in the north tend to be militantly apolitical and the Roman Catholic hierarchy with one or two expections has also supported the British state and opposed Republicanism. What is at the heart of the type of Loyalism put forward by our friend is basically insuring Protestant supremacy in terms of jobs, housing, etc and triumphalism over their neighbours. Sectarianism has insured that wages in the six counties are the lowest in the UK, even worse than in Cornwall in many areas. It was also hysterically whipped up by people from outside of Ulster in the late 19 th and early 20 th such as Edward Carson who has a right wing half-Italian lawyer from Dublin, Randolph Churchill and Bishop Fredrick D'Arcy a Church of Ireland Bishop from Wexford and militant advocate of eugenics in order to insure that the industrial base of Ulster which was very important at the time stayed in British hands and to undermine the workers' movement.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 20:35

Slugger O'Toole, that most neutral of sources! :laugh: After the Massereene shootings and the murder of Stephen Carroll huge numbers of people from across NI gathered to demonstarte for peace on scale not seen before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Massereene_Barracks_shooting#Reaction
A definite and imo positive sign that the majority of people are moving forward and rejecting violence.
PS using that word is offensive, regardless of having a great auntie on your fathers side who was a protestant from Northern Ireland.

I'm not a supporter of the UDA, by any stretch of the imagination. It seemed to me you were suggesting the IRA were righteous heroes of the people and the UDA just sectarian death squads. Although that is the popular misconception is just isn't as simple as that.You just can't judge an individual based on their political beliefs.

Its slugger o'toole reporting on a BBC report...But you think that the BBC are all Fenian bastards dont you? Often supporters of the Loyalist death squads seem shy about admitting to others, but you can always tell, and frankly I dont believe you. Having looked at your site its pretty obvious that you are at least sympathetic. Other things you have said would back that up. And yes you can judge people based on their political beliefs. If someone told me they were a Nazi or a Klansman or a Libertarian I would judge them on that because only absolute scum would hold those views. I hope you are a misguided teenager but something tells me you are not.

Look at a recent demonstration in Derry after a "dissident" bomb, hardly anyone showed up. The reaction to Masserene was not unusual, and not as all embracing, as the establishment would like to believe.

Slugger O'Toole is as neutral as they come.

RedSunRising

26th April 2011, 20:50

I think everyone has calmed down. Not to mention with the police state you can't move without the authorities knowing it. Power-Sharing has been a miracle for NI, its still nowhere near perfect but we are making progression, and finally the working class communities can live relatively more safely.

I would support the idea off NI independence as a fair compromise, ie no rule from london or dublin. Unfortunately its only been the Unionist community who have so far backed the idea and without strong republican support they'd just feel more threatened by the republic looming without the backup of the UK.

You really far to much?

You bigged up the Loyalist Ulster Workers Strike against Power sharing and now you are bigging up Power sharing?

Actually the Provisionals for a long time put forward the idea of a federal Ireland with the north have near to self rule. The left within the Provos fought rightly against this as a sop to Unionism. Loyalism is essentially sectarian and reactionary (again DUP and TUV...how progressive! :rolleyes:) and must be smashed.

This is a brillant Marxist analyis of its poison.

http://inniu.wordpress.com/the-incompatibility-of-green-and-orange/

And dont say you a democrat and its fine for you if the six counties decide to leave the Union. When Ireland decided to leave the Union your lads refused the wishes of the majority and carved up Ulster. Already FOUR of the six occupied counties want out of the Union, would it be fine for them to go? Loyalists are already talking about re-partition and no warning bombs across Ireland in the event of the a nationalist majority across the north.

GallowsBird

26th April 2011, 22:12

Tim Finnegan

27th April 2011, 00:50

Thats a pisstake done by Partick Thistle fans...
Death of the author, pal, death of the author. ;)

Should say Britain really, or the UK rather than England... people from all over Britain went to Northern Ireland not just English people, the majority being Anglo-Scottish Borderers (hence Ulster-Scots... Northumberland isn't as famous as the Scottish bits) though early in the history of the settlement they did marry into Irish families (and some were of Highland descent) so they are quit mixed really with most "Ulster Unionists" having some Irish ancestry (seeing them as English occupiers, or only of immigrant culture is a slight simplification).
I think he was talking about the British state rather than the Unionist community, but fair point that the UK can't always be reduced to its most prominent member. (At the very least, I'm uneasy of any logic that holds Morningside or Kelvinside above anti-imperialist reproach, but Peterlee as damnable as the City of London.)

