get talking then!!!
Anna Bryant
Hey
It is up to us to make this news group interesting. So i shall do my
wee bit now.
Let's start up a discussion then.
What do people think is the way forward for the Northern Ireland peace
process? Do you think Mo Mowlam will come up with a suitable peace
settlement by Thursday? (I personally don't). And do you think there
will ever be PEACE in Ulster?
This is all something I feel very strongly about. I will be moving to
NI in 6 months time, adn love the place so much despite all the
troubles.
Please let me know your opinions of the way forward, or if there is one?
Anna
--
Anna Bryant
'What is this thing called love?'
M.Smith
dan
Anna Bryant <an...@bryant1.xxxxxxxxx.co.uk> wrote in article
<tLYtbGAV...@bryant1.demon.co.uk>...
> Hey
> It is up to us to make this news group interesting. So i shall do my
> wee bit now.
>
> Let's start up a discussion then.
>
> What do people think is the way forward for the Northern Ireland peace
> process? Do you think Mo Mowlam will come up with a suitable peace
> settlement by Thursday? (I personally don't). And do you think there
> will ever be PEACE in Ulster?
There will not be a peace settlement.
Isai 59:8 (DBY) the way of peace they know not, and there is no judgment in
their goings; they have made their paths crooked: whoso goeth therein
knoweth not peace.
Jere 6:14 (DBY) And they have healed the breach of the daughter of my
people lightly, saying, Peace, peace! when there is no peace.
> This is all something I feel very strongly about. I will be moving to
> NI in 6 months time, adn love the place so much despite all the
> troubles.
Actualy despite the "troubles" NI has less crime than any other part of the
UK
>
> Please let me know your opinions of the way forward, or if there is one?
There is a way to peace.
Psal 119:165 (DBY) Great peace have they that love thy law, and nothing
doth stumble them.
Anna Bryant
I have been thinking about what it means to have peace in Northern
Ireland, and have realised that it is not as simple as that.
We have to ask ourselves first...
WHAT IS PEACE?
Do we mean no more fighting, no more tension, and no more lives lost?
Or do we mean when both sides are happy?
All the MPs are doing what they can, but this is to achieve political
peace. This doesn;t necessarily mean that everyone will be made happy.
It will probably take years for this, whatever they decide on. And even
then will people won't be completely happy. Will they have what they
are fighting for?
I personally think this is impossible. There is a major conflict of
interests. Like two sides of a coin. It will only be when the sides
realise they won;t get exactly what they want, and they agree to
compromise that there will be a proper peace settlement. But there is a
long way until people are ready for this. This is something they have
been fighting for years, something their families and ancestors too.
They will have to give up so much of themselves and who they are until
there is complete peace there.
And I don;t think they can do it alone. This is where they need God's
help. There is a long way, but we can all pray God will have mercy on
the land and help save it.
What do people think of my opinion?
Olaf Ruhl
Hallo Anna,
I think, You are absolutely right: people in Northern Ireland will have to
- and have started to - ralise that neither side can get the whole cake,
they have to share it. And they have realised they can't get peace by
means of war. They will have to come to terms with the fact that "the
grounds our fathers ploughed in, the soil it is the same - and the places
where we say our prayers have just got different names" as in the song
"There Were Roses": Whenever they turn to God for their interest they have
to remember that God is One.
I included the Northern Ireland parties in the intercessions in a service
in Essen (Germany) last Sunday, and I will do so again on Easter Monday in
Friedrichsthal, whatever the outcome of the talks tonight will be.
Olaf Ruhl
Dudweiler-Saar
-
** A glezele lekhayim es shat nit nemen haynt! **
Ally
What is peace? good question.
But I know that this is not the peace *I* wanted, this is a
democratic society and the majority of this country have been forced
into dealing with terrorists, what happened to the voteing system were
we could vote on the future of our country?
You want your own way in this world? well get a gun and kill people
for 29 years, then you will have two governments at your mercy.
Ally,
al...@zetnet.net
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/aonion/
Harold Walmsley
Peace is something which Ian Paisley is frightened of! That spawn of satan
who claims to represent Christians is indirectly responsible for more
murders in Northern Ireland than any other individual. I hope the cunt
burns forever in hell!!
