 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
Related threads:
Songs of the 1916 Easter Rising (56)
BS: The Irish Easter Rising (11)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 21 Apr 16 - 04:16 AM It's pretty difficult to put over 700 years of suppression into a post on Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 16 - 04:26 AM "It's pretty difficult to put over 700 years of suppression into a post on Mudcat." How stupid do these people think the Irish are - putting teh effort they are norw doing into celebrating A contemptible joke The jingoists have learned nothing sine the Empire went walkabout - still the superior race with all the answers. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Fergie Date: 21 Apr 16 - 07:19 AM Keith thank you for some more straight answers, I'm not in a position to deal with all you said at this moment, so I'll answer it section by section You said - The occupation was not seen as "aggressive and oppressive subjugation." Incorrect - In consequence of the "Land Wars" and the activities of the Land League. Ireland was in the years leading up to the rising the most heavily policed part of Britain, there were armed Police stationed in fortified barracks in almost every village in Ireland. The police had a reputation for brutality and an absolute intolerance of any activity that they considered "seditious". In addition the police were backed up by a system of "justice" that was presided over by establishment JPs, magistrates and judges that would sentence dissenters to punative periods of incarceration solely on the word on any police officer. Th Dublin Metropolitan Police were hated by the ordinary citizens. the DMP carried batons and swords and patrolled the streets in groups. They delighted in smashing heads at the slighest excuse and many the innocent man was hauled off to spend the night in a cell and was then charged on the word of a DMP and condemned to months in prison. If you want to know how these bullies behaved look up the DMP and it's roll in the 1913 Lockout. The British Garrisons were also feared and hated, they were brutal in the extreme and fired on innocent, unarmed civilians on many occasions. Read up on the activities of King's Own Scottish Borderers and their role in the event that has come to be known as the Bachelors Walk Massacre in 1914. The majority of ordinary citizens feared the police and soldiers for good reason. They kept their heads down and submitted to the authorities because they knew what the cost of putting their heads above the parapet would be. They behaved in that fashion precisely because they lived under occupation and were ruled over by a vindictive, aggressive and oppressive regime that deliberatly kept them in subjugation. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Apr 16 - 07:49 AM Fergie, I think that your interpretation is wrong, and based on propaganda not fact. If it were true, why was there no outcry or demand for independence? Why did the IRB never attract more than a fringe membership? Why did membership and votes for Sinn Fein collapse after 1908? By 1915 they had so little support that they went broke and could not pay their office rent. Jim, had Easter Week not happened, they would have introduced it earlier - why wouldn't they have. Wrong again Jim. Ireland was excluded from conscription BEFORE the rising. Sure it was suggested in 1918, but rejected immediately. There was not even conscription in the British North in WW2! The rising achieved nothing, and certainly had nothing to do with Irish exemption from conscription. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Apr 16 - 08:00 AM Fergie, the issues of the Land Wars and Land League were all settled amicably and finally in the 19th Century. It was not an issue by 1916. The DMP were an Irish Catholic organisation. Not British. The Batchelors Walk massacre was not an example of British oppression of the Irish. The army was called out because German weapons were being smuggled into the country. It was wrong that they fired on a crowd when they were returning to barracks, but they were not acting on higher orders. It was a heat of the moment thing. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 16 - 08:48 AM "Ireland was excluded from conscription BEFORE the rising." And after the rising Briain attempted to introduce compulsory conscription - fact. "Sure it was suggested in 1918, but rejected immediately." It was rejected by the Irish politicians who would have accepted it before the Rising - the Rising saved many thousands of young Irish lives - nothing to you maybe. Blaming the soldiers for the Bachelors Walk massacre is simple abrogation of responsibility, just as blaming tho=e soldiers on the spot during the Bloody Sunday massacre was - the officers, and overall, the Government who put the army there were responsible in both cases - The British Govenment underlined that fact when they apologised for the Derry massacre. Your behaviour here has demonstrated beyond all doubt why The British Empire was always has hated by the Irish people as it was - describing what Ireland is celebrating at the present time as "A contemptible joke" is beyond belief - having said it, refusing either to defend it or to withdraw it is.... well - word fail. A question; do you believe that those at present celebrating the Rising, or those who have always cherished the event are simpletons? