The BNP Policy on Northern Ireland
Neolithic
http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/02/bnp-policies/
"NORTHERN IRELAND - an end to sectarianism!
Britain has shamefully allowed the terrorists in N.I. to come close to
winning when the IRA could have been destroyed years ago."
Anyone who supports the BNP cannot, at the same time, be an Irish
Republican.
Neolithic
Falcon
"Neolithic" <neolith...@email.com> wrote in message
news:pgnm54h28b4l5js6m...@4ax.com...
Or, for that matter, a believer in Irish independence. How ironic.
--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
------------------------------
Neolithic
wrote:
>
>
>"Neolithic" <neolith...@email.com> wrote in message
>news:pgnm54h28b4l5js6m...@4ax.com...
>> From:
>>
>> http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/02/bnp-policies/
>>
>> "NORTHERN IRELAND - an end to sectarianism!
>>
>> Britain has shamefully allowed the terrorists in N.I. to come close to
>> winning when the IRA could have been destroyed years ago."
>>
>> Anyone who supports the BNP cannot, at the same time, be an Irish
>> Republican.
>
>Or, for that matter, a believer in Irish independence.
Precisely my point.
>How ironic.
Indeed it is.
Neolithic
Ex_OWM
"Falcon" <fal...@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:6c1e0aF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
> "Neolithic" <neolith...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:pgnm54h28b4l5js6m...@4ax.com...
>> From:
>>
>> http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/02/bnp-policies/
>>
>> "NORTHERN IRELAND - an end to sectarianism!
>>
>> Britain has shamefully allowed the terrorists in N.I. to come close to
>> winning when the IRA could have been destroyed years ago."
>>
>> Anyone who supports the BNP cannot, at the same time, be an Irish
>> Republican.
>
> Or, for that matter, a believer in Irish independence. How ironic.
Shag all that, they want to send all the immigrants home and spend more
money on guns, those two things alone more than make up for any other minor
failings they may have.
allan connochie
"Ex_OWM" <allthesp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6c3u2bF...@mid.individual.net...
Quite! Their website at the moment says they believe in 'voluntary
repatriation' but only a few years ago it featured an article by their
present leader saying that he'd want to evict them all at a point of a gun
but he realised that the US would interfere.
Allan
freeireland
> "Ex_OWM" <allthespamyoul...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6c3u2bF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Falcon" <fal...@invalid.net> wrote in message
> >news:6c1e0aF...@mid.individual.net...
>
> >>news:pgnm54h28b4l5js6m...@4ax.com...
> >>> From:
>
> >>>http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/02/bnp-policies/
>
> >>> "NORTHERN IRELAND - an end to sectarianism!
>
> >>> Britain has shamefully allowed the terrorists in N.I. to come close to
> >>> winning when the IRA could have been destroyed years ago."
>
> >>> Anyone who supports the BNP cannot, at the same time, be an Irish
> >>> Republican.
>
> >> Or, for that matter, a believer in Irish independence. How ironic.
>
> > Shag all that, they want to send all the immigrants home and spend more
> > money on guns, those two things alone more than make up for any other
> > minor failings they may have.
>
> Quite! Their website at the moment says they believe in 'voluntary
> repatriation' but only a few years ago it featured an article by their
> present leader saying that he'd want to evict them all at a point of a gun
> but he realised that the US would interfere.
>
> Allan
There policy also refers to the Republic of Ireland.
"In the long run, we wish to end the conflict in Ireland by welcoming
Eire as well as Ulster as equal partners in a federation of the
nations of the British Isles."
800 years of rebellions and still the BNP don't get it, talk about not
taking a hint.
Sophistry Made Simple
"freeireland" <kmce...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5f4a4e00-8b34-4804...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> 800 years of rebellions and still the BNP don't get it, talk about not
> taking a hint.
Or 800 years of loyalty with the odd scuffle from time to time by tiny
minorities or disgruntled little lords, with notable high points being the
valiant Irish defending of two English kings against republican and Dutch
usurpers. I wonder did it ever rankle that they got so little credit for
dispatching so many survivors of the Spanish Armada too?
allan connochie
"freeireland" <kmce...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5f4a4e00-8b34-4804...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Quite so. The original poster in the first thread seemed to suggest that it
was a respectable party which attracted a few of the wrong kind, when in
fact it is exactly the opposite. It is a party which has attempted to
broaden its appeal by putting on a more respectable appearance in order to
win votes from ordinary people many of whom don't look too closely at what
they are voting for whoever it is. I told the other poster the policy over
Ireland several weeks ago but it doesn't seem to bother him.
Allan
William A. T. Clark
"allan connochie" <connc...@noemail.com> wrote:
Yes, but you have to remember that the "original poster" was Ray
"Wingnut" Cantillon, resident fascist and looney of s.c.i.
Consider the source.
WIlliam Clark
allan connochie
"William A. T. Clark" <clar...@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
news:clark.31-F8C411...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> In article <7Xm7k.18247$aE7....@newsfe16.ams2>,
> "allan connochie" <connc...@noemail.com> wrote:
>
>> "freeireland" <kmce...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:5f4a4e00-8b34-4804...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> > On 21 Jun, 19:39, "allan connochie" <conncoh...@noemail.com> wrote:
>> >> "Ex_OWM" <allthespamyoul...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > "In the long run, we wish to end the conflict in Ireland by welcoming
>> > Eire as well as Ulster as equal partners in a federation of the
>> > nations of the British Isles."
>> >
>> > 800 years of rebellions and still the BNP don't get it, talk about not
>> > taking a hint.
>>
>> Quite so. The original poster in the first thread seemed to suggest that
>> it
>> was a respectable party which attracted a few of the wrong kind, when in
>> fact it is exactly the opposite. It is a party which has attempted to
>> broaden its appeal by putting on a more respectable appearance in order
>> to
>> win votes from ordinary people many of whom don't look too closely at
>> what
>> they are voting for whoever it is. I told the other poster the policy
>> over
>> Ireland several weeks ago but it doesn't seem to bother him.
>>
>>
>> Allan
>
> Yes, but you have to remember that the "original poster" was Ray
> "Wingnut" Cantillon, resident fascist and looney of s.c.i.
>
> Consider the source.
Point taken !
Allan
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
you should maybe try and read some Irish History. The only people
loyal where those planted here. The elections in the early part of the
20th century where a clear indication of what Irish citizens wanted.
Every generation of Ireland has know rebellion. As for the spanish
armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
Sophistry Made Simple
On 22 Jun, 04:12, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5f4a4e00-8b34-4804...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > 800 years of rebellions and still the BNP don't get it, talk about not
> > taking a hint.
>
> Or 800 years of loyalty with the odd scuffle from time to time by tiny
> minorities or disgruntled little lords, with notable high points being the
> valiant Irish defending of two English kings against republican and Dutch
> usurpers. I wonder did it ever rankle that they got so little credit for
> dispatching so many survivors of the Spanish Armada too?
>you should maybe try and read some Irish History.
The typical reply of those that think they have, but really haven't.
>The only people loyal where those planted here.
To pick examples at random, the loyalists that defended Irish towns against
Cromwell weren't fighting for Charles nor the restoration of James at the
Boyne? The Jacobites were all planters? Even the 'rebellion' of 1641 that
proceeded it all was averred to be in support of the king, as was their
subsequent expeditions to England and Scotland.
'Those planted here', on the other hand, went on to invent Irish nationalism
as we now know it.
> The elections in the early part of the 20th century where a clear
> indication of what Irish citizens wanted.
750 years later - 1906, 1910, etc., and exactly what was that then?
>Every generation of Ireland has know rebellion.
A common conceit - Cabbage Patch tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination by
the self-anointed, these are hardly the stuff of rebellion, especially
compared to the eternally compliant majority who took no part. Why is it
that the Irish were always betrayed by spies and traitors within their
ranks?
> As for the spanish
armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots and
English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
Sophistry Made Simple
"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
news:adl16498mkqqtal63...@4ax.com...
> Scríobh "Sophistry Made Simple" <spam...@yourplace.com>:
>>> As for the spanish
>>armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
>>dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>>
>>Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots
>>and
>>English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
>
> Never mind that, what about the Spanish stereotype? A substantial
> number of the Spanish students I see here each summer are blondes.
> And from Cú Chullain to Aodh Rua, there are plenty of pre-Armada
> descriptions of flame and yellow-haired Irish.
It's the assertion that the 'Irish red hair suddenly became dark' after one
stormy week in 1588 that I would like to hear more about.
Red hair can be found all over Europe, it's common even in the Atlas
Mountains of North Africa, perhaps due to the Vandals and Goths that
eventually fetched up there. People move around, and are under no
obligation to live up to stereotypes - the Iberians that seem to have been
one source of Irish genes, the Vandals that gave their name to Andalucia, or
the Romans to Zaragoza are no doubt still represented in the Spanish gene
mix, perhaps 'darkened' by 6 or 7 hundred years of the Caliphate.
