The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #45911   Message #3792474
Posted By: Teribus
27-May-16 - 12:38 PM
Thread Name: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
Jim Carroll - 27 May 16 - 09:35 AM

Teribus
None of your links (at long last) - make the slightest difference to anythhing I've said


1: So there was a split in the Irish Volunteers in 1914 with 92.5% of the membership siding with Redmond (Nationalist, Constitutional Home Rule) and only 7.5% of them siding with Pearse (Militant, Republican, Independence). But you said there wasn't a split didn't you.

2: Clearly demonstrated that the Easter Rising did harden the attitudes of the Unionists reluctant acceptance of a temporary six year exclusion in July 1914 to demanding permanent exclusion two years later in July 1916 in the immediate aftermath of the Easter Rising - I cannot think of anything else that might have made them change their minds can you?

3: Ample evidence provided of previous rebellions where Spain and France have egged on malcontents in Ireland in order to hopefully divert the attention of England with whom both Spain and France were engaged in hostilities at the time.

4: No example of me ever having said that there was no artillery in Dublin then Jim? Thought not - just more output from the Jim Carroll factory of "Made-Up-Shit". What I actually did say and what the RTE/Boston College link tells you is that there was no artillery in Dublin when the first fires were started by looters in Sackville Street. The link also tells you that no artillery fire was directed on Sackville Street until after noon on the 26th April. At The Four Courts here is the entry for 18:15hrs on the 26th April Fighting continues around the Four Courts, with rebels setting fire to buildings in an attempt to hamper the military advance. - I would imagine that the researchers from both RTE and Boston College had good factual grounds for detailing those pieces of information - I for the life of me can see no reason to believe that they just made it up or lied about it.

5: The Kent brothers were tried by Court Martial as the country was under Martial Law at the time. Had they not fired on the policemen who had come to arrest them then none of them would have died. Instead they fired on the police and on the soldiers who were subsequently called to assist the police in the armed stand-off initiated by the Kent Brothers. One brother sentenced to death with that sentence being carried out, a second brother was acquitted and released and a third sentenced to death with that sentence being commuted to 5 years penal servitude of which he only served one year.

6: The UVF took no action, and because of that no orders had to be given to crush them, no orders were disobeyed - In short there was no "Mutiny". No act of military aggression as you first described it.

7: The RTE/Boston College link provided gives you the time line on when fires were started in Sackville Street - No British troops near, only civilian looters and Irish Volunteers present - Tell me why should the researchers from RTE or Boston College lie. Also mentioned in their chronology of the events they state that Volunteer fire drove away members of the Dublin Metropolitan Police, so when the fires started in Sackville Street the Dublin Fire Brigade did not make any attempt to put those fires out - Tell me what do you think would happen if you torched buildings in a city centre then just left them to burn - would things get better or would they get worse?

8: Ireland not being entitled to independence because of what happened in Norman times

As I said "If you can show me the post in which I said anything even remotely like that I would be utterly amazed" - after all you've had long enough and you've been asked often enough - yet neither you or Joe Offer have come up with that elusive, or should it be non-existent post of mine - more Jim Carroll "Made-Up-Shit".