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 02:19

PS using that word is offensive, regardless of having a great auntie on your fathers side who was a protestant from Northern Ireland.

Using what word? And yeah I would believe a woman who grew up in the murder triangle, a life long communist and was forced out of the province that despite all she loved so much over to England by scum such like you, and no she wasnt a raving Republican and yes she remained soft on Unionism till she died. But she knew a fascist, and she knew a bigot. You know very little about Irish Republicanism so I am guessing still you have no Republican friends, and Im also guessing that NO Republican would ever say what you said about RCs cheering on an Orange march.

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 02:20

I don't understand half the shit said here. But I'm going for Loyal.

You would, you also go for the US army.

Dr Mindbender

27th April 2011, 02:48

I believe Karl Marx once wrote something along the lines of ''While Ireland remains in chains, the british working class will never be free''.

At the time of writing, i take it to mean the island of Ireland.

That is all i'm saying on the sovereignty debate. The whole thing is so fucking tiresome.

Viet Minh

27th April 2011, 03:16

We shouldnt make to much of the religious divide, as the Communist Party of Ireland Marxist-Leninist pointed out the divide wasnt about religion but about loyalty or disloyalty to British Imperialism, religious identity serving as a significator for that and guaranting job placement and/or better jobs, though genuinely religious Protestants in the north tend to be militantly apolitical and the Roman Catholic hierarchy with one or two expections has also supported the British state and opposed Republicanism. What is at the heart of the type of Loyalism put forward by our friend is basically insuring Protestant supremacy in terms of jobs, housing, etc and triumphalism over their neighbours. Sectarianism has insured that wages in the six counties are the lowest in the UK, even worse than in Cornwall in many areas. It was also hysterically whipped up by people from outside of Ulster in the late 19 th and early 20 th such as Edward Carson who has a right wing half-Italian lawyer from Dublin, Randolph Churchill and Bishop Fredrick D'Arcy a Church of Ireland Bishop from Wexford and militant advocate of eugenics in order to insure that the industrial base of Ulster which was very important at the time stayed in British hands and to undermine the workers' movement.

I was gonna let this go, but once again during your nonsensical tirades you make unfounded accusations against me. I am in absolutely no position to 'ensure protestant supremacy in jobs' neither do I give a flying fuck about Protestants or any other religion for that matter. I don't advocate religious supremacy either way. Clear? Thank you.

Its slugger o'toole reporting on a BBC report...But you think that the BBC are all Fenian bastards dont you? Often supporters of the Loyalist death squads seem shy about admitting to others, but you can always tell, and frankly I dont believe you. Having looked at your site its pretty obvious that you are at least sympathetic. Other things you have said would back that up. And yes you can judge people based on their political beliefs. If someone told me they were a Nazi or a Klansman or a Libertarian I would judge them on that because only absolute scum would hold those views. I hope you are a misguided teenager but something tells me you are not.

I am sympathetic to some actions of the UVF, UDA and the IRA when they were defending themselves from attacks by their enemies and the british/ irish states, but as a rule no. Violence solves nothing.

Look at a recent demonstration in Derry after a "dissident" bomb, hardly anyone showed up. The reaction to Masserene was not unusual, and not as all embracing, as the establishment would like to believe.

Possibly because they were afraid of further attacks or retribution, these groups have 'their' communities in fear for their lives. And what? You say the reaction to Masserene (hundreds gathered in peaceful protest) is not unusual, after clearly stating that nobody objects to the renewed RIRA campaign?

Slugger O'Toole is as neutral as they come.

:lol: :lol:

owait, ur srs?! :D :D :D

You really far to much?

You bigged up the Loyalist Ulster Workers Strike against Power sharing and now you are bigging up Power sharing?

Generally I am against power sharing, its like giving the BNP power sharing because of the nailbomber or Combat 18 terrorism. But it has brought peace to Northern Ireland and for that I support the move. If the working class had objected to it en masse of course as a leftist I would have to support their wishes.

Actually the Provisionals for a long time put forward the idea of a federal Ireland with the north have near to self rule. The left within the Provos fought rightly against this as a sop to Unionism. Loyalism is essentially sectarian and reactionary (again DUP and TUV...how progressive! :rolleyes:) and must be smashed.

So the left wanted to force control over Northern Ireland to the Republic? If I said 'Republicanism must be smashed' what would you take that to mean? Something reactionary no doubt.. :rolleyes:

This is a brillant Marxist analyis of its poison.

http://inniu.wordpress.com/the-incompatibility-of-green-and-orange/

And dont say you a democrat and its fine for you if the six counties decide to leave the Union. When Ireland decided to leave the Union your lads refused the wishes of the majority and carved up Ulster. Already FOUR of the six occupied counties want out of the Union, would it be fine for them to go? Loyalists are already talking about re-partition and no warning bombs across Ireland in the event of the a nationalist majority across the north.