As for the blondes - the curtains may not always match the carpet.
mothed out
> Scríobh "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>:
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
> >news:adl16498mkqqtal63...@4ax.com...
>
> >>>> As for the spanish
> >>>armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
> >>>dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>
> >>>Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots
> >>>and
> >>>English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
>
> >> Never mind that, what about the Spanish stereotype? A substantial
> >> number of the Spanish students I see here each summer are blondes.
> >> And from Cú Chullain to Aodh Rua, there are plenty of pre-Armada
> >> descriptions of flame and yellow-haired Irish.
>
> >It's the assertion that the 'Irish red hair suddenly became dark' after one
> >stormy week in 1588 that I would like to hear more about.
>
>
OK, four responses is quite enough to be following on from one of
Freebie's statements of fact.
> >Red hair can be found all over Europe, it's common even in the Atlas
> >Mountains of North Africa, perhaps due to the Vandals and Goths that
> >eventually fetched up there. People move around, and are under no
> >obligation to live up to stereotypes - the Iberians that seem to have been
> >one source of Irish genes, the Vandals that gave their name to Andalucia, or
> >the Romans to Zaragoza are no doubt still represented in the Spanish gene
> >mix, perhaps 'darkened' by 6 or 7 hundred years of the Caliphate.
>
> >As for the blondes - the curtains may not always match the carpet.
>
> --
> 'Donegal: Up Here It's Different'
> © Féachadóir
Sophistry Made Simple
"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
> Scríobh "Sophistry Made Simple" <spam...@yourplace.com>:
>>
>>"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
>>news:adl16498mkqqtal63...@4ax.com...
>>> Scríobh "Sophistry Made Simple" <spam...@yourplace.com>:
>>
>>>>> As for the spanish
>>>>armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
>>>>dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>>>>
>>>>Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots
>>>>and
>>>>English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
>>>
>>> Never mind that, what about the Spanish stereotype? A substantial
>>> number of the Spanish students I see here each summer are blondes.
>>> And from Cú Chullain to Aodh Rua, there are plenty of pre-Armada
>>> descriptions of flame and yellow-haired Irish.
>>
>>It's the assertion that the 'Irish red hair suddenly became dark' after
>>one
>>stormy week in 1588 that I would like to hear more about.
>
Right, and before you pop up again with another helpful contribution, I'll
save you the trouble as I'm sure we are all familiar with the other Fionns,
Finbars, Fintans, Orlas, Ciaras and Donnchas.
So you can put your hand down now, I'm waiting for the small boy at the back
to show how the presence of dark haired people in Ireland proves that far
from the likes of the Tyrconnells massacring Armada survivors that they let
them loose on their women instead!
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e0c71b06-2a9e-4fda...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On 22 Jun, 04:12, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
> wrote:
>
> > "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:5f4a4e00-8b34-4804...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > 800 years of rebellions and still the BNP don't get it, talk about not
> > > taking a hint.
>
> > Or 800 years of loyalty with the odd scuffle from time to time by tiny
> > minorities or disgruntled little lords, with notable high points being the
> > valiant Irish defending of two English kings against republican and Dutch
> > usurpers. I wonder did it ever rankle that they got so little credit for
> > dispatching so many survivors of the Spanish Armada too?
> >you should maybe try and read some Irish History.
>
> The typical reply of those that think they have, but really haven't.
>
> >The only people loyal where those planted here.
>
> To pick examples at random, the loyalists that defended Irish towns against
> Cromwell weren't fighting for Charles nor the restoration of James at the
> Boyne? The Jacobites were all planters?
Again Irish nationalists embraced Jacobitism simply because they
thought it bring an end to anti catholic laws and had little to do
with the interference with monarchical succession. Loyalists fought
against Cromwell because they believed the interference with
monarchical succession was illegitimate.
> Even the 'rebellion' of 1641 that
> proceeded it all was averred to be in support of the king, as was their
> subsequent expeditions to England and Scotland.
I presume you are referring to the Irish Uprising of 1641 led by Rory
O'More, the aim of which was to protect Irish interests and to try and
reclaim some land they lost? It was not until the Confederate in 1642
that any loyalty to King Charles was made. That loyality was nothing
more than a compromise to again retrieve lost lands. It had little to
do with loyality but compromise.
> 'Those planted here', on the other hand, went on to invent Irish nationalism
> as we now know it.
What complete and utter tripe. Planters involved in Irish nationalism
where certainly in the minority. Modern Irish nationalism is comes
from many cultural and politcal organisations. Irish nationalism and
Irish culture which plays a large part in Irish nationalism is at over
1000 years old. Planters only got involved in that in a positive way
for a small time period. Modern Irish nationalism finds its roots in
Daniel O'Connell.
>
> > The elections in the early part of the 20th century where a clear
> > indication of what Irish citizens wanted.
>
> 750 years later - 1906, 1910, etc., and exactly what was that then?
>
> >Every generation of Ireland has know rebellion.
>
> A common conceit - Cabbage Patch tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination by
> the self-anointed, these are hardly the stuff of rebellion, especially
> compared to the eternally compliant majority who took no part. Why is it
> that the Irish were always betrayed by spies and traitors within their
> ranks?
Really, then how come the population of Ireland before Cromwell was
1,500,000 and at his death only 500000. Where did that two thirds of
the population disappear too. Another example would be that in 1672
over 6000 Irish boys and women where sold as slaves England gained
Jamaica. How long did Hugh O'Neill's campaign last? If I remeber right
it was 9 years.
>
> > As for the spanish
>
> armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
> dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>
> Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots and
> English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
Really, the Vikings, normans and Scotts had dark short curly hair with
dark skin did they?
After Tyrconnell's betrayal and massacre of one group of Spanish,
O'Neill went tothe aid of all Spanish survivors in his territory.
MacSweeney Bannagh for example helped repair the Girona and she set
sail with over 1300 Spanish.
While Spanish culture never took foothold in Ireland. Irish do have an
Iberian gene which is much lower than that of the Vikings or Scots.
Sophistry Made Simple
"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
> talking to the likes of freeirelandfromthesafetyofmyarmchair?
Or indeed yourself for all you had to offer in return.
Sophistry Made Simple
*You should know that there was no such thing as Irish nationalism at that
time, and that loyalists of the day meant all the Irish that fought for the
King. Nevertheless I'm gald you agree with me that they were all loyal, for
whatever reason.
> Even the 'rebellion' of 1641 that
> proceeded it all was averred to be in support of the king, as was their
> subsequent expeditions to England and Scotland.
I presume you are referring to the Irish Uprising of 1641 led by Rory
O'More, the aim of which was to protect Irish interests and to try and
reclaim some land they lost? It was not until the Confederate in 1642
that any loyalty to King Charles was made. That loyality was nothing
more than a compromise to again retrieve lost lands. It had little to
do with loyality but compromise.
*The 1641 rebellion was planned right from the beginning as a pre-emptive
strike to curb the growing power of parliament so as to consolidate the
position of the king. A traitor, again, ensured that things did not go to
plan. Loyalism then as now was based on what was thought to be most
advantageous.
Pro Deo, Rege et Patria, Hibernia Unanimis.
> 'Those planted here', on the other hand, went on to invent Irish
> nationalism
> as we now know it.
What complete and utter tripe. Planters involved in Irish nationalism
where certainly in the minority.
*That does not contradict what I said, but you would be quite wrong again to
think that they were in the minority at the time that nationalism was first
conceived.
Modern Irish nationalism is comes
from many cultural and politcal organisations.
*Not the point.
Irish nationalism and
Irish culture which plays a large part in Irish nationalism is at over
1000 years old.
*Bollocks I'm afraid, nationalism as a concept simply did not exist for the
vast majority of that time.
Planters only got involved in that in a positive way
for a small time period.
*Nevertheless, it may well have happened without Tone and his ilk, but when?
Modern Irish nationalism finds its roots in
Daniel O'Connell.
*O'Connell despised nationalists and was a political dead end. Far from
emancipating catholics, he agitated for the last bit of the puzzle - the
right to put his arse on a seat in Westminster - everything else, including
the right to vote, was already achieved decades before. If anything, he
succeeded in disenfranchising the poorer catholics as the bar was raised to
£10 freeholders, ensuring that it was only the middle classes and upwards -
the right sort - could now vote.
> > The elections in the early part of the 20th century where a clear
> > indication of what Irish citizens wanted.
>
> 750 years later - 1906, 1910, etc., and exactly what was that then?
>
> >Every generation of Ireland has know rebellion.
>
> A common conceit - Cabbage Patch tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination
> by
> the self-anointed, these are hardly the stuff of rebellion, especially
> compared to the eternally compliant majority who took no part. Why is it
> that the Irish were always betrayed by spies and traitors within their
> ranks?
