Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
 

Donate to our new server appeal.


       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Football
Blackleaf

Silence of Shame - Celtic fans protesting against the Poppy

Silence of Shame - Celtic fans protesting against the Poppy - what say the media?

By Grandmaster Suck
Thursday, 6th November 2008
Follow Follow


Celtic FC's pandering to extreme republicanism is coming home to roost.

It's bizarre that while Northern Ireland has had ceasefire on and off since 1994 that Celtic have been left behind in a mad little world promoting and celebrating attitudes and actions the people of Ireland - however you define them - have left behind.

The smirking behind the hands over designating songs and chants as political as opposed to sectarian hides the reality that they have given the green light to the crackpots who live in haze of hate where the confusion of sectarianism, history, politics and religion produces a cult of the idolisation of violence. It's not much of an identity but for some of them hating Protestants is enough to satisfy their confusion and inadequacy.

The current manifestation of this warped world view is the news that a gang of these inadequates intend to protest against the players of all SPL clubs having red poppies on their shirts this weekend.

Amongst this weedy collection are Cairde na hÉireann - the official Sinn Fein representatives in Scotland - and indeed the leaflets for this protest will be distributed from their shop in the Barras on Saturday.

The degeneracy of this mob is beyond the ken of human beings. Worked up into a frenzy of hate you wonder what has suddenly made these Scottish born, bred and buttered Celtic fans suddenly hate the poppy? It's hardly been a tradition in Scotland has it?

Whilst we can take the mickey and exaggerate in the name of footballing rivalry the facts are that the Catholic community on Scotland is Scottish and that in the two World Wars there was no measurable opposition to conscription and that in British Legion branches up and down the land they have partaken in commemorations and collections for generations.

This opposition to the poppy is ill - it can be be dressed up as sudden concern for Iraqi and Afghan civilians but it has nothing to do with that. It's simply another excuse to demonstrate their hatred of anything - even this most sacred symbol of sacrifice - which they believe to be associated with Britishness and Protestantism.

It is the duty of all in positions of authority - the media, in politics, in football - to condemn this display of hate. If it was a group of Rangers fans doing this there would be no hesitation in the condemnation. Now is the time to crush the remnants of hate in our society.

If anyone is bewildered by this bizarre behaviour just cast your mind back to where they get their motivation for their hate.

Back in 1987 11 civilians were murdered in the Enniskillen Massacre when a Remembrance Sunday service was attacked. What is often forgotten is that two more no-warning attacks were foiled that day - at the Tullyhommon memorial in Fermanagh and on the headquarters of the British Legion.

This is what excites these monsters - the murder of Protestants, the reality of ordinary decent people having to face the rest of their lives blind or in wheelchairs.

It should not be tolerated - the media, the police, the politicians and most importantly Celtic FC themselves should not surround this evil in the Silence of Shame.

followfollow.com
William_Cleland

Letting them have a minute's applause instead of the traditional silence was Munich style appeasement.
Rinty

The applause was a good idea as it meant that the other celtic fans were not overruled by the minority.  It was obvious that some of those bams would waste the silence.  It is a shame that our bigots mean that we have to have a minutes applause rather than join the rest of the world in silence, but I think in this instance it is a good idea and makes sense, the silence of the majority can be ruined by the noise of a few, but the minority cannot drown out the applause of the majority.

The poppy protest is pathetic and doesnt make any sense.  The green brigade as the call themselves, like their counterparts at Ibrox. the Blue order, are a disgrace.

But the original article is wrong to suggest that Celtic FC are pandering to this.  The protesters left the ground to do it and celtic have banned many of those who took part, with some banned for life.

The opposition to poppy's does not make sense and the craziest part, in my opinion, was people who supported the armed struggle of the IRA wearing the white poppy which is against all wars, even the one waged by the IRA.

These guys are just football bigots, trying to dress up their tribal sectarianism as a poltical stance.

An insult to many armed foces personnel who support Celtic past or present.  An insult to the many irishmen who died on the fields of France, catholic or protestant. celtic or rangers.
agentmancuso

William_Cleland wrote:
Letting them have a minute's applause instead of the traditional silence was Munich style appeasement.


That's a ridiculous comment. Holding a minute's applause was an excellent idea, as it meant the minority of idiots were completely drowned out.

Unfortunately, the (completely artificial) righteous indignation of the other bigots merely succeeded in drawing attention to the protest again. So the United Bigots win, because they manage to put their pathetic obsession with cartoon history on the centre stage again.
Rinty

From what I hear about 50 people took part, 30 or so actually leaving the ground to take part, celtic have banned more than 20 of them, so the whole article in follow, follow is nonsense, Celtic don't encourage these guys and they amount to about 0.1% of Celtic's home crowd.
William_Cleland

agentmancuso wrote:
That's a ridiculous comment. Holding a minute's applause was an excellent idea, as it meant the minority of idiots were completely drowned out.

Unfortunately, the (completely artificial) righteous indignation of the other bigots merely succeeded in drawing attention to the protest again. So the United Bigots win, because they manage to put their pathetic obsession with cartoon history on the centre stage again.


Nothing ridiculous about it at all and I find your use of the west of Scotland tactic of making an accusation of bigotry to silence people who dare to point out certain grim realities that are awkward for the powers that be more pathetic than anything else. The traditional way to remember our war dead is with a dignified and solemn minute's silence. By holding an unseemly minute's applause against the wishes of the Royal British Legion that protocol has now been lost and the militant Republicans have won a small victory.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news...ause-for-war-dead-86908-20877794/

It's a slippery slope from that to the situation that people in places like Newry and Londonderry now regularly encounter where British citizens living and working in the UK are often told to remove poppies in the workplace because Republicans claim to find them offensive.

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/...tion-employee-asked-to.4643345.jp

The mistake made by Chamberlain in Munich was in believing that by making relatively minor concessions Hitler would settle down and further conflict would be avoided. The reality is that if you make concessions to extremists they simply see it as a sign of weakness and push for even more. If a minute's silence had been held it would have been easy for the stewards to pull out the few protestors if they had really been as a few in number as Rinty suggests and after imposing sine die bans from all Scottish football grounds the problem would have been solved and traditional standards of decorum would have been successfully maintained.
azzuri

William_Cleland wrote:
agentmancuso wrote:
That's a ridiculous comment. Holding a minute's applause was an excellent idea, as it meant the minority of idiots were completely drowned out.

Unfortunately, the (completely artificial) righteous indignation of the other bigots merely succeeded in drawing attention to the protest again. So the United Bigots win, because they manage to put their pathetic obsession with cartoon history on the centre stage again.


Nothing ridiculous about it at all and I find your use of the west of Scotland tactic of making an accusation of bigotry to silence people who dare to point out certain grim realities that are awkward for the powers that be more pathetic than anything else. The traditional way to remember our war dead is with a dignified and solemn minute's silence. By holding an unseemly minute's applause against the wishes of the Royal British Legion that protocol has now been lost and the militant Republicans have won a small victory.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news...ause-for-war-dead-86908-20877794/

It's a slippery slope from that to the situation that people in places like Newry and Londonderry now regularly encounter where British citizens living and working in the UK are often told to remove poppies in the workplace because Republicans claim to find them offensive.

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/...tion-employee-asked-to.4643345.jp

The mistake made by Chamberlain in Munich was in believing that by making relatively minor concessions Hitler would settle down and further conflict would be avoided. The reality is that if you make concessions to extremists they simply see it as a sign of weakness and push for even more. If a minute's silence had been held it would have been easy for the stewards to pull out the few protestors if they had really been as a few in number as Rinty suggests and after imposing sine die bans from all Scottish football grounds the problem would have been solved and traditional standards of decorum would have been successfully maintained.


I'm actually in broad agreement with you, give these idiots a rope to hang themselves with and show them up for what they are. The ones not thrown out will be hounded by the majority of Celtic's decent support.

Otherwise we'll find ourselves revisiting this same topic every November for the next 100 years+. Well, maybe WE won't.... Laughing
Rinty

"By holding an unseemly minute's applause against the wishes of the Royal British Legion that protocol has now been lost and the militant Republicans have won a small victory."

No william, the widely held minutes silence is on the 11th at 11 o'clock.  Other events take different point of views.  I agree with you that it would have been good to have silence, but the victory for the tiny minority would have been theuir chance to destroy the minutes silence at the football.

Your point might be valid if this was a one-off but football has adopted the minutes applause for some time now in case it is wasted, whether for players or other events.  I would say that the applause is the standrd method in scottish football now and it preferable to fans detroying the silence.  This is not a precedent and will not affect the worldwide minutes silence on the 11th.

The appeasement, if at all, was not on saturday, it came before, in minutes silence for players, so it not tied up in this issue, but a more general issue for football supporters and their behaviour.

The bans are easier to imposr because th idots had to leave the stdium to do it.  Whenh idiots break silence it is NOT easy for stewrads to identify them as there is usually a eaction from people who are offended and by the time the minute is up the stewards dont know who is who.

In this case Celtic have banned 30 people who organised and took part and some of them 'sine die'.

But, this is not an isolated case and celtic are not the only team who have fanms who celebrate death in this way.

In England the FA had to introduce a minutes applause for the anniversary of Munich because they knew so many fans of some teams would ruin it.
William_Cleland

Rinty wrote:
Your point might be valid if this was a one-off but football has adopted the minutes applause for some time now in case it is wasted, whether for players or other events.


I think in reality you are on a sticky wicket when even Graham Spiers is willing to criticise Celtic over this issue:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/...tball/scotland/article5119850.ece

The possible antics of scumbags who idolise the likes of Sean Russell rather than having respect for Britain's war dead should not have been a factor in a decision such as this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se%C3%A1n_Russell
agentmancuso

William_Cleland wrote:
Nothing ridiculous about it at all

The suggestion that holding a minute's applause instead of a minute's silence is in any way comparable to allowing one country to invade and forcibly dismember another is evidently laughable.

Quote:
I find your use of the west of Scotland tactic of making an accusation of bigotry to silence people

It's difficult to see what (other than bigotry) could possible promote the ludicrous comparison between a brutal military invasion by the Nazis and an irritating display of bad manners by a tiny group of football supporters. I guess sheer stupidity is an option.

Quote:
who dare to point out

I take off my hat to the selfless courage demanded of all who participated in the oh so predictable chorus of Righteous Indignation, such as the Daily Mail, Follow Follow, and countless other sub-literate bigots. Their bravery is an example to us all.

Quote:
certain grim realities

Grim reality? That a noisy minority of Old Firm fans are thick? So what's new?

Quote:
the powers that be

If the powers that be would stop attempting to take over every sizeable public event with Officially Approved demonstrations of communitarian nausea then the problem wouldn't arise.
Quote:

The traditional way to remember our war dead is with a dignified and solemn minute's silence.

Yes. On 11th November. Not by fecking around with sporting occasions.

Quote:
By holding an unseemly minute's applause against the wishes of the Royal British Legion

What right do the RBL have to attempt to control the behaviour or opinions of football supporters?

Quote:
the militant Republicans have won a small victory.