Harold Walmsley
So are you saying that the this peace agreement came about because the
terrorists fought for it. I don't think so! The parties who represent these
organisations are a small minority and let's face it, they must be given
credit for their stand.
STEPHEN KJELLGREN
So you condone the murdering violence of the terrorists do you. How can you
lay the blame on a person who has not lifted a gun. So what you are saying
is, the likes of the IRA are children of God? Where are you coming from?
Ally
That is a wonderfull peacefull attitude, NOT.
On 11 Apr 1998 14:51:46 GMT, "Harold Walmsley"
<H.Wal...@btinternet.com> wrote:
Harold Walmsley
He might as well have pulled the trigger himself. Mr. Paisley has incited
young Protestants to violence ever since he started spouting his
political/religious crap in the early 70's. Of course I'm not calling the
IRA the children of God. I've worn HM Forces uniform in the past and am
proud to have done so. I don't think I would call people who would rejoice
in my or my colleagues death 'children of God'. I think I'm in a better
position that many, probably including yourself, to have an opinion on the
outcome of the talks. I was brought up in a Protestant evangelical family
and had religion shoved down my throat from an early age, and was taught
that Roman Catholics were not to be trusted and had a hatred for
Nationalists bred into me. I am now married to a Roman Catholic and am able
to make my own decisions, and can tell you one thing I am certain of is
that Mr. Paisley and his gang of religious zealots are doing satan's work
for him in N. Ireland if they reject the historic agreement reached on Good
Friday
STEPHEN KJELLGREN <ora...@gateway.net.au> wrote in article
<6gpecq$684$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
JH
>Peace is something which Ian Paisley is frightened of! That spawn of satan
>who claims to represent Christians is indirectly responsible for more
>murders in Northern Ireland than any other individual. I hope the c***
>(edited for decencys sake)
>burns forever in hell!!
>
>
I take it that you are a nationalist supporter, what did Ian Paisley
ever do to you in person that justifies what you said about him?? The
people who deserve to burn in hell are the terrorists who have held
this country to ransom for years.
Personally I think the majority of people in NI will vote to accept
the deal that has been struck, whether that is for better or worse
remains to be seen. But if it is for better as we all hope then at
least our children might get a chance to know what true peace is.
John (http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/duke/)
We can be heroes. Just for one day
Don Keogh
JH wrote in message <3530aecc...@news.zetnet.co.uk>...
I believe that this kind of short-term-ism will land
northern Ireland and possibly the whole island
into the same predicament as the Balkans within
2 or 3 years.
Michael
Brendan Heading
In article <3530aecc...@news.zetnet.co.uk>, JH
<the....@xzetnet.co.uk> writes
>I take it that you are a nationalist supporter, what did Ian Paisley
>ever do to you in person that justifies what you said about him?? The
>people who deserve to burn in hell are the terrorists who have held
>this country to ransom for years.
Harold's argument is actually fairly correct. Ian Paisley spent his time
whipping up loyalist anger, and every time it exploded he stepped
casually out of the way so as not to get involved in the flak.
--
Brendan Heading (brendan dot heading at cableol dot co dot uk)
===Please remove the spamguard to reply====
NB : I am a spokesman for *no* organisation or movement.
"Growth for it's own sake is the ideology of a cancer"
- Edward Abbey
Harold Walmsley
JH wrote:
> I take it that you are a nationalist supporter, what did Ian Paisley
> ever do to you in person that justifies what you said about him?? The
> people who deserve to burn in hell are the terrorists who have held
> this country to ransom for years.
Oh, so you assume just because I see Paisley for what he really is, then I
must be a Nationalist. Actually I support Mr. Trimble's very courageous
stand and am definately not a Nationalist. I am an ex-member of the
security forces and proud to have worn the Crown uniform for many years.
And anyway, I don't believe in hell!
John Fisher
In article <bX6e1MAjMLM1Ew$d...@cableol.co.YouKay>, Brendan Heading
<brendan...@cableol.co.You.Kay> writes
>>ever do to you in person that justifies what you said about him?? The
>>people who deserve to burn in hell are the terrorists who have held
>>this country to ransom for years.