Really, then how come the population of Ireland before Cromwell was
1,500,000 and at his death only 500000. Where did that two thirds of
the population disappear too. Another example would be that in 1672
over 6000 Irish boys and women where sold as slaves England gained
Jamaica. How long did Hugh O'Neill's campaign last? If I remeber right
it was 9 years.
*OK, so that's 9 years of actual war rather than fighting for the king -
that leaves just 791 to account for.
> > As for the spanish
>
> armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
> dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>
> Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots
> and
> English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
Really, the Vikings, normans and Scotts had dark short curly hair with
dark skin did they?
*The Dubh Galls - is that who you mean?
After Tyrconnell's betrayal and massacre of one group of Spanish,
O'Neill went tothe aid of all Spanish survivors in his territory.
*He stopped the massacres but still sent them on to Dublin, where they
finished the job.
MacSweeney Bannagh for example helped repair the Girona and she set
sail with over 1300 Spanish.
*Much good it did them - so did they stay or did they go, you don't seem to
be able to make up your mind?
While Spanish culture never took foothold in Ireland. Irish do have an
Iberian gene which is much lower than that of the Vikings or Scots.
*That probably meant something to you when you typed it, but...
freeireland
To once again show how you are infact incorrect.
"From the seventh century to the twelfth (when it reached its most
elaborate form, in An Leabhar Gabhála ‘the Book of the Taking of
Ireland’), the Irish elite created a national identity, in the form of
a striking myth of origin that established the position of the Irish
amongst the peoples of the world and traced the Irish ruling classes
to a single source. They state that they are a nation, as the Greeks,
the Goths, the Gauls and others were nations. There were kings of
Ireland in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and a myth of an
immemorial kingship of Ireland was created. This was accompanied by a
remarkable flowering of Christian culture and an extensive literature
in medieval Irish. The claim to nationhood (drawing on this myth of
origin) is eloquently expressed in the Remonstrance of Domhnall Ó
Néill (who claimed to be king of Ireland) and of the Irish kings to
Pope John XXII about 1317. This idea of nationhood and the same myth
of origin again became important in the seventeenth century, when the
Gaelic Irish and Old English in Ireland, both under attack, were
trying to create a Catholic nation under a Stuart monarchy. They
failed."
From http://multitext.ucc.ie/d/Nationality_Nation_Nationalism
>
> > Even the 'rebellion' of 1641 that
> > proceeded it all was averred to be in support of the king, as was their
> > subsequent expeditions to England and Scotland.
>
> I presume you are referring to the Irish Uprising of 1641 led by Rory
> O'More, the aim of which was to protect Irish interests and to try and
> reclaim some land they lost? It was not until the Confederate in 1642
> that any loyalty to King Charles was made. That loyality was nothing
> more than a compromise to again retrieve lost lands. It had little to
> do with loyality but compromise.
>
> *The 1641 rebellion was planned right from the beginning as a pre-emptive
> strike to curb the growing power of parliament so as to consolidate the
> position of the king. A traitor, again, ensured that things did not go to
> plan. Loyalism then as now was based on what was thought to be most
> advantageous.
Again incorrect. the plans of the rebel leaders was to take key towns
and strongholds then negotiate for their lands from a position of
strength. Charles I sent a force over to Ireland to subdue the rebels,
Rory O'More one of the rebel leaders led a force at Julianstown in
County Meath on 29 against the Kings troops. How is that onsolidating
the
position of the king.
The Catholic confederation was created in 1642 and only then did a
pact to support the King emerge. For the Old Irish if the King
survived the threat in England he would reward them with their lands
back.
>
> Pro Deo, Rege et Patria, Hibernia Unanimis.
>
> > 'Those planted here', on the other hand, went on to invent Irish
> > nationalism
> > as we now know it.
>
> What complete and utter tripe. Planters involved in Irish nationalism
> where certainly in the minority.
>
> *That does not contradict what I said, but you would be quite wrong again to
> think that they were in the minority at the time that nationalism was first
> conceived.
>
> Modern Irish nationalism is comes
> from many cultural and politcal organisations.
>
> *Not the point.
Its the point exactly. Irish culture, (eg language, mythology) and
nationhood existed before the plantation.
>
> Irish nationalism and
> Irish culture which plays a large part in Irish nationalism is at over
> 1000 years old.
>
> *Bollocks I'm afraid, nationalism as a concept simply did not exist for the
> vast majority of that time.
I think I have shown that infact it is correct.
>
> Planters only got involved in that in a positive way
> for a small time period.
>
> *Nevertheless, it may well have happened without Tone and his ilk, but when?
Tone was a separatist and certainly not the first. Domhnall Ó Néill
was promoting separatism as far back as 1317.
>
> Modern Irish nationalism finds its roots in
> Daniel O'Connell.
>
> *O'Connell despised nationalists and was a political dead end. Far from
> emancipating catholics, he agitated for the last bit of the puzzle - the
> right to put his arse on a seat in Westminster - everything else, including
> the right to vote, was already achieved decades before. If anything, he
> succeeded in disenfranchising the poorer catholics as the bar was raised to
> £10 freeholders, ensuring that it was only the middle classes and upwards -
> the right sort - could now vote.
Irish nationalists have always taken seats in westminster. Even todays
nationalists in Northern Ireland do. This does not make them any less
a nationalist.
O'Connell campaigned for Repeal of the Act of Union and home rule
without the use of violence and this is the cornerstop of modern Irish
nationalism. Irish nationalism by enlarge was about equality and not
always separatism. This is why O'Connell is known in Ireland as "The
Liberator" for his success in achieving Catholic Emancipation.
‘The principle of my political life …. is, that all ameliorations and
improvements in political institutions can be obtained by persevering
in a perfectly peaceable and legal course, and cannot be obtained by
forcible means, or if they could be got by forcible means, such means
create more evils than they cure, and leave the country worse than
they found it.’ O'Connell 1843
>
> > > The elections in the early part of the 20th century where a clear
> > > indication of what Irish citizens wanted.
>
> > 750 years later - 1906, 1910, etc., and exactly what was that then?
>
> > >Every generation of Ireland has know rebellion.
>
> > A common conceit - Cabbage Patch tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination
> > by
> > the self-anointed, these are hardly the stuff of rebellion, especially
> > compared to the eternally compliant majority who took no part. Why is it
> > that the Irish were always betrayed by spies and traitors within their
> > ranks?
>
> Really, then how come the population of Ireland before Cromwell was
> 1,500,000 and at his death only 500000. Where did that two thirds of
> the population disappear too. Another example would be that in 1672
> over 6000 Irish boys and women where sold as slaves England gained
> Jamaica. How long did Hugh O'Neill's campaign last? If I remeber right
> it was 9 years.
>
> *OK, so that's 9 years of actual war rather than fighting for the king -
> that leaves just 791 to account for.
Well there was an 11 year confederate war as another example. These
are examples clearly in contradiction which your "Cabbage Patch
tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination" accusation. Clearly when 2/3s
of the population disappear clearly the majority where not eternally
compliant.
>
> > > As for the spanish
>
> > armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
> > dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>
> > Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots
> > and
> > English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
>
> Really, the Vikings, normans and Scotts had dark short curly hair with
> dark skin did they?
>
> *The Dubh Galls - is that who you mean?
>
> After Tyrconnell's betrayal and massacre of one group of Spanish,
> O'Neill went tothe aid of all Spanish survivors in his territory.
>
> *He stopped the massacres but still sent them on to Dublin, where they
> finished the job.
>
> MacSweeney Bannagh for example helped repair the Girona and she set
> sail with over 1300 Spanish.
>
> *Much good it did them - so did they stay or did they go, you don't seem to
> be able to make up your mind?
None the less its a clear example that Irish nationalist in majority
aided the Spanish. little is actually known of how many actually
survived when the armada hit the coast of west Ireland.
>
> While Spanish culture never took foothold in Ireland. Irish do have an
> Iberian gene which is much lower than that of the Vikings or Scots.
>
> *That probably meant something to you when you typed it, but...
Its quite simple there are traces of an Iberian gene in Ireland. The
american myth proposition has also been debunked, the armada spanish/
Irish link was spread by those living inthe west of Ireland. Then of
course the similarity in buildings and architecture between houses and
buildings in the west coast of Ireland and those in the north of the
Iberia penisula. During the spanish-anglo war other spanish also
landed in ireland and inter mixed. The Irish regiments in the spanish
navy and armies (Hugh O'Neil himself after the flight of the earls was
in charge of a spanish garrison) fought in europe and in the americas
after the defeat of the British armarda one year after the spanish
armada was destroyed.
teles...@live.com
*
* 6 See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_nationalism
[start of extract]
History [of Irish Nationalism
Roots [of Irish Nationalism]
Ireland has been subject to varying degrees of rule from England since
the late 12th century (See Norman Ireland). The Gaelic Irish resisted
this conquest through military and other means, but were organised in
small independent lordships and did not have a common political goal
such as an independent Irish state. Conflict over the English presence
was exacerbated by the Protestant Reformation in England, which
introduced a religious element to the 16th century Tudor re-conquest
of Ireland, as almost all of the native Irish remained Catholic.
