Suspend the Loyalists

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I don't see how you can call yourself a free country and not have it recognized as a basic right. Notice the word I chose, recgonized. The government doesn't give the people the right to say what they want. The people give the government the chance to exist. This whole idea of we as a people being beholden to the government and we should be thankful for whatever scraps fall off of the table in terms of political rights.... it's sickening. Nobody gives me the right to vote, or the right to work harder and get my family ahead. Even if you use the term as a euphemism, they are 'God given', much the same way insurance companies recognize 'acts of God', even if they're all atheists. The fact is, rights exist because people exist. If you deny or limit the right, then you cannot say you are a representational society. At some level, you're something else.... an aristocray, a platocracy, whatever you want to call yourselves.

Look, I know these guys are offensive. Don't you think having the Klan outside the Shoah memorial the day it opened claiming the Holocaust was a lie was painful? Especially for the survivors who watched family members totured, raped and executed? Free speech isn't easy, if it was, we wouldn't have to remind ourselves of how important it is, it would just be obvious. But the way to deal with difficult or offensive ideas is to hold them up to scrutiny and rebut them, not silence them or limit them.

---

Your arguement here is misguided. To walk through a neighborhood in a mob declaring your superiority when the populace knows that some marchers are carrying weapons and will use them is an outright incitement to violence. People should have a right to peaceful assembly.

You believe in the 2nd ammendment as well? Do you believe that the KKK should be allowed to carry weapons in angry protests declaring their superiority over Blacks in Harlem? You honestly believe that if blacks being forced to watch this march feel threatened and angry themselves it is their fault that the protest turns "violent"? I personally believe that violence isn't only physical.

Oh well a third night of it .
And the head of the order refuses to condemn the attacks and says that all the blame lies with the police , the commission and the government :dizzy2:

And Santaclause... dont forget Santa and the elves are to blame as well!

Bloody hell I hope no one gets killed! Its been an absolute miracle that there arent 5 deaths already!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

This would be especially ironic for the IRA, who are catholic marxists.

---

Isnt that an oxymoron? I thought marxism pronounced religion as one of the sources of evil that had to rooted out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghost908

Isnt that an oxymoron? I thought marxism pronounced religion as one of the sources of evil that had to rooted out.

---

As I understand it, Communists follows that doctrine and Marxists don't. My personal experience is that Marxists claim the title in order to pick and choose which parts of Communism they like and exclude the ones they don't. Logical, of course, but a misnomer all the same.

The Orange Order is not a political party, so it has no representatives that could be suspended.

Re-routing marches puts restrictions on where you can go, not what you can say, so it is not a restriction on free speech.

Originally the provisional IRA and hence Sinn Fein were marxist and only ethnically Catholic. They have toned this down over the last two decades in order to broaden their appeal to the Catholic electorate in Northern Ireland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke of Gloucester

The Orange Order is not a political party, so it has no representatives that could be suspended.

Re-routing marches puts restrictions on where you can go, not what you can say, so it is not a restriction on free speech.

Originally the provisional IRA and hence Sinn Fein were marxist and only ethnically Catholic. They have toned this down over the last two decades in order to broaden their appeal to the Catholic electorate in Northern Ireland.

---

Ah, like how the KKK now accepts members who aren't Protestant. I actually didn't know that.

The Orange Order is not a political party, so it has no representatives that could be suspended. ~D ~D ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke of Gloucester

Originally the provisional IRA and hence Sinn Fein were marxist and only ethnically Catholic. They have toned this down over the last two decades in order to broaden their appeal to the Catholic electorate in Northern Ireland.

---

It might also have something to do with the fact that the CCCP went toes up in 1989, and was having trouble nurturing their 5th columns for years before that. ~:) Hard to run a revolution on rhetoric alone.

Seamus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I honestly do not know whether there were any pro-Taliban protests at ground zero yesterday or not. Knowing my country, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

---

As far as I know, Don, none were reported. This could have more to do with the fact that the whole area is a hard-hat construction zone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

My point is that I'm not unsympathetic. I know it's incredibly offensive (I need to watch my language this time) stuff to have to deal with. I know how angry it can make you to have to hear this stuff. In terms of location, think about how actual Holocaust survivors felt in Washington D.C. when they walked out of the opening and saw a bunch of Klansmen walking around saying they were lying about the holocaust?