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 16 - 08:57 AM ! Land Wars and Land League were all settled amicably and finally in the 19th Century." Not true again. The official Land War protests lasted until 1911 when the West Meath MP who organised the Cattle Drives called them off, but in fact they continued in parts of Ireland right up to Independence - this County was one of the foremost in those events. We recorded about half a dozen songs about the events made during the lifetimes of the singers Go look it up. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Fergie Date: 21 Apr 16 - 10:06 AM Keith. Trying to educate you is like playing handball against a haystack. You replied "The DMP were an Irish Catholic organisation. Not British." The DMP = Dublin Metropolitan Police it was the title of the police service that controlled the Dublin area. It was comprised of Catholic and Protestant members and the senior offers were almost exclusively protestant and unionist inclined. I know this because, much to my shame some of my ancestors were members and they were all Church of Ireland and unionist by inclination. Believe me the thought that they were part of "an Irish Catholic organisation" would have made them guffah with mirth. You also said "Why did the IRB never attract more than a fringe membership?" Keith any person with a modicum of understand of Irish history would understand why the IRB had a small membership. The Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) were a secret society whose membership was controlled by it's leadership. You could not join the IRB, membership was by invitation only. I trust that you motives in being involved in this discussion are honest, but for somebody who holds such strong opinions on the subject of the 1916 Rising you seem to be almost wilfully ignorant of some of the key organisations involved. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Apr 16 - 10:25 AM Fergie, The DMP was an unarmed police force modelled exactly on the London MP. I am sure that neither one behaved worse than the other by our standards. British police were guilty of the same behaviour towards strikers in the early 20th Century. The IRB may have been secret but if it was to have any hope of fighting the British out of Ireland, it would need many more than its tiny fringe membership to achieve anything. But it could not recruit them. Sinn Fein had the same aims but was not a secret organisation. It published articles in The United Irishman and stood for elections. Unfortunately no-one was interested. Jim, is WIKI wrong on the Land League? It says that the Irish Land question was resolved in 1903. "The major land reforms came when Parliament passed laws in 1870, 1881, 1903 and 1909 that enabled most tenant farmers to purchase their lands, and lowered the rents of the others.[8] From 1870 and as a result of the Land War agitations and the Plan of Campaign of the 1880s, various British governments introduced a series of Irish Land Acts. William O'Brien played a leading role in the 1902 Land Conference to pave the way for the most advanced social legislation in Ireland since the Union, the Wyndham Land Purchase Act of 1903.This Act set the conditions for the break-up of large estates and gradually devolved to rural landholders, and tenants' ownership of the lands. It effectively ended the era of the absentee landlord, finally resolving the Irish Land Question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_National_Land_League |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Apr 16 - 10:41 AM House Of Commons 1892. "The Commissioner of Police reports there are seven superintendents in the Dublin Metropolitan Police, and they are all Roman Catholics. " "The Commissioner adds that the question of religion does not form any factor in the promotions in the Force. " http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1892/mar/28/dublin-metropolitan-police |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Fergie Date: 21 Apr 16 - 10:44 AM Keith, Your ability to vacillate is remarkable, but not in a good way. Your dismissive attitude is tiresome and I'm done with wasting my time trying to have an honest discussion with somebody that seems unwilling to accept that their understanding of the issues are weak and seems to regard the state of ignorance as a virtue. I'm out of here. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 16 - 11:29 AM "t says that the Irish Land question was resolved in 1903." The Land League was in no way the end of the land disputes which, as I said, continued up to Independence and hangovers of t those disputes continued into The Free State Period. "The grazier system provoked the growth of the United Irish League and the so-called 'ranch war' of the early twentieth century[63]. Many landlords, particularly in the west and in the midlands, who had favoured the grazier system, once again found their estates under prolonged threat from agrarian agitators. In the post-1903 period, the U.I.L. demanded the break-up and distribution of estates belonging to landlords who were not willing to sell under the terms of the Wyndham act. There was prolonged agitation on the Ashtown estate in Co Galway, for example,which lasted from around 1905 to 1914[64] . With the outbreak of World War I agitation temporarily abated on most estates as farming profits improved. Land sales under the land acts were suspended without provoking any great opposition. However, when the war ended and economic prosperity waned, smallholders and the landless once again began to clamour for the break-up of estates." The disputes mentioned above occurred here in Clare, Kerry and parts of Limerick and took the form of rusting the big landlord's cattle, driving them through the towns then freeing them on open land. You have insulted a large number of people here with your ignorance and arrogance and your habit of hstily scooping up bits you think make your case continues to spoil these discussions. Yo once said you had read nothing of Irish history and were not interested enough to do so - it shows. I'm British but my personal associations with Ireland go back to my childhood and my family history with Ireland is centuries old. I know from personal contact that Fergie's knowledge of the subject is voluminous - far more than mine, yet you still think you know more than we do through your internet raids. In describing The Rising as you have, vitrually single-handedly placed yourself above all those who are proudly celebrating the events of Easter 1916, reading anw writing about it as making dozens of programmes about it. I ask again "do you believe that those at present celebrating the Rising, or those who have always cherished the event are simpletons?" Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Apr 16 - 12:12 PM Sorry Fergie, but the fact is that none of your points stand up. I "dismissed" them only by showing them to be false. You have been taken in by propaganda in place of hard history. Jim, I do not claim expertise in Irish history, but have backed everything I say with quotes from acknowledged experts. Do you claim that you and Fergie know more than the professional historians whose statements refute your views? Are you claiming that Wiki is wrong in this statement? "The Ashbourne Act of 1885 started a limited process of allowing tenant farmers buy their freeholds, which was greatly extended following the 1902 Land Conference, by the 1903 Wyndham Land Purchase Act. Augustine Birrell's Act of 1909 allowed for compulsory purchase, and also allowed the purchase and division of untenanted land that was being directly farmed by the owners. These Acts allowed tenants first to attain extensive property rights on their leaseholdings and then to purchase their land off their landlords via UK government loans and the Land Commission. The 1903 Act gave Irish tenant farmers a government-sponsored right to buy, which is still not available in Britain itself today." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_War |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 16 - 12:35 PM "Are you claiming that Wiki is wrong in this statement?" You have just been given the situation of the land wars - did I make them up or are they all propaganda, as Fergie's statements are? One more time "The grazier system provoked the growth of the United Irish League and the so-called 'ranch war' of the early twentieth century[63]. Many landlords, particularly in the west and in the midlands, who had favoured the grazier system, once again found their estates under prolonged threat from agrarian agitators. In the post-1903 period, the U.I.L. demanded the break-up and distribution of estates belonging to landlords who were not willing to sell under the terms of the Wyndham act. There was prolonged agitation on the Ashtown estate in Co Galway, for example,which lasted from around 1905 to 1914[64] . With the outbreak of World War I agitation temporarily abated on most estates as farming profits improved. Land sales under the land acts were suspended without provoking any great opposition. However, when the war ended and economic prosperity waned, smallholders and the landless once again began to clamour for the break-up of estates." And again, one more time. "do you believe that those at present celebrating the Rising, or those who have always cherished the event are simpletons?" Your continued arrogance is beyond belief Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Apr 16 - 12:39 PM Not just me! Fr Séamus Murphy SJ is an Irish Jesuit priest who is currently teaching philosophy at Loyola University Chicago. "On the first day of the Rising, the Volunteers and Irish Citizen Army (ICA) members deliberately killed some civilians and unarmed Dublin Metropolitan Police constables. They staged the Rising in the most densely populated part of Ireland, even choosing the South Dublin Union, full of sick and elderly like its descendant St James's Hospital, as one place to fight. There were far more civilian (260) than rebel (82) or combined military and police (142)deaths, and responsibility for their deaths lies primarily with the leaders of the Rising." "With no authority, the Rising's leaders declared a republic, nominated themselves as its government, and shot anybody in their way. As is clear