Another central feature of future Anglo-Irish conflict was the
dispossession of Irish Catholic landowners in the Plantations of
Ireland and their replacement with a Protestant landowning class from
England and Scotland[citation needed]. In addition, the Plantation of
Ulster, begun in 1609, "planted" a sizable colony of English and
Scottish settlers of all classes into the north of Ireland.
The closest Gaelic lords came to waging an identifiably nationalist
campaign against the English presence was the rebellion of Hugh
O'Neill in the 1590s (known as the Nine Years War 1594-1603), which
aimed to expel the English and make Ireland a Spanish
proctorate[citation needed]. However, despite claiming to represent a
movement of Irish Catholics against English Protestants, O'Neill's
forces were a shifting coalition of clans and lords and many
historians see O'Neill himself as being primarily motivated by
personal ambition - specifically the securing of his authority over
Tyrone in Ulster[citation needed].
A more significant movement came in the 1640s, after the Irish
Rebellion of 1641, when a coalition of Gaelic Irish and Old English
(Ireland) Catholics set up a de facto independent Irish state to fight
the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (see Confederate Ireland). The
Confederate Catholics of Ireland, also known as the Confederation of
Kilkenny, emphasised that Ireland was a Kingdom independent from
England, though under the same monarch. They demanded autonomy for the
Irish Parliament, full rights for Catholics and an end to the
confiscation of Catholic owned land. The Confederate cause was
destroyed in the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland 1649-53 and the old
Catholic landowning class was dispossessed permanently.
A similar Irish Catholic monarchist movement emerged in the 1680s and
'90s, when Irish Catholic Jacobites supported James II after his
deposition in the Glorious Revolution. The Jacobites demanded that
Irish Catholics would be a majority in an autonomous Irish Parliament,
that confiscated Catholic land would be restored and that the Lord
Deputy of Ireland would in future be an Irishman. Similarly to the
Confederates of the 1640s, the Jacobites were conscious of
representing the "Irish nation", but were not separatists and largely
represented the interests of the landed class as opposed to all the
Irish people. Like the Confederates, they were also defeated in the
Williamite war in Ireland 1689-91. Thereafter, Irish government and
landholding were dominated by the largely English Protestant
Ascendancy. Catholics were discriminated against under the Penal Laws.
(See also Early Modern Ireland 1536-1691)
This coupling of religious and ethnic identity (Roman Catholic and
Gaelic), as well as a consciousness of dispossession and defeat at the
hands of British and Protestant forces came to be enduring features of
Irish nationalism.
[end]
Alas, your references to the myths which various people promoted fall
far short of the actual historic political reality. And anyway, all
this talk of myths really depends on which myths you want to promote,
since myths are plentiful. For example the classic mythical Táin
stories are full of various kings and queens from the (separate)
kingdoms of Ireland, who are depicted as warring and competing, as
with Maeve's raid on Ulster, based on her jealousy of the Ulster
Kingdom's greater assets etc etc, so even the mythical classics do not
in general hint at a poltical unity, even if at various times there
was a promotion of the idea of a common mythic origin of the various
different royals (and in any case, common myths about the origins of
people speaking Irish and having common cultural traits so totally
obviously does not signify that poltically unified entities prevailed,
a unified nation-kingdom (and certainly not a national state as we
would understand it) existed, you've only got to look at the continual
evidence of wars and shifting boudaries, not to mention the engrained
and common notion of the 'four kingdoms' of munster, ulster etc.
Even if you look at the origins of Dublin, the very capital of the
Republic of Ireland, it only got to be founded there because the
Vikings chose to seize that territory, i have heard it said because at
that time the Liffey was on the boundary between different kingdoms,
but certainly it was only possibly because there was no unified
opposition to them from the various kingdoms in Ireland, so even the
very capital itself was founded by outsiders and came to be founded on
account of the ongoing struggling of different Irish kingdoms. The
looser, mythic, idealised view of 'nationalism' as something based in
the myths of various kings put forward in the Donnchadh Ó Corráin
article is nice, but doesn't mean a whole lot given the de facto
warring, segmentation, and autonomy of the juristictions that is the
true reality of early Irish history for so many centuries, and which,
when it comes down to it, is pretty well summed up on the wiki page on
Irish nationalism.
Anyway, if you don't like the wiki on Irish nationalism, go
and edit it to your taste, and see how long you last when confronted
by the critical opinion of your collected peers and various
historically informed folk who no doubt drop by :) Good luck out
there!
By all means prefer and work for and believe it would be better to
have a politically unified ireland now (why not if you want one to
exist?), but please don't cook up or pretend in something in the past
which didn't actually exist in de facto reality.
mothed out
P.S. Oops, accidentally used an account i just made to ask a computer
question on a group.
mothed out !
freeireland
You could have just provided a link with maybe a snippet.
>
> Alas, your references to the myths which various people promoted fall
> far short of the actual historic political reality.
No it does not. The myth part is only in regards to the origins of the
nation. Does this mean the eygptions, the greeks or the Romans where
never nations. Mythology plays a strong part in the origins of a lot
of nations.
The An Leabhar Gabhála not only gives the Irish nation a common
source, partially based on myth though also in facts. It describes the
various tribes of Celts who came to Ireland for example. It also
created the role of the High King of Ireland also based on Irish
culture, by predicting 7 great high kings. Even today the number 7 is
a special number in Irish culture. eg the seven son etc.
"In the King of England's court in Ireland these laws are rigidly
observed, viz. that any person that is not an Irishman may bring any
Irishman into court on any cause of action without restriction; but
every Irishman, cleric or lay, excepting only prelates, is refused all
recourse to law by the very fact of being Irish."
"For, from the time when in consequence of that grant the English
iniquitously but with some show of religion entered within the limits
of our kingdom, they have striven with all their might and with every
treacherous artifice in their power, to wipe our nation out entirely
and utterly to extirpate it."
In the Remonstrance of Domhnall Ó Néill (who claimed to be king of
Ireland) and of the Irish kings to Pope John XXII.
-http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/T310000-001/index.html
The An Leabhar Gabhála was a declaration of nationhood. Domhnall Ó
Néill a high king as clearly uses the terms Irish and nation in
regards to Ireland in 1317. How could he have done this if it did not
exist until the plantation?
The term nation is not clearly defined. Though Ireland was self aware
as a nation as early as the 7th century.
Its a bit strange that you would ignore scholars from the University
of Cork and instead use wikipedia. Especially considering even Jimmy
Wales the cofounder of wikipedia admitts it has severe quality
problems.
"An encyclopedia can't just have a small percentage of good entries
and be considered a success. I would argue, in fact, that the overall
quality of an encyclopedia is best judged by its weakest entries
rather than its best. What's the worth of an unreliable reference
work?" - Nicholas Carr
> Anyway, if you don't like the wiki on Irish nationalism, go
> and edit it to your taste, and see how long you last when confronted
> by the critical opinion of your collected peers and various
> historically informed folk who no doubt drop by :) Good luck out
> there!
Why would I care when the cofounder admitts its unreliable.
>
> By all means prefer and work for and believe it would be better to
> have a politically unified ireland now (why not if you want one to
> exist?), but please don't cook up or pretend in something in the past
> which didn't actually exist in de facto reality.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sophistry Made Simple
From http://multitext.ucc.ie/d/Nationality_Nation_Nationalism
***You know it really pisses me off just how many stupid cunts post links
here to prove their point yet only read down far enough until they find
something that they think agrees with them. If you had indeed read all the
way down you would have found this paragraph instead:
***"In Ireland’s case, nation and nationality are old, but nationalism, in
the fullest sense, namely, that the nation should be an independent
sovereign state and that all its members should struggle to achieve its
independence and serve it, is an ideology of the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, as it is elsewhere in Europe. Nationalism draws on all kinds of
sources—myth, legend, religion, history, art, culture, language,
literature—to create a cult of the nation. Irish nationalists drew on the
achievements of the early medieval Irish church, the golden age, the idea
that Ireland was a holy island, the early origin myths, and the history of
its medieval kings. Besides, Irish nationalism was self-consciously the heir
of the colonial nationalism of the eighteenth century and celebrated Grattan
and his ‘Patriots’."
***Now, wasn't that just what I had already told you?
>
> > Even the 'rebellion' of 1641 that
> > proceeded it all was averred to be in support of the king, as was their
> > subsequent expeditions to England and Scotland.