>
>whipping up loyalist anger, and every time it exploded he stepped
>casually out of the way so as not to get involved in the flak.
I was interested to hear that when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
Friday he was booed by a crowd of supporters of the loyalist
paramilitaries, there to support their negotiators in the talks.
--
John Fisher jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk jo...@epcc.ed.ac.uk
Drummond is an independent site; its opinions are my own
Brendan Heading
In article <N4d2ICA4...@drummond.demon.co.uk>, John Fisher
<jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Harold's argument is actually fairly correct. Ian Paisley spent his time
>>whipping up loyalist anger, and every time it exploded he stepped
>>casually out of the way so as not to get involved in the flak.
>
>I was interested to hear that when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
>Friday he was booed by a crowd of supporters of the loyalist
>paramilitaries, there to support their negotiators in the talks.
Yes. Those people who were there when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
Thursday night were the people who, 30 years ago, listened to all of his
rants and believed them. As David Ervine put it in response : "I've been
there, I've seen it, I've done it, I bought the T-Shirt". A lot of the
loyalists who committed crimes after acting on Paisley's words have
today matured and taken a grasp of real politics. Hence the response to
Paisley by the PUP supporters on Thursday.
James Watt
The message <352dfd53...@news.zetnet.co.uk>
from al...@zetnet.net (Ally) contains these words:
I must agree with Ally. As a voter who believes/believed in the
democratic process this whole saga has left me staggered by the ease
in which the Gov. has ignored the wishes of the electorate. Where
else in the world would put up with it.
James Watt
The message <01bd655b$283f2c60$683763c3@preinstalledcom>
from "Harold Walmsley" <H.Wal...@btinternet.com> contains these words:
They should be given "Credit" I think not. What we must ask
ourselves is what forced them to negotiate, instead of murder to
attain their aims. The fact that three decades of murder and
genocide didn't work, and an increasingly disillusioned membership
forced their hands to consider an adjustment of strategy.
James Watt
The message <wFK0xAAg...@cableol.co.YouKay>
from Brendan Heading <brendan...@cableol.co.You.Kay> contains
these words:
It could also be said that these people who you call supporters of
the Loyalist delegates, were venting their anger on the DUP because
they ironically see them as too liberal. Paisley practiced
brinksmanship, and was undoubtedly a gifted orator but I do not
believe he is as good at leading as he is talking.
John is right when he said that Paisley stepped aside when times
were rough, this is what causes the friction between his party and
the other Loyalist groups. Many of the PUP/UDP supporters view
themselves as having made sacrifices for their belief (however
misguided) What happened at the news conference was a form of
resentment towards a man and a party who they would regard as whose
words have spoken louder than their actions.
lao...@rocketmail.com
In article <01bd6608$df0ec2e0$023b63c3@preinstalledcom>,
"Harold Walmsley" <H.Wal...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> He might as well have pulled the trigger himself. Mr. Paisley has incited
> young Protestants to violence ever since he started spouting his
> political/religious crap in the early 70's.
He's been doing it for a hell of a lot longer than that. He was beating the
drum in the 50's moaning about the awful crime that Catholic families were
living in traditionally Protestant area. Ona few occasions, he actually gave
these addresses to loyalist rabble. Of course, he accepted no responsibility
when these addresses were attacked. The Catholics in question had done no
wrong, except presume that they would be tolerated.
Laochra
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Brian E. Gleeson
From downunder, one gets the view that Paisley is more interested in sowing
discord than peace, yet uses the authority of Christian ministry which is
based on love of God and Neighbour. Is this not incongruous?
If he wants to be a combatant instead of a peacemaker, doesn't he deserve that
someone sticks a cracker up his rectum to help him come to his senses.
In all honesty why would a sane person want to follow the way of continued
agro when there is an opportunity for a peaceful coexistence
Brian
Brendan Heading wrote:
> In article <N4d2ICA4...@drummond.demon.co.uk>, John Fisher
> <jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> writes
> >>Harold's argument is actually fairly correct. Ian Paisley spent his time
> >>whipping up loyalist anger, and every time it exploded he stepped
> >>casually out of the way so as not to get involved in the flak.
