BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Amos
Date: 01 May 16 - 01:05 PM

My impression is that it was the backlash (against the brutality of the British punishment of the Rising) that shifted national sentiment in Ireland, and moved it toward determination for independence, rather than settling for Home Rule. Between the famine, the land-takings, and the executions of the leaders, etc., the British painted an ugly picture of themselves. I would certainly have felt getting shut of them would be a high priority, were I an Irishman in those days.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 16 - 01:10 PM

Jim,
You have quoted a novelist and an American Jesuit

Dishonest Jim.
One was an Irish Jesuit priest currently teaching philosophy in a US university, and the other a correspondent on the Irish Times who agreed with me on that point.
Neither described the Irish as ignorant of their own history
Neither did I.

I am sorry I misremembered whose wild claim I responded to.
Do you distance yourself from it?

What she actually said that the "revisionists" who avoided placing direct blame for the Famine on anybody taught that to children , and that ended in the 1930s.

Completely untrue Jim!
This is what she actually said,

"To some extent, these beliefs were fostered by the state school system south of the border, which itself arose out of particular historical circumstances. In 1922, for example, the Free State government instructed history teachers that pupils should be 'imbued with the ideals and aspirations of such men as Thomas Davis and Patrick Pearse' and that they should emphasise 'the continuity of the separatist idea from Tone to Pearse' (see Francis T. Holohan, 'History teaching in the Irish Free State 1922-35' in HI Winter 1994).

" Accordingly, in many Irish schools, a heroic but simplistic view of Irish history emerged, a morality story replete with heroes and villains. This approach, however, was subsequently challenged by the Irish academic establishment. In the 1930s, a number of leading Irish academics—following the lead of British historians earlier in the century—set an agenda for the study of Irish history, which placed it on a more professional and scientific basis in terms of research methods and source materials. At the same time this approach also demanded the systematic revision and challenging of received wisdoms or unquestioned assumptions. What was specific to Ireland, however, was the declared mission to challenge received nationalist myths, and by implication, although less centrally, loyalist myths. Thus, at the launch of the influential Irish Historical Studies journal in 1938, the editors stated their commitment to replace 'interpretive distortions' with 'value-free history'. To a large extent, however, this debate took place within the rarefied atmosphere of academia and failed to percolate down into the schoolrooms either north or south of the border."

So, the Irish school system pushed "nationalist myths" at Irish children instead of objective history. That is brain washing, and she says it has not been changed. The person quoted in my Indy article called them "gobshites" for putting such shit in his schoolbooks.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 16 - 01:17 PM

Amos,
I would certainly have felt getting shut of them would be a high priority, were I an Irishman in those days.

If all that propaganda were true, so would anyone.
It is a fact that they had already been granted home rule, and a fact that they did not support the rising.
Beware of historical myths.

Jim, instead of trying to make a case against me, please return to making a case for the rising.
Is the problem that you can't?

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Amos
Date: 01 May 16 - 01:53 PM

Keith:

What I was trying to say is that that sentiment shifted as a result of the British heavy-handed reaction to the Rising, afterwards.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 16 - 02:01 PM

"It is a fact that they had already been granted home rule, "
You can repeat this as oftnas you like Keith but it simply isn't true - the Home Rule they had agreed to was deliberately changed by the Brits to appease the Unionists and this was unacceptable top the Irish politicians who described it as a betrayal - which particular part of this statement do you have a problem with - did I fake the quote?
Here is another quote showing that The doctored Treaty was unacceptable

This is a statement by head of the Irish Parliamentarians , John Redmond as reported in The Irish Times, July 1916

If we are to have self-government, Ireland must be a self-governing unit. That instinct is implanted deeply in the heart, of every thoughtful Irishman, Unionist or Nationalist. In the first place the country is too small to be divided between two systems of government. In the next place, the political, social and economic qualities of North and South complement one another; one without the other must be miserably incomplete. For Southern Unionists ... the idea of the dismemberment of Ireland is hateful. ... In a word, the permanent partition of our country is inconceivable.1
From Robert Kee's 'Ourselves Alone (vol 3 of The Green Flag)
"Jim, instead of trying to make a case against me,"
I have made a case for the Risingt you have made your own case against yourself.
Kineally's position on revisionist teaching is outlined here.
"Her new work, A Death-Dealing Famine, is a curate's-egg sort of a book. I am not sure for whom it is intended. Dr Kinealy seems to be striving to achieve two things simultaneously. At one level she assumes the role of the Roy Foster of Famine history and at another the mantle of a modern Cecil Woodham-Smith. She will not like the first description, for Foster is the arch-revisionist, not a species that finds favour with Dr Kinealy, since revisionists seek to remove blame from considerations of Ireland's past and Kinealy is very strong on blame. "
You will note the dates covered by your quote (maybe you have and hoped I wouldn't) (History teaching in the Irish Free State 1922-35')
You were referring to the present day children being brainwashed.
"Neither did I."
You described Fergie as such and he was echoing what is happening now in Ireland - you claimed he was ignorant of his own history.
"and the other a correspondent on the Irish Times"
"Jim, that was by Gene Kerrigan, who is a journalist and novelist"
Make up your mind
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 May 16 - 02:03 PM

Professor, Instead of relying on cut and pastes from the internet try reading a full book, or preferably several books. Then and only then will you have anything worthwhile to add to this discussion.