>
> I presume you are referring to the Irish Uprising of 1641 led by Rory
> O'More, the aim of which was to protect Irish interests and to try and
> reclaim some land they lost? It was not until the Confederate in 1642
> that any loyalty to King Charles was made. That loyality was nothing
> more than a compromise to again retrieve lost lands. It had little to
> do with loyality but compromise.
>
> *The 1641 rebellion was planned right from the beginning as a pre-emptive
> strike to curb the growing power of parliament so as to consolidate the
> position of the king. A traitor, again, ensured that things did not go to
> plan. Loyalism then as now was based on what was thought to be most
> advantageous.
Again incorrect. the plans of the rebel leaders was to take key towns
and strongholds then negotiate for their lands from a position of
strength. Charles I sent a force over to Ireland to subdue the rebels,
Rory O'More one of the rebel leaders led a force at Julianstown in
County Meath on 29 against the Kings troops. How is that onsolidating
the
position of the king.
***Er, what did I just say - "a traitor, again, ensured that things did not
go to plan". Try and pay attention.
The Catholic confederation was created in 1642 and only then did a
pact to support the King emerge. For the Old Irish if the King
survived the threat in England he would reward them with their lands
back.
***You are free to look all this up and then continue with your ignorance,
if you still want to. It's all there, if you only look instead of only
finding what you want to find.
>
> Pro Deo, Rege et Patria, Hibernia Unanimis.
>
> > 'Those planted here', on the other hand, went on to invent Irish
> > nationalism
> > as we now know it.
>
> What complete and utter tripe. Planters involved in Irish nationalism
> where certainly in the minority.
>
> *That does not contradict what I said, but you would be quite wrong again
> to
> think that they were in the minority at the time that nationalism was
> first
> conceived.
>
> Modern Irish nationalism is comes
> from many cultural and politcal organisations.
>
> *Not the point.
Its the point exactly. Irish culture, (eg language, mythology) and
nationhood existed before the plantation.
***That's not the issue - we are talking about modern Irish nationalism 'as
we know it'.
> Irish nationalism and
> Irish culture which plays a large part in Irish nationalism is at over
> 1000 years old.
>
> *Bollocks I'm afraid, nationalism as a concept simply did not exist for
> the
> vast majority of that time.
I think I have shown that infact it is correct.
***I think you have shown that you don't really understand what you are
meant to be talking about.
> Planters only got involved in that in a positive way
> for a small time period.
>
> *Nevertheless, it may well have happened without Tone and his ilk, but
> when?
Tone was a separatist and certainly not the first. Domhnall Ó Néill
was promoting separatism as far back as 1317.
***See what I mean?
> Modern Irish nationalism finds its roots in
> Daniel O'Connell.
>
> *O'Connell despised nationalists and was a political dead end. Far from
> emancipating catholics, he agitated for the last bit of the puzzle - the
> right to put his arse on a seat in Westminster - everything else,
> including
> the right to vote, was already achieved decades before. If anything, he
> succeeded in disenfranchising the poorer catholics as the bar was raised
> to
> £10 freeholders, ensuring that it was only the middle classes and
> upwards -
> the right sort - could now vote.
Irish nationalists have always taken seats in westminster. Even todays
nationalists in Northern Ireland do. This does not make them any less
a nationalist.
***Right, now go back and read my last paragraph - slowly, until you can
show that you understand what's written there.
O'Connell campaigned for Repeal of the Act of Union and home rule
without the use of violence and this is the cornerstop of modern Irish
nationalism. Irish nationalism by enlarge was about equality and not
always separatism. This is why O'Connell is known in Ireland as "The
Liberator" for his success in achieving Catholic Emancipation.
***This reads like the confused jumble of a 10 year old's history homework,
especially if you are claiming that peaceful means were the 'cornerstop' of
modern Irish nationalism.
‘The principle of my political life …. is, that all ameliorations and
improvements in political institutions can be obtained by persevering
in a perfectly peaceable and legal course, and cannot be obtained by
forcible means, or if they could be got by forcible means, such means
create more evils than they cure, and leave the country worse than
they found it.’ O'Connell 1843
***Again from your website link:
***"Political and cultural nationalism flowed in many streams in
nineteenth-century Ireland and was understood in many different ways. Two
main traditions can be discerned, though many held a position somewhere
between. The one expressed itself through constitutional means, parliament,
and peaceful agitation. Here belong O’Connell’s Repeal campaign (it is
doubtful whether O’Connell was a nationalist), and the Home Rule movement of
Butt and Parnell (both of whom wanted much more than self-government for
Ireland). The other was revolutionary, often secret and oath-bound, and
sought an independent Ireland, usually a republican one, by military force.
The IRB (or Fenians) best represent this tradition."
> > > The elections in the early part of the 20th century where a clear
> > > indication of what Irish citizens wanted.
***And again:
***"The support of the people ebbed and flowed, and very many, often the
great majority, were indifferent."
> > 750 years later - 1906, 1910, etc., and exactly what was that then?
>
> > >Every generation of Ireland has know rebellion.
>
> > A common conceit - Cabbage Patch tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination
> > by
> > the self-anointed, these are hardly the stuff of rebellion, especially
> > compared to the eternally compliant majority who took no part. Why is it
> > that the Irish were always betrayed by spies and traitors within their
> > ranks?
>
> Really, then how come the population of Ireland before Cromwell was
> 1,500,000 and at his death only 500000. Where did that two thirds of
> the population disappear too. Another example would be that in 1672
> over 6000 Irish boys and women where sold as slaves England gained
> Jamaica. How long did Hugh O'Neill's campaign last? If I remeber right
> it was 9 years.
>
> *OK, so that's 9 years of actual war rather than fighting for the king -
> that leaves just 791 to account for.
Well there was an 11 year confederate war as another example.
**** Yes, there was - fighting for the fucking king, haven't we been over
this one already?
These
are examples clearly in contradiction which your "Cabbage Patch
tussles, backstreet mobs, assassination" accusation. Clearly when 2/3s
of the population disappear clearly the majority where not eternally
compliant.
****Yes, we've done the 9 years of republican victory over the loyalists
too. Still waiting for the other 791.
> > > As for the spanish
>
> > armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became
> > dark. Especially around coastal areas, so much for dispatching them?
>
> > Oh right, nothing to do with a thousand years of Vikings, Normans, Scots
> > and
> > English? Can you back up this absurd assertion with data of any sort?
>
> Really, the Vikings, normans and Scotts had dark short curly hair with
> dark skin did they?
>
> *The Dubh Galls - is that who you mean?
***Well, is it?
> After Tyrconnell's betrayal and massacre of one group of Spanish,
> O'Neill went tothe aid of all Spanish survivors in his territory.
>
> *He stopped the massacres but still sent them on to Dublin, where they
> finished the job.
>
> MacSweeney Bannagh for example helped repair the Girona and she set
> sail with over 1300 Spanish.
>
> *Much good it did them - so did they stay or did they go, you don't seem
> to
> be able to make up your mind?
None the less its a clear example that Irish nationalist in majority
aided the Spanish.
***Is it shite. One example where the Irish didn't slaughter them all, and
one example where they slaughtered 300, and sent the rest to Dublin, later
to be slaughtered.
little is actually known of how many actually
survived when the armada hit the coast of west Ireland.
***Well you seem pretty sure there was enough to alter the entire gene pool.
In fact, no more than 8 survivors were ever identified as still alive a year
later.
> While Spanish culture never took foothold in Ireland. Irish do have an
> Iberian gene which is much lower than that of the Vikings or Scots.
>
> *That probably meant something to you when you typed it, but...
Its quite simple there are traces of an Iberian gene in Ireland.
***What there is predates the modern Spanish mix by up to 2,000 years and
would be entirely different to the various peoples who contributed to that
mix centuries *after* that celtic population had left for Ireland.
The
american myth proposition has also been debunked, the armada spanish/
Irish link was spread by those living inthe west of Ireland. Then of
course the similarity in buildings and architecture between houses and
buildings in the west coast of Ireland and those in the north of the
Iberia penisula.
***Oh yeah, so that's why we've got hacienda bungalows all over the place.
During the spanish-anglo war other spanish also
landed in ireland and inter mixed. The Irish regiments in the spanish
navy and armies (Hugh O'Neil himself after the flight of the earls was
in charge of a spanish garrison) fought in europe and in the americas
after the defeat of the British armarda one year after the spanish
armada was destroyed.
***Look, you're really pushing it now, give it a rest. The proposition is
that the survivors of the Spanish Armada were hunted and killed almost to a
man and almost entirely by the Irish themselves, whether on their own
volition, acting as agents of the crown, or as wreckers. This is no big
secret, and was the fate of almost every Spanish expedition to fetch up
here. Your assertion of a secret influx of Spaniards in sufficient
quantities to change the entire genetic makeup of whole populations -
without leaving any other trace in names, words, customs, blood ties, or
even folklore - is simply ludicrous.