from what Pearse, Connolly and Clarke stated at the time, democratic elections were beneath them. They believed that the people did not want an independent republic: they were determined to start a chain of events that would, by political emotional blackmail, compel the Irish people to 'want' it. Nor did they represent the Volunteers or even the IRB in full. As Pearse himself admitted, they subverted the Volunteers, lying to Eoin MacNeill about their plans. They excluded IRB leaders (like Bulmer Hobson) who did not agree with them. " "Militarily insignificant, the Rising had no political effect on Britain, strengthened extreme northern unionists, and was politically devastating for the IPP, as Redmond and many others understood at once. In the Rising, the unelected gunmen defeated the elected representatives. That wrought dreadful long-term damage to Irish political culture, as regards democracy, peace, politics rather than violence, the rule of law, human rights, tolerance and pluralism." http://www.irishcatholic.ie/article/just-war-no |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 16 - 12:43 PM A bit more to ignore "From 1918 to 1920 a major part of the unrest in rural Ireland, as so often in the past, related to land. The purchase and division of estates under the Land Acts had largely ceased during the Great War and emigration was curtailed. Sinn Féin's victory in the 1918 election is likely to have raised expectations; the party agitated on the land question during the 1918 election, with de Valera and Cosgrave in particular campaigning against landlords and large graziers.11 Thousands of farm labourers joined the ITGWU, which launched a land campaign in 1919 aimed at securing better wages and conditions. Strikes were accompanied by cattle running, arson and land occupations. Smallholders, labourers and eleven-month conacre tenants began forcibly to lay claim to land. As Frank Gallagher, at the time publicity officer for the first Dáil, described the situation in his Four Glorious Years (1957): Farm hungry men do not believe in gentle methods ... When the farmer objected his crops were sometimes burned, his family set upon ... Those who led the taking over of estates did not hesitate to shoot owners who stood in their way. More often than not, as Gallagher admitted, Protestant-owned land was the target, with ancestral grievances justifying occupations. A Land Settlement Commission established by the Dáil reported that "claims are being based on the assertion that the claimants or their ancestors were formerly in occupation of the property" and that some claims were being "put forward in the hope of intimidating the present occupiers". As one person sent by the Dáil to investigate the situation described it: "…the fever [of agrarian agitation] swept with the fury of a prairie fire over Connacht and portions of the other provinces, sparing neither great ranch nor medium farm and inflicting in its headlong course, sad havoc on man, beast, and property".12 Based on his reading of the Dáil Commission's reports, Diarmaid Ferriter describes many rural areas as on the verge of social anarchy: Obduracy could be fuelled by long-term sectarian hatred or in many cases abject poverty, while those seeking land frequently organised themselves into ad-hoc committees to orchestrate agitation, or simply to plead for a fair hearing. Many locals deprived of land took it upon themselves to evict Protestant neighbours without recourse to arbitration.13 - See more at: http://www.drb.ie/essays/getting-them-out#sthash.I0YrcOh4.dpuf" Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: MGM·Lion Date: 21 Apr 16 - 05:01 PM Just to comment, tho committed to neither side, that the venerable Keith'n'Carroll Show has here transmuted into a sort of intellectual game of tennis, with each side serving to the other views of various indubitable authorities, who however start from heterogeneous & irreconcilable attitudes & partis pris (I think that the correct plural)... This one, as they say, could run & run.......! ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: GUEST,joe at airport Date: 21 Apr 16 - 07:07 PM So, are there any facts that we agree upon?
Yes, this discussion has been a bit combative, and we've had to clean up a number of off-topic posts; but I've learned a lot from it. It was my call to keep this thread in the music section since it began her and since so many songs have sprung from the Easter Rising. I know some people think it should be in the BS section, but I can't see how it's the end of the world either way. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 03:17 AM "This one, as they say, could run & run.......!" No it can't Mike - everything has been said and we are apparently down to the unchangeable opinion of a Jesuit Priest - where can we possibly go from here? Would Britain have GRANTED (now there's a word to consider in post-Empire days) Ireland Home Rule - it still hasn't; six counties still remain as part of the remnants of Empire - a fact that is still the cause of disharmony, bloodshed and death nearly a century after Independence. If Easter Week was a waste of time (a "contemptible joke" as Keith so eloquently put it), where does that leave the present day Irish people who are putting a great deal of time and effort into celebrating it as Ireland's first major step to freedom - with little more than a sense of humour, it would appear. We have all been "taken in by propaganda in place of hard history" - a nation in denial - Keith's cut-'n-pastes have proved that beyond any doubt - who are we to argue with The Jesuits? Must drop a line to the Pres., Michael D,, who just gave a very moving speech on Roger Casement on Banna Strand, poor deluded man! This has been Post Empire Loyalist jingoism at its very worst - I wonder how Joe and his fellow-Americans would have reacted to 1777 being described as a "contemptible joke" - not well, I imagine. It would appear that there are those who still have not got over the passing of the Empire. There is enough here for people to make up their own minds - let's move on eh. I was particularly impressed with the spirit of friendship and acceptance of this Guardian article - says what should be said nicely, I thought (can't blue-clickie again - must be something I said). http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/25/the-guardian-view-on-the-easter-rising-centenary-irelands-history-lesson-for-britain Onward and upward. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Apr 16 - 03:50 AM Points well taken, Jim. Still, I wonder whether the matter was at a point in 1916 where it could have been handled by diplomatic processes instead of by more bloodshed. Would the tactics of Gandhi have been more effective? But I suppose that Gandhi's tactics came almost half a century later (although he also used them in South Africa earlier). I guess it boils down to the basic question of pacifism: are the methods of war the most effective way to achieve justice? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Apr 16 - 03:53 AM Good article, Jim Clicky here. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: GUEST Date: 22 Apr 16 - 04:01 AM BS - despite the Peadar Kearney. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 04:01 AM Was the British occupation of Ireland legitimate? In 1916, Britain was a united kingdom of England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland. None was occupying any other. Can we even agree that it was an occupation? No. Would Britain have granted home rule without the Easter rising? It had already granted home rule, postponed only because it was fighting and losing a war for the very existence of Britain, including Ireland, as a free democratic state. Is Ireland better off because of the Easter rising? The rising achieved nothing, killed hundreds of innocent civilians, and led to the deaths of a couple of thousand more in the civil war. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 04:16 AM Jim, opening sentence of Dave's Article, "Although it was widely disapproved by Irish opinion at the time, " Do you still dispute that, which is one of my two points? Your stuff about land wars is easily shown to be irrelevant to the rising. "The major land reforms came when Parliament passed laws in 1870, 1881, 1903 and 1909 that enabled most tenant farmers to purchase their lands, and lowered the rents of the others." " Act of 1903.This Act set the conditions for the break-up of large estates and gradually devolved to rural landholders, and tenants' ownership of the lands. It effectively ended the era of the absentee landlord, finally resolving the Irish Land Question." "The 1903 Act gave Irish tenant farmers a government-sponsored right to buy, which is still not available in Britain itself today." All sorted long before the rising. If it had still been an issue, the rising would not have been an almost exclusively urban event. There were no tenant farmers in metropolitan Dublin! |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 04:22 AM Jim, you accused me of Post Empire Loyalist jingoism. Fr Séamus Murphy SJ is an Irish Jesuit priest who is currently teaching philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, and holds identical views. Is he also a post empire loyalist jingoist? No. Those views are reasoned and supported by all the historical facts. You have produced nothing to challenge any of them. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 04:45 AM Give the others a chance Keith - all our points have been covered over and over again and we've taken up far too much space n this forum as it is. Joe "are the methods of war the most effective way to achieve justice" I'm not the one to answer that - ask the Kenyans and the people of the Congo or Palestine or India who followed on the heels of Ireland in shedding their blood for independence; or more recently, the Vietnamese - did pacifism work for them - would turning the other cheek change the fact that the Palestinians are gradually being flushed out of existence as a people? I am not a nationalist, Irish or British and I consider myself an instinctive pacifist, as, I believe, most human beings to be, but I believe we are forced to react to circumstances rather than our own philosophical beliefs. My father was a pacifist, yet he went off and killed Spaniards for what he believed in. If I had to choose one of the heroes of Easter Week it would, without hesitation, be Connolly, not because he "died in the chair", but because he wanted to change society and not just its leaders - "neither English nor Irish landlords" I love that. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 04:51 AM "BS - despite the Peadar Kearney." Didn't notice that when I scanned it in Guest. I occasionally drink in the "Peadar Kearney" in Dublin, when I'm there - they spell it properly and it used to be a nice singing pub for elderly locals. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 22 Apr 16 - 05:00 AM "Those views are reasoned and supported by all the historical facts." You are not in possession of ALL the historical facts. Your FACTS are cut and pastes from the Internet. Selective at least. When, and only when, you have read extensively on Irish history from 1170 to the present day will you be in a position to make such a statement. I too am out of here. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 05:53 AM Your FACTS are cut and pastes from the Internet. Selective at least. Essays and articles by historians who know more than all of us together. I notice that you still can not identify a single one of my FACTS that you challenge, or produce a single one of your own. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:04 AM Jim, opening sentence of Dave's Article Dave's Article??? The article has bugger all to do with me. All I did was provided a clicky to a link to an article that Jim had already provided a link for. That is an historic fact that can be proved by many eminent people... |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:19 AM "I notice that you still can not identify a single one of my FACTS that you challenge, or produce a single one of your own" For ***** sake Keith - your 'fact' have been torn to shreds over and over again The changes and about-turns of the Home Rule Bill - the many reasons Irish (and British) people enlisted - the devastating photographs of indiscriminate shelling - the behavour of the British towards opponents (you won't even respond to the Tans, the fact that the land wars continued till after independence..... You have ignored all this and continue to chant 'I won' in parrot fashion Your priest may or may not be a jingoist, but he represents a minority opinion here in Ireland ad it is what it is - an opinion, nothing more. Your insulting behavior towards the Irish people as a whole and your refusal to either qualify or withdraw those insults marks your case out for what it is - sheer archaic jingoism. If Ireland would have got Home Rule without Easter Week - why didn't they get it - why was there a civil war and a near century of persecution forced n the Northern Catholics - why wasn't Independence implemented immediately after the war and the six counties added a year later, as the signed treaty stated - none of this took place and still haven't beer ratified? Now will you go away? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: MGM·Lion Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:31 AM "This one, as they say, could run & run.......!" No it can't Mike · 0317 AM .... Oh? seems to me to be having a pretty good go, Jim...! ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:41 AM What can you do Mike - silence doesn't seem to work I get a pit pissed off with triumphalism with no basis. Sorry - I suppose it's much easier to snipe from the sidelines. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 07:18 AM Sorry Mike - didn't mean to snap Troublesome priest, and all that Jim CaRROLL |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 08:26 AM If Ireland would have got Home Rule without Easter Week - why didn't they get it - They would have. It was already agreed but there was the small matter of WW1 that had to be dealt with first. FACT. The Home Rule Act was already passed. FACT. Home Rule was assured FACT. The Rising had almost no popular support. The Rising achieved nothing but thousands of unnecessary Irish deaths. your 'fact' have been torn to shreds over and over again If that is true, identify a single one. My case is just that the rising was unnecessary because home rule was already assured, and the people did not support it. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 09:11 AM the many reasons Irish (and British) people enlisted I quoted historians who researched their actual motivation. the devastating photographs of indiscriminate shelling There are no such photographs. The shells were fired directly at the occupied buildings, and at the actual windows from where the rebels were firing. See the pictures I provided of the Liberty building and YMCA. Lar Joye, curator of military history at the National Museum of Ireland, "Most of the damage to Dublin's city centre was caused by fire, particularly at premises like the Irish Times warehouse and Hoyte's Druggists and Oil Works, rather than by shelling." http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/tss-helga-ii/ |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Greg F. Date: 22 Apr 16 - 10:43 AM "Those views are reasoned and supported by all the historical facts." Absolutely, Professor! - and also supported by all historians (live ones, that is) whose books are available in regular bookshops & etc & etc........ It don't never change, do it? ;>) |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: GUEST,Derrick Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:14 PM "The Rising achieved nothing but thousands of unnecessary Irish deaths." The death toll was hundreds rather than thousands,the majority civilians many of whom were killed by army fire. The figures come from Wikipedia link below https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Rising Almost 500 people were killed in the Easter Rising. About 54% were civilians, 30% were British military and police, and 16% were Irish rebels. More than 2,600 were wounded. Many of the civilians were killed as a result of the British using artillery and heavy machine guns, or mistaking civilians for rebels. Others were caught in the crossfire in a crowded city. The shelling and the fires it caused left parts of inner city Dublin in ruins. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Rising |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:25 PM Keith has frequently quoted Fr. Seamus Murphy, S.J. I found an interesting article by Murphy in the Irish Times. It's worth a read: |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:34 PM Thanks Joe. Derrick, I was including the civil war. Earlier today (4.01AM) I acknowledged that the rising had "only" killed hundreds. I said, "The rising achieved nothing, killed hundreds of innocent civilians, and led to the deaths of a couple of thousand more in the civil war." |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:43 PM Murphy in Irish Times. "Far more serious is the attempt of the Rising's leaders, without authority from the living Irish people (as opposed to the imaginary authority of the dead generations), to establish a new state and themselves as its government with power to start a war and execute citizens. That can't be laughed off. Furthermore, the Rising is not like the Battle of Clontarf (1014), a 'dead' event with no contemporary political relevance: it is the template for the two-headed monster run by the IRA Army Council, and for its feral children, the Real and Continuity IRAs." "To celebrate the Rising is to celebrate their anti-democratic elitism and bloodlust." |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:53 PM Jim, we can finish this. I only argue two points. The Rising did not have popular support. The Home Rule Bill had already been passed. You denied both but they are established, hard, historical facts. Do you still deny them? If not, we are done. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:55 PM !"To celebrate the Rising is to celebrate their anti-democratic elitism and bloodlust."" The opinion of a Jesuit Priest - a minority of - what exactly? Had Ireland not risen, Britain would have exercised its right to send Irish youth to the front. On the first day of the Somme, a matter of a few weeks of the rising, over 19000 young British men lost their lives and 8,000 were wounded - in one day. Now that's what I call "bloodlust". Fr Murphy's Church supported the war calling for "Irishmen to support Catholic Belgium". Catholic Belgium was responsible for the deaths of 10 million Congolese and the amputation of hands of unnumbered plantation workers Bloodlust or what? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Apr 16 - 01:10 PM " I only argue two points" WHAT? Not again!! You have argued every single aspect of this uprising up to the point of maing out that those celebrating it as gullible morons (racist to say the least) The Home Rule was stamped to death by the Irish Parliamentarians because it had been altered - you have had the Lloyd George quote. It was viciously attacked in Parliament by British Tories It was not actually accepted by Britain until 1922 following a war of Independence and then in a deformed state. Each time you repeat this nonsense you confirm the stupidity of your case. How do you no it had no support - did people carry out a survey to find what the country as a whole thought - where are your figures. A few Dubliners around the GPO at the end of the Rising protested - many more assisted the rebels throughout the fighting, geiving them shelter and misleading the soldiers. Many hundreds of Dubliners used the Rising to loot busnesses and shops in the vicinity - in fact the rebels attempted to stop this from happening. Within months of the Rising the people totally supported the Rising and mounted the Irish War of Independence. How exactly do you suggest that the Rebels should have called for support for the Rising - a public ballot maybe? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Teribus Date: 23 Apr 16 - 03:39 AM Fergie, where and when did Joe Offer ask you to deliver YOUR definitive History of Ireland in just a few paragraphs? Do you really expect it to accepted as the full story? Let us have a few of your glaring omissions shall we? Henry's expansion westwards into Ireland was no different and no less "legal" than the westward expansion of the Celts from central Europe - basically that was how things were done then - you fall into the trap of judging events and mores of a bygone age through 21st century perspectives. You omit to mention Irish raids on England and Wales, were these to be ignored? the "English" did not "invade" Ireland but lesser sons of Norman Knights did to carve out land for themselves - Nothing new in that for "Normans" who branched out from Normandy into the British Isles, down through Italy, on to Sicily and into the middle-east (Aleppo in Syria was a "Norman" city). As to the various "Irish Rebellions" down through those 800 years if you look into them you will find that they were mainly instigated either by Spain or France who promised much but delivered little - The "Great" Chief O'Neill's rebellion was motivated by pure self-interest, its object was not to win freedom for Ireland but to deliver it to Spain as a colony with O'Neill in the position as Viceroy. Scotland was no different and there were far more Scottish Rebellions than Irish and they came much closer to success, again the foreign power promising "assistance" delivered little or nothing leaving the general population to suffer the consequences - rebellions when they happened tended to coincide with European Wars in which England or Great Britain was involved. No mention of the collusion of the Nationalists and the Germans between 1914 and 1916, no mention of failed attempts to smuggle arms into Ireland to arm the nationalists in time of war - or should that have been ignored too? The Royal Navy's intelligence branch by breaking German ciphers (Main reason why the Nationalists Gun running attempts failed) knew that something was about to happen in 1916 and had their advice been taken and had the leaders been arrested then the Easter Rising would never have happened. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Teribus Date: 23 Apr 16 - 03:56 AM "I've read quite a bit more about Irish history, mostly fiction. I suppose I've learned most of the history I know from novels, and I think that's not a bad thing." - Joe Offer, You are right Joe it is not a bad thing - it is absolutely appalling. By what you state above you have read no history at all - instead you have read what undoubtedly are heavily biased STORIES about historical events - whale of a difference, particularly if you are then going to base any serious argument on what is fiction. If you are going to study any historical event you have to look at it from all perspectives, not just that of someone writing a work of fiction. You have to look at those events objectively, history has no romantic aspect. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Raggytash Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:01 AM Fergie, that translates as my club is bigger than your shillelagh therefore I win. It also nicely avoids having to mention all the repressive measures that were put into place over centuries of suppression to prevent the indigenous population from .... lets see ......... owning land, having an education, having a vote, speaking their own language, being able to practice law, even wearing green at one stage together with countless other restrictions, designed to for one purpose and one purpose only, to subjugate the people. Therefore all the Irish population and all the Irish diaspora must be grossly misinformed and grossly mistaken to be celebrating the centenary of the 1916 rising. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Teribus Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:14 AM "Artillery was used but was it indiscriminate? Any evidence" The dozens of statements of eye witness evidence - the massive damage that was done, the weapons used - even the Gunboat Helga firing shells from the Liffey - these can only be used 'indiscriminately' in the hope they might hit their target." Intelligence and reports from the Nationalists led Government Forces and Police present to believe that civilians had been evacuated. There was no clear way of identifying civilians from "Volunteers". No heavy artillery was deployed no heavy artillery was used. Heaviest gun was the QF 12 pounder on the Helga which was 3" - had they wished to do so the British could have used a Dreadnought or Battle Cruiser with 15" guns to reduce Dublin to rubble, they didn't, the only artillery used were light field pieces and the devastation caused was to clear fields of fire. This having been my "specialisation" while in the Navy I can tell you with 100% certainty that no naval gunfire is indiscriminate and no shot is fired in the vague hope that it MIGHT hit the target. Indirect naval gunfire is corrected by observers onto target and that is done very rapidly, in Dublin the rebels held an area under full observation by Government forces, each rebel strongpoint could be identified on any city map and from that information the gunnery officer on the Helga would have an initial range and bearing to target - it really is quite a simple exercise in applied mathematics Jom. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Raggytash Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:41 AM There is a difference between being indiscriminate and being accurate. Can you tell us the percentage of your practise artillery firing was accurate: 1. from the first shot 2. overall. |
|
Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916 From: Raggytash Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:44 AM 3. Would those figures have been achievable in 1916 |