You have said many times you have no knowledge and no interest in the history of Ireland. We all know this and frankly are bored with your bigoted, racist and uninformed rantings on here.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 16 - 02:32 PM

Two points you need to answer if your 'signed sealed and delivered' Treaty is to be accepted.
If this was the case - how were the Brits able to change it - if they did, would that not invalidate it?
If Redmond refused to accept a partitioned Ireland, how could a treaty permanently partitioning it possibly be a valid one?
Please answer these points or stop making claims that are obviously false.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 May 16 - 03:13 PM

Amos, yes I agree with that too.

Jim,
the Home Rule they had agreed to was deliberately changed by the Brits to appease the Unionists

When did that happen Jim? If after the rising it had no bearing on the rising. Right?

You will note the dates covered by your quote (maybe you have and hoped I wouldn't) (History teaching in the Irish Free State 1922-35')
Rubbish Jim! That was just the title of one of the books she referred to!
She said that academics tried to stop the myths being pushed some time in the 30s, but it made no difference. She does not say it ever ended!

"Jim, that was by Gene Kerrigan, who is a journalist and novelist"
No Jim. He wrote the book that you quoted from as if it was historical fact.
I quoted an IT correspondent as an example of an Irish person who thought the rising wrong, along with the Irish priest/philosophy lecturer.

If Redmond refused to accept a partitioned Ireland,

No-one suggested partition until the third reading of the Bill, and the final Bill did not include "permanent partition."

Rag, unless you have found fault with any of the history I have quoted, what is your complaint?
If you have, please specify! (Good luck with that!)

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 16 - 05:30 PM

" If after the rising it had no bearing on the rising."
It was secretly decided with the Unionists before the rising - it had everything to do with the Rising.
Britain's previous conduct had proved them to be untrustworthy and their actions confirmed that as a fact - their track-record went before them.
What kind of biondingin agreement can be secretly altered without consulting one of the main signatories - is that the way Britain regards biding agreements?
Don't be stupid Keith - Britain had no intention of honouring that agreement and the rebels knew it - and weren't they right?
That was the period of history she was addressing - I've now read the ***** book and two more of hers.
You have her position on the famine and Britain's role in it in black and white.
Please repeat that you believe Irish children were brainwashed to hate Britain and confirm your racism.
Who the hell do you think you are?
You have boasted you have neither read a book nor are interested in doing so.
You call Fergie, who lives in Ireland and is steeped in its history.
My family are Irish, some were involved in the War of Independence.
Ireland has devoted the entire year to honouring this event.
Yaet you know more than all of us rolled together.
If you are a typical Briton there is every reason to hate the place - you are a jingoistic meglomaniac.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 01 May 16 - 07:34 PM

Now come along Jimbo:

"Easter week Rising - 1,250 out of a population of 3.1 million = 0.04%"
Which led immediately to a war of Independence which ended up forcing Britain to the negotiating table and eventually to the collapse of the entire British Empire - not bad for 1,250 rebels.

Doesn't quite square with:

the fact that brutish British behaviour led to the Irish starting a war of Independence, given that when the Treaty was finally forced through with alterations at gunpoint six years later it led to Civil War in the new Republic

If your 1250 rebels forced Britain to the negotiating table and brought about the collapse of the British Empire can you please explain how the Brits managed to force any conditions on the victorious nationalists to accept their terms at gunpoint in 1922? Doesn't quite add up does it. Mind you it might to you as reasoning and logic does not seem to be your strong suit whereas emotive twaddle does.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 01 May 16 - 07:38 PM

"Professor, Instead of relying on cut and pastes from the internet try reading a full book, or preferably several books."

Why Raggy neither you or your pals do, yet you feel free to pontificate on any subject under the sun from a grounding of clueless ignorance

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 May 16 - 08:55 PM

I kinda prefer that people back up their statements with copy-pastes of pertinent information - within reason. When people wage wars of nothing but copy-pastes, that's taking it too far - but that's not happening in this thread. There were too many posts here that only attacked other people and said nothing at all about the topic of discussion. I deleted a good number of those, and will continue to do so. I think it makes for a better discussion when people don't use ad hominem arguments, which is just a fancy name for a personal attack.