Indeed they have. But not because of the minute's applause. Only because the tiny brains of smug whingers fail to notice that drawing attention to these people is the worst possible course of action. Publicity is their victory.
Rinty

"I think in reality you are on a sticky wicket"

Why?  It has nothing to do with me.  And why 'even' graham speirs?  He hasnt been slow to state his opinions in the past re Celtic.  As the son of a protestant minister I would expect him to notice these things at celtic park.  The bigots in the support dont exactly make the place inclusive or welcoming for those of us who are not irish-catholics.

My point is that this move to applause from silence is not to do with armistice day, is not unique to celtic and not to Scotland.

The issue of the opinions of these bampots who oraginsed this 'protest' or any other protest is separate from the issue of silence vs applause.
William_Cleland

I have told you repeatedly that I don't engage in line by line rebuttal flamewars, agentmancuso. An argument can be made for a minute's applause when it is a celebration of somebody's life, which has come to an end through natural causes. I find the argument that it should be used to mark something as sombre as Remembrance Sunday tasteless and bordering on grotesque.
Rinty

BUt William, it is the same argument, it is not about what the silence/applaisue ids for, it is abiout the behavious of football fans, that is why English teams applauded rather than stayed silent to celebrate the Manchester United team who died in Munich.

Also, the SFA have never marked armistice day, so the fact that they are is a tep forward re remebreing the sacifice of those who died, not a backward step.  If there had been a tradition of silence at football matches on this day, that was now being chaged I could see the point, but we are talking about introducing a new event into football games against a backgroubnd of applause in favour iof silence which is already there because of the behaviour of fans, not just celtic fans.

The issue of republicans attitude to the poppy is separate from the issue of football fans tendency to celebrate death.  Whether it is munich 58, the ibrox disaster, tommy burns, davie cooper or Johnny Doyle, football supporters wasted memorial events to dead people.
William_Cleland

Do you think Israelis are going to start applauding at Yad Vashem when they remember the victims of the holocaust? On sombre occasions when something tragic in the history of the nation is being commemorated it is completely jarring to have people behave like that. Personally, the main source of regret in all of this for me is that Celtic didn't carry out their threat to switch to the GAA back in the early 1950s. Then you could sing your rebel songs to your hearts content amongst like minded people and the rest of us could just ignore you.
Rinty

I don't sing 'rebel' songs William and dont know about Celtic and the GAA, the 1950's are not the question here.

Your last post at least reveals your real reasoning on this.  That football fans cant stay silent at minutes' silences is ignored over a chance for you to continue a campaign.  Some might say that you are using the rememberance sunday for your own agenda.
agentmancuso

William_Cleland wrote:
Do you think Israelis are going to start applauding at Yad Vashem when they remember the victims of the holocaust? On sombre occasions when something tragic in the history of the nation is being commemorated it is completely jarring to have people behave like that. Personally, my only regret is that Celtic didn't carry out their threat to switch to the GAA back in the early 1950s. Then you could sing your rebel songs to your hearts content and the rest of us could just ignore you.


It's unusually honest of you to give up the facade of arguing the point and let the underlying bigotry come to the surface.

But you miss the point entirely. Football supporters aren't there to "commemorate something tragic in the history of the nation". They're there to watch the game. There is a time and place to something "commemorate tragic in the history of the nation" but not by trying to force it down people's throats at a completely secular event. It would be different if protesters turned up at a Remembrance event and interrupted it; that would be appalling. But exactly the reverse happens; the moral majority turn up at irrelevant places and try to force everyone to behave in a way that suits their  unpleasant agenda.

Why do the powers that be insist on trying to inflict this sort of moral conformism in completely inappropriate places? It's a distinctly 'nationalist' trait...
William_Cleland

Is it really that hard for you to rationalise why someone could be genuinely offended at people applauding on Remembrance Sunday? Try that at your local war memorial and see how people react.
agentmancuso

William_Cleland wrote:
Is it really that hard for you to rationalise why someone could be genuinely offended at people applauding on Remembrance Sunday? Try that at your local war memorial and see how people react.


If the clowns that try to make football crowds stand in reverential silence were to drag their local war memorial onto the pitch and abandon it in the centre circle then their audience would equally have every right to be annoyed.
William_Cleland

agentmancuso wrote:
It's unusually honest of you to give up the facade of arguing the point and let the underlying bigotry come to the surface.


And it is sadly predictable of you to launch a personal attack like this. You on many occasions have voiced your extreme distaste for the Old Firm. Funny how when I do something similar I become a bigot. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
Rinty

William your distaste is not for the old firm, it is entirely aimed at Celtic and based on celtic and all of their fans fitting your caricature of a republican bampot.

I am a celtic supporter, not a catholic, not irish.  I, like many celtic supporters, am of the opinion, as I stated earlier, that it would be good if we could have a silence at these things.  But, as that is rarely possible in football, recognise why the applause is a better idea.

Those who protest against the poppy as 'imperialist' are wrong, in my opinion.  By introducing an applause it forced those who wanted to protest out of the ground, they left 10 minutes into the game to hold their protest outside, making it possible to identify those taking part.

By having an applause instead of silence Celtic sucesfully managed to make sure there was no protest in the ground and disassociate the club, and the rest of the supporters, from this action.  Surely this is a good thing.  It might not be the ideal situation but surely you think that celtic should isolate and act against thos sort of protest?

I get the feeling that you wanted the silence to go ahead so that Celtic would be emabrassed, rather than any desire to honour people who died in wars.
William_Cleland

Celtic have been one big 120 year long provocation designed to keep the working class divided along ancestral tribal lines. I'm surprised that a self-proclaimed socialist wouldn't be able to see that. What Glasgow needed was more of a Liverpool and Everton style rivalry. Despite the huge number of people of Irish RC ancestry on Merseyside these issues would not arise at Anfield or Goodison. To hell with Scottish football I'm through with it permanently.
agentmancuso

William_Cleland wrote:
You on many occasions have voiced your extreme distaste for the Old Firm. Funny how when I do something similar I become a bigot. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.


My distaste for the Old Firm applies equally to both halves. Yours is one way traffic. That's because you are both a bigot and a hypocrite.
William_Cleland

Coming from you that's a compliment.
Rinty

Liverpool and Everton are not split down the same lines as Celeitc and rangers, so the 'toubles' across the water did not polarise the support.  I have friends in Southport who are proud orangemen and support Liverpool, and you see Irish tricolours and union jacks in both ends at their games.
schawaldowris

Today I witnessed the Scotland Argentina pre match conference with Maradona on Sky TV.

Almost from the start the English sports pack hi-jacked the conference. They were clearly not in the least interested in the Scotland/Argentian match. Their sole objective was to bait and badger Maradona on his "hand of God" comment. Indeed the only questions on the match came from Argentinian and one Italian journalists. Despite the fact the conference was in Glasgow, the English journalists raised no questions on the Scottish team or manager.

I have long considered the English sports journalists to be the most arrogant in the world. I now wish to amend that comment. The world is not big enough to contain their arrogance.
agentmancuso

schawaldowris wrote:

I have long considered the English sports journalists to be the most arrogant in the world. I now wish to amend that comment. The world is not big enough to contain their arrogance.


There's certainly something very odd about them. It's more than just arrogance though, there's frequently a distinct trace of anxiety in the obsessive attention they pay to certain things.
kevin04

schawaldowris wrote:
Today I witnessed the Scotland Argentina pre match conference with Maradona on Sky TV.

Almost from the start the English sports pack hi-jacked the conference. They were clearly not in the least interested in the Scotland/Argentian match. Their sole objective was to bait and badger Maradona on his "hand of God" comment. Indeed the only questions on the match came from Argentinian and one Italian journalists. Despite the fact the conference was in Glasgow, the English journalists raised no questions on the Scottish team or manager.

I have long considered the English sports journalists to be the most arrogant in the world. I now wish to amend that comment. The world is not big enough to contain their arrogance.


I watched live from the Stv link and some of the questions were unbelievable that they were asking, It was 22 years ago!
He handled the press conference pretty well, his joke about England's world cup was quite funny after being bombarded with questions about his 'Hand of God' goal.
parkhead_rfb

i was at the match and i walked out due to being forced to take part in a celebration of british imperialism.

celtic and others are very quick to tell celtic fans to keep our politics out of football so why then should we be forced to take part in a celebration of the british army?

what would the reaction be if celtic were to wear easter lillies in commemoration of irelands war dead?

let us not forget that celtic fans are in the main either from or descended from the irish comunity where "our brave boys" have given us such delights as the black and tans, bloody sunday (x2), collusion and many more delights over the last 800 years.

I also find it the biggest irony ever that people are moaning about our right to protest particularly given the fact that the second world war was allegedely about free speech.

the british poppy is not a rememberance of those who died in www1 or ww2.  it is a jingoistic piece of propaganda used to rally support for britains latest dirty war wherever that may be at the time and i want no part in it.

those who wish to do so can attend one of the many ceremonies where such things are welcome.

"britains dirty wars: no story of glory"
Rinty

Quote:
i was at the match and i walked out due to being forced to take part in a celebration of british imperialism.


No you weren't.  The SPL decided to take part in an annual rememberance for war dead, Celtic are part of the SPL.  Some people decide to use that annual event to promote 'british imperialism', most dont.

There is no doubt that, this year, attempts have been made to use the event to give some justification for afghanistant and Iraq.  That is a valid political point, but one best made elsewhere away from the pointless and poorly attended walkout at Celtic.

Quote:
celtic and others are very quick to tell celtic fans to keep our politics out of football so why then should we be forced to take part in a celebration of the british army?


The poppy is most often associated with the First World War in which Irishmen were still british and died in their thousands as part of the british army.  Especially here in Scotland where recruitment among "irish-catholics" was very high.

Its not celebrating the army, its commemorating those who died.

Quote:
what would the reaction be if celtic were to wear easter lillies in commemoration of irelands war dead?


Bemusement probably.  If any club tok an individual decision to place a symbol on their strip then I would imagine it would be controversial.  The SPl are unlikely to ask clubs to wear an easter lily so I dont see that it is comparable.  The lily doesnt honour war dead, it commemorates a small number of dead men from a specific event in Iriah history.

Why not some sort of symbol to commemortate all of those, on every side, who died during Irelands blody civil wars, or even the famine.  The Easter Uprising is not comparable to a symbol for all war dead in all wars Britain is involved in.  If the poppy were symbolising one specific military event important in British imperialist History, then I could see your point.

Quote:
the british poppy is not a rememberance of those who died in www1 or ww2.  it is a jingoistic piece of propaganda used to rally support for britains latest dirty war wherever that may be at the time and i want no part in it.


There were some jingositic events, but the SPL wearing a stick on poppy doesnt rank with them.  I wear my poppy in November to remember members of my family and others, Irish and Scottish, who died in foolish imperialist wars and in stands against facism in europe.

Quote:
those who wish to do so can attend one of the many ceremonies where such things are welcome.


But surely this is encouragiong people to take part in the more 'jingoistic' events and counterproductive to your points.