> >
> >I was interested to hear that when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
> >Friday he was booed by a crowd of supporters of the loyalist
> >paramilitaries, there to support their negotiators in the talks.
>
> Yes. Those people who were there when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
> Thursday night were the people who, 30 years ago, listened to all of his
> rants and believed them. As David Ervine put it in response : "I've been
> there, I've seen it, I've done it, I bought the T-Shirt". A lot of the
> loyalists who committed crimes after acting on Paisley's words have
> today matured and taken a grasp of real politics. Hence the response to
> Paisley by the PUP supporters on Thursday.
>
> --
> Brendan Heading (brendan dot heading at cableol dot co dot uk)
> ===Please remove the spamguard to reply====
> NB : I am a spokesman for *no* organisation or movement.
> "Growth for it's own sake is the ideology of a cancer"
> - Edward Abbey
--
L
Big Mac
On Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:00:48 +0100, Brendan Heading
<brendan...@cableol.co.You.Kay> wrote:
>In article <N4d2ICA4...@drummond.demon.co.uk>, John Fisher
><jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>Harold's argument is actually fairly correct. Ian Paisley spent his time
>>>whipping up loyalist anger, and every time it exploded he stepped
>>>casually out of the way so as not to get involved in the flak.
>>
>>I was interested to hear that when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
>>Friday he was booed by a crowd of supporters of the loyalist
>>paramilitaries, there to support their negotiators in the talks.
>
>Yes. Those people who were there when Paisley turned up at Stormont on
>Thursday night were the people who, 30 years ago, listened to all of his
>rants and believed them. As David Ervine put it in response : "I've been
>there, I've seen it, I've done it, I bought the T-Shirt". A lot of the
>loyalists who committed crimes after acting on Paisley's words have
>today matured and taken a grasp of real politics. Hence the response to
>Paisley by the PUP supporters on Thursday.
Was that press conference a model for the future? I'm no fan of any
brand of loyalism but it looked to me like someone tried to get their
political views over to the media, and was shouted down by those who
felt that morality and "the majority" were on their side. And this
shouting down has been commonly taken as a good thing, a deserved
counterblast to an incorrigible bigot. Well, bigot he may be, but I
don't see how anybody's democratic rights, whatever their views, are
well served by this.
Big Mac
On Thu, 16 Apr 1998 14:23:15 +0000, 6...@hack.powernet[dot]co[dot]uk
(Simon Gardner) wrote:
>In article <3535e810...@news.xara.com>,
>macdo...@ferengi.co.uk (Big Mac) wrote:
>
>> Was that press conference a model for the future? I'm no fan of any
>> brand of loyalism but it looked to me like someone tried to get their
>> political views over to the media, and was shouted down by those who
>> felt that morality and "the majority" were on their side. And this
>> shouting down has been commonly taken as a good thing, a deserved
>> counterblast to an incorrigible bigot. Well, bigot he may be, but I
>> don't see how anybody's democratic rights, whatever their views, are
>> well served by this.
>
>Oh I dunno. It's mistakenly traeing Paisley and such as honorary decent
>human beings (by virtue of being elected) that has got us into this mess.
>The more opprobrium, loathing and derision heaped on his head, the better.
But surely only so much shit will stay heaped on his admittedly broad
and flat head? The rest will "trickle down" in great quantities onto
the people who have repeatedly voted him the most popular politician
in the North. When they shouted down Paisley, they also shouted down
the people who elected him. Is the disenfranchisement of those people
the price for bringing "peace" to Ireland? Bearing in mind that the
latest phase of the conflict erupted over the rights of people who
were denied a say in the running of the state, doesn't this bode very
ill for the future?
T Bruce Tober
In article <3535E3FA...@vicnet.net.au>, Brian E. Gleeson
<bgle...@vicnet.net.au> writes
>From downunder, one gets the view that Paisley is more interested in sowing
>discord than peace, yet uses the authority of Christian ministry which is
>based on love of God and Neighbour. Is this not incongruous?
