"No heavy artillery in Dublin"
You've been given s link that says there was and the firemen's log books put the damage they were dealing with down to heavy artillery - you wwere given evidence of all this.
You may, of course, know more than they did, but, in your inimitable fashion, still omit to supply a link to any of your claims, so we have to take you at your word - I don't.
"Wealthy pre-word War One Liverpool"
Again - no link.
The period was one of mass poverty and deprivation - don't need Government supplied figures for this one My parents were born in the early 1900s and my grandparents on both sides, spoke of their situation regularly.
Both Liverpool and Dublin were massively poor citied - the link I provided from Queens Uni. in Belfast specified as a reason fo volunteering for WW1 was the poverty and mass unemployment (alonng with other reasons).
But again, you appear to know more and again, you provide no linkd.
I provided a link to a University study of pre-war conditions in Liverpool - ignored and contradicted without proof of your own.
"Democratic Britain in the early 1800s"
The period of "reform " you mention saw the most controversial land enclosures in history, The Poaching Wars, the transportation of The Tolpuddle Martyrs for attempting to set up a Trade Union, the Highland Clearances were in full swing in Scotland, evictions of tenants forced many of them to emigrate to Canada in their hundreds of thousands, pretty much the same as with Ireland and the mine and mill owners were taking advantage of the mass emigrations to drive down wages and to stop the rise of the new Trades Unions.
Half the adult population of Britain had no vote and attempts by women to change that situation gave rise to police violence, imprisonment, forced feeding and humiliation - women only got the vote by agreeing to join the British campaign to decimate Britain's youth on the killing fields of Europe in WW1.
A democratic heaven, you might say!
"The Redmondites were not in power and as that is plainly true then they could not enact or repeal anything"
I didn't say they were capable of either - I said the described the Treaty they had previously supported as a "betrayal" because it had been altered to make partition permanent.
Stop distorting what I say.
The obscene profit in ceramic poppies was presented as a linked fact.
"No it is not, because I believe that I have answered, as I asked you before, please say what you think I missed."
You have now had it put up and you still haven't answered any of them
Britain attempted to introduce compulsory conscription in Ireland in 1918 - what part of that fact do you have a problem with?
Had Ireland not opposed British rule, there would have been no reason whatever that it should have been left out of the bloodbath - why should they have been left out while the rest of British youth was being slaughtered?
"The British parliament passed the act before the rising,"
And altered it in July 1916 to make the partition of the six counties permanent - it was originally intended that these counties (originally the whole of Ulster, but altered when it was realised that this would give the Catholics a majority in the North) would be partitioned until a year after the war ended.
Even the Parliamentary Irish rejected the re-written treaty - Redmond described it as "a betrayal"
The Republicans who took part in the Rising did so because they realised that Britain had no intention of ratifying any treaty that did not meet its own interests.
You have been given all this before, what part of this do you have problems with; if none, why are you raising it again and again and again.....?
Britain was finally forced to concede a form of Independence, at the threat of an alternative of "a signature or war", which lead to immediate Civil War in the 26 Counties, built in financial, political and land-owning injustice, inequality and hardship for the Catholic third of the six counties, and a near-century of unrest and bloodshed.
What problems do you have with any of this?
The Rising did not have the support of those in the immediately vicinity, (I told you this years ago), but there is no indication whatever of how the rest of Ireland felt - they were never asked.
It doesn't matter anyway - within a matter of months the Rebels had the complete support of the Irish people, a support which led to a full-scale war of independence which ended overall rule in Ireland by the wealthiest and most powerful Empire the world has known being kicked out ignominiously by poorly armed irregular fighters.
The Rising has since been considered the turning-point in Irish history by the Irish people as a whole.
You, who have stated you know nothing of Irish history and have never read a book on the subject, have taken onto yourself to describe the Irish people as a whole as gullible and misled in their beliefs and written-off that fully accepted Irish turning point with contempt - what does that make you Keith?
You said earlier that "we can finish this."
Your stated contempt for the Irish people and their knowledge of their own history wil never be "finished" until you withdraw your appalling statement or qualify it - it verges on racism to suggest that an entire nation is gullible enough to have been misled by propaganda on its own history and that you, with your declared ignorance and disinterest, know more than they do.
If anything, your stated contempt has been written into the history of this forum in your own words."
You have to provided answers to these question, you just keep repeating the same denials, as you still are - you claim you have answered them - this is simply untrue.
I have specifically asked if you have any problems with the facts I provided - are they true, did I make them up - If you have answered any of these and provided proof - where are your answers - not here?
I have asked you over and over again if you believe the Irish people to be stupid and ignorant to have been so fooled into supporting the Rising and in your own words "murder in cold blood" - if you have answered, where have you?
Jim Carroll