Another loaded site and a very loaded question. I've already said that if the majority want to join the south and go about it in a non-violent manner then they have my support and hopefully that of the working class, the majority of whom are loyalist. Time and again you excuse this and that Republican group, 'oh they were pro treaty' or 'they were not as Marxist' and still you try to bundle loyalists into one stereotypically reactionary violent grouping.

Using what word? And yeah I would believe a woman who grew up in the murder triangle, a life long communist and was forced out of the province that despite all she loved so much over to England by scum such like you, and no she wasnt a raving Republican and yes she remained soft on Unionism till she died. But she knew a fascist, and she knew a bigot. You know very little about Irish Republicanism so I am guessing still you have no Republican friends, and Im also guessing that NO Republican would ever say what you said about RCs cheering on an Orange march.

Well I'm guessing you know no loyalists, and I'd be right considering the unbelievably bad stereotypical idea you have of them! :D But yes I do know Republicans, form the North and South of Ireland, and from Scotland. And yes that was said to me. Republican views vary you know, there's no unified official general republican party line. After the death of David Ervine some republicans hailed him as a truly great man, and others vilified him as a fascist killer. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

You would, you also go for the US army.

I didn't read the whole thread but I think its fairly clear he condemned both the US army and the Taliban. Would you care to do the same?

I believe Karl Marx once wrote something along the lines of ''While Ireland remains in chains, the british working class will never be free''.

At the time of writing, i take it to mean the island of Ireland.

That is all i'm saying on the sovereignty debate. The whole thing is so fucking tiresome.

Its hard to know what he would have made of partition however.

psgchisolm

27th April 2011, 03:21

You would, you also go for the US army.Some insult you got there. hurr Durr US Army. btw why did you derail the thread with that crap which has nothing to do with this thread? I would a can of beans lulz at you.:laugh: GOD TROLLING SO SO MUCH FUN.:laugh:

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 03:54

So the left wanted to force control over Northern Ireland to the Republic? If I said 'Republicanism must be smashed' what would you take that to mean? Something reactionary no doubt.. :rolleyes:

Well I'm guessing you know no loyalists, and I'd be right considering the unbelievably bad stereotypical idea you have of them! :D But yes I do know Republicans, form the North and South of Ireland, and from Scotland. And yes that was said to me. Republican views vary you know, there's no unified official general republican party line. After the death of David Ervine some republicans hailed him as a truly great man, and others vilified him as a fascist killer. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
.

Yes the Left wanted to give no truck to a reactionary sectarian idealogy that was holding Ireland randsom. Nationalists felt "its their culture innit?". Surprise, fucking surprise.

No I dont know any Loyalists, I wouldnt want to know any Loyalists, I regard you as fascist scum. I dont hang out with people who big up throwing shit piss filled ballons at children, Im weird like that. I know some Unionists, including two members even of the Orange Order who I have had heated arguments with, but I dont consider them scum. You are scum though. And no Republican or Communist bigs up the Orange Order or says that their marches were quaint. Republicans are always looking for the nice side of Unionism and Loyalism hence the crap about David Ervine.

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 03:58

Another loaded site and a very loaded question. I've already said that if the majority want to join the south and go about it in a non-violent manner then they have my support and hopefully that of the working class, the majority of whom are loyalist. Time and again you excuse this and that Republican group, 'oh they were pro treaty' or 'they were not as Marxist' and still you try to bundle loyalists into one stereotypically reactionary violent grouping.

If they were pro-Treaty than they werent Republican. Hence you dont know any Republicans otherwise you wouldnt be calling pro-treayites Republicans.

Because they are.

And what UDA, UVF actions do you support?

Tim Finnegan

27th April 2011, 03:58

I am in absolutely no position to 'ensure protestant supremacy in jobs' neither do I give a flying fuck about Protestants or any other religion for that matter. I don't advocate religious supremacy either way.
You don't need to advocate the status quo. You just need to fail to oppose it.

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 03:59

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 04:01

I was gonna let this go, but once again during your nonsensical tirades you make unfounded accusations against me. I am in absolutely no position to 'ensure protestant supremacy in jobs' neither do I give a flying fuck about Protestants or any other religion for that matter. I don't advocate religious supremacy either way. Clear? Thank you.