William A. T. Clark
> elaborate form, in An Leabhar Gabhála Śthe Book of the Taking of
> Irelandą), the Irish elite created a national identity, in the form of
> a striking myth of origin that established the position of the Irish
> amongst the peoples of the world and traced the Irish ruling classes
> to a single source. They state that they are a nation, as the Greeks,
> the Goths, the Gauls and others were nations. There were kings of
> Ireland in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and a myth of an
> immemorial kingship of Ireland was created. This was accompanied by a
> remarkable flowering of Christian culture and an extensive literature
> in medieval Irish. The claim to nationhood (drawing on this myth of
> origin) is eloquently expressed in the Remonstrance of Domhnall Ó
> Néill (who claimed to be king of Ireland) and of the Irish kings to
> Pope John XXII about 1317. This idea of nationhood and the same myth
> of origin again became important in the seventeenth century, when the
> Gaelic Irish and Old English in Ireland, both under attack, were
> trying to create a Catholic nation under a Stuart monarchy. They
> failed."
>
> From http://multitext.ucc.ie/d/Nationality_Nation_Nationalism
>
> ***You know it really pisses me off just how many stupid cunts post links
> here to prove their point yet only read down far enough until they find
> something that they think agrees with them. If you had indeed read all the
> way down you would have found this paragraph instead:
>
> ***"In Irelandąs case, nation and nationality are old, but nationalism, in
> the fullest sense, namely, that the nation should be an independent
> sovereign state and that all its members should struggle to achieve its
> independence and serve it, is an ideology of the nineteenth and twentieth
> centuries, as it is elsewhere in Europe. Nationalism draws on all kinds of
> sources‹myth, legend, religion, history, art, culture, language,
> literature‹to create a cult of the nation. Irish nationalists drew on the
> achievements of the early medieval Irish church, the golden age, the idea
> that Ireland was a holy island, the early origin myths, and the history of
> its medieval kings. Besides, Irish nationalism was self-consciously the heir
> of the colonial nationalism of the eighteenth century and celebrated Grattan
> and his ŚPatriotsą."
> > Ł10 freeholders, ensuring that it was only the middle classes and
> > upwards -
> > the right sort - could now vote.
>
> Irish nationalists have always taken seats in westminster. Even todays
> nationalists in Northern Ireland do. This does not make them any less
> a nationalist.
>
> ***Right, now go back and read my last paragraph - slowly, until you can
> show that you understand what's written there.
>
> O'Connell campaigned for Repeal of the Act of Union and home rule
> without the use of violence and this is the cornerstop of modern Irish
> nationalism. Irish nationalism by enlarge was about equality and not
> always separatism. This is why O'Connell is known in Ireland as "The
> Liberator" for his success in achieving Catholic Emancipation.
>
> ***This reads like the confused jumble of a 10 year old's history homework,
> especially if you are claiming that peaceful means were the 'cornerstop' of
> modern Irish nationalism.
>
> ŚThe principle of my political life Š. is, that all ameliorations and
> improvements in political institutions can be obtained by persevering
> in a perfectly peaceable and legal course, and cannot be obtained by
> forcible means, or if they could be got by forcible means, such means
> create more evils than they cure, and leave the country worse than
> they found it.ą O'Connell 1843
>
> ***Again from your website link:
>
> ***"Political and cultural nationalism flowed in many streams in
> nineteenth-century Ireland and was understood in many different ways. Two
> main traditions can be discerned, though many held a position somewhere
> between. The one expressed itself through constitutional means, parliament,
> and peaceful agitation. Here belong OąConnelląs Repeal campaign (it is
> doubtful whether OąConnell was a nationalist), and the Home Rule movement of
Better be careful - he's not very bright, he doesn't get anything right
(as you can see), but his "lawyer buddy" will come after you. Of course,
the lawyer doesn't actually exist, but . . . I think you get the drift
by now.
William Clark
mothed out
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> ***You know it really pisses me off just how many stupid cunts post links
> here to prove their point yet only read down far enough until they find
> something that they think agrees with them. If you had indeed read all the
> way down you would have found this paragraph instead:
>
> ***"In Ireland’s case, nation and nationality are old, but nationalism, in
> the fullest sense, namely, that the nation should be an independent
> sovereign state and that all its members should struggle to achieve its
> independence and serve it, is an ideology of the nineteenth and twentieth
> centuries, as it is elsewhere in Europe. Nationalism draws on all kinds of
> sources—myth, legend, religion, history, art, culture, language,
> literature—to create a cult of the nation. Irish nationalists drew on the
> achievements of the early medieval Irish church, the golden age, the idea
> that Ireland was a holy island, the early origin myths, and the history of
> its medieval kings. Besides, Irish nationalism was self-consciously the heir
> of the colonial nationalism of the eighteenth century and celebrated Grattan
> and his ‘Patriots’."
>
> ***Now, wasn't that just what I had already told you?
>
Precisely!
> ...
>
> read more »
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> ***You know it really pisses me off just how many stupid cunts post links
> here to prove their point yet only read down far enough until they find
> something that they think agrees with them. If you had indeed read all the
> way down you would have found this paragraph instead:
>
> ***"In Ireland’s case, nation and nationality are old, but nationalism, in
> the fullest sense, namely, that the nation should be an independent
> sovereign state and that all its members should struggle to achieve its
> independence and serve it, is an ideology of the nineteenth and twentieth
> centuries, as it is elsewhere in Europe. Nationalism draws on all kinds of
> sources—myth, legend, religion, history, art, culture, language,
> literature—to create a cult of the nation. Irish nationalists drew on the
> achievements of the early medieval Irish church, the golden age, the idea
> that Ireland was a holy island, the early origin myths, and the history of
> its medieval kings. Besides, Irish nationalism was self-consciously the heir
> of the colonial nationalism of the eighteenth century and celebrated Grattan
> and his ‘Patriots’."
>
> ***Now, wasn't that just what I had already told you?
Sorry not it wasn't and again if stupid cunts like yourself would read
the entire text in its entirety and of course with the good use of a
dictionary.
From the link I already posted again a part that you cleary avoided
posting.
"Scholars are not agreed about what a nation means or when nations
came into being. There are two views: the short one and the long. The
short one is that the nation is modern and came into being some time
in the eighteenth or nineteenth centuries (Hobsbawm, Gellner,
Kedourie). Scholars are not agreed when, or from where it emerged: the
Enlightenment, American Revolution, French Revolution, Romanticism.
According to the long view, the nation has its roots (in many cases)
in the middle ages or earlier, in literacy in the vernacular, and in
religions, especially the bible (Hastings, Anthony Smith). It begins
with an ethnicity, a large group of people with a shared identity,
based on culture and spoken language. Some ethnicities become nations.
A nation is more self-conscious than an ethnicity: it normally has a
written literature in its own language, a self-conscious identity,
claims to autonomy and to a specific territory (like biblical Israel).
Part of these claims are real, part imaginary."
Nationalism - from Dictionary.com
"national spirit or aspirations.
devotion and loyalty to one's own nation; patriotism.
excessive patriotism; chauvinism.
the desire for national advancement or independence.
the policy or doctrine of asserting the interests of one's own nation,
viewed as separate from the interests of other nations or the common
interests of all nations.
an idiom or trait peculiar to a nation.
a movement, as in the arts, based upon the folk idioms, history,
aspirations, etc., of a nation."
From the Oxford dictionary
"the desire by a group of people who share the same race, culture,
language, etc. to form an independent country"
"a feeling of love for and pride in your country; a feeling that your
country is better than any other"
Again the Remonstrance of Domhnall Ó Néill in 1317 is a clear protest
of English imperialism in Ireland hence the name "Remonstrance".
Wolfe Tone was far from the first Irish revolutionary also certainly
not the first to fight for Irish independence. He was also not the
first to remonstrate against it. The difference he made was to unite
catholic and dissenter.
You made a wild remark about when Irish nationalism started yet
clearly you do not even know what nationalism is? Nationalism can be
expressed in many ways and clearly Irelands cultural, romantic,
ethnic, religious nationalism existed before the 7th century. Civic
nationalism where state derives political legitimacy from the active
participation of its citizens was the only form of nationalism not
existing until 1922 in regards to Irish nationalism. This is why the
quote mentions Irish nationalism in its fullest form. Though this does
not mean Irish nationalism did not exist before then and the starting
point of any nationalism is the existence of a nation.
Modern Irish nationalism has little in common with the revotionary
Irish/Dissenters of the 18th century and is based on constitutional,
reformist politicians such as O'Connell and Parnell. If anything
revolutionary nationalists of the 18th century are closer to violent
republicanism. Modern Irish nationalism is parliamentary and certainly
not revolutionary.
Ergo no it wasn't. Backup your wild claim with evidence!
>
>
> > Pro Deo, Rege et Patria, Hibernia Unanimis.