---

Don is correct here. Protestors in this country are expected to file for the appropriate permit for a march. This request must be enough in advance to allow scivil authorities time to prepare security etc. for the event. Courts will generally rule against a government that denies such a permit unless a "clear and present danger" to the community, or unusually harsh economic hardships would be imposed by the protest in question.

So, the klukkers can march, right through the Black or Jewish neighborhood, wear their guns under their robes (if the locale permits concealed carry and they have the appropriate permit), carry their flags and crosses, and generally parade their ignorance for all to see. Anyone in the crowd or the march who swings at someone else is then arrested, and if such behavior spreads, additional police in riot gear come in to impose order. Should such behavior occur, the community might try to deny subsequent requests pointing to demonstrated danger, and the courts would likely be more receptive. We presume peaceful demonstration until clear proof of compelling danger to the community demonstrates the need for some minimal restriction.

-- Note: I am aware that such a denial may justify the ban on the chosen route imposed in the Ulster example. Such bans are possible here as well, but the community and courts tend to err on the side of Free Speech in all instances, so I am not certain this march would have been denied access to their preferred route in an analogous situation in the USA.

Seamus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeonGod

Ah, like how the KKK now accepts members who aren't Protestant. I actually didn't know that.

---

A strange comparison to say the least! The IRA hasnt got much to do with religion, except that the group that it mainly pools from happen to be catholic. Its not a theological conflict, it just happens that the groups involved are of different religions and so it is an easy label set to use. Infact most of the greatest figures and leaders in the history of the struggle for Irish independence have been protestant.

"Infact most of the greatest figures and leaders in the history of the struggle for Irish independence have been protestant."

from 1798 onwards.
And I doubt it's most.

Quote:

---

We presume peaceful demonstration until clear proof of compelling danger to the community demonstrates the need for some minimal restriction

---

Ho ho ho. Trust me on this, there is more clear proof of compelling danger caused by NI factions marching through each others back gardens than you could shake a stick at. It happens every bloody year, or it did until the commission out a stop to most of it.

I would say the result of allowing the Orangemen to march where they originally wanted would have been as predictable as (and very similar to) the result of me covering myself in Kit-e-Kat, climbing into the lions' den at London Zoo and kicking Simba in the balls.

Quote:

---

Its not a theological conflict

---

It is for Ian Paisley.

Again, I do not think you should make the premise of suspending one's groups rights, because you suspect another group will engage in an unlawful response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff

"Infact most of the greatest figures and leaders in the history of the struggle for Irish independence have been protestant."

from 1798 onwards.
And I doubt it's most.

---

Your point about 1798? That fenian rising is pretty much the bigining of the modern Irish independence struggle.

Butt, Parnell, Tone, Emmet thats pretty much a whos who of the greatest figures. Depends who you ask I suppose.

1798 was important because it was the first Irish bid for independence that had a major contribution from Irish Protestants.
It was also the first in the shift away from the most hardcore Gaelic areas to the more Anglicised areas.

These are both significant for your point about Protestants and Irish nationalism. The implications of people of a less native (for want of a better word) cultural persuasion is very important considering the collapse of Gaelic culture in the later 19th and early 20th century: Ireland finally won its independence (sort of) when traditional Irish culture was becoming far less important.

"Butt, Parnell, Tone, Emmet": it does indeed depend on who you ask because there's a pretty big list of Catholics who should be on your who's who of greatest figures list.

Well, Taffy, no offense, but I noticed you didn't offer any Catholics to take their place with the big 4.... you're not suggesting that Eamon deValera or Michael Collins belong in the same group, are you? The UK was already considering how to divest itself of Ireland before they started their campaigns of terror. Sure, they were great early leaders, but if anything, I would argue they slowed down the progress of Irish independence. Gave the hardliners back in parliment too much ammunition.

Don, I'm actually very busy at the moment so I suggest you hit the history books rather than me.
Like I said, there are plenty of them.

Quote:

---

1798 was important because it was the first Irish bid for independence that had a major contribution from Irish Protestants.
It was also the first in the shift away from the most hardcore Gaelic areas to the more Anglicised areas.

These are both significant for your point about Protestants and Irish nationalism. The implications of people of a less native (for want of a better word) cultural persuasion is very important considering the collapse of Gaelic culture in the later 19th and early 20th century: Ireland finally won its independence (sort of) when traditional Irish culture was becoming far less important.

