Murials - what's your feeling?

GlynD

mezza101 wrote: »

good to see martin wearing his poppy :money:

Are there any poppy murials?

mezza101

GlynD wrote: »

Are there any poppy murials?

does bansksy do em

btw have you seen the latest beeb news story about another barrier going up in belfast, looks like your hope for integration is even further away than ever, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24856275

GlynD

mezza101 wrote: »

does bansksy do em

btw have you seen the latest beeb news story about another barrier going up in belfast, looks like your hope for integration is even further away than ever, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24856275

Haven't a clue. Does Banksy live in Belfast?

I heard that news item on the radio this morning. I'm shocked and appalled. I know the church is in a very bad flashpoint and agree it deserves protection but oh what a sad reflection on the people in that area that a church actually needs to be protected in this way.

I know the fence isn't just to protect the church btw. It's to stop missile throwing by both sides which seems to be frequent and voluminous.

Why can't the police put a stop to it? I remember when I lived in GB there was a particular ex-mining village where there was always trouble when the pubs emptied out. The local police put a black Maria there every night for about three years until they stamped it out. That's what's needed here.

qwert_yuiop

GlynD wrote: »

The local police put a black Maria there .

So that's what "institutional racism" means.

GlynD

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

So that's what "institutional racism" means.

She was a formidable woman! :rotfl:

lazer

GlynD wrote: »

Some figures I heard the other day bear that out. 60% of deaths in the troubles were caused by PIRA; 10% of deaths were caused by Crown Forces, yet 90% of past and current investigations and resources have concentrated on deaths caused by Crown Forces. Most of the deaths caused by PIRA were actually Northern Ireland Catholics.

The security forces could never "kill with impunity". The rules of engagement for Northern Ireland were strict and quite a few soldiers were imprisoned for breaching them.

My conclusion as regards this is that most current investigations backed by SF are being unnecessarily pressed to gain some sort of propaganda value to enable people like you to spout the results.

Like I have said time and time again - the Crown Forces were meant to protect all citizens of Northern Ireland - they didn't - therefore they have a lot to answer too.

People should be able to trust the police, army etc, but in Northern Ireland, sections of the community couldn't.

Any act by Government Forces that results in the death of a citizen should be investigated - both in Northern Ireland or elsewhere, no government orgnaistion should intentionally murder its own citizens and there should be a full and thorough investigation into every single death caused by government forces - and if (or when) it is proven that the deaths were unnessecary - then someone needs to be held responsible and made accountable for it - that is why we are having the investigations - because no-one has ever been held accountable (the investigations held at the time were rubbish in all honesty as no-one in authority cared that a catholic was klled by the army or whatever) for the deaths caused by the army etc in Northern Ireland.

The PIRA on the other hand was an illegal organisations and any acts or murders it carried out were investigated fully and the perpatrators if found were held responsible at the time and sentanced to prison etc.

Simply - the IRA was illegal, and was not there to serve and protect and members were fully subjected to the law, the British Army/RUC was there to serve and protect all N. Ireland citizens and it didn't.

In my opinion any unnessecary act of violence sanctioned or carried out by government forces is much much much worse than an act carried out by an illegal organisation, or by any other individual for the simple reason that government is meant to look after it's citizens it has a responsibilty towards them

GlynD

lazer wrote: »

Like I have said time and time again - the Crown Forces were meant to protect all citizens of Northern Ireland - they didn't - therefore they have a lot to answer too.

People should be able to trust the police, army etc, but in Northern Ireland, sections of the community couldn't.

Any act by Government Forces that results in the death of a citizen should be investigated - both in Northern Ireland or elsewhere, no government orgnaistion should intentionally murder its own citizens and there should be a full and thorough investigation into every single death caused by government forces - and if (or when) it is proven that the deaths were unnessecary - then someone needs to be held responsible and made accountable for it - that is why we are having the investigations - because no-one has ever been held accountable (the investigations held at the time were rubbish in all honesty as no-one in authority cared that a catholic was klled by the army or whatever) for the deaths caused by the army etc in Northern Ireland.

The PIRA on the other hand was an illegal organisations and any acts or murders it carried out were investigated fully and the perpatrators if found were held responsible at the time and sentanced to prison etc.

Simply - the IRA was illegal, and was not there to serve and protect and members were fully subjected to the law, the British Army/RUC was there to serve and protect all N. Ireland citizens and it didn't.

In my opinion any unnessecary act of violence sanctioned or carried out by government forces is much much much worse than an act carried out by an illegal organisation, or by any other individual for the simple reason that government is meant to look after it's citizens it has a responsibilty towards them

There's a lot of sense in most of what you post except for one thing: both sections of the community could trust the police but one section was constantly told they couldn't. Members of that community who joined the police or army were targeted in an attempt to rid the security forces of them so that the terrorists could say the police and army didn't represent the minority.