So what's new. That's always been his style. He's one of the church's
biggest hypocrites.
>If he wants to be a combatant instead of a peacemaker, doesn't he deserve that
>someone sticks a cracker up his rectum to help him come to his senses.
That wouldn't help achieve the goal you mention, but would be a
worthwhile sendoff to an old fart who's always been nothing but a loud
mouthed bigot.
>In all honesty why would a sane person want to follow the way of continued
>agro when there is an opportunity for a peaceful coexistence
You are naive to the "mentality" of the macho warrier.
tbt -- Sign all messages with non-escrowed keys, don't give in to government
tyranny. Commentary at http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/crecon/Escrow.htm
--
|Bruce Tober, octob...@reporters.net, Birmingham, England +44-121-242-3832|
| Freelance PhotoJournalist - IT, Business, The Arts and lots more |
| Website - http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/crecon/ |
| PGP Key Details follow: |
| RSA key ID 0x94F48255 Fingerprint 0907 EBCD 1B37 91F5 D15C 0D2E C617 2671 |
| DSS/DH key ID 0xB1445118 |
| DSS/DH key Fingerprint CBB5 8BF8 2CCC 9B86 41EB 1788 6930 78FB B144 5118 |
STEPHEN KJELLGREN
So people that post to this group have different opinions. People are
different and have different views about what Northern Ireland’s future
should be. Ian Paisley believes that the proposal that will be put to the
people in 6 weeks time will fail. Shall we wait till the people of Northern
Ireland decide their fete and not the rest of the world? A new concept
Democracy.
I’m surprised that so many in this group condemn Paisley. He is not a
representative of any paramilitary organisation or terrorist group. Gerry
Adams is the political representative of the Sinn Fein and people seem to be
congratulating him on the part he has taken in the so-called peace process.
I suggest to Paisley he join and represent a Protestant militant group and
he to, may be seen as a peacemaker. Then again he is not capable of stooping
to such a level.
Looking forward to the responses to this hahahaha
JM
>From downunder, one gets the view that Paisley is more interested in sowing
>discord than peace, yet uses the authority of Christian ministry which is
>based on love of God and Neighbour. Is this not incongruous?
>
>If he wants to be a combatant instead of a peacemaker, doesn't he deserve that
>someone sticks a cracker up his rectum to help him come to his senses.
>
>In all honesty why would a sane person want to follow the way of continued
>agro when there is an opportunity for a peaceful coexistence
That possibility doesn't exist. The IRA are still here, with all their
semtex and guns, balaclavad IRA men gave speeches at Easter 1916
celebrations stating that the struggle still goes on.
As long as there is this threat of a forced UI we'll never live in
peace.
***************************************************
Jerry
***************************************************
I think, I can't remember if, I think, I think, according to the Brits anyway.
I can't for the life of me remember, but I can't remember which.
I doubt if it, and maybe it was, I honestly can't remember.
Sorry the date escapes me, Obviously it would, I think it was after
***************************************************
Greg Carlin making a factual post 25/02/98
***************************************************
Brendan Heading
>discord than peace, yet uses the authority of Christian ministry which is
>based on love of God and Neighbour. Is this not incongruous?
You are right, and yes, it *is* incongruous!
George Griffin
}From downunder, one gets the view that Paisley is more interested in sowing
}discord than peace, yet uses the authority of Christian ministry which is
}based on love of God and Neighbour. Is this not incongruous?
}
Paisley is more of an old testament preacher, fire and brimstone etc.
George
John Harrington
George Griffin wrote in message <35365c52...@news.btinternet.com>...
Saw him on TV last night saying "no is a positive....and yes is a
negative....". Its been a while since I read '1984' but I almost expected
him to continue "...and hate is love, and war is peace"
John
>
>George
>
>
John Fisher
In article <3535e810...@news.xara.com>, Big Mac
<macdo...@ferengi.co.uk> writes
>Was that press conference a model for the future? I'm no fan of any
>brand of loyalism but it looked to me like someone tried to get their
>political views over to the media, and was shouted down by those who
>felt that morality and "the majority" were on their side. And this
>shouting down has been commonly taken as a good thing, a deserved
>counterblast to an incorrigible bigot. Well, bigot he may be, but I
>don't see how anybody's democratic rights, whatever their views, are
>well served by this.