We don't allow personal attacks at Mudcat, but I don't think that prohibition requires moderators to review and pass judgment on every post. We're all adults here, and the assumption is that adults know how to carry on a discussion in a civil manner. Participants are expected to moderate themselves, for the most part.

I think that there is room for a wide variety of opinions about the Easter Rising. Opinions can be different without one being right and the other wrong - can't they?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 May 16 - 09:33 PM

Oh, by the way, Keith keeps quoting articles by Fr Séamus Murphy SJ, an Irish Jesuit priest who has been living in Chicago and teaching at Loyola University since 2009. He taught philosophy at Milltown Institute, Dublin, Ireland from 1987 to 1990, and again from 1996 to 2008. Click here for his bio from the Irish Jesuits.

Jim, he hasn't lived in the United States long enough for us to call him an American.

He had an article called Imposing Independence in the April 25 issue of the Jesuit America Magazine. He makes some good points, but I found him to be overly critical of the Easter Rising participants. I suppose he has a right to his opinion, despite my disagreement.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 02 May 16 - 02:30 AM

Thanks for posting the link to that article Joe - I think he got it spot on.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 02 May 16 - 03:05 AM

Amos - 01 May 16 - 01:05 PM

I think that those nationalists who supported Daniell O'Connell were perfectly aware of his vision and his goal of independence. The dissolution and repeal of the Act of Union was the first stepping stone on that path. If you do believe that the Rising advanced the cause then you should also accept that at the same time it hardened the Unionist opposition

Between the famine, the land-takings, and the executions of the leaders, etc., the British painted an ugly picture of themselves. I would certainly have felt getting shut of them would be a high priority, were I an Irishman in those days.

1: "The Famine" was a natural disaster it was not the fault of the British - it is lazy and convenient for anyone to blame them for it.

2: What "Land-Takings"? Between 1870 and 1903 the British Government passed a whole series of Laws giving Irish Tenant farmers what the Irish Land League demanded.

3: The executions were a mistake but the hands of the Government may have been tied both legally and in the interests of national security. 90 people were sentenced to death in the wake of the Easter Rising - 75 of those sentences were commuted to a term of 5 years imprisonment. The 15 who were executed were guilty of treason, I think back then if you committed murder the automatic sentence was death, the Judge having no option, I think the same was true of treason in time of war. As I have previously stated it would have been far far better to let the leaders of the rising live and then publicly shame them throughout Ireland and Great Britain, but that would run the risk of letting the Germans know that Britain's Naval Intelligence Service had broken Germany's Naval Codes.

4: Lastly Amos you would not have thought that way at all if you were an Ulsterman.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 May 16 - 04:20 AM

Jim, the Home Rule Bill 1914 was genuine.
No secrets.
There is no suggestion that the Irish Nationalist members did not have full confidence in it, or the people of Ireland.

No-one suggested partition until the final stages, and then only a temporary exclusion for Ulster was requested and agreed.
The Bill was passed with an unusually large majority of 77.

Had Belgium not been invaded it would have come into force at once.
But for the rising, it would have been enacted unchanged after the armistice.

The rising poisoned the well of negotiation and brought years of bloody conflict in place of a peaceful transition.

Education,
Kineally tells us that the Irish school system pushes "nationalist myths" instead of objective history. Is that not brainwashing?
Do you approve of it?
They also push religion. I know you object to that.
Read here about both abuses in Irish schools, and the propaganda text books.
(the text is in English) http://etudesirlandaises.revues.org/2119

