The aims of the rising were clearly set out in the proclamation - there was no split
I rea[peat - how do you harden the attitude of a group that has threatened Civil War if its aims were not met?
"Ample evidence provided of previous rebellions where Spain and France have egged on malcontents in Ireland"
Where - you have provided none.
Wolfe Tone went to France to request aid - not the other way around - the time he spent pleading his case is indicative of how difficult it was.
I suggest you visit the exhibition in Bantry House if you dispute this.
" No example of me ever having said that there was no artillery in Dublin then Jim"
As I said, every Nation has a right to demand independence and the Irish were way ahead in the field in doing this.
Your suggestion that this was not the case is no more than post Imperial spite.
"No artillery at all in Dublin at that time and it was the looters who set fire to the buildings."
The main cause of the extent of the fires was the artillery British shell that hit the water supply making it impossible to put the fires out.
The fires blazed thoughout the week - your timeline mentions only one day at the beginning of that week.
Looters could not have possible caused fires to the that extent
We've ******* been here obv=ver anbd ob=[ver again - artillery fire cause verutualkly all the damage in the centre of Dublin - the Rebels didn't have the wherewithal if they'd wanted to carry it out.
Don't be stupid.
"he Kent brothers were tried by Court Martial as the country was under Martial Law at the time. "
How does this effect the fact that at one minute Asquith claimed that Tom had been executed for murder and later changed it to treason - doesn't truth apply to martial law frightening though!!
Tom Kent was executed as a murderer even though they couldn't prove he was carrying a gun -Asquith changed it to taking part in a rebellion, which waqs equally fallacious.
The trial was riggged - whent there was of it.
"The UVF took no action, and because of that no orders had to be given to crush them, "
So - threatening not to obey orders at a time of threatened civil war was tantamount to mutiny and had it happened in actual wartime would have been open to a sentence of death - semantics aside of course.
"he RTE/Boston College link provided gives you the time line on when fires were started in Sackville Street "
When they started - you claimed that the fires were the responsibility of the looters - full stop.
You did this to remove the artillery barrage from blame - easier to blame the victims.
"As I said "If you can show me the post in which I said anything even remotely like that I would be utterly amazed"
The whole tenor of your argument has indicated that.
Suggesting that Ireland's claim to unity was dubious because of what happened in Norman Times indicates that.
Suggesting that "misfits egged on by France and Spain" were the reason Ireland has demanded independence (as you ahve just repeated) is a screaming indication that Ireland was not entitled to independence
Keith has at least described the Irish as being gullible and led on by propaganda and as dismissed celebrations of "a contemptible joke" comparable to St Patrick's Day - his hatred of the Irish and their history is admitted - yours is palpable - he at least, has more bottler than you.
Between you, you are a pair of squalid little Englanders.
I've finished responding to facts that are long done and dusted.
You have described everything I have put up as "immaterial" and have ignored them.
I have responded to every point you have made only to have them repeated over and over again - as we used to say in Liverpool - "you don't boil cabbages twice".
I will not be responding to any of your points again - you have responded to none of mine.
So far, you have puttwo Wiki links which prove nothing ad a timeline that we have discussed and settled as immaterial to your arguments.
The pair ofg you have bent over backwards to denigrate Ireland and her history - Keith attempting to draw blood from The Civil War - a subject that is still never discussed her a,d you, stooping as low as to attempt to smear one of the leaders over his accused, but unproven sexuality.
You really are a disgusting pair.
This is getting in the way of what I want to do - continue with the story and put together lots and lots of "immaterial" information - not for your benefit (other than to get under your skin, which it does) - now that really turns me on.
Jim Carroll