>
I suppose you're right, but you have to remember that Dr Paisley has all
kinds of ways open to him to get his message across. He only has to
pick up the phone and newsteams from all round the world come running,
and during the referendum campaign, since he will be the main person on
the NO side, he will have to be interviewed constantly. No, I don't
think we're going to lack an opportunity to hear Dr Paisley's views.
Someone asked how it was possible for a man of the cloth to resfuse to
go along with the new agreement. I think that Dr Paisley is one of the
people for whom this is genuinely a religious issue. He feels that the
Roman Catholic church is working for Satan, and that those who follow
its precepts are doomed to eternity in Hell. The Irish Republic is a
Catholic entity, and it wishes to destroy Protestant Ulster, because it
is doing the Devil's work. Protestant Ulster stands because of God's
will and the heroic deeds of the past, and it is a bright beacon of holy
light in a world infested with sin and the power of Satan.
If you really and truly believe that, it's going to be pretty difficult
to make peace, isn't it? Make peace with the Devil? It would quite
literally be better to die fighting.
Big Mac
I guess that appears to be vaguely plausible for all of two seconds,
until you realise that Paisley is detemined to maintain the Union with
one of the most irreligious countries on the planet. He drones on
about the Papist conspiracy against Christianity. He hardly seems to
have noticed that the monarch he swears allegiance to is the head of a
church that doesn't even believe in God anymore in any meaningful
sense.
Harry Merrick
Big Mac wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:07:27 +0100, John Fisher
> <jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In article <3535e810...@news.xara.com>, Big Mac
> ><macdo...@ferengi.co.uk> writes
> >
>
......................."SHNIP".......................................
>
>
> I guess that appears to be vaguely plausible for all of two seconds,
> until you realise that Paisley is detemined to maintain the Union with
> one of the most irreligious countries on the planet. He drones on
> about the Papist conspiracy against Christianity. He hardly seems to
> have noticed that the monarch he swears allegiance to is the head of a
> church that doesn't even believe in God anymore in any meaningful
> sense.
My goodness! Harsh words indeed! I can only just wish that the Anglican
Hierarchy in the UK could read this and respond!! Unfortunately, unlikely,
since it would appear that God does NOT support the Internet!!
--
Harry.
ICQ# 2546277.
--
"No Problem Can Stand The Assault Of Sustained Thinking."
Voltaire.
Robin Popplestone
> From downunder, one gets the view that Paisley is more interested in sowing
> discord than peace, yet uses the authority of Christian ministry which is
> based on love of God and Neighbour. Is this not incongruous?
Incongruous, but not unprecedented.
Robin
Fiona Hyland
> My goodness! Harsh words indeed! I can only just wish that the Anglican
> Hierarchy in the UK could read this and respond!! Unfortunately, unlikely,
> since it would appear that God does NOT support the Internet!!
Are you equating God with the Anglican Hierarchy in the UK?
Excess of hubris perhaps? :-)
all the best, Fiona
*********************************************
Fiona Hyland fc...@cornell.edu
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/fch2/
Big Mac
On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 10:42:04 -0400, fc...@cornell.edu (Fiona Hyland)
wrote:
>> My goodness! Harsh words indeed! I can only just wish that the Anglican
>> Hierarchy in the UK could read this and respond!! Unfortunately, unlikely,
>> since it would appear that God does NOT support the Internet!!
>
>Are you equating God with the Anglican Hierarchy in the UK?
>Excess of hubris perhaps? :-)
God has had his own way on Earth for far too long. Frankly, His views
have become to be seen as quite offensive to a great number of people.
He tried very hard to make the transition from a petty, vindictive,
and macho tribal deity in the Old Testament to a firm but caring and
forgiving Big Pal in the Sky in the New Testament. But like the old
patricians of the Conservative Party, it's apparent that the change
was only skin deep. It's as well that He's keeping His
pronouncements to Himself, unable as He is to fit into polite society
and observe the standards of behaviour that we expect in "Cool
Britannia".