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 16 - 04:22 AM

"The Famine" was a natural disaster it was not the fault of the British - it is lazy and convenient for anyone to blame them for it."
The Famine was described by Sir Charles Trevelyan, who was responsible for distributing relief as "God's punishment on the indolent Irish" - he advised the Government to sell relief food to the starving Irish at market prices so as not to interfere with the market economy (laissez faire) and suggested that The Famine could be used to solve 'The Irish Question' - the Russell Government complied and closed down the relief system that the former Peel Government set up.
There was four times the amount of food necessary to feed the Irish people, what wasn't shipped abroad for sale was locked in warehouses under armed guard.
The 'assistance' that Britain gave to Ireland was enforced emigration - the effect on the population according to the 1851 census was to cut the population from 8,175,124 in 1845 to 6,552,385 in 1851 - which is why it is still referred to as "The Irish Holocaust".
"What "Land-Takings"? Between 1870 and 1903"
The land that had been acquired by absentee landlords evicting starving farmers during the Famine - the practice was known as 'cabin tumbling' because of the practice of destroying the homes of those evicted with battering rams so they could not return.
The Bailiffs, backed by the police, would turn the starving families out onto the roads, where many thousands died of fever and starvation, the lucky one made it to the Coffin Ships heading for America.
In the period when Lord Russell was Prime Minister, the workhouses had been closed, so those evicted were often forced to live in hedges or even dig holes in the earth to survive, as the voluntary relief set up mainly by the Quakers was woefully inadequate.
Other religious groups assisted, but in areas like this the Protestant Groups would only feed and educate the children if their parents agreed to change their religion - these are still known as "The Soupers"
When the British Government finally agreed, under protest, to return the bigger estates to the Irish people, they did so in such a manner as to provoke the Land Wars - those farmers who already had substantial amounts of land were given priority, leaving the poorer ones to struggle.
The protests took the form of rustling the big landlord's cattle, driving them through the towns and letting then letting them loose on open land (The Burren was the favourite around here)
The protests officially lasted till 1911, but in fact continued in some Counties up to and beyond independence in 1922, well within the lifetimes of several of the people we have heard talking about their family's experiences.
All these facts and many more have been put up with the relevant linked documentation over and over again on the threads dedicated to the famine on which Teribus and Keith have attempted to rewrite Irish history - they are fully aware of the facts and yet continue their crusade.
Joe
Happy to concede that your priest is Irish, which makes Keith's backers a philosophy student and a journalist-cum-novelist - a change from real historians who sell their books in real bookshops, I suppose.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 02 May 16 - 04:39 AM

Carroll if you want to discuss the Famine then start a thread on it.

I think that you find yourself pretty lonely there.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 16 - 04:44 AM

Not going here again Keith - dialogoe over
You have been given the facts and have ignored them
I am happy to accept as truth your statement that you know nothing about Ireland, have never read a book on any of these subjects and are not interested enough to do so in the future - you said it, you have confirmed it over and over again here and elsewhere with your displayed ignorance of Ireland and I believe it.
Why on earth should I wish to debate with anybody who has made such a confession?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 May 16 - 04:46 AM

Jim,
Happy to concede that your priest is Irish, which makes Keith's backers a philosophy student and a journalist-cum-novelist -

No.
A university lecturer in philosophy, and an Irish Times correspondent are my two examples of Irish people who believe that the rising was wrong.

I am sure they are representative of the views of many Irish people, and I quoted them because you keep claiming that the whole nation celebrates rising.
It does not.
You were wrong again.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 May 16 - 04:53 AM

Jim,
You have been given the facts and have ignored them

I have ignored no fact. If I have say what it is. Good luck with that Jim because you have nothing.

YOU ignore the FACT that the Home Rule Bill was passed in 1914 with the blessing of Nationalists, Unionists and the Irish people.

That means that the rising was completely unnecessary, against the will of the people of Ireland, and actually counter productive in bringing about independence.
All facts Jim, which you close your mind to because it undermines your ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 16 - 06:33 AM

Bit more time now Terrytoon
"Doesn't quite square with:"
Why exactly - what of the facts I have put up do you actually dispute with facts of your own rather than simply deny - what do you have against linking your pearls of wisdom rather than stating them for all to believe unquestioningly?
The executions were a display of what would happen to anybody who dared to defy the Empire - it turned out to be enough of an example of Britain's brutality to mobilise the Irish people and eventually to help bring the Empire crashing around its own ears.
Even Keith has had to accept the dishonest nature of the British establishment in agreeing Home Rule then secretly going behind the back of one of the signatories to connive with the other to add permanence to partition - Lloyd George admitted having done so.
This is the type of behaviour one would expect from a Banana Republic dictatorship.
"Jimbo"
A step in the right direction, I suppose, but not very imaginative and you have used it before.
Why not try "Carroll's a girls name" - used to make my infant school mates curl up.
Keith
You seem now to have reverted to trolling - you want to take part in this, address your remarks to the thread in general or, at the very least, to somebody else.
This is not a dialogue
Jim Carroll.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 May 16 - 03:12 PM

Jim, I was obviously being too modest about my knowledge of history.
I clearly knew a lot of things about the rising that you did not, and what you thought you knew has been shown to be myth.

You now know that home rule was assured by Act of Parliament, making all the Irish bloodshed in the rising and what followed wholly unnecessary.
You now know that the people did not support the rising, and that the rebels murdered unarmed Irish people in cold blood.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 02 May 16 - 03:22 PM

Professor, by your own admission on numerous occasions you have clearly stated you have no knowledge and more importantly no interest in Irish history.

You have now read a little from cut an' pastes from the internet. That does not mean you have any insight into Irish history nor will you have until you take the trouble to read a few books about the subject.