>
> > > 'Those planted here', on the other hand, went on to invent Irish
> > > nationalism
> > > as we now know it.
>
> > What complete and utter tripe. Planters involved in Irish nationalism
> > where certainly in the minority.
>
> > *That does not contradict what I said, but you would be quite wrong again
> > to
> > think that they were in the minority at the time that nationalism was
> > first
> > conceived.
>
> > Modern Irish nationalism is comes
> > from many cultural and politcal organisations.
>
> > *Not the point.
>
> Its the point exactly. Irish culture, (eg language, mythology) and
> nationhood existed before the plantation.
>
> ***That's not the issue - we are talking about modern Irish nationalism 'as
> we know it'.
Irish nationalism as we know it is parliamentary and certainly not
revolutionary such as that of the 18th century or wolfe tone. The
forefathers of modern Irish parliamentary nationalism are O'Connell
and Parnell.
>
> > Irish nationalism and
> > Irish culture which plays a large part in Irish nationalism is at over
> > 1000 years old.
>
> > *Bollocks I'm afraid, nationalism as a concept simply did not exist for
> > the
> > vast majority of that time.
>
> I think I have shown that infact it is correct.
>
> ***I think you have shown that you don't really understand what you are
> meant to be talking about.
>
> > Planters only got involved in that in a positive way
> > for a small time period.
>
> > *Nevertheless, it may well have happened without Tone and his ilk, but
> > when?
>
> Tone was a separatist and certainly not the first. Domhnall Ó Néill
> was promoting separatism as far back as 1317.
>
> ***See what I mean?
Revolutionary nationalists existed as far back as 1317. Tone was just
another in a long line. Many came after him and therefore he had as
much success as Domhnall Ó Néill in 1317. It was the Irish Volunteers
who conducted the 1916 Easter Rising who succeeded as revolutionaries
not Wolfe Tone. Wolfe Tone did nothing different from Domhnall Ó
Néill, Hugh O'Neill, Owen Roe, the Young Irelanders or the Fenians.
Wolfe Tone certainly did not introduce Irish revolutions as I have
clearly shown.
>
> > Modern Irish nationalism finds its roots in
> > Daniel O'Connell.
>
> > *O'Connell despised nationalists and was a political dead end. Far from
> > emancipating catholics, he agitated for the last bit of the puzzle - the
> > right to put his arse on a seat in Westminster - everything else,
> > including
> > the right to vote, was already achieved decades before. If anything, he
> > succeeded in disenfranchising the poorer catholics as the bar was raised
> > to
> > £10 freeholders, ensuring that it was only the middle classes and
> > upwards -
> > the right sort - could now vote.
>
> Irish nationalists have always taken seats in westminster. Even todays
> nationalists in Northern Ireland do. This does not make them any less
> a nationalist.
>
> ***Right, now go back and read my last paragraph - slowly, until you can
> show that you understand what's written there.
Its a nonsense, if before the The Catholic Relief Act you had 40
shilling freeholding you could vote but your elected representative
could not take his seat in parliment. After the act you could not
vote. What actual difference did that make. At least with the act
passed O'Connell was able to take his seat. In April 1835 he helped to
overthrow Sir Robert Peel’s Conservative ministry. O'Connell's plan
was to use his wild card vote and the ability to produce calm in
Ireladn to get further concessions.
Is this your 10 year olds home work.
You have shown no example. I have shown an example where the Irish
aided 1300 Spanish and the aid decalration by Hugh O'Neill.
>
> little is actually known of how many actually
> survived when the armada hit the coast of west Ireland.
>
> ***Well you seem pretty sure there was enough to alter the entire gene pool.
> In fact, no more than 8 survivors were ever identified as still alive a year
> later.
That does not mean they did not exists. Infact the number of ships
that landed in Ireland in some manner or another has not been
identified. Incase you had not realised it would not be in their
interest to do so.
Ok, tell me how many spanish died and how many ships ran a ground on
the coast of Ireland. The truth is nobody knows how many Spanish ships
ran aground of the coast of Ireland and secondly because a ship sinks
does not mean everyone on board drowned. Tell me how many Spaniards
died at the hands of the Irish?
> quantities to change the entire genetic makeup of whole populations
so your trying to tell me there is no spanish influence in Galway.
Sophistry Made Simple
>so your trying to tell me there is no spanish influence in Galway.
Oh good grief - you took a week to come back with this pile of shite?
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2ef191a5-3b27-4b1c...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >so your trying to tell me there is no spanish influence in Galway.
>
> Oh good grief - you took a week to come back with this pile of shite?
You must think I have nothing better to do. I reply when I have time,
thats the beauty of usenet. Though a few good rational points that
post.
freeireland
wrote:
> In article <g441tj$rm...@reader01.news.esat.net>,> > "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > Ireland¹), the Irish elite created a national identity, in the form of
> > a striking myth of origin that established the position of the Irish
> > amongst the peoples of the world and traced the Irish ruling classes
> > to a single source. They state that they are a nation, as the Greeks,
> > the Goths, the Gauls and others were nations. There were kings of
> > Ireland in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and a myth of an
> > immemorial kingship of Ireland was created. This was accompanied by a
> > remarkable flowering of Christian culture and an extensive literature
> > in medieval Irish. The claim to nationhood (drawing on this myth of
> > origin) is eloquently expressed in the Remonstrance of Domhnall Ó
> > Néill (who claimed to be king of Ireland) and of the Irish kings to
> > Pope John XXII about 1317. This idea of nationhood and the same myth
> > of origin again became important in the seventeenth century, when the
> > Gaelic Irish and Old English in Ireland, both under attack, were
> > trying to create a Catholic nation under a Stuart monarchy. They
> > failed."
>
>
> > ***You know it really pisses me off just how many stupid cunts post links
> > here to prove their point yet only read down far enough until they find
> > something that they think agrees with them. If you had indeed read all the
> > way down you would have found this paragraph instead:
>
> > the fullest sense, namely, that the nation should be an independent
> > sovereign state and that all its members should struggle to achieve its
> > independence and serve it, is an ideology of the nineteenth and twentieth
> > centuries, as it is elsewhere in Europe. Nationalism draws on all kinds of
> > sources‹myth, legend, religion, history, art, culture, language,
> > literature‹to create a cult of the nation. Irish nationalists drew on the
> > achievements of the early medieval Irish church, the golden age, the idea
> > that Ireland was a holy island, the early origin myths, and the history of
> > its medieval kings. Besides, Irish nationalism was self-consciously the heir
> > of the colonial nationalism of the eighteenth century and celebrated Grattan
> > > upwards -
> > > the right sort - could now vote.
>
> > Irish nationalists have always taken seats in westminster. Even todays
> > nationalists in Northern Ireland do. This does not make them any less
> > a nationalist.
>
> > ***Right, now go back and read my last paragraph - slowly, until you can
> > show that you understand what's written there.
>
> > O'Connell campaigned for Repeal of the Act of Union and home rule
> > without the use of violence and this is the cornerstop of modern Irish
> > nationalism. Irish nationalism by enlarge was about equality and not
> > always separatism. This is why O'Connell is known in Ireland as "The
> > Liberator" for his success in achieving Catholic Emancipation.
>
> > ***This reads like the confused jumble of a 10 year old's history homework,
> > especially if you are claiming that peaceful means were the 'cornerstop' of
> > modern Irish nationalism.
>
> > improvements in political institutions can be obtained by persevering
> > in a perfectly peaceable and legal course, and cannot be obtained by
> > forcible means, or if they could be got by forcible means, such means
> > create more evils than they cure, and leave the country worse than
>
> > ***Again from your website link:
>
> > ***"Political and cultural nationalism flowed in many streams in
> > nineteenth-century Ireland and was understood in many different ways. Two
> > main traditions can be discerned, though many held a position somewhere
> > between. The one expressed itself through constitutional means, parliament,
> > doubtful whether O¹Connell was a nationalist), and the Home Rule movement of
yawn this tiresome fool,
I am still awaiting for you to retract your wild and proven to be
incorrect claim. So much for your case proven and closed.
"There is no URL in existence, and you made the post up just to
denigrate an institution you know absolutely nothing about (and
cannot even distinguish from Ohio University). You are, pure and
simple, a
bare faced liar. Case proven and closed".
As for solictor friend, the City is full of them as anyone from this
part of the world knows. So thats hardly unsurprising and I certainly
never threatened anyone with one (Maybe you would care to back that up
with a quote), only a moron would threaten somebody they don't know on
the other side of the world. Though I am scared to travel these days
as I am afraid of some american football player waiting for me, who
would threaten such a thing. Sorry though that made me laugh so hard
it brought a tear to my eye.
Those posts where entertaining.