---

I dont mean to sound unkind, but your dates and impression of the period are totally off. The Irish language and culture were destroyed BEFORE 1798, the 17th century is renouned for this. Hedge schools, penal laws and persecution. By the begining of the 1800s the Irish language was for the first time being unravelled and properly written as a sort of liguistic persuit by various linguists many of whom were infact German. Exactly contrary to what you suggest, towards the end of the 19th century Gaelic culture began to emerge MASSIVELY again! Ever here of the Gaelic Revival? Conradh na Gaeilge (The Gaelic League) was set up in 1893 amidst a flurry of Gaelic rivivalist activity with the principle goal of reviving the Gaelic language. The GAA was set up around this time to revive Gaelic sports. Cultural Nationalism emerged. Irish culture went into overdrive around this period, it is a well documented and studied area. Sadly THIS is the point where it became sectarian and polarised, Protestants were pushed out of Nationalist circles because they were Protestant. I know people in Uni who have devoted their lives studying this area of Irish history. My friend, you actually couldnt be more wrong. Seriously, I suggest you read some books on the Gaelic Revival. Its a very interesting period.

tribesman, if Sinn Fein were suspended from Stormont for having a spy ring, why should the loyalist parties be suspended for miscellaneous loyalists (those not necessarily of a party) rioting?

er, no.

I think you'll find that in the first half of the 19th century the Gaelic language dominated the West of Ireland, admittedly remote and underpopulated compared to the east but still it was widely spoken over a large geographic area.

The Irish language and culture were not destroyed before 1798. The famine and schooling in English really did for it. Compromised? yes. Altered? yes. Destroyed? no.

I have heard of the Gaelic revival etc. it didn't really amount to much in the end did it?
You really are patronising you know that?
I also know people in universities who study this, shocking.

My point was that 1798 was the first anglicised non-Catholic specific uprising for an independent Ireland.

I'm not trying to imply that Catholics weren't patriotic or didn't do a lot of the fighting and dying for Irish independence. But most of the educated class were Protestant. I believe when Emmet & Tone started, you weren't even allowed to hold a seat in parliment if you were Catholic. You weren't allowed to attend Trinity as a Catholic until the twentieth century. It's only natural in what can only be described as an apartheid system of the day, that the leadership roles would be filled by Irish protestants. What's more, the Crown employed the local pastors & bishops to encourage the people to be loyal subjects. Many Catholic fenians were threatened with excommunication. Hard to take a very public role in light of that...

What I find amazing is the dichotomy in Irish aristocratic society of the day. Irish protestants of the day ranged from Robert Emmet to the Duke of Wellington (also an Irish protestant). Must have made for some very interesting ballroom debates back in the day...

I think the Gaelic Revival really did so something. Without it, would Gaelic still be spoken at all? Although the number of people who speak the language is dishearteningly low, it is beginning to see a resurgence due to the actions of its supporters. There is now Gaelic television, Gaelic radio, Gaelic newspapers...

As well, the Irish and Scots abroad have begun to delve into their Gaelic roots. North American pursuits in Gaelic are slowly beginning to pick up momentum. Without the romantic interest of the period, none of this would have been possible.

NeonGod:
All the linguistic experts tend to agree that for a community to be counted as being x language speaking then you need roughly 80% of the population up speaking it. In Ireland those areas are shrinking rapidly. The Gaeltacht areas set up to protect and nurture Gaelic speaking communities often have Gaelic speaking minorities. Those areas were set up in the mid 20th century when these areas were still considered Gaelic speaking communities: they are a tiny proportion of Ireland's land mass.

Gaelic in Scotland is spoken by just over 1% of the population and absolute numbers declined by about 10% (maybe more actually) at the last census. Only about half of Scotland's Gaelic speakers live in Gaelic speaking areas (and that's if you ignore the 80% rule in favour of a simple majority).

Gaelic in Northern Ireland is a mystery(because it's not included in census results) but is supposedly doing quite well.

if Sinn Fein were suspended from Stormont for having a spy ring,
Alledged Malcolm , an allegation that has so far despite 3 years of investigation , remains an unproven allegation .