However I know and you know and everyone else knows you will never do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 May 16 - 03:32 PM

You and I and everyone else knows that you can not find a single flaw in the history I have put up.

If you could, what an issue you would make of it.
But you have nothing.

Or will you produce something now?
Good luck with that Rag.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 May 16 - 05:38 PM

You and I and everyone else knows that you can not find a single flaw in the history I have put up.

Correct for once, Professor. Congratulations.

Not a single flaw, but a cornucopia thereof.

Go read a book or three & educate yourself.

PS: you haven't "put up" history, you've posted horseshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 02 May 16 - 06:23 PM

Jim Carroll - 02 May 16 - 06:33 AM

Thing is Jom you don't put up any facts, you put up ill-informed and biased opinion and present it as fact. Thing is Jom you don't put up any facts, you substitute conjecture and present it as fact. Any time that you do actually put up a fact it will be responded to.

The executions Jom were the sentence demanded by the law for anyone found guilty of treason in time of war. As for mobilising the Irish people? It managed to mobilise what percentage of the Irish people to take part in the Irish War of Independence - 0.48%, the deal negotiated to end the War was not universally accepted and the country slipped into civil war that managed to rouse the interest and participation of only 3.33% of the Irish people.

As for the British Empire Jom, the events of 1916 and 1921 had nothing whatsoever to do with its demise, that is mere conjecture on your part. That Empire Jom carried on for another half a century and demonstrated that an Empire can be ended through peaceful transition, its strength is still in evidence today as represented by the second largest international body in the world after the United Nations - The Commonwealth of Nations consisting of 53 sovereign member states most of whom were former British Colonies or dependencies. This transition occurred during our lifetime Jom and guess what? I didn't hear any crash.

Oh dear Jom have you just found out that politicians are dishonest? That they will do anything to get a deal? What planet have you been living on? Talking of honesty Jom your leaders of 1916 weren't exactly honest with their followers were they? de Valera wasn't exactly honest with Michael Collins was he?

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 02:34 AM

Let me give you an analogy professor, one that is particularly fitting I believe.

If the history of Ireland is a big book of 750 pages you have read just one page and think you can tell everybody about Ireland because you have read just one page.

That was not true yesterday, it isn't true today and it won't be true tomorrow. When and only when you have read the entire book will you be in a position to make any sort of relevant comment.

Will you ever read the whole book? I have for one doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 03:00 AM

Still nothing on the Rising then Greg.

If there are "a cornucopia" of flaws in the history I have put up in support of my views, why can't any of you produce a single one?
Because you are lying.

Even Rag, who presumably has read lots of history books, can not produce anything to support his case or to challenge the other.
Or can you Rag?
Over to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 03:36 AM

I didn't really expect you to understand that professor. Your loss not mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 03 May 16 - 03:54 AM

Never mind about the "professor" Raggy when are you going to make a start on even that one page? My guess would be never. But you certainly have never read the book - pot, kettle, black mean anything to you? The information so far supplied by Keith has been correct and in context, the information supplied by you to this thread has been unsubstantiated rumour that doesn't even bear the most cursory examination.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 03:57 AM

That's pretty rich coming from someone who thinks Cork is on the east coast of Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 03:57 AM

"Thing is Jom you don't put up any facts, "
You have had these facts over and over again, we have had at least two epic threads on the Famine and yet you repeat the same garbage as you did then - want me to link you to the threads - the two Trevelyan latters, including the one published in Coogan's 2016 book, or the newly-researched facts from the landslide of books published during the 150th anniversary commemorations, or even those from Englishwoman Mrs Cecil Woodham Smith's 'The Great Hunger' (up to 1995 her book was the only major work dealing with The Famine).
On the last thread, we actually narrowed it down to (I think) numerous essential facts (full warehouses, enough food to feed Ireland four time over, the continuation of importing food for profit, laissez faire policy, Trevelyan's letter, the massive number of evictions, which, in my opinion, proved beyond doubt Britain's guilt in the outcome of the Famine....) all linked to documented evidence - I put them up again and again, requesting your response - you refused to respond - which is what you pair do and what you are doing here.
I don't know what you read (I don't count The Daily Mail and the Beano as reading), but you never link what you say, you just present them as definitive statements which turn out to be nothing more than clay pigeons.
I know what Keith reads - nothing - he's been honest enough to tell us that - and it shows (though I now smell the burning rubber of desperate back-pedaling) .
Again, Keith has been honest enough to tall us that he isn't interested enough to read up on these subjects, though he persists in dragging out these charades and trying to win prizes.
Your technique is to make your definitive, unlinked statements, ignore the responses and make them again later, as you are doing here with The Famine - you've been shot down over all this countless number of times yet you still come back for more.
I suggest if you want to make a point on this you answer the questions you were given last time and come back with some documented facts of your own - declaring a thing to be true doesn't make it so.
This is actual, well established and universally accepted history we are dealing with - not jingoistic propaganda, which is what your arguments mount up to.
"The executions Jom were the sentence demanded by the law for anyone found guilty of treason in time of war."
That has never been put up as a reason for them happening, they took place at the behest of General Maxwell alone, they were held in secret, and those charged were not allowed to offer a defence of any shape or form - they were revenge-taking kangaroo courts - a disgrace to the army and a disgrace to the Empire, some aspects of the 'trials' were actually illegal by both military and civil standards.