J Fisher
Big Mac (macdo...@ferengi.co.uk) wrote:
: On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:07:27 +0100, John Fisher
: <jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:
: >If you really and truly believe that, it's going to be pretty difficult
: >to make peace, isn't it? Make peace with the Devil? It would quite
: >literally be better to die fighting.
: I guess that appears to be vaguely plausible for all of two seconds,
: until you realise that Paisley is detemined to maintain the Union with
: one of the most irreligious countries on the planet. He drones on
: about the Papist conspiracy against Christianity. He hardly seems to
: have noticed that the monarch he swears allegiance to is the head of a
: church that doesn't even believe in God anymore in any meaningful
: sense.
The point is that in Paisley's view, the Irish Republic is
simply a front for the Catholic Church. I'm sure he would
agree that the UK has strayed far from the godly straight
and narrow, but at least it's better than that. Moreover the
fact that the monarch is the head of the Church of England I
think he would regard as part of the problem, rather than
the solution.
This paranoia about the Catholic Church is very deep-
rooted. My father, who was a Northern Ireland man, was a
militant atheist and a member of the CP from 1933 to 1956.
He was, nonetheless, prone to go into meltdown about the
Catholic Church which he considered to be a deep-laid and
dangerous conspiracy to take over the world.
And he wasn't 100% wrong, let's remember.
--
--John
Brendan Heading
In article <EyJUKDAv...@drummond.demon.co.uk>, John Fisher
<jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> writes
>Someone asked how it was possible for a man of the cloth to resfuse to
>go along with the new agreement. I think that Dr Paisley is one of the
>people for whom this is genuinely a religious issue. He feels that the
>Roman Catholic church is working for Satan, and that those who follow
>its precepts are doomed to eternity in Hell. The Irish Republic is a
>Catholic entity, and it wishes to destroy Protestant Ulster, because it
>is doing the Devil's work. Protestant Ulster stands because of God's
>will and the heroic deeds of the past, and it is a bright beacon of holy
>light in a world infested with sin and the power of Satan.
>
>to make peace, isn't it? Make peace with the Devil? It would quite
>literally be better to die fighting.
I think your analysis of Paisley is spot on. And, indeed, his attitude
*is* that it would be better to die fighting.
Apparently recently the editor of the Belfast Telegraph said in an
interview that Paisley was "getting on a bit" and it was time he should
be bowing out of politics (or other words to that effect). Paisley, in a
statement in response, said that he may be old but at least he was
guaranteed Resurrection and Eternal Life, unlike the editor of the
Belfast Telegraph.
Frank
I have lived outside Ireland for 25 years. It's strange how the view
improves with distance. How clear everything gets with time. For years the
war of words in Northern Ireland were as narrow as the back streets of
Belfast, and now this Easter, finally we have HOPE, a very ingenious plan,
something I never though possible for Northern Ireland, a fair and workable
solution. Truly democratic.
But still we must endure the hollow echoes of hate and bitterness that ring
down those narrow streets, and all in the name of god. Who's god are we
talking about..? sure the RC have a lot to answer for but so do you Mr.
Paisley, so do you. You are indeed one of the evil men responsible for the
horror of the past 30 years.
Here's to the peace makers, may they be guided by the innocent smiles of
our children, and not by the evil tongues of the old and bitter.
Frank Cassidy
Harry Merrick <merr...@agencies.dnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<35373C5E...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
>
>
> Big Mac wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:07:27 +0100, John Fisher
> > <jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >In article <3535e810...@news.xara.com>, Big Mac
> > ><macdo...@ferengi.co.uk> writes
> > >
> >
>
> ......................."SHNIP".......................................
>
> >
> >
> > I guess that appears to be vaguely plausible for all of two seconds,
> > until you realise that Paisley is detemined to maintain the Union with
> > one of the most irreligious countries on the planet. He drones on
> > about the Papist conspiracy against Christianity. He hardly seems to
> > have noticed that the monarch he swears allegiance to is the head of a
> > church that doesn't even believe in God anymore in any meaningful
> > sense.