Areas where the PIRA terrorists dominated became no-go to the police because even a simply burglary or act of vandalism reported could be a "come-on" to get the police to attend in order to murder them.

Republican rhetoric for years has tried to portray the security forces as partisan when it wasn't true. Yes they were loyal to the Queen but that is expected of a policeman or soldier.

Republican propaganda works along the lines of, tell the biggest lie you can and stick to it as long as you can. That way, after a time, more people will believe the lie.

I can tell you now: I was in the army, in an Irish regiment. There were hundreds of Irish Catholics from both sides of the border in there with us. When the UDR was started it reached 18% Catholic before the murders of Catholic soldiers started. UDR men were easy to kill because they went home at night in estates where the terrorists dominated. Some of the highest ranking police officers before, during and after the troubles were Roman Catholic. Even the B Specials had their percentage, but republicans will dance up and down and tell you that is a lie.

Yes citizens deserve protection but an armed citizen representing a terrorist organisation who is intent upon causing death or injury was, and still is, a person the security forces want to stop, by killing him/her if necessary: in order to protect the lives of innocents who are also entitled to the same protection.

What makes me laugh ironically are the people who call for enquiries into the Loughgall Ambush. What was it now: 8 men, armed with Russian automatic assault rifles and a huge bomb in the bucket of a JCB. Jumping out of a van, spraying gunfire everywhere. Not knowing that police and army elite units were waiting for them inside the police station they bombed?

The republican movement says these men were killed illegally! Who in the name of God actually believes that?

lazer

GlynD wrote: »

There's a lot of sense in most of what you post except for one thing: both sections of the community could trust the police but one section was constantly told they couldn't. Members of that community who joined the police or army were targeted in an attempt to rid the security forces of them so that the terrorists could say the police and army didn't represent the minority.

Areas where the PIRA terrorists dominated became no-go to the police because even a simply burglary or act of vandalism reported could be a "come-on" to get the police to attend in order to murder them.

Republican rhetoric for years has tried to portray the security forces as partisan when it wasn't true. Yes they were loyal to the Queen but that is expected of a policeman or soldier.

Republican propaganda works along the lines of, tell the biggest lie you can and stick to it as long as you can. That way, after a time, more people will believe the lie.

I can tell you now: I was in the army, in an Irish regiment. There were hundreds of Irish Catholics from both sides of the border in there with us. When the UDR was started it reached 18% Catholic before the murders of Catholic soldiers started. UDR men were easy to kill because they went home at night in estates where the terrorists dominated. Some of the highest ranking police officers before, during and after the troubles were Roman Catholic. Even the B Specials had their percentage, but republicans will dance up and down and tell you that is a lie.

Yes citizens deserve protection but an armed citizen representing a terrorist organisation who is intent upon causing death or injury was, and still is, a person the security forces want to stop, by killing him/her if necessary: in order to protect the lives of innocents who are also entitled to the same protection.

What makes me laugh ironically are the people who call for enquiries into the Loughgall Ambush. What was it now: 8 men, armed with Russian automatic assault rifles and a huge bomb in the bucket of a JCB. Jumping out of a van, spraying gunfire everywhere. Not knowing that police and army elite units were waiting for them inside the police station they bombed?

The republican movement says these men were killed illegally! Who in the name of God actually believes that?

The polie and Army could not be trusted - if the could would the civilians have died on Bloody Sunday?

Has it now been proven that there was collusion between the crown forces and unionists paramilities?

Some of the claims may have been exaggerated, but there was some truth in it.

The IRA attacked the police and army - but is that a valid excuse for the police and army not protecting innocent civilians.

I accept that part of the reason the RUC was almost 100% unionist is that the Republicans stopped the Cathlics joining - that much is true - but why could the protestants not serve the whole community fairly?

chunter

Ah now.
Anyway, I've checked the Irish census of 1901 and 1911.
There were no families with both a murial and a poppy.

Worth reminding people that around 80-100,000 irish nationists signed up at the start of WW1. By 1914 Redmond had become a nationalist hero of Parnellite stature. He encouraged Irish Nationalists to join the British Army.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Redmond

By the time those who survived the war came back to Ireland, the political climate had completely changed.

So when you're kicking the wreaths off the war memorials, just remember that there are a substantial number of Irish Nationalists on that list, and the closer to the border you go, the more there'll be.

margaretclare

I had to back to the beginning of all this to find out what a 'murial' is.