Those who want a jingostic celebration of the poppy can go to such events, those who take it less seriously can go to less jingoistic events, those who take it even less seriously can just wear a poppy, those who dont like it can refuse to do any of this, or ignore when others wear a poppy, including footballers.

I take it that by not walking out in other matches you are showing your support for other logos and symbols on celtics shirt like the clydesdale bank and carling?  If not then your walkout is meaningless.
parkhead_rfb

i believe i am right in saying that the poppy money still goes to the butcher of the somme earl haigs fund therefore those buying and wearing the poppy are contributing to todays british army mercenaries killed and wounded in places they shouldnt be in the first place therefore it is very much a political symbol and one i object to very much.

as for www1 soldiers lets not kid ourselves they were all poor little dupes either.  the black and tans were made up of british www1 veterans and they went on to committ atrocity upon atrocity in ireland.

if some idiot from britain wants to go to iraq etc and get killed for his wage then more fool him or her but dont expect me to stand and applaud or to contribute to their fund.

everything about the british army disgusts me and i will not be forced to take part in a celebation of their wars.

as for your point about the potest being a minority and so less significant i take it you will be applying the same ethos to solidarity as what percentage of votes did they  last get in scotland?
Rinty

Quote:
i believe i am right in saying that the poppy money still goes to the butcher of the somme earl haigs fund therefore those buying and wearing the poppy are contributing to todays british army mercenaries killed and wounded in places they shouldnt be in the first place therefore it is very much a political symbol and one i object to very much.


??  the poppys are sold to raise money for the Haig Fund, which helps ex-British service personnel who are wounded and injured.  You are not contributing to the army or supporting conflict by providing help to those who are casualties of that war.

Quote:
as for www1 soldiers lets not kid ourselves they were all poor little dupes either.  the black and tans were made up of british www1 veterans and they went on to committ atrocity upon atrocity in ireland.


What a warped way of looking at it.  I had Irish relatives who died in WW!.  Are they to be tarred with the same brush as the black n tans because they were in the same war on the same side?

Does your rule apply to those veterans of the Fenians who slaughtered native americans.  Are all Irish republicans therefore the same?

Quote:
if some idiot from britain wants to go to iraq etc and get killed for his wage then more fool him or her but dont expect me to stand and applaud or to contribute to their fund.


Now that sounds like a sensible approach to me.  Dont applaud, dont conhtribute to the fund.  Thats the choice all of us have.  But to claim that those who do buy poppys, applaud ar stay silent are all suporting Britains involvement in Iraq is just warped propaganda.

Quote:
everything about the british army disgusts me and i will not be forced to take part in a celebation of their wars.


Being in the stadium is not the same as endorsing or taking part.  The rememberance day poppy means different things to different people.  the actrual poppy and the funds raised is about treating service personel and their families who are injured.

Those who returned injured from WW! also helped build some of the greatest political opposition to war.  I can imagine you and your mates back then on Red Clydeside booing Davie Kirkwood because he was once in the army.

James Connolly was also once a british soldier, serving in Ireland.  He used that experience as a teenager to form his views. But to you, his vioews are irrelevant as he is the same as the balck and tans.  No?

Quote:
as for your point about the potest being a minority and so less significant i take it you will be applying the same ethos to solidarity as what percentage of votes did they  last get in scotland?


er, I didnt make a point about the protest being a minority.  It was poorly attended, I said that but made no 'point' about it.  I certainly didnt have an 'ethos' to apply to it.  So I would apply the same ethos to solidarity in the election if I knew what your question meant.  If someone wanted to report that a poorly attended solidarity meeting was 'poorly attended' then I dont have a problem wth it.
parkhead_rfb

good point on james connolly given that if i were to sing a song about james connolly i would be fairly likely be thrown out of celtic park, why then should i be forced to take part in an applause for an organisation i vehemently oppose?

the fact that the poppy still contributes to present day brit army personnel shows it is a political institution.  is it contributing to the families of iraqi's killed?  no it is solely for "our brave boys.

why should i not be allowed to sing about james connolly, bobby sands, the easter rising etc yet be forced to take part in a minutes applause for the brits?

many of celtics own fans have been murdered, interned, brutalised by these morons on khaki throughout their occupation and should not be forced to endure a celebration of it.
Rinty

Quote:
why should i not be allowed to sing about james connolly, bobby sands, the easter rising etc yet be forced to take part in a minutes applause for the brits?


You didnt need to applaud and the November events are specifically for those who died in war.  You are not contributing to the current soldiers with injuries unless you buy a poppy, which I assume you dont.  You can chose to take part in a national recognised day for reflection on those killed in war or not.

The issue of singing at CP is a different debate.  The poppy day thing was NOT asking you to sing a song celebrating a military victory or the death of the opposition.  It is usually a minutes silence for relection, with no rules on how you refelect or what you reflect on.  You and I both know that the applause was because people like you would boo and sing over the top of the minutes silence for those who died in wars.

Personally I reflect on the idea of war, imperialist or otherwise, and how it is, mainly, of no use to the working class, no matter what army is taking part.

But I wouldnt want to see peoples grandads going without help because they fought against the fascists in WW2 or some young kid not get help for his dad who lost a leg because of Tony Blair's lies.  Your campaign focusses on the wrong people.

A young James Connolly witnessed attrocities by soldiers when in the army and came out to be a leading socialist thinker and leader.  You would prevent the same process these days by attacking young soldiers as black n tans.

Those who served in WW1 were more likely to come out of it like Connolly or Kirkwood than join the Tans.
William_Cleland

If he hates Britain so much who exactly is forcing him to stay in it? With the Tiger Economy of the last two decades there really is no reason why somebody of Irish ancestry who loathes the British state and desperately wants to be Irish in cultural terms could not simply have moved back there.
Cymro

Now, now William, lets not make this a stupid "oh if he hates Britain so much why doesn't he fcuk off back to Ireland" etc. He's entitled to see himself as what ever he wants to - be that Scottish, Irish, both, a loony or (if he's lucky) Welsh Wink, as Rinty has highlighted though he seems to come to many of his oppositions by principles of some form of 'blanket' "it's British and therefore must be bad" stance.

Personally I agree that the behaviour of elements of the British armed forces through out history have been and are still disgusting in cases and I will not in any way congratulate or celebrate these, but I also appreciate that November 11th should be above politics and that is why I buy a poppy, not to celebrate conquest or qar but to appreciate that people have died through being forced to fight through conscription, through choice based on a wide range of principles or through lies. During minutes silence I choose to remember in my mind the more 'poiitive' (for want of a better word) aspects of why people have gone to war in the past and in the present.
William_Cleland

You are putting words in my mouth again and building a strawman argument which is very much your MO on here. For what it is worth I have tended to work outside Scotland during my adult life as I am not too keen on living in the UK for a variety of reasons. Find it quite sad really that someone would stay in a country they obviously loathe when they could very easily do something about it. Understandable in the 70s and 80s when the Republic was still a basketcase economically but not now. Maybe all this extreme Republicanism stuff is simply a way of dealing with deeper issues he has related to not being able to do something worthwhile and positive with his life? Rather than ponder that question you will no doubt continue to find ways to make me fit some negative stereotype because outmoded 19th century nationalist notions about the Celts give you some kind of visceral level feeling of unity with the guy.
Cymro

William what the f**k are you on about that I am putting words in your mouth and that this is my MO on here? You usually use the 'strawman' phrase for Rinty, now it's me for some reason. It's you that posted "If he hates Britain so much who exactly is forcing him to stay in it?" not me putting words into anyones mouth here!

And as four your bizzare claim of me having some sense of unity with him, I don't know how long you've been a member of this site William, but a quick search doesn't take long to see the vast majority of posts are of me disagreeing with him, I'm sure you'd accept that is far from Unity. However if you are suggesting that having an interest beyond my own expeciences is 19th century then I'd be inclined to place you in the same box labeled "hasn't a f***ing clue" as good old Parkhead.
William_Cleland

The words you placed in quotes above were "oh if he hates Britain so much why doesn't he fcuk off back to Ireland", which was not what I wrote and which conveys a different meaning from my actual words. That different meaning was the strawman argument you then proceeded to address. You could apologise for doing that but based on your MO on here you no doubt won't.
Cymro

What the hell are you on aout Willie? It means the same thing! Parkhead links himself to Irishness and Irish Republicanism, it's you that has asked the question basically if he hates being here in Britain so much why doesnt he go to Ireland where as you rightly claim there are more viable opportunities than in the 80's. What other possibe meaning could you have had for that sentence ?

My point was that going down that road is not necessary, if you had another meaning which is hidden somewhere then explain it. If I am wrong I will say " I was wrong" but the same wil then be said of you - your claim that I was somehow supporting Parkhead and felt some form of "because outmoded 19th century nationalist notions about the Celts give you some kind of visceral level feeling of unity with the guy" which ranks highly amongst the bullshit I've read from certain people on this site.
William_Cleland

On a philosophical level I have no problem whatsoever with any EU citizen living and working in Scotland including parkhead_rfb because I believe in freedom of movement across the European continent and the erasing of national boundaries as barriers that keep people fenced in. Pointing out that nobody is forcing him to stay if he hates the place conveys a different meaning from a suggestion that he should f**k off back to Ireland, which implies that I want to be able to pick and choose which EU, and even in this case UK, citizens have the right to live and work in Scotland. Your difficulty in grasping that either points to a lack of intelligence on your part or a strong desire to make me fit some stereotype. Over and out for this thread unless you have something intelligent to add at this point.
Cymro

William_Cleland wrote:
On a philosophical level I have no problem whatsoever with any EU citizen living and working in Scotland including parkhead_rfb because I believe in freedom of movement across the European continent and the erasing of national boundaries as barriers that keep people fenced in. Pointing out that nobody is forcing him to stay if he hates the place conveys a different meaning from a suggestion that he should f**k off back to Ireland, which implies that I want to be able to pick and choose which EU, and even in this case UK, citizens have the right to live and work in Scotland. Your difficulty in grasping that either points to a lack of intelligence on your part or a strong desire to make me fit some stereotype. Over and out for this thread unless you have something intelligent to add at this point.


Silly Billy, you're running around in circles here now and when you've realised your mistake out comes words along the line of "I've had enough of this" (it's called sulking/spitting out your dummy) this site is full of examples of you doing this which is precedded by your "strawman" comment. Bit of a creature of habit aren't you?

If you had another meaning to your post "If he hates Britain so much who exactly is forcing him to stay in it? With the Tiger Economy of the last two decades there really is no reason why somebody of Irish ancestry who loathes the British state and desperately wants to be Irish in cultural terms could not simply have moved back there" then make that clear. It's you who refers to leaving Britiain and it's you that then goes on about Ireland. No one put words into mouths here, at best it was you failing to say rightly what you meant, no bigger cospiracy than that. Regarding your stereotypie comment, you do a good job of fitting that yourself at times I'm afraid, in the past I have stated that you are too happy to make excuses for the secterian behaviour of some Rangers fans and in that respect you and Parkhead are two sides to the same coin, so I don't need to suggest anymore than that when it comes to that little gem.-
agentmancuso

Mr Cleland is quite right. The question "Why doesn't he go and live in Ireland?" can be asked in two different ways. Nine times out of ten it will be asked rhetorically, and so can be dismissed as idiot bigotry, but it can also be framed as a legitimate quest for knowledge.

