“..the only reception it deserves – a hostile one”
With a ruling due tomorrow on the British Armed Forces parade in Belfast on 2 November and a counter-protest by Sinn Féin, the News Letter points to the anger of some that the Parades Commission has no power to rule on an éirígí organised protest as they have not sought permission for their demonstration.
(éirígí link may not be working at present)
ADDS: I should have noted that dependent on éirígí plans they may not even fall within the scope of the Parades Commission. Under the Public Processions Act they would only be expected to apply if they intend to hold a parade or the focus of their demonstration is objecting to a parade. Demonstrating against a civic reception or the presence of British soldiers in Ireland falls under public order legislation.
LOL Greenflag! If more people in NI had a sense of humour there wouldn’t be half the problems.
I posted on an earlier thread that the squaddies probably couldn’t care less about another march, and a good dinner followed by a piss up would be sufficient. Nevertheless, they ere entitled to walk through their home city, at the behest of Belfast City Council. No-one with any sense of reason would have been bothered. A Sunday morning parade, similar to a Royal British Legion one. Now SF have upped the ante by implicitly inviting every head case in nationalist West Belfast to protest. And the loyalist eejits who previously had no interest in the RIR will follow suite.
This almost guarantees a degree of trouble, and the ensuing blame, Police heavy handedness etc. Stoopid, stoopid, stoopid. If the PC allow the SF parade, hope not, the RIR should be allowed to carry their loaded weapons. In the credit crunch, several hundred less benefit claimants in West Belfast would be welcome news:,
Code word here is british!!!
Big M ,
‘If more people in NI had a sense of humour there wouldn’t be half the problems.’
Perhaps ? My observation for what it’s worth is that the good folk of NI (both tribes ) take those things which ought to be taken seriously not serious enough and those which ought not to be taken too seriously as almost matters of existential life or death
Have you perhaps considered that if those who do have a sense of humour -did’nt , that NI might have twice the problems it has or even worse some geometric progression of said amount ?;)
I remember as a 13/1 year old having to be virtually carried from the cinema in an apopoleptic fit of laughter having seen Groucho (the leer ) Marx in Night of the Opera . As a somewhat more serious adult I revisited this film but alas no longer found it as funny as I had as a teenager .
Nevertheless Marx (and I don’t mean Karl) has some sound advice to those who take life more seriously than is warranted.
Heres an extract of a mini review I read recently which digs into the philosophy of Groucho Marx (not related to Karl (hairy face) Marx .
‘I’ve long been of the opinion that life is too serious to be taken seriously, and if that is my religion, then Groucho is the pope. In his interactions with peers, children, lawyers, actors, writers and politicians, the man simply refuses to take any of it seriously. Shakespeare wrote that life is a tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing. These letters make it seem as if Groucho actually lived it that way.
A letter from Warner Brothers threatening legal action for the Marx Brothers’ use of the name “Casablanca” in the title of their movie was met not with bluster, counterthreats or even a request for discussion, but rather with a letter from Groucho discussing the history of the name “Warner” and the word “brothers.”
“Professionally,” he writes, “we were brothers long before you… what about the Smith Brothers? The Brothers Karamazov? Dan Brothers, an outfielder with Detroit?”
Subsequent letters from the WB lawyers were met with even more flippancy, and eventually they simply stopped writing and gave up the matter.
In 1963, responding to an admiring letter he received from T.S. Eliot, Groucho replied, “Dear Tom; If this isn’t your first name, I’m in a hell of a fix.”
In 1959, he wrote Elaine Tynan, the author of The Dud Avocado, to tell her how much he enjoyed her book. She wrote back, thanking him for his kind words and requesting a photo of him for her wall.
“I am delighted,” he replied, “that you are delighted that I was delighted about your book. I am sending you a photo of myself at age of seven. You will probably say to yourself, ‘Why the cigar?’ That’s a very good question. Actually, the cigar is a phony, so is the moustache and, to wrap it all up neatly, so am I.”
It takes a staggering degree of self-assurance to steadfastly refuse to be dragged down into the pit of worthiness and self-importance. It takes a monumental degree of wisdom to know that life is short and silly and probably ought to be treated that way. Serious is easy. It doesn’t take much to stand on a soapbox and bemoan the fall of something, the corruption of whatever, the abuse of everything.
Perhaps the questions of “Why are we here?” “What is our purpose?” and “Is there a God?” are not answered in these letters. But a more important question is: How are we to go through life? How are we to approach this mess of an existence?
Groucho’s answer: with laughter.