"Controversially, Maxwell decided that the courts-martial would be held in secret and without a defence, which Crown law officers later ruled to have been illegal.[132] Some of those who conducted the trials had commanded British troops involved in suppressing the Rising, a conflict of interest that the Military Manual prohibited."
(Wiki entry on The Rising).

You describe the Rebellion as "murder", yet none of the actual murders or atrocities that took place at the time were ever tried.   

"After the Rising, claims of atrocities carried out by British troops began to emerge. Although they did not receive as much attention as the executions, they sparked outrage among the Irish public and were raised by Irish MPs in Parliament.
One incident was the 'Portobello killings'. On Tuesday 25 April, Dubliner Francis Sheehy-Skeffington, a pacifist nationalist activist, had been arrested by British soldiers. Captain John Bowen-Colthurst then took him with a British raiding party as a hostage and human shield. On Rathmines Road he stopped a boy named James Coade, whom he shot dead. His troops then destroyed a tobacconist's shop with grenades and seized journalists Thomas Dickson and Patrick MacIntyre. The next morning, Colthurst had Skeffington and the two journalists shot by firing squad in Portobello Barracks. The bodies were then buried there. Later that day he shot a Labour Party councillor, Richard O'Carroll. When Major Sir Francis Vane learned of the killings he telephoned his superiors in Dublin Castle, but no action was taken. Vane informed Herbert Kitchener, who told General Maxwell to arrest Colthurst, but Maxwell refused. Colthurst was eventually arrested and court-martialled in June. He was found guilty of murder but insane, and detained for twenty months at Broadmoor. Public and political pressure led to a public inquiry, which reached similar conclusions. Major Vane was discharged "owing to his action in the Skeffington murder case".[141][142][143][144][145]
The other incident was the 'North King Street massacre'. On the night of 28–29 April, British soldiers of the South Staffordshire Regiment, under Colonel Henry Taylor, had burst into houses on North King Street and killed 15 male civilians whom they accused of being rebels. The soldiers shot or bayoneted the victims, then secretly buried some of them in cellars or back yards after robbing them. The area saw some of the fiercest fighting of the Rising and the British had taken heavy casualties for little gain. General Maxwell attempted to excuse the killings and argued that the rebels were ultimately responsible. He claimed that "the rebels wore no uniform" and that the people of North King Street were rebel sympathizers. Maxwell concluded that such incidents "are absolutely unavoidable in such a business as this" and that "Under the circumstance the troops [...] behaved with the greatest restraint". A private brief, prepared for the Prime Minister, said the soldiers "had orders not to take any prisoners" but took it to mean they were to shoot any suspected rebel. The City Coroner's inquest found that soldiers had killed "unarmed and offending" residents. The military court of inquiry ruled that no specific soldiers could be held responsible, and no action was taken"
From the Wiki entry on the Rising.

"As for the British Empire Jom, the events of 1916 and 1921 had nothing whatsoever to do with its demise,"
'Course it didn't - it fell of its own accord.
The Rising was the first great crack in the facade, it inspired the movement for India leaving the Empire, it was written about at length by the Russian revolutionaries, who used it to overthrow Tsardom... it showed the Empire at its brutal worst and it showed how a small number of poorly armed irregulars could take on the might of the richest and most powerful power in the world - the first domino to wobble.
"That they will do anything to get a deal? "
Now you appear to be defending the altering of a treaty on National Independence - not "some politicians" but an Empire.
How on earth can you write off the altering of a document that has brought about a century bloodshed, injustice and civil conflict which is still seething away waiting to erupt again (by my watch, in a couple of months time)
What kind of people are you
"I was obviously being too modest about my knowledge of history."
I see Keith is developing a sense of humour in his old age.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 03:58 AM

Rag, it is true I do not read books on Irish history, but I am very well read on the period 1914-1918 which of course includes the rising.
That is how I have been able to expose your ignorance of the facts behind the rising, and your gullible acceptance of the myths deliberately created about it and presented as historical fact to generations of Irish school kids.