Isn't it more than a little curious that people who claim great affection for a particular foreign country show such little interest in the real day-to-day life of the place?

I'd suggest that such strident adulation for a mythical ancestral homeland is a sign of retarded emotional development.
parkhead_rfb

Rinty wrote:
Quote:
why should i not be allowed to sing about james connolly, bobby sands, the easter rising etc yet be forced to take part in a minutes applause for the brits?


You didnt need to applaud and the November events are specifically for those who died in war.  You are not contributing to the current soldiers with injuries unless you buy a poppy, which I assume you dont.  You can chose to take part in a national recognised day for reflection on those killed in war or not.

The issue of singing at CP is a different debate.  The poppy day thing was NOT asking you to sing a song celebrating a military victory or the death of the opposition.  It is usually a minutes silence for relection, with no rules on how you refelect or what you reflect on.  You and I both know that the applause was because people like you would boo and sing over the top of the minutes silence for those who died in wars.

Personally I reflect on the idea of war, imperialist or otherwise, and how it is, mainly, of no use to the working class, no matter what army is taking part.

But I wouldnt want to see peoples grandads going without help because they fought against the fascists in WW2 or some young kid not get help for his dad who lost a leg because of Tony Blair's lies.  Your campaign focusses on the wrong people.

A young James Connolly witnessed attrocities by soldiers when in the army and came out to be a leading socialist thinker and leader.  You would prevent the same process these days by attacking young soldiers as black n tans.

Those who served in WW1 were more likely to come out of it like Connolly or Kirkwood than join the Tans.


you will find there was actually no booing at all. protestors held up placards with images of various british wars with the slogan "britains dirty wars: no story of glory" we then left the stadium on the ten minute mark as planned.

those who wanted to observe the applause were allowed to do so and the same would have been done for a minutes silence.

can anyone though a answer the issue as to why it is ok for football grounds to host a minutes applause, silence whatever for the political means of rememberance day (and whatever way you look at it that symbol that was on the shirts that day IS political) yet i cant sing irish republican songs?

which is it have we to keep politics out of football or are we only allowed those politics which the media and government deem we should have?

how is it the song goes again rinty.....let the people sing?
Rinty

I dont think that Celtic banning certain songs is related in any way to the SPL and other national institutions having those days whether it is war dead, dead footballers, dead royalty or whatever.  It is not comparable and an antirely different subject.

If there had been a silence people would have booed through it.

I think that the protest is pointless and adds nothing to the debate about the current govt politicising rememberance sunday.

In fact your protest is detrimental to the rest of us whio make the political arguments as mow it is seen as being tied up in the old firm pettiness.  Because of that some people wont want to listen.
Cymro

parkhead_rfb wrote:
Rinty wrote:
Quote:
why should i not be allowed to sing about james connolly, bobby sands, the easter rising etc yet be forced to take part in a minutes applause for the brits?


You didnt need to applaud and the November events are specifically for those who died in war.  You are not contributing to the current soldiers with injuries unless you buy a poppy, which I assume you dont.  You can chose to take part in a national recognised day for reflection on those killed in war or not.

The issue of singing at CP is a different debate.  The poppy day thing was NOT asking you to sing a song celebrating a military victory or the death of the opposition.  It is usually a minutes silence for relection, with no rules on how you refelect or what you reflect on.  You and I both know that the applause was because people like you would boo and sing over the top of the minutes silence for those who died in wars.

Personally I reflect on the idea of war, imperialist or otherwise, and how it is, mainly, of no use to the working class, no matter what army is taking part.

But I wouldnt want to see peoples grandads going without help because they fought against the fascists in WW2 or some young kid not get help for his dad who lost a leg because of Tony Blair's lies.  Your campaign focusses on the wrong people.

A young James Connolly witnessed attrocities by soldiers when in the army and came out to be a leading socialist thinker and leader.  You would prevent the same process these days by attacking young soldiers as black n tans.

Those who served in WW1 were more likely to come out of it like Connolly or Kirkwood than join the Tans.


you will find there was actually no booing at all. protestors held up placards with images of various british wars with the slogan "britains dirty wars: no story of glory" we then left the stadium on the ten minute mark as planned.

those who wanted to observe the applause were allowed to do so and the same would have been done for a minutes silence.

can anyone though a answer the issue as to why it is ok for football grounds to host a minutes applause, silence whatever for the political means of rememberance day (and whatever way you look at it that symbol that was on the shirts that day IS political) yet i cant sing irish republican songs?

which is it have we to keep politics out of football or are we only allowed those politics which the media and government deem we should have?

how is it the song goes again rinty.....let the people sing?


Parkhead, they are two very different things. Like it or not but your sing songs are just the same as songs celebrating Unionism, as I mentioned to William earlier - 2 sides of the same coin. However, while many will politicise Rememberence Day (remember the talk of making 11/11 a British Day), many do not and use it as an opportunity to honour or remember those killed in wars, be they in the line of duty, which obviously included Irish in the First and Second World Wars who where conscripted or joined for political reasons as much as anything else - defeating fascism,  or innocent vicitms of war.

There is a guy I know from my local, he's Irish as are most of his family yet his father served in the Second World War within the British Army as he was a strong Socialist and wanted to participate in the defeat of Fascism. I would have thought given your claims that you are a socialist that you would accept that, or is your sense of socialism weaker than your hatred of anything possible to do with British? Seems more fascist to me that one I'm afraid, certainly not Socialist.
parkhead_rfb

Cymro wrote:
parkhead_rfb wrote:
Rinty wrote:
Quote:
why should i not be allowed to sing about james connolly, bobby sands, the easter rising etc yet be forced to take part in a minutes applause for the brits?


You didnt need to applaud and the November events are specifically for those who died in war.  You are not contributing to the current soldiers with injuries unless you buy a poppy, which I assume you dont.  You can chose to take part in a national recognised day for reflection on those killed in war or not.

The issue of singing at CP is a different debate.  The poppy day thing was NOT asking you to sing a song celebrating a military victory or the death of the opposition.  It is usually a minutes silence for relection, with no rules on how you refelect or what you reflect on.  You and I both know that the applause was because people like you would boo and sing over the top of the minutes silence for those who died in wars.

Personally I reflect on the idea of war, imperialist or otherwise, and how it is, mainly, of no use to the working class, no matter what army is taking part.

But I wouldnt want to see peoples grandads going without help because they fought against the fascists in WW2 or some young kid not get help for his dad who lost a leg because of Tony Blair's lies.  Your campaign focusses on the wrong people.

A young James Connolly witnessed attrocities by soldiers when in the army and came out to be a leading socialist thinker and leader.  You would prevent the same process these days by attacking young soldiers as black n tans.

Those who served in WW1 were more likely to come out of it like Connolly or Kirkwood than join the Tans.


you will find there was actually no booing at all. protestors held up placards with images of various british wars with the slogan "britains dirty wars: no story of glory" we then left the stadium on the ten minute mark as planned.

those who wanted to observe the applause were allowed to do so and the same would have been done for a minutes silence.

can anyone though a answer the issue as to why it is ok for football grounds to host a minutes applause, silence whatever for the political means of rememberance day (and whatever way you look at it that symbol that was on the shirts that day IS political) yet i cant sing irish republican songs?

which is it have we to keep politics out of football or are we only allowed those politics which the media and government deem we should have?

how is it the song goes again rinty.....let the people sing?


Parkhead, they are two very different things. Like it or not but your sing songs are just the same as songs celebrating Unionism, as I mentioned to William earlier - 2 sides of the same coin. However, while many will politicise Rememberence Day (remember the talk of making 11/11 a British Day), many do not and use it as an opportunity to honour or remember those killed in wars, be they in the line of duty, which obviously included Irish in the First and Second World Wars who where conscripted or joined for political reasons as much as anything else - defeating fascism,  or innocent vicitms of war.

There is a guy I know from my local, he's Irish as are most of his family yet his father served in the Second World War within the British Army as he was a strong Socialist and wanted to participate in the defeat of Fascism. I would have thought given your claims that you are a socialist that you would accept that, or is your sense of socialism weaker than your hatred of anything possible to do with British? Seems more fascist to me that one I'm afraid, certainly not Socialist.


again this tired argument.

the money from poppys is far more likely now to be going to "our brave boys" in iraq, the falklands etc etc than ww2 veterans and certainly very, very few www1 veterans.

I will give you a very good question though in relation to you questioning me being a socialist.

the spanish civil war seen many young men go abroad to fight and die in a direct fight against fascism.  how many of those were ever helped by the earl haig fund?

now dont say no doubt many went on to fight in ww2 i mean how many would have been eligible for help for that conflict?
Rinty

Quote:
the money from poppys is far more likely now to be going to "our brave boys" in iraq, the falklands etc etc than ww2 veterans and certainly very, very few www1 veterans.


Of course it is.  The point about WW! is that it is this that launched the poppy idea and is still the war that causes most people to regret avoidable mass loss of life.  No-one is claiming that the money is to help WW1 veterans.

Quote:
the spanish civil war seen many young men go abroad to fight and die in a direct fight against fascism.  how many of those were ever helped by the earl haig fund?


Some of them, the ones who then went on to fight in WW2 against fascism and were injured then.  But the spanish civil war was not a war that the british army were inviolved in and the fund is to help serving or ex british service personnel.  There are lots of other funds for other things.
parkhead_rfb

which is my point exactly the poppy is only for the british army so it is not for all the things listed in this thread.

had celtic had a minutes applause for those kiled in ALL wars with no inclusion of the poppy then fine.  what we got though was an applause combined with british army poppies on the shirts.

so my question still stands have we to keep politics out of football or not?  why should i be thrown out for republican songs but its ok for poppies to be on the shirts?

its ironic in the extreme to ban republican songs but say its ok to have poppies on the basis that ww2 was against fascism, you couldnt make that argument up!
Rinty

"its ironic in the extreme to ban republican songs but say its ok to have poppies on the basis that ww2 was against fascism, you couldnt make that argument up!"

You just did!  You made that argument up!  N-one is sat-ying that the poppy was about anything else and no-one is saying it is about fighting facism.  The minutes silence is to contemplte those who died in wars, the poppy is to raise monet for medical support for victims.

You lot have decied to make this argument into a  narrow tribal one about singing republican songs at aa football ground.

By doing this it is now more difficult to make the political arguments wihtout it being framed in a huns/tims context.
parkhead_rfb

Rinty wrote:
"its ironic in the extreme to ban republican songs but say its ok to have poppies on the basis that ww2 was against fascism, you couldnt make that argument up!"

You just did!  You made that argument up!  N-one is sat-ying that the poppy was about anything else and no-one is saying it is about fighting facism.  The minutes silence is to contemplte those who died in wars, the poppy is to raise monet for medical support for victims.

You lot have decied to make this argument into a  narrow tribal one about singing republican songs at aa football ground.