Greenflag would concur with Groucho’s answer with the proviso , oft repeated in the annals of ‘The Rise and Fall of Reginald Perrin ‘ enunciated with precision by the great CeeJay (the boss)
‘not too much , not too little , just enough ‘
and
‘I did’nt get where I am by knowing the difference between Venezuela and Chile ‘
By the way whats the weather like in Venezuela ?
Chile
There’s an Orange portion on the Irish Republican flag. It represents the British people of Ireland. According to the size and proportions of the colours on the Irish flag, the British people of Ireland are entitled to have a say and equal rights in a Democratic Irish Republic. Like it or not, there is a strong history of Irish people serving in the British army. The British people of Ireland today strongly identify with this and the RIR troops who served in the Middle East. They wish to have a parade to honour their troops. They should be allowed to do so. The protest is rediculous. If it ends up in a melee and riot it will be shamefull and embarrasing. Eirigi/SF are using the lowest common denominator for a protest. A ‘United Ireland’, what Eirigi/SF believe in, entails the British people expressing their culture (as like the 12th July, etc…). This is part of their culture. It should be respected, whether people agree with it or not! Eirigi/SF don’t understand Democratic Republican principles, or in this case, compromise!
According to cynic:
“Read their website. They are anti everything British and American in Afghanistan which they describe as a “a brutal occupation” being resisted by the Afghani people and which they then try to compare to Northern Ireland.
The fact that the allies are there at the invitation of the ELECTED Afghani Government to try to support democratic government escapes them. NATO and almost 40 other countries with contingents there have effectively been duped by the Americans and British. In éirígí’s view it is all a “war against the Afghani people”.”
I have read their website and their is no mention of supporting the Taliban as somone tried to suggest (not sure if it was you or not cynic)
“The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and all of its parts, cherishing all of the children of the nation equally and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.”
For Erigi and SF folk the above extract is taken from the 1916 Proclamation. The 1916 Proclamation is the bedrock of modern Irish Republicanism. The sentence taken from the 1916 Proclamation above guarantees and respects the rights and culture of British people in Ireland! Whether one likes it or not British Unionists views and opinions should be respected. To ignore the meaning of the above sentence is to ignore the meaning of Irish Republicanism which is all encompassing!
cynic, did the americans go into afghanistan at the request of the government are did they go in and put that government in power?
“cynic, if only the British had stayed at home and reined in their thieving rapacious greedy grabbing expansionist colonialist policies, where would we be now? If only!
Posted by Pancho’s Horse on Oct 22, 2008 @ 05:15 PM”
Simple —you would be living in mud huts jabbering in a language incomprehensible to the rest of the world and subsisting on oats in a good year and SFA in a bad year All the while you would toady to the local “chief”
There’s an Orange portion on the Irish Republican flag. It represents the British people of Ireland
It doesn’t represent British anything. It represents Irish orangeism.
The sentence taken from the 1916 Proclamation above guarantees and respects the rights and culture of British people in Ireland!
It doesn’t guaranteee the right of the British army to parade in Ireland. And it doesn’t mean that Irish people are not entitled to protest either the presence of the British army in Ireland or its war crimes elsewhere.
To ignore the meaning of the above sentence is to ignore the meaning of Irish Republicanism which is all encompassing!
The meaning and history of Irish Republicanism is entirely consistent with protesting against the actions of the British military.
“Simple —you would be living in mud huts jabbering in a language incomprehensible to the rest of the world and subsisting on oats in a good year and SFA in a bad year All the while you would toady to the local “chief””
I don’t think so!
“It doesn’t represent British anything. It represents Irish orangeism.”
Indeed, but Irish Orangeism is associated with British culture. Unionists view themselves as British!
Cynic,
There was never the physical presence of British soldiers in loyalist areas as there was in nationalist areas. Yes i have been in loyalist areas and loyalist pubs for that matter.
Greenflag,
The British army pretty much set the conflict ablaze with their actions on Bloody Sunday, one sided internment, the Falls curfew, the massacre in Ballymurphy etc. Having set it ablaze their policy was to deliberately stir up sectarian warfare between what you call the “2 tribes”… despite their best efforts the Republican movement despite the truly terrible depths plumbed in 75 and 76 did not for the most time resort to all out sectarian warfare. The British Army also refused to support Sunningdale and refused to stand up to the Loyalist strike. This precipitated another 30 years of conflict. Many people would still be alive today if this entirely one sided partisan force whose sole purpose was to stoke sectarian warfare to dampen down republican radicalism had never set foot on Irish soil in 1969.
dub
The British Army also refused to support Sunningdale?????
The British Army does what it is told by the MoD, ie The British Government. Your post makes out that squaddies carried out all this stuff over a few pints in the NAAFI. What if the Coldstream Guards disagreed with the Black Watch? Get a grip.