What has Loyalism been about brains????

psgchisolm

27th April 2011, 04:12

What has Loyalism been about brains????The key letters in that post are "I"

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 04:19

The key letters in that post are "I"

Yeah right in the case for some one who runs a site for loyalist paramilitary fans.

http://sn.loyal4life.org/_UDA/photo/4680290/109928.html

psgchisolm

27th April 2011, 04:30

Yeah right in the case for some one who runs a site for loyalist paramilitary fans.

http://sn.loyal4life.org/_UDA/photo/4680290/109928.htmlIs his right. Just like whoever hosts this site has his own ideas for leftism.

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 04:46

Is his right. Just like whoever hosts this site has his own ideas for leftism.

If you had grown up in the murder triangle or Ardoyne you wouldnt think so.

RedSunRising

27th April 2011, 04:54

So the left wanted to force control over Northern Ireland to the Republic? If I said 'Republicanism must be smashed' what would you take that to mean? Something reactionary no doubt.. :rolleyes:

Yes the Left, and the revolutionary left almost completely has opposed unionism and loyalism and supported however critically Republicanism? You know that as well as I do....Do you have any guesses why?

psgchisolm

27th April 2011, 05:00

If you had grown up in the murder triangle or Ardoyne you wouldnt think so.No I wouldn't because I'm not an authoritarian dick.

Viet Minh

27th April 2011, 13:09

Yes the Left wanted to give no truck to a reactionary sectarian idealogy that was holding Ireland randsom. Nationalists felt "its their culture innit?". Surprise, fucking surprise.

Nationalists felt its their land, and didn't want non native Irish in it you mean?

No I dont know any Loyalists, I wouldnt want to know any Loyalists, I regard you as fascist scum. I dont hang out with people who big up throwing shit piss filled ballons at children, Im weird like that. I know some Unionists, including two members even of the Orange Order who I have had heated arguments with, but I dont consider them scum. You are scum though. And no Republican or Communist bigs up the Orange Order or says that their marches were quaint. Republicans are always looking for the nice side of Unionism and Loyalism hence the crap about David Ervine.

Piss filled balloons, thats a new one on me.. Still it beats a bomb I suppose, that stuff is really hard to wash out of a kids coat. You are showing your true colours here, keep it up with the bigoted shit, really. :)

If they were pro-Treaty than they werent Republican. Hence you dont know any Republicans otherwise you wouldnt be calling pro-treayites Republicans.

Because they are.

And what UDA, UVF actions do you support?

So you know two unionists, who you claim are different somehow form loyalists (but haven't yet specified in what way) but feel confident to state that all loyalists are fascist scum? :rolleyes:

You don't need to advocate the status quo. You just need to fail to oppose it.

What status quo? There are laws in place against discrimination. Admittedly it wasn't always the case (one possible example is Harland and Wolff) but those days are gone we need to move forward. Any discrimination I see I will challenge, but frankly I think red sun is looking very hard for a situation that doesn't exist anymore except in the minds of rira apologists.

Loyalist brains thanked this post.

Because Karl Marx wanted Ireland to be free, now it is. You have a nice theocracy in the south and in the north although there are some fascists who wish to ethnically cleanse the place of 'loyalist scum' there is relative freedom compared to most places, and most supposedly socialist ones too.

What has Loyalism been about brains????

'What has Loyalism been about brains????' Sorry I don't understand the question, sorry for my stupidity. I guess thats a form of discrimination thats okay

Yeah right in the case for some one who runs a site for loyalist paramilitary fans.

http://sn.loyal4life.org/_UDA/photo/4680290/109928.html

I don't run it there are several moderators, its basically dead though and full of spam. If you condemn Republican paramilitary sites as a matter of course (including possibly this one who advocate to some degree republcian paramilitary activities) then you can take the mroal high ground.

If you had grown up in the murder triangle or Ardoyne you wouldnt think so.

Did you? If you'd grown up in the Fountain or Cluan place you'd feel rather differently again. The difference is I don't suggest you have no entitlement to voice your opinion.

Yes the Left, and the revolutionary left almost completely has opposed unionism and loyalism and supported however critically Republicanism? You know that as well as I do....Do you have any guesses why?

Because Irish Republicans want a Soviet-style revolution where all political opponents are executed? Because some of the far left have no respect for such pifling things as the will of the people, in this case the working class protestants? Or maybe because Republicans liek you spend all your time revising history and spouting propaganda to stir up hatred and entrench a whole new generation in sectarian conflict?
Or is it because Gerry Adams has a beard so therefore must be a socialist? :D How many guesses am I allowed?