By doing this it is now more difficult to make the political arguments wihtout it being framed in a huns/tims context.


no the poppy is not for victims of war it is for british soldiers injured or killed in war therefore it is a political symbol.  the british poppy does not help support those injured or killed by british soldiers (who i have far, far more sympathy for) or other world wide conflicts.

so i ask again and no one seems to be able to answer this, why is one political symbol ok but others such as the starry plough are not?
Rinty

Quote:
no the poppy is not for victims of war it is for british soldiers injured or killed in war therefore it is a political symbol.  the british poppy does not help support those injured or killed by british soldiers (who i have far, far more sympathy for) or other world wide conflicts.


Yes, I know that YOU see it as a political symbol, and that others use it politically.  You and I know both know what it is for and what most people see it as, I dont see any point in you repreating your position instead of explaining it.

Quote:
so i ask again and no one seems to be able to answer this, why is one political symbol ok but others such as the starry plough are not?


Actually, that is the first time I have seen this question or I would have answered it.  I am in favour of banning symbols, personally I would ban a swasika from all places apart from museums and movies Smile

But what you are talking about is two things really, one is the symbols that a corporate business like Celtic allows when judging what is best for its business.  Like many businesses this is usually based on what is acceptable to their customers.  The second is symbols allowed by national insitiutions and your clubs level of obligation to that institution.

In both of those cases I dont see what you gain from the protest.  It was the SPL that decided on the poppies, unless we know whether this was decided by a committee that has powers to implement these things without consultation, celtic being obliged as members to accept.  Or, what celtic said at any meeting that this may have been discussed at, or how they voted if their was a vote.  Then you dont know whether you are aiming your objections at and dont say.

It is clear that, to you, this was really a protest about singing republican songs and displaying certain symbols that you say are not allowed.

My problem as someone who is an actual campaigner against imperialism, is that any level-headed arguments you might have about the political use of the poppy symbol or the use of the money raised, are now lost, in scottish media, in the tirbalism of your smaller and pettier debate about you being able to sing a song.

You are already free to sing those sings in most other places, most of the time. Your right to use your full repertoire for a couple hours on 20 or so occassions per year, is more important to you than the political arguments that you try to associate with your actions.

I argued for bans of the sash and other songs at Cumnock games.  My argument was simply that I am not saying ban the song or that no-one should sing it.  Its just that they shouldnt sing it during the small percentage of the weeks hours that they could be seen to be representing the club.  Even the most hardened didnt have musch of an argument.

I think it is right that a place like celtic park should be able to set rules of what is approriate behaviour in their stadium.  Perhaps the Celtic you wish that you support is not the same club I am thinking about.  The one I am thinking about display posionous drinks and greedy bankers on their shirts and played a fund raising game for the JNF.
parkhead_rfb

funnily enough the green brigade have been active in protesting against john reid and other issues with celtic.  personally i dont buy any nike merchandise now but thats a seperate issue.

the fact is i object to the british army poppy and do not want to have anything to do with any applause for it or otherwise, why then should i be forced to do so at a celtic match?

some of those who walked out have had family brutalised and even killed by these same forces the poppy is used to help, why should they be forced to endure that at a celtic match?  there are plenty of other services on rememberance day for that.

and as for being free to sing republican songs elsewhere i dont quite think you realise the reality of that one as you would be very likely to find yourself in court (with charges no doubt later dropped) for doing so in many places.
Cymro

parkhead_rfb wrote:
funnily enough the green brigade have been active in protesting against john reid and other issues with celtic.  personally i dont buy any nike merchandise now but thats a seperate issue.

the fact is i object to the british army poppy and do not want to have anything to do with any applause for it or otherwise, why then should i be forced to do so at a celtic match?

some of those who walked out have had family brutalised and even killed by these same forces the poppy is used to help, why should they be forced to endure that at a celtic match?  there are plenty of other services on rememberance day for that.

and as for being free to sing republican songs elsewhere i dont quite think you realise the reality of that one as you would be very likely to find yourself in court (with charges no doubt later dropped) for doing so in many places.


You're not being forced though, you choose to go to watch Celtic. No one makes you. However a decision is made to commemorate Rememberence Day but Celtic FC and inevitably supported by most fans is forced to change because of the actions of the small number of you who can't show that same respect. If anyones being forced to do something here because of the behaviour of others it's those who wanted to show a dignified response to the dead.
William_Cleland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Stokes



http://www.brazenhead.co.uk/CSC.htm
Rinty

you b****rd William, i was keeping that for my sucker punch Smile  I was hoping that Parkie would answer my point about Celtic playing a fundraising game for the Jewish National Fund first.
parkhead_rfb

Cymro wrote:
parkhead_rfb wrote:
funnily enough the green brigade have been active in protesting against john reid and other issues with celtic.  personally i dont buy any nike merchandise now but thats a seperate issue.

the fact is i object to the british army poppy and do not want to have anything to do with any applause for it or otherwise, why then should i be forced to do so at a celtic match?

some of those who walked out have had family brutalised and even killed by these same forces the poppy is used to help, why should they be forced to endure that at a celtic match?  there are plenty of other services on rememberance day for that.

and as for being free to sing republican songs elsewhere i dont quite think you realise the reality of that one as you would be very likely to find yourself in court (with charges no doubt later dropped) for doing so in many places.


You're not being forced though, you choose to go to watch Celtic. No one makes you. However a decision is made to commemorate Rememberence Day but Celtic FC and inevitably supported by most fans is forced to change because of the actions of the small number of you who can't show that same respect. If anyones being forced to do something here because of the behaviour of others it's those who wanted to show a dignified response to the dead.


why couldnt those who wanted to remember killed brits go to one of the many rememberances services specifically for that purpose?

no one seems to be able to answer why i am not allowed to sing republican songs but should be forced to have an official applause for british imperialism.

is there a big bureau of acceptable political beliefs somewhere that i dont know about?
Cymro

Quote:
why couldnt those who wanted to remember killed brits go to one of the many rememberances services specifically for that purpose?


But the minutes silence at footbal games where specific events for that purpose, if it where only Celtic who did some form of event you'd have a point, but this was a SFA/SPL wide initiative across every football game that weekend. It would have been wrong if Celtic FC had seen themselves as a special case and didn't need to behave like every other club in Scottish football. It was essentially you and the small group of like minded people that hijacked this event, not the other way round. If opposing Rememberence Sunday is so important to you there would have been nothing at all wrong in you organising your own event elsewhere, after all Celtic Park is private property, not owned by the fans and as a business Celtic FC can organise what events they feel are most appropriate within the limits of the law.

Quote:
And again, it unfortunatly says a lot about the continued simplistic way that you are determined to look at this event as a "Killed Brit" celebration, it's already been said that many use this event as an opportunity to remember a lot more people than just Brits who died.

no one seems to be able to answer why i am not allowed to sing republican songs but should be forced to have an official applause for british imperialism.


Again it's nothing to do with British Imperialism unless you want it to be - which is essentially you making excuses. And regarding your other point, there is a world of difference between the two things you mention. On a simple level - Celtic FC own Celtic Park therefore they are entitled to say to anyone who attends the stadium not to do certain things and to do certain other things. On a wider level I'd put you wanting to sing Republican Songs in a football match in the same box of 'unwelcome behaviour' as the array of Loyalist songs sang by Rangers fans. On the other hand a minutes silence is nothing but a sign of respect for the wide range of people who died for many reasons during wars, which if you want to can be an opportunity to think of the innocents killed in the Irish Troubles by both sides.


no one seems to be able to answer why i am not allowed to sing republican songs but should be forced to have an official applause for british imperialism.

is there a big bureau of acceptable political beliefs somewhere that i dont know about?
parkhead_rfb

i dont see why its an issue at all that everyone else in scotland did it.   why was there one at all at any ground?  scottish football is very keen on telling us to keep politics out of football so again why is the political poppy acceptable.

the british poppy funds british servicemen and their families ONLY, the earl haig fund is named after one of the biggest imperialist murdering b***ards ever and the fund mostly in the present is used to assist mercenaries who have fought in britains illegal and immoral wars.

that IS a political symbol.

I went to see celtic and was forced to take part in a minutes applause for murderers.  i then used my right to free speech to make a point that i was very against that applause.

i am not trying to stop anyone remembering as many dead brits as they choose but they can do it at one of the many cenotaphs around the country if they are that interested in doing it.
agentmancuso

parkhead_rfb wrote:
i am not trying to stop anyone remembering as many dead brits as they choose


Many of those 'brits' were Irishmen.
William_Cleland

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7749793.stm
parkhead_rfb

agentmancuso wrote:
parkhead_rfb wrote:
i am not trying to stop anyone remembering as many dead brits as they choose


Many of those 'brits' were Irishmen.


how many irish men does the current poppy help?  none its for BRITISH soldiers.  no one else just british soldiers.  not the victims of war, not those from other nations killed in war it is solely for dead and injured brits.

if celtic had the symbol of a cancer charity on their shirts and a minutes applause for those killed by cancer- no problem, effects all people and non political.

like wise if it was aids etc etc but the british poppy is a political symbol and is very restricted in who it will help.

the fact that many irishmen have been silly enough to fight for the brits does not change that one bit.
Cymro

No, the poppy apeal is to help British soliders not necessarily Brits. The Poppy became a symbol as a result of the First World War, which included many Irish given Ireland was a part of the Uk at the time and they where conscripted into the army, many later went on to take part in Irish politics on the side you now support as Rinty stated a while ago, many Irish also chose to fight fascism in the Second World War by joining the British Army due to the Irish Free State being neutral, now as a socialist how can you oppose that? Since then you have the Gurkhas, they aren't Brits but for reasons of tradition for many Nepalese people fight within the British Army. These aren't 'Brits', these are people from many nations that for all sorts of reasons choose to join the British Army.

It was the actions of a small lot of Celtic fans that hijacked this event. It was up to Celtic FC as owners of Celtic Park if they wanted a minutes silence. It was no secret that this was join to be happening that weekend. You basically ignored this in order to make what was seemingly an illthought political jesture.
agentmancuso

parkhead_rfb wrote:
how many irish men does the current poppy help?  none its for BRITISH soldiers.  

Did you read the article that Mr Cleland posted?
Quote:

The British military is experiencing a large rise in recruits from the Irish Republic, figures obtained by BBC Radio 4's PM programme have shown.
They reveal a four-fold increase in military personnel from the Irish Republic during the past three years.
Between 2005 and 2006, just 3% of recruits entering the military through its recruitment centres in Northern Ireland came from the Republic.
The figure so far this year is 14%, and officers believe it will rise further.


And of course, surely you consider all the recruits who join at Northern Irish recruitment centres to be Irish anyway?

Quote:
not those from other nations killed in war it is solely for dead and injured brits.

Don't injured people deserve sympathy and medical treatment whatever their nationality?

Quote:
the fact that many irishmen have been silly enough to fight for the brits does not change that one bit.