Duke of Gloucester . Sorry if my reply this morning seemed flippant , but I was laughing so much I couldn't post sensibly without being late for work .....So....to the crux of the issue
so it has no representatives that could be suspended.
Do you mean the Orange Order or the Independant Orange Order ? One of them claims to be not political , but does none the less be very involved with politicians and politics . The other is political and is affilated with a political party (though they are shifting towards switching their affiliation to a more bigoted Party)
Or were you making a joke about the "Hero of Drumcree's" political party being thouroughly trounced in the last election as people shift away from the idea of dialouge and compromise ?

There was a rather charming old lady on TV last night , this delightful grandmother was speaking very openly to the cameras as she served up hot cups of tea and some very tasty looking cakes to the protesting Orangemen .
She said that the Orange Orders Politicians were becoming too soft , it was time for some new stronger politicians to take up the struggle for the marchers . What we really need in the Order is great political leaders like BILLY WRIGHT , they would make sure that we were allowed to march . :help:

Are you familiar with the name of that murdering , thieving , hijacking , arms smuggling , drug dealing scumbag ?
Would you describe him as a great political leader ?

But hey , she was only the wife of the Lodge Master , what would she know eh ?

Billy Wright? seriously?

I know, the numbers are painful. Interest, though, is increasing with the increasing support for culturalism. I believe that the numbers will increase both in transported areas and at home in due time.

NG,
I'm sad to say it but I wouldn't hold my breath.
2 years ago I was speaking to some academics at a conference (whose subject was the Irish language and who were both from "Gaelic speaking areas") and they really were not at all optimistic about the situation. I haven't heard anything to make me believe otherwise since then.

Im not trying to patronise at all. The facts are clear. I have studied this area of history more than I would have liked.

Quote:

---

I think you'll find that in the first half of the 19th century the Gaelic language dominated the West of Ireland, admittedly remote and underpopulate compared to the east but still it was widely spoken over a large geographic area.
The Irish language and culture were not destroyed before 1798. The famine and schooling in English really did for it. Compromised? yes. Altered? yes. Destroyed? no.

---

By the mid 19th century the language was on its last legs. The mortal wound was the damage caused by the Penal Laws (1691 to 1760). These Laws disinfranchised the Irish, encouraging (perhaps "forcing" is a much better word to use in this situation) Catholic Irish to convert to Anglo Protestant Culture and language. In this, the laws were a horrible success. Brutally, all things foreign to the English (ie. Anything Gaelic) were stamped out. Irish was not allowed to be taught in schools, read up on the Penal Laws if you want to know any more detail. To make a long tragic story short, this is the period where the Irish language was destroyed. What was left was a mortally wounded, still breathing but bleading to death language. By the begining of the 19th cnetury a Protestant Clergyman and linguist by the name of William Neilson was one of the first Irishmen to attempt any sort of revival. Note the date here, this is around the time of the United Irishmen uprising. Now please explain to me why on earth this and many other guys like him would try and revive a laguage at the very begining of the 19th century if infact the language was doing well as you seem to claim. Irish speaking parents of this time forbode their sons to speak Irish as it was seen as a huge disadvantage. The language was in its last generation, already below natural critical mass, famine or no famine. Then along came the famine that effectively wiped any last remanants of the language away, but that is not what killed it. Its like putting a bullet in the head of someone who has just been lethally poisoned and has 3 seconds left to live.

Quote:

---

I have heard of the Gaelic revival etc. it didn't really amount to much in the end did it?

---

You must be joking! The cultural revival was one of THE most important chapters in Irish independence. Infact I would say it was the single biggest factor along with the land movement. Seriously, the Cultural Revival went right through to dear old Eamon "Comely maidens dancing at the crossroads" de Valera's continued power of the 1950's, and the effects are still in full view today. The entire Irish Identity is moulded somewhat around the artificial kickstart Irish culture got 125 years ago. Heck, GAA is bigger than ever, and the Abbey is moving to a bigger venue... :dizzy2:

Again, Im sorry if you perceived me as being patronising, its just I am of the very strong opinion that you are a little misinformed on this topic.

Well, let's hope Ireland gets its act together and Scotland devolves. I'm sure many a Gaelic institution would follow.

My belief is mostly one of personal experience. I've met people who have an avid interest in the language of their ancestors (members of my family included) and available education in the area, at least in my vicinity, is growing.