" As a part of the school curriculum, the subject of history taught young learners a monolithic nationalist, anti-British and pro-Catholic history that was heavily dependent upon allegory and collective memory."

"The nationalist role ascribed to history in primary schools was not as pronounced in secondary schools. This was because the type of indoctrination involved was more effective with younger subjects,"

"Gaelic culture was proclaimed as not only relatively, but absolutely better than others. Nationalist history was not only pro-Irish but anti-British."
http://etudesirlandaises.revues.org/2119

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 04:19 AM

" taught young learners a monolithic nationalist, anti-British and pro-Catholic history"
Sigh........!
During the 'Free State" period which ended in 1937 - read what you have scooped up Keith.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 04:33 AM

No Jim. You need to read it.
"In terms of the function ascribed to history, it was not until the mid 1960s that Irish education emerged from "Plato's cave"."

"The nationalist role assigned to history at the foundation of the State was significantly diminished."

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 04:36 AM

Did you not even read the title Jim?

"Politics, Policy and History: History Teaching in Irish Secondary Schools 1922-1970"

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 04:49 AM

John O'Callaghan

An interesting paragraph on John O'Callaghans take on the rising here.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 04:54 AM

You obviously do not understand the article you have scooped up nor the Kineally quotes that blew up in your face.
Irish history blaming Britain, as outlined by Kineally, cease to be taught when the Free State ended and 'The Emergency Period' in Ireland necessitated that Irish people could freely emigrate to Britain for work, which would not have been facilitated by biting the hand that they expected to feed it.
That is the whole point of her attack on revisionist historians who, since that period, have avoided apportioning blame for anything - read her book.
It is why there was never a substantial work on the Famine until 1995 and probably why there has never been one on The Uprising.
"but I am very well read on the period 1914-1918 which of course includes the rising."
Thank you for confirming your ignorance on the Rising - no British history book, on the war, or anything else, has ever covered the Easter Rising as anything more than a passing reference.
The only British historian to have done so is Robert Kee, in his trilogy and he devotes no more than a few paragraphs itself - if this not the case - name one British history book which has,
Now - back to the real world - go away
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 06:01 AM

One last word on your slur on today's Irish children then perhaps we can put this to bed forever.
Both your previous quotes from Kineally and the ones you have attempted to use here refer to the period of Irish education during the free State period.
Your quote relates to the section of your article that was dealing specifically with the period from independence up to the declaration of the new Irish Republic.

Free State Period
"The government of the Irish Free State had a vested interest in disseminating its own version of history"
"Eoin MacNeill, the first secretary of the Gaelic League and professor of ancient Irish History at UCD, was the minister for Education from August 1922 to November 1925. This was a decisive period in the determination of the direction of the new Irish education system. "
"The first annual report of the Department of Education highlighted the fact that the central educational aim of the Free State was "the strengthening of the national fibre by giving the language, music, history and tradition of Ireland their natural place in the life of Irish schools"
"The fundamental role that history can play in the development of patriotic attitudes was recognised and exploited in the Irish Free State. History was used in the pursuit of extra-educational objectives. The political objective was the most important in history teaching, and, as such, history teaching operated as a political instrument. Its end, in so far as it concerned the State, was chiefly political; the production of loyal citizens and the justification and preservation of the State's existence. As a part of the school curriculum, the subject of history taught young learners a monolithic nationalist, anti-British and pro-Catholic history that was heavily dependent upon allegory and collective memory. School history was a major part in a State project to preserve and propagate what it meant to be Irish. It was based on the twin aims of developing a State that was Gaelic and predominantly Catholic in outlook and spirit. The primary objective of history teaching was the transmission of the distinct nationality upon which the State was founded."

1931 onwards
" The extent of the change in emphasis from British to Irish history was made clear by the reports of examiners and inspectors, who commented on the ignorance of British history displayed by many students in matters in which Ireland was directly affected by Britain:"
"It is undesirable that teachers should treat Irish history as an isolated phenomenon or should fail to explain the connection between events in Ireland and the contemporaneous events in Great Britain and Europe"

You deliberately misinterpreted Kineally to prove that Irish children are brainwashed, you are doing so now to continue that despicable accusation.
That is beneath contempt.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 06:05 AM

Jim, you are making stuff up.
On the subject of Irish schools teaching "Nationalists myths" as factual history, she said,
"Thus, at the launch of the influential Irish Historical Studies journal in 1938, the editors stated their commitment to replace 'interpretive distortions' with 'value-free history'. To a large extent, however, this debate took place within the rarefied atmosphere of academia and failed to percolate down into the schoolrooms either north or south of the border."
She is quite clear then that it continued beyond 1938 and does not say when the abuse ended.
The paper I just quoted says it went on at least up to the seventies.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 06:51 AM