They're not 'fighting for the brits'. Stop living in a cartoon world of goodies and baddies. Boys join up because they are bored, unemployed and restless. And it's a reasonable argument that when they get hurt, they deserve assistance, however dubious the military action in which they are involved. Personally, I'm uneasy about lending anything that could be construed as support to military action, so I don't buy a poppy. But I respect others' right to do so, as should you.
Red Justice

As a true and genuine Republican Socialist I am going to say my bit about the poppy and the importance to reject it. Firstly the poppy is a British emblem. Celtic FC is has significant support amongst the Scots-Irish community. Celtic fans display proubly symbols of Ireland. The poppy by contrast is displayed by leading figures in both political and media sections of British life. The poppy is alien to what  Celtic FC represents which is about sport not politics. The poppy is political and the emphasis is in helping not just ex-services and dependants but also those serving in today's illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Legion's website informs us of the people in action every day of the year and encourages messages to be sent to "Our Heroes" - that is to the forces in the front-line in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As for the horrors of the First World War they are well documented. Thousands of Irish men killed serving the British Army were barely cold in their graves when the British attempted to conscript a similar batch of Irish men to be sent out and  slaughtered in Britain's interests.

Many Irish rightly refused conscription and flocked to the ranks of Volunteers rejecting Britain and all she stood for in Ireland. For Scots-Irish or Irish to wear a poppy serves to belittle the number of Irish dead in WW1 and consider the appalling history of the British army in Ireland.

As a Scot with some Irish family myself I am offended by the poppy that I see as a  British emblem that represents the British political interests in war today and in the past.  And as a Republican Socialist I reject all British institutions that will never serve the good of the Scottish or Irish in our countries.

Celtic FC and fans support a soccer team with strong ties to the Irish diaspora and should reject The British poppy at all times. It has political interests behind it and the blood of the Irish and peoples of foreign wars all over it in the past as well as today in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Cymro

Red Justice, the poppy is as British as you want it to be and that is also assuming that anything 'British' is instantly bad. Now, I am happy to support an end to the Union but I'm not therefore going to think 'oh everything possibly linked to British is therefore bad', even something linked to the armed forces. Using that logic fighting Nazism by the British Army was a bad thing. Now you claim (somewhat arrogantly) to be a "true and genuine Republican and Socialist"? While many chose to join the International Brigades in fighting Franco in Spain many chose to fight the evils of Fascism from within the ranks of the British Army for all sorts of reasons - believe it or not but they mostly nothing to do with Ireland!

For most people who've been within the British Army as some time or other Ireland or Imperialism where the last things on their mind, especially when you get out of the small cliques within Western Scotland and Northern Ireland that want to celebrate both sides of the Irish troubles.  

Regarding the idea of Heroes within Iraq and Afghanistan, while I oppose the war in Iraq (I don't in Afghanistan) as long as soldiers stick to the rules defined within the Geneva Convention and within Human Rights I do not feel it's right to blame the soldiers for the decisions of politicans in going to war in Iraq. By the sheer nature of joining the Army you have to be willing to go and fight at the order of the cowards in Whitehall. It's these people you should blame, not those who as members of the armed forces have to go to war. While I wouldn't join the Army it's not correct to see them all as bad people.  As Rinty previously mentioned, some previous highflying members of the Republican movement in Ireland spent time fighting in the trenches for the British Army. Even now post conscription people opt to join the armed forces for all sorts of reasons, with Ireland or defending Imperialism a factor for only a small number of bigots.
agentmancuso

Red Justice wrote:
As a true and genuine Republican Socialist

A true believer. The Remnant of Israel. Hallelujah.

Quote:
Firstly the poppy is a British emblem. Celtic FC is has significant support amongst the Scots-Irish community. Celtic fans display proubly symbols of Ireland.

Many Celtic fans regard themselves as British. Some British soldiers are Celtic fans. Some lifelong Celtic fans are of recent Irish descent and vote SNP and know all the words to the Wolfe Tones and serve in the British army. Like my brother, for instance. Where does he fit into your fuckwit tribalism?
Aventinian

Red Justice wrote:
And as a Republican Socialist I reject all British institutions that will never serve the good of the Scottish or Irish in our countries.


Presumably you mean as a nationalist.
Cymro

Even by your standards of trying to shoehorn everything under an "All nats are bad" banner, that is pure desperation. How about you discuss the issue as opposed to going down the name calling route eh?
Red Justice

Aventinian wrote:
Red Justice wrote:
And as a Republican Socialist I reject all British institutions that will never serve the good of the Scottish or Irish in our countries.


Presumably you mean as a nationalist.


I am not a nationalist but rather a republican minded socialist which makes me a Republican Socialist. Indeed little of what I stand for relates to Scottish nationalism which is too 'civic' or constitutional for me where I prefer to believe in revolutionary struggle to achieve objectives where democracy is lacking. I do support independence but very much in the context of a socialist republic model.

On the issue of the British army those who join and to fight in foreign wars are conscious of what they are doing no matter what the excuses are.

My point is the poppy is a British emblem with political associations attached to it regarding wars and the establishment.

Celtic FC is a soccer team and should not allow itself or fans to be associated with imperialist rememberance or the British poppy worn by all members of the British establishment. The rememberance or poppy represents support for the British army and whatever dirty war they are presently engaged in. It is not only about WW1 or WW2.
agentmancuso

Red Justice wrote:
Celtic FC is a soccer team and should not allow itself or fans to be associated with imperialist rememberance


Don't you mean should not allow itself to be associated with political opinions of any sort. Shocked
Red Justice

Then there should be no attempt to have a 1 minute silence at a match or wearing of poppies on shirts which is political. If you are going to remember then wear white poppies and remember victims of all wars not just the fallen of the Brit army.
agentmancuso

Red Justice wrote:
Then there should be no attempt to have a 1 minute silence at a match or wearing of poppies on shirts which is political.


I agree.
parkhead_rfb

Red Justice wrote:
Aventinian wrote:
Red Justice wrote:
And as a Republican Socialist I reject all British institutions that will never serve the good of the Scottish or Irish in our countries.


Presumably you mean as a nationalist.


I am not a nationalist but rather a republican minded socialist which makes me a Republican Socialist. Indeed little of what I stand for relates to Scottish nationalism which is too 'civic' or constitutional for me where I prefer to believe in revolutionary struggle to achieve objectives where democracy is lacking. I do support independence but very much in the context of a socialist republic model.

On the issue of the British army those who join and to fight in foreign wars are conscious of what they are doing no matter what the excuses are.

My point is the poppy is a British emblem with political associations attached to it regarding wars and the establishment.

Celtic FC is a soccer team and should not allow itself or fans to be associated with imperialist rememberance or the British poppy worn by all members of the British establishment. The rememberance or poppy represents support for the British army and whatever dirty war they are presently engaged in. It is not only about WW1 or WW2.


agreed.

the first and second world war point is a convenient excuse for what the poppy is really used for.

anyone who joins the british army these days and is unaware of its imperialist murderous history is either too stupid to be given a gun or deserves everything they get from the natives of whatever country they happen to be occupying.
parkhead_rfb

well, well, well.  i think the following article from todays herad sums up pretty well the double standards on play here as a huns player wont be allowed on the park if he marks the situation in palestine!

sorry bougherra only stuff for our brave mercenary killing boys is allowed:


http://www.theherald.co.uk/sport/...y_if_he_persists_with_protest.php

Bougherra won’t play if he persists with protestMARTIN GREIG January 17 2009

PROTEST VOTE: Madjid Bougherra has been warned he will not be allowed to play today if he wears anything deemed to be political.
Madjid Bougherra will not be allowed to enter the field of play for Rangers against Falkirk this afternoon if he carries out his intention to wear a black armband in protest at the "barbaric" treatment of Palestine by Israel.

The defender is planning a political protest over the situation in the Middle East when Rangers welcome Falkirk to Ibrox today, but in doing so he would contravene FIFA rules and not be allowed to play.

"Anything worn on a kit that infers a personal, political or religious slogan is not allowed," confirmed an SFA spokesman.

"The referee will be looking out for anything and if Bougherra wears an armband then he will not be allowed to enter the field of play."

advertisement
Bougherra, a devout Muslim, has spoken out against the treatment of Palestine by Israel and declared his intention to protest. "As a Muslim, I am deeply touched by the barbarity that has been suffered by our Palestinian brothers and sisters from Israel," he said.

"These killings must stop because there could be massacres and even genocide. The images that come to us from Gaza upset any sensitive and fair human. I hope we will soon find a lasting solution to enable the Palestinian people to live like everyone else.

"I am now thinking about action in the next match.

Personally, I do not want to expose myself to a sanction, but I will wear a black armband at the next championship match as a sign of mourning and protest."

Freddy Kanoute, the Sevilla striker, was fined for revealing a T-shirt with a message of support for Palestine after scoring against Deportivo La Coruna last week.

Bougherra was impressed with the former Spurs striker's actions. "I have great respect for Kanoute. What he did was an honour from all Muslim footballers and I support him with all my strength."
parkhead_rfb

can i just also add fair play to the guy hun or not.
Cymro

parkhead_rfb wrote:
Red Justice wrote:
Aventinian wrote:
Red Justice wrote:
And as a Republican Socialist I reject all British institutions that will never serve the good of the Scottish or Irish in our countries.


Presumably you mean as a nationalist.


I am not a nationalist but rather a republican minded socialist which makes me a Republican Socialist. Indeed little of what I stand for relates to Scottish nationalism which is too 'civic' or constitutional for me where I prefer to believe in revolutionary struggle to achieve objectives where democracy is lacking. I do support independence but very much in the context of a socialist republic model.

On the issue of the British army those who join and to fight in foreign wars are conscious of what they are doing no matter what the excuses are.

My point is the poppy is a British emblem with political associations attached to it regarding wars and the establishment.

Celtic FC is a soccer team and should not allow itself or fans to be associated with imperialist rememberance or the British poppy worn by all members of the British establishment. The rememberance or poppy represents support for the British army and whatever dirty war they are presently engaged in. It is not only about WW1 or WW2.


agreed.

the first and second world war point is a convenient excuse for what the poppy is really used for.

anyone who joins the british army these days and is unaware of its imperialist murderous history is either too stupid to be given a gun or deserves everything they get from the natives of whatever country they happen to be occupying.


Just like ignoring the First and Second World War is also a convenient  excuse for you to justify your own beliefs too.

Are you saying that they shouldn't have got involved in the couple of Balkan Conflicts and ignored the genocide then? What about the butchering in Sierra Leone? Ai, turning the other cheek is just what we should be doing. Who gives a s**t if minorities are getting killed eh Parkie? While the British Government does a lot of bad things as does it's army but to claim all they do is bad is stupid and would probably suggest that people who have such stupid closed mind should probably keep away from politics and as for claiming to be a socialist, it's like me claiming to be a tree.
parkhead_rfb

Cymro wrote:
parkhead_rfb wrote:
Red Justice wrote:
Aventinian wrote:
Red Justice wrote:
And as a Republican Socialist I reject all British institutions that will never serve the good of the Scottish or Irish in our countries.


Presumably you mean as a nationalist.