>
>
> My goodness! Harsh words indeed! I can only just wish that the Anglican
> Hierarchy in the UK could read this and respond!! Unfortunately,
unlikely,
> since it would appear that God does NOT support the Internet!!
J W B Greenwood
In article <ErKGns.270.0.sta...@dcs.ed.ac.uk>, J Fisher
<URL:mailto:jo...@epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> Big Mac (macdo...@ferengi.co.uk) wrote:
> : On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:07:27 +0100, John Fisher
> : <jo...@drummond.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> : >If you really and truly believe that, it's going to be pretty difficult
> : >to make peace, isn't it? Make peace with the Devil? It would quite
> : >literally be better to die fighting.
> : I guess that appears to be vaguely plausible for all of two seconds,
> : until you realise that Paisley is detemined to maintain the Union with
> : one of the most irreligious countries on the planet. He drones on
> : about the Papist conspiracy against Christianity. He hardly seems to
> : have noticed that the monarch he swears allegiance to is the head of a
> : church that doesn't even believe in God anymore in any meaningful
> : sense.
>
> simply a front for the Catholic Church. I'm sure he would
> agree that the UK has strayed far from the godly straight
> and narrow, but at least it's better than that. Moreover the
> fact that the monarch is the head of the Church of England I
> think he would regard as part of the problem, rather than
> the solution.
>
> This paranoia about the Catholic Church is very deep-
> rooted. My father, who was a Northern Ireland man, was a
> militant atheist and a member of the CP from 1933 to 1956.
> He was, nonetheless, prone to go into meltdown about the
> Catholic Church which he considered to be a deep-laid and
> dangerous conspiracy to take over the world.
>
> And he wasn't 100% wrong, let's remember.
>
The Catholic Church the only one with that ambition, there are plenty
more sects with the same one and this has been and continues to be the
cause of most of the world's conflicts. If they only involved the
members of these sects I wouldn't give a damn, however, the members
seem to be able to sit back in safety whilst the folk who are not
members bear the brunt of these conflicts.
--
Gerard Cunningham
Big Mac wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 10:42:04 -0400, fc...@cornell.edu (Fiona Hyland)
>wrote:
>>> My goodness! Harsh words indeed! I can only just wish that the Anglican
>>> Hierarchy in the UK could read this and respond!! Unfortunately, unlikely,
>>> since it would appear that God does NOT support the Internet!!
>>
>>Are you equating God with the Anglican Hierarchy in the UK?
>>Excess of hubris perhaps? :-)
>
>God has had his own way on Earth for far too long.
I had a word with God this morning. She's pretty pissed at your
assumption of male superiority.
"In order to find his equal, an Irishman is forced to talk to God"
-Stephen, Braveheart
Gerard Cunningham
John Hobson
STEPHEN KJELLGREN wrote in message <6h56du$s1q$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>I’m surprised that so many in this group condemn Paisley. He is not a
>representative of any paramilitary organisation or terrorist group.
That's his Pontius Pilate act. He encourages atrocities but then stands back
in horror when the Maze is full of Loyalist prisoners. They now sing 'The
Grand Old Duke of York' when he appears' And scare the living daylights out
of him when he's confronted by his own nemesis.
Cheers,
JohnH
JM
On Thu, 16 Apr 1998 14:23:15 +0000, 6...@hack.powernet[dot]co[dot]uk
>In article <3535e810...@news.xara.com>,
>macdo...@ferengi.co.uk (Big Mac) wrote:
>
>> Was that press conference a model for the future? I'm no fan of any
>> brand of loyalism but it looked to me like someone tried to get their
>> political views over to the media, and was shouted down by those who
>> felt that morality and "the majority" were on their side. And this
>> shouting down has been commonly taken as a good thing, a deserved
>> counterblast to an incorrigible bigot. Well, bigot he may be, but I
>> don't see how anybody's democratic rights, whatever their views, are
>> well served by this.
>
>Oh I dunno. It's mistakenly traeing Paisley and such as honorary decent
>human beings (by virtue of being elected) that has got us into this mess.
And such? Does that include Adams and McGuinness, known IRA men.