"It is undesirable that teachers should treat Irish history as an isolated phenomenon or should fail to explain the connection between events in Ireland and the contemporaneous events in Great Britain and Europe"
Why stop there Jim?
The quote continues,
"The tendency, apparent in the syllabi, to study the history of Ireland in isolation was still an issue in the 1970s,"

I did not misinterpret Kineally, that is what she said in the essay.
see it here in her original intended context.
http://www.historyireland.com/18th-19th-century-history/beyond-revisionism-reassessing-the-great-irish-famine/

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 08:13 AM

"The tendency, apparent in the syllabi, to study the history of Ireland in isolation was still an issue in the 1970s,""
That has no connection whatever to teaching children to hate Britain - none whatever - it talks about the scope of taught history, that is what "ISOLATION" means, not what was or is being taught.
Britain has been accused of the same, as has many countries - only teaching their own history.
The section you have quoted both in Kineally's article and the recent one, which uses the same sources, refers to The Free State Period.
Irish children have never taught to hate Britain, as you have suggested - not even in The Free State Period.
In the period referred to, British were being taught to pity those who were not 'lucky enough' to be born British – we were still singing hymns about it in the 1950s in our school in Liverpool
That is another disgusting racist smear.
"On the subject of Irish schools teaching "Nationalists myths" as factual history"
Free State history - Kineally, of all people, blames Britain for the Famine - why should she describe it as "Nationalist Myth"?
Both she and your article deal with Irish history chronologically and I have headed in my extracts from your article - Free State then Irish Republic.
Does your hatred of the Irish have no depths that you can distort your own cut-'n-pastes?
Finished with disgusting aspect of your demeaning of Irish children.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 08:35 AM

Jim, He hasn't even read the article he pasted, let alone understood it. For example:

"However, this declared determination of revisionism to destroy the 'myths and untruths' of populist historical consciousness has also limited the ability of revisionists to construct an alternative view of Irish history"

or

"Such myths and dreams need to be explained and deconstructed, not denied, destroyed or omitted, TO SUIT A PRESENT CONVENIENCE" (my capitals)

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 08:40 AM

If you can't acknowledge your deliberate distortions and the racism of your claims, everybody else can, which suits me.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 16 - 10:05 AM

O'Callaghan summarising his findings on
"Politics, Policy and History: History Teaching in Irish Secondary Schools 1922-1970"

"The conclusion drawn is that history teaching was used by elite interest groups, namely the State and the church, in the service of their own interests. It was used to justify the State's existence and employed as an instrument of religious education. "

That is for the whole period. Nothing changed on the demise of the "Free State"

Kineally,
" What was specific to Ireland, however, was the declared mission to challenge received nationalist myths, and by implication, although less centrally, loyalist myths. Thus, at the launch of the influential Irish Historical Studies journal in 1938, the editors stated their commitment to replace 'interpretive distortions' with 'value-free history'. To a large extent, however, this debate took place within the rarefied atmosphere of academia and failed to percolate down into the schoolrooms either north or south of the border."

And Jim, no-one except you could find racism in anything I have posted.
Rag will back you because he backs anyone with far left views.
Shall we ask Joe?

You resort to personal attack everytime your arguments get knocked flat.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 10:40 AM

Try reading the whole article professor, don,t stop at the one line which can be taken as you so often do ......................... out of context. The only person you,re fooling is yourself ........................ oh and your fellow jingoist Terricola

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 10:56 AM

All pre Republic days Keith - you have the details in your own link.
"And Jim, no-one except you could find racism in anything I have posted."
To describe Irish children as brainwashed by the Irish education system is racist.
To describe Irish people as being fooled by propaganda and ignorant of their own history is racist.
To describe the subject of the commemorations taking place at the present time throughout Ireland as a "contemptible joke" is racist.
To set yourself up to re-write Irish history as it is now widely published, having boasted that you have never read a book on Ireland and are not interested enough in the subject ever to want to do so is the type of arrogant racism that proves beyond any doubt that the Easter Rising to get rid of such belligerent arrogant racism was a necessity - your arguments a living example of that attitude.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 16 - 12:38 PM

Can I add that the effort someone is prepared to put into showing that the Irish know nothing of their own history and are gullible enough to be misguided by propaganda, while at the same admitting that they have never read a book on the subject and are not interested enough ever to do so shows beyond doubt the contempt they feel towards the people under discussion.
You really couldn't have made it clearer - here and on previous discussions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 May 16 - 12:46 PM

Incidentally professor neither you, nor anyone else, including my good lady, knows how I vote. How you can claim I am left wing is, like most of your posts, totally uninformed and based on your own groundless assumptions.