I am not a nationalist but rather a republican minded socialist which makes me a Republican Socialist. Indeed little of what I stand for relates to Scottish nationalism which is too 'civic' or constitutional for me where I prefer to believe in revolutionary struggle to achieve objectives where democracy is lacking. I do support independence but very much in the context of a socialist republic model.

On the issue of the British army those who join and to fight in foreign wars are conscious of what they are doing no matter what the excuses are.

My point is the poppy is a British emblem with political associations attached to it regarding wars and the establishment.

Celtic FC is a soccer team and should not allow itself or fans to be associated with imperialist rememberance or the British poppy worn by all members of the British establishment. The rememberance or poppy represents support for the British army and whatever dirty war they are presently engaged in. It is not only about WW1 or WW2.


agreed.

the first and second world war point is a convenient excuse for what the poppy is really used for.

anyone who joins the british army these days and is unaware of its imperialist murderous history is either too stupid to be given a gun or deserves everything they get from the natives of whatever country they happen to be occupying.


Just like ignoring the First and Second World War is also a convenient  excuse for you to justify your own beliefs too.

Are you saying that they shouldn't have got involved in the couple of Balkan Conflicts and ignored the genocide then? What about the butchering in Sierra Leone? Ai, turning the other cheek is just what we should be doing. Who gives a s**t if minorities are getting killed eh Parkie? While the British Government does a lot of bad things as does it's army but to claim all they do is bad is stupid and would probably suggest that people who have such stupid closed mind should probably keep away from politics and as for claiming to be a socialist, it's like me claiming to be a tree.


care to comment on the above? should he have been allowed to wear the arm band or not?
Cymro

While I admire him for wanting to make such a statement I don't know whether he should. On the one hand I agree with him wanting to do a small gesture supporting the Palestinians (I assume it is them he is supporting and not Hamas) however it is again different to displaying a Poppy, the only simmilarity being that it's a political statement. It is the display of the Poppy though that is the exception that proves the rule here - it's regarded by most people as something which is above politics, while not only in the SPL but also the EPL politics as a rule is kept out. The best example I can think of is when Steve McMananman and Robbie Fowler got into trouble for bareing t-shirts supporting sacked dockers during a Liverpool match in the 90's.
parkhead_rfb

Cymro wrote:
While I admire him for wanting to make such a statement I don't know whether he should. On the one hand I agree with him wanting to do a small gesture supporting the Palestinians (I assume it is them he is supporting and not Hamas) however it is again different to displaying a Poppy, the only simmilarity being that it's a political statement. It is the display of the Poppy though that is the exception that proves the rule here - it's regarded by most people as something which is above politics, while not only in the SPL but also the EPL politics as a rule is kept out. The best example I can think of is when Steve McMananman and Robbie Fowler got into trouble for bareing t-shirts supporting sacked dockers during a Liverpool match in the 90's.


see its seen by MOST PEOPLE as above politics because the mass media tells us this is so and folks like yourself continue the myth.  a symbol which funds only one side in any war is a political one and no amount of misty eyed tales of world war one veterans can change that.

what in effect has happened here is the authorities have decided that palestinian dead are not as worthy of rememberance as "our brave boys".

britains military campaigns should be something of deep shame they are not something to be celebrated no matter the excuse or the world war one imagery you want to hide the poppy behind.

funny though how if you look at which state and army was at the heart of creating israel as a state you come to.......drum rolll please......britain and its brave boys!
Cymro

Parkhead, you seem to be going out of your way to 'belittle' the importance of the First World War in the arguments about the Poppy. The reason for that as far as I can make out is because it actually places a huge spanner in your arguments - given that many Irish chose or where forced into the British Army, yet you choose to place them in the same 'Brit' category as every other undesireable you can think of. The same goes for the many Irish (and not British) who went on to join the British Army to fight fascism in the Second World War. These people don't suit your argument because they completely undermine the basis of what you are arguing for.

It's those who commit war crimes and those who send us to an illegal war that are at wrong here, not the large numbers of the general population who join the Army, not to kick some Irish Arse, not to expand Britains Imperial tallons.

Regarding Palestinian lives being worth less. Well in terms of general support, it's sad but true. They probably are. It's the same the world over. In Palestine do you think they shed a tear for someone killed in say Darfur? Or in Ireland do you think the people worry about deaths of people in say China? No. As people we are very self centred and tend to give 'our people' more attention than people we do not know their faces or homes. This certainly isn't a 'Brit' thing though. Indeed, you are as guilty of it in the fact the Irish struggle is your interest/passion from what you post on here. You claim to be a socialist with a wider interest but when it comes down to it it's your hatred of 'Brits' that forms the basis of your points. If you actually knew a little about the foundation of Palestine you'd know that while Britain had the mandate for the country after WW2 pre establishing Israel, given that she was on her arse after the war the establishment of Irael was more to do with Britains inability to deal with huge pressures from the Jewish population not only committing acts of terror in Palestine but it's lobby groups in the US and the rest of the world than some other conspiracy by the pesky Brits in Downling Street.

Rememberence events isn't a myth in terms of it's acceptance and being above politics. It's more to do with sentiment. People feel happy acknowledging the actions of those who went to war for all sorts of reasons as opposed to the reasons they may have gone to war. It's you that likes to label it a myth or other negative connotations because as with you liking to ignore the First and Second World Wars they can only undermine your arguments (or maybe what you are told to believe). On a basic level, Plaid Cymru hold firm pacifist beliefs and oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan yet they participate in events at the Cenotaph (as do the SNP) and at memorials across Wales (and Scotland). This is because while war is political, for most people the acts of rememberance are above politics.....until a small band of people hijack them from time to time.
parkhead_rfb

why does the first world throw a spanner in my works?  its probably the biggest example of why people shouldnt take part in britains imperial wars.  theres nothing heroic about falling for the brit propaganda and becoming cannon fodder.

dress it up whatever way you want but running into machine guns to bolster britains imperialist ego is just plain stupidity if your scottish, irish, welsh or wherever your from.

if you want to celebrate stupidity then on you go.

at least those involved in world war one though had the excuse that the media wasn as widespread but people nowadays really ought to know better.

the world would be a far better place and we wouldnt even need poppies if the brits just stayed at home.
Cymro

Quote:
why does the first world throw a spanner in my works?  its probably the biggest example of why people shouldnt take part in britains imperial wars.  theres nothing heroic about falling for the brit propaganda and becoming cannon fodder.


Because of the very important issue of conscription! It wasn't a matter of people deciding that they loved Imperialism many if not most joined the Army it was because of conscription. There was also the use of local people of importance to persuade people to go and join the Army. Especially in rural areas many farmers and labourers joined the Army under essentially orders from the landlords.

So to ignore this very important element of the First World War and it's place within the sentiment of what goes on during Rememberence Day events basically ignored a huge element for the sole reason that it does not fit into your shallow and narrow view of a British Soldier in History.

Quote:
dress it up whatever way you want but running into machine guns to bolster britains imperialist ego is just plain stupidity if your scottish, irish, welsh or wherever your from.


Then you clearly have very little actual grasp of your history Parkhead.

Quote:
if you want to celebrate stupidity then on you go.


Nah, that's clearly your job with your pipeband

Quote:
at least those involved in world war one though had the excuse that the media wasn as widespread but people nowadays really ought to know better.


Ah so here you are almost grasping that maybe, just maybe those who joined the First World War may have not made a decision based completely on Imperialism?

Quote:
the world would be a far better place and we wouldnt even need poppies if the brits just stayed at home.


So come on Mr Socalledsocialist. Should they have stayed on the White Cliffs of Dover when Hitley went about his day to day job with the people of Europe? Had the British State refused to do anything in 1939 and let him go about his genocide I can imagine the likes of you jumping up and down like a man posessed proclaiming that it was a disgrace that the Brits allowed this to happen. In that instance I'd agree with you.
parkhead_rfb

i think your taking an altogether wrong approach as to why britain really went to war against hitlers germany.  yes hitlers regime was inherently evil but had britains imperialist interests not been threatened by his attempts at expansion then its far more likely britain would never have become involved.

for example why did britain not interfere just a few years previous when a democratically elected government in spain was over run by a fascist regime?  both had equally as right wing ideologies.

I cant recall ever hearing or the british state supporting the international brigades.

i think you will also find that there was an not so insignifiant amount of anti semtitism within british politics at the time so to suggest britains involvement as wholly altruistic is nieve in the extreme.

as has been shown with zimbabwe and more recently palestine britain very rarely gets involved in anything without a selfish motive.  to deny this is to deny over 800 years of history.

funnily enough had britain stayed at home in the first world war lets not forget hitler would never have even come to power.  but then britain helping to install evil dictators is hardly a new thing either is it.
agentmancuso

parkhead_rfb wrote:
for example why did britain not interfere just a few years previous when a democratically elected government in spain was over run by a fascist regime?  both had equally as right wing ideologies.

Not really. Franco's regime wasn't fascist in any strict sense of the term, just ultra-Conservative. It had more in common with the military dictatorships that plague South America than it had with Hitler's Germany, or even Mussolini's Italy.
Quote:

britain very rarely gets involved in anything without a selfish motive.  to deny this is to deny over 800 years of history.

Britain has only existed for half that time. No state ever gets involved in anything from purely altruistic reasons, not least because no state ever represents such a unity of opinion or purpose, no matter what it pretends.

Quote:
funnily enough had britain stayed at home in the first world war lets not forget hitler would never have even come to power.  

That's an odd one. British involvement in the Great War was altruistic to an extent difficult to comprehend nowadays - such naivete seems unimaginable.

Out here in the real world nationalities aren't divided into goodies and baddies.
parkhead_rfb

so britain wasnt a major party in the agreement at versailles then?

remembering those poor souls killed because of conscription by supporting a fund named after "the butcher of the somme".  yip you poppy wearers have a firm grasp of reality there.
agentmancuso

parkhead_rfb wrote:
so britain wasnt a major party in the agreement at versailles then?


As the Versailles treaty was signed 5 years after Britain entered the Great War, it's difficult to see what possible relevance it could have to the reasons why Britain became involved in the first place.

In any case, Britain had very little influence on the final outcome of Versailles, relative to its involvement in the actual war.

Quote:
remembering those poor souls killed because of conscription by supporting a fund named after "the butcher of the somme".  yip you poppy wearers have a firm grasp of reality there.

I'm not a poppy wearer. But I don't see why the name of the fund should be all that important. Surely it's worth remembering the many people who died in horrible - and completely avoidable - ways. Conscripts or not, most of them were inspired by nationalism of sort very similar to your own. (Except that they actually lived in the country they believed they were fighting for. Oh and they actually fought people who had weapons too, rather than just killing random civilians.)
Cymro

Quote:
i think your taking an altogether wrong approach as to why britain really went to war against hitlers germany.


No, I'm just taking a different one to you. You take an approach which justifies your republican beliefs i.e. that British have always and will always be in the wrong. I don't need to do that in order to justify my beliefs for an Independent Wales, an Independent Scotland or even an United Irish Republic.

Quote:
yes hitlers regime was inherently evil but had britains imperialist interests not been threatened by his attempts at expansion then its far more likely britain would never have become involved.

for example why did britain not interfere just a few years previous when a democratically elected government in spain was over run by a fascist regime?  both had equally as right wing ideologies.


It has been noted though that Hitler intially was a great admirer of Britians power an influence across the globe at the time. Initially he was interested in an agreement which would have allowed Britiain to keep it's foreign colonies while enabling Hitler to regard mainland Europe as his playground.

If it was down to Britiain defending her imperial status as you suggest she would have almost certainly picked a fight with Spain because unlike Germany, Spain did have an Empire or remnants of an Empire which where comprable to Britiains and which neighboured eachother in the Caribbean and South America.

Quote:
I cant recall ever hearing or the british state supporting the international brigades.


Certainly not then but while I'm sure the British state would have been glad to see war break out in Spain they would be unwilling to be drawn into it because of the threats that this could spread to colonies of both countries. There does seem to be greater appreciation now though towards the memories of those who went as part of the International Brigade. Certainly is the case down here where one in particular Twm Sbaen (Tom Jones from Rhosllannerchrugog near Wrexham) is a very well known and celebrated historical figure now.

Quote:
i think you will also find that there was an not so insignifiant amount of anti semtitism within british politics at the time so to suggest britains involvement as wholly altruistic is nieve in the extreme.

as has been shown with zimbabwe and more recently palestine britain very rarely gets involved in anything without a selfish motive.  to deny this is to deny over 800 years of history.


Show me a country which hasn't threatened or used wars for selfish gains and I'll show you spin. Because of the nature of politics and more importantly politicians states will go to war to protect their aims. But, had they not done this in the second world war, Jews would have been killed in higher numbers as would Communists, Gypsies, and Gays. But hey, at least you could satisfy yourself knowing that this was better than Britiain going to war eh?

Quote:
funnily enough had britain stayed at home in the first world war lets not forget hitler would never have even come to power.  but then britain helping to install evil dictators is hardly a new thing either is it.


No, Britains mistake along with the French, Russians and laterly the US in the First World War was that they stopped at the German border. Hitler came to power as a result of the resulting vaccum left in Germany which was able to feed on the sense of 'hard done by' which prevailed within German society at the time. This included antisemitism and imperialism aspirations. Because of the nature of international politics at the time, no attempt was made to rebuild Germany, they where left to their own destiny. That is where Britain had a responsibility, had Britian stayed at home in an essentially pointless war, Hitler or another person like him would have almost certainly come to power using the Jews and Bolsheviks as an excuse for some other event.

Regarding the treaty of Versailles, while it was essentially a failure, the principles of using it to kick Germany into submission was down to another key player in the war - France, who was basically s**t scared of it's neighbour. Britain would have been happy to see Germany loose it's overseas territories, that's about it.
parkhead_rfb

agentmancuso wrote:
parkhead_rfb wrote:
so britain wasnt a major party in the agreement at versailles then?


As the Versailles treaty was signed 5 years after Britain entered the Great War, it's difficult to see what possible relevance it could have to the reasons why Britain became involved in the first place.

In any case, Britain had very little influence on the final outcome of Versailles, relative to its involvement in the actual war.

Quote:
remembering those poor souls killed because of conscription by supporting a fund named after "the butcher of the somme".  yip you poppy wearers have a firm grasp of reality there.

I'm not a poppy wearer. But I don't see why the name of the fund should be all that important. Surely it's worth remembering the many people who died in horrible - and completely avoidable - ways. Conscripts or not, most of them were inspired by nationalism of sort very similar to your own. (Except that they actually lived in the country they believed they were fighting for. Oh and they actually fought people who had weapons too, rather than just killing random civilians.)


the irish republican army regularly engaged british soldiers in combat.

facts are facts though and an organisation such as the IRA couldnt realistically take on the full british state in a traditional conflict sense.

still though its not like the british army ever killed 14 civillians in derry or shot children in west belfast eh.
Cymro

Parkie, why do you like to make out that not liking the IRA is = to liking things like Bloody Sunday? Bit childish isn't it?
agentmancuso

parkhead_rfb wrote:
the irish republican army regularly engaged british soldiers in combat.

Not since the disastrous cross-border raids in the late 'forties.

Quote:
still though its not like the british army ever killed 14 civillians in derry .


Of course they did. And the subsequent whitewash was a disgrace. But the situation would never had arisen had it not been for the belligerent stupidity of people like McGuinness, then head honcho of the local thugs, now Minister of the Crown.
Cymro

agentmancuso wrote:
parkhead_rfb wrote:
the irish republican army regularly engaged british soldiers in combat.

Not since the disastrous cross-border raids in the late 'forties.

Quote:
still though its not like the british army ever killed 14 civillians in derry .


Of course they did. And the subsequent whitewash was a disgrace. But the situation would never had arisen had it not been for the belligerent stupidity of people like McGuinness, then head honcho of the local thugs, now Minister of the Crown.


Well I don't think you can honestly claim that to be THE truth, unless you are in receipt of more information than any of the rest of us. I don't think we'll ever know the truth, even with this enquiry. Once one person would have fired a shot from what ever side because of the apparent chaos of the situation it was inevitable that there would be a blood bath.
agentmancuso

I'm not sure which bit you are arguing with?
Cymro

That Bloody Sunday would not have happened if it wasn't for McGuinness or the IRA.
agentmancuso

I don't think it's that much of a mystery. When the British Army arrived on the streets of Derry & Belfast, it was with the specific intention of protecting Catholics from forced evictions by Orange fanatics. The troops were cheered and welcomed by crowds in Catholic areas. For the minority of nationalist extremists this was a problem: it didn't fit in with their Marxist fantasy world of Colonial Oppression. The Provisional IRA deliberately targeted British soldiers who, with the inevitable logic of guerrilla warfare, resorted by pressuring the civilian nationalist population within which the Provisionals were hiding. Hence ever increasing anxiety, mutual suspicion and paranoia. With that background, and the added element of trigger happy paratroopers, the question of whether McGuiness himself ever fired the first shot is largely irrelevant: the whole situation is a powder keg waiting for the first spark.
Cymro

agentmancuso wrote:
I don't think it's that much of a mystery. When the British Army arrived on the streets of Derry & Belfast, it was with the specific intention of protecting Catholics from forced evictions by Orange fanatics. The troops were cheered and welcomed by crowds in Catholic areas. For the minority of nationalist extremists this was a problem: it didn't fit in with their Marxist fantasy world of Colonial Oppression. The Provisional IRA deliberately targeted British soldiers who, with the inevitable logic of guerrilla warfare, resorted by pressuring the civilian nationalist population within which the Provisionals were hiding. Hence ever increasing anxiety, mutual suspicion and paranoia. With that background, and the added element of trigger happy paratroopers, the question of whether McGuiness himself ever fired the first shot is largely irrelevant: the whole situation is a powder keg waiting for the first spark.


My personal feeling is that to blame the IRA and McGuinness is just over simplifying things. I'm not arguing that if the IRA never existed that as many Catholics would have died because I don't believe that, as I've said before their actions made a 'bad word' out of being a Republican. However I believe that the blame for Bloody Sunday lies squarly at the door of the British Army, accidents happen (whether the initial shot was a mistake or not I'm not going to argue) but the subsequent massacre and cover up means that the only place blame can be placed is squarely at that of the British State and those who where involved from within the Armed and Security Forces.
agentmancuso

Cymro wrote:
the blame for Bloody Sunday lies squarly at the door of the British Army, accidents happen (whether the initial shot was a mistake or not I'm not going to argue) but the subsequent massacre and cover up means that the only place blame can be placed is squarely at that of the British State and those who where involved from within the Armed and Security Forces.


On the day, yes, absolutely. But these things don't happen out of the blue, and as usual, the people who end up suffering most are the very community the terrorists claim to be 'protecting'.
Cymro

agentmancuso wrote:
Cymro wrote:
the blame for Bloody Sunday lies squarly at the door of the British Army, accidents happen (whether the initial shot was a mistake or not I'm not going to argue) but the subsequent massacre and cover up means that the only place blame can be placed is squarely at that of the British State and those who where involved from within the Armed and Security Forces.


On the day, yes, absolutely. But these things don't happen out of the blue, and as usual, the people who end up suffering most are the very community the terrorists claim to be 'protecting'.


I couldn't agree more with that, my personal feeling though is that often people when debating or discussing the events around Bloody Sunday tend to look towards the IRA as a means of justifying the shooting of 13 people.
agentmancuso

Cymro wrote:
often people when debating or discussing the events around Bloody Sunday tend to look towards the IRA as a means of justifying the shooting of 13 people.


Yes, I know, sadly that's true. One side is just as bad as the other; killing civilians is not acceptable, and anyone who who shelters behind the lie of 'necessity' for any political reason has blood on their hands.

Terror begets terror.

Sad
parkhead_rfb

agentmancuso wrote:
I don't think it's that much of a mystery. When the British Army arrived on the streets of Derry & Belfast, it was with the specific intention of protecting Catholics from forced evictions by Orange fanatics. The troops were cheered and welcomed by crowds in Catholic areas. For the minority of nationalist extremists this was a problem: it didn't fit in with their Marxist fantasy world of Colonial Oppression. The Provisional IRA deliberately targeted British soldiers who, with the inevitable logic of guerrilla warfare, resorted by pressuring the civilian nationalist population within which the Provisionals were hiding. Hence ever increasing anxiety, mutual suspicion and paranoia. With that background, and the added element of trigger happy paratroopers, the question of whether McGuiness himself ever fired the first shot is largely irrelevant: the whole situation is a powder keg waiting for the first spark.


if the intention of british troops was to protect catholics can you perhaps explain why british soldiers were handed a ficticious book which was supposed to have been produced by the ira?

if you actually knew what you were talking about as well you would also know that following the battle of the bog side etc the ira were in no way armed for any type of conflict.  the battle of the bogside and following events were due to the mass population taking against the loyalist police forces.

yes many welcomed the brits initially but many republicans also knew that history had taught them better about what soon happens when british forces come to ireland.  they happened to be correct.

after arriving to "protect the catholic polulation" the army then sought about assisting to enforce internment, collusion with loyalist paramilitaries, murder of civillians and outright brutality against nationalists.  As always the british army will enforce the intentions of their imperialist government.

as four your statement the ira hasnt engaged the british in active combat since the 40's again that is incorrect.  several volunteers have died on the streets of ireland while engaged against brits.  volunteer billy reid who my band previously was named after being one such volunteer who was killed when his gun jammed whilst engaging brits.
Punnaburrafurramurra

Parkhead_rfb said "the world would be a far better place and we wouldnt even need poppies if the brits just stayed at home."


I've no doubt Scotland would be a better place if people like you had stayed at home.

And people like these.....

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/s.../homepage/news/article2311845.ece

One Celtic - one alien culture

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Football Page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Our Scotland Hit Counter Scottish Top Site - Topsites Our Scotland Forums Critical Acclaim ~ Politically Progressive Top Sites View Site Stats Scottish Politics