Sophistry Made Simple
Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole Spanish
thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse and on the issue of
modern nationalism I can only surmise that you are confusing it with the
narrow definition as applied to sections of NI politics. If so, you're way
off beam again. The remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning
for nationhood, more a letter of complaint, going over the heads of local
management straight to the boss of Christendom Inc, and asking the local
branch to be merged with the Scottish division. You should look at the
facts and draw a conclusion, not the other way around.
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:97b7b6ca-96f2-4fd0...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On 3 Jul, 00:14, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
> > wrote:
> >> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:2ef191a5-3b27-4b1c...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >so your trying to tell me there is no spanish influence in Galway.
>
> >> Oh good grief - you took a week to come back with this pile of shite?
>
> > You must think I have nothing better to do. I reply when I have time,
> > thats the beauty of usenet. Though a few good rational points that
> > post.
>
> Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole Spanish
> thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse
"The old Spanish houses are in ruins and tufts of weeds are growing in
the splays of the bay windows. Outside the town walls rise the
suburbs, new, gay and thoughtless of the past. However, it is enough
to close one’s eyes against this unsettling modernity just for a
moment, and the ‘Spanish City’ can be seen in the shadows of history."
-James Joyce
Joyce goes further naming streets such as Madeira Street, Spaniards
Walk, Velasquez Palmyra Avenue clearly indicating a latin european
connection. The Hibernian divisons in the Spanish army and the
migration of Irish to Spain.
> and on the issue of
> modern nationalism I can only surmise that you are confusing it with the
> narrow definition as applied to sections of NI politics.
Irish nationalism in the North has little difference to Irish
nationalism in the Republic. Culturally, historically and idealogy
wise they are pretty much the same. The PIRA and its splitter groups
are the last of the revolutionary nationalists in Ireland which is
much closer to that of Irish revolutionaires in the past, including
Wolfe Tone.
> If so, you're way
> off beam again. The remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning
> for nationhood, more a letter of complaint, going over the heads of local
> management straight to the boss of Christendom Inc, and asking the local
> branch to be merged with the Scottish division. You should look at the
> facts and draw a conclusion, not the other way around.
I have never claimed the remonstrance was a declaration of national
yearning, the remonstrance is an example of a declaration of the Irish
nationhood. Domhnall Ó Néill within the remonstrance clearly refers to
'our nation' and the 'fact of being Irish' clearly not only showing
the existance of Ireland as a nation with a high king linage but that
as a nation it was self aware. There is no yearning but a direct claim
of nationhood.
"In the King of England's court in Ireland these laws are rigidly
observed, viz. that any person that is not an Irishman may bring any
Irishman into court on any cause of action without restriction; but
every Irishman, cleric or lay, excepting only prelates, is refused all
recourse to law by the very fact of being Irish."
"For, from the time when in consequence of that grant the English
iniquitously but with some show of religion entered within the limits
of our kingdom, they have striven with all their might and with every
treacherous artifice in their power, to wipe our nation out entirely
and utterly to extirpate it."
From the UCC link I provided earlier.
Sophistry Made Simple
> Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole Spanish
> thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse
"The old Spanish houses are in ruins and tufts of weeds are growing in
the splays of the bay windows. Outside the town walls rise the
suburbs, new, gay and thoughtless of the past. However, it is enough
to close one’s eyes against this unsettling modernity just for a
moment, and the ‘Spanish City’ can be seen in the shadows of history."
-James Joyce
Joyce goes further naming streets such as Madeira Street, Spaniards
Walk, Velasquez Palmyra Avenue clearly indicating a latin european
connection. The Hibernian divisons in the Spanish army and the
migration of Irish to Spain.
Big deal - I lived on Third Avenue, off Seville Place, walked to work up
Amiens St., Northumberland St., Nassau St. Every city has such things, the
difference here being that I can show you them - where are the Joyce
streets? Madeira is Portuguese and Palmyra is in Syria so he's just like
you - stretching things a bit.
How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army? You are still
not giving me anything about the slaughter of the Armada survivors by the
loyal Irish. That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
issue.
Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6111dbff-3bc2-4737...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole Spanish
> > thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse
>
> "The old Spanish houses are in ruins and tufts of weeds are growing in
> the splays of the bay windows. Outside the town walls rise the
> suburbs, new, gay and thoughtless of the past. However, it is enough
> to close one’s eyes against this unsettling modernity just for a
> moment, and the ‘Spanish City’ can be seen in the shadows of history."
>
> -James Joyce
>
> Joyce goes further naming streets such as Madeira Street, Spaniards
> Walk, Velasquez Palmyra Avenue clearly indicating a latin european
> connection. The Hibernian divisons in the Spanish army and the
> migration of Irish to Spain.
>
> Big deal - I lived on Third Avenue, off Seville Place, walked to work up
> Amiens St., Northumberland St., Nassau St. Every city has such things, the
> difference here being that I can show you them - where are the Joyce
> streets? Madeira is Portuguese and Palmyra is in Syria so he's just like
> you - stretching things a bit.
You must think I was never in Galway!
>
> How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army?
Certainly showing a link between Britian and Ireland just as their was
a link between Spain and Ireland at the time of the Armada! Yet you
calimed their where no bloolines
> You are still
> not giving me anything about the slaughter of the Armada survivors by the
> loyal Irish.
Again I have already shown how 1300 men where put on the Girona by
MacSweeney Bannagh. How O’Neill in Ulster sent provisions and aid to
the survivors who had been shipwrecked in his territory. It is also
known that Devil’s Hook(son in law of Irish pirate Grace O'Malley) and
Sir Murrough-ne-Doe O’Flaherty offered refuge to Spanish survivors.
The O'Rourke's of Breffni also aided the Spanish who landed of the
coast of Leitrim. Brian O'Rourke also called Battle Axe was hanged in
London for aiding Spanish survivors.
You cannot tell me exactly how many Spanish ships landed in Ireland,
how many spanish made it ashore in total. Nobody knows this
information and any figures are at best a bit of an estimate.
> That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> issue.
Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
>
> Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
Sophistry Made Simple
On 4 Jul, 22:14, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6111dbff-3bc2-4737...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole Spanish
> > thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse
>
> "The old Spanish houses are in ruins and tufts of weeds are growing in
> the splays of the bay windows. Outside the town walls rise the
> suburbs, new, gay and thoughtless of the past. However, it is enough
> to close one’s eyes against this unsettling modernity just for a
> moment, and the ‘Spanish City’ can be seen in the shadows of history."
>
> -James Joyce
>
> Joyce goes further naming streets such as Madeira Street, Spaniards
> Walk, Velasquez Palmyra Avenue clearly indicating a latin european
> connection. The Hibernian divisons in the Spanish army and the
> migration of Irish to Spain.
>
> Big deal - I lived on Third Avenue, off Seville Place, walked to work up
> Amiens St., Northumberland St., Nassau St. Every city has such things, the
> difference here being that I can show you them - where are the Joyce
> streets? Madeira is Portuguese and Palmyra is in Syria so he's just like
> you - stretching things a bit.
You must think I was never in Galway!
Can you tell me where those streets are then? Or what the Spanish
connection to them is?
>
> How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army?
Certainly showing a link between Britian and Ireland just as their was
a link between Spain and Ireland at the time of the Armada! Yet you
calimed their where no bloolines
Er - what? Would you like to type that again?
> You are still
> not giving me anything about the slaughter of the Armada survivors by the
> loyal Irish.
Again I have already shown how 1300 men where put on the Girona by
MacSweeney Bannagh. How O’Neill in Ulster sent provisions and aid to
the survivors who had been shipwrecked in his territory. It is also
known that Devil’s Hook(son in law of Irish pirate Grace O'Malley) and
Sir Murrough-ne-Doe O’Flaherty offered refuge to Spanish survivors.
The O'Rourke's of Breffni also aided the Spanish who landed of the
coast of Leitrim. Brian O'Rourke also called Battle Axe was hanged in
London for aiding Spanish survivors.
You cannot tell me exactly how many Spanish ships landed in Ireland,
how many spanish made it ashore in total. Nobody knows this
information and any figures are at best a bit of an estimate.
Yet you seem so certain of them yourself - that the entire characteristics
of Irish appearance changed, but nobody can find any Spaniards!
> That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> issue.
Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
This is James Joyce, the renowned historian or the one one famed for
sticking in any old bollocks that occurred to him?
> Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
You might do well to read them all the way through.
How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
Read, analyse, conclude - not copy, paste, and step back beaming.
freeireland
Did you actually do any research at all on this. The wikipedia entry
for Galway even has a photograph of Spanish Parade. Its near the city
center and its the street the House hotel is on.
The Spanish connection is simple, the word Spanish is in the street
name.
>
>
>
> > How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army?
>
> Certainly showing a link between Britian and Ireland just as their was
> a link between Spain and Ireland at the time of the Armada! Yet you
> calimed their where no bloolines
>
> Er - what? Would you like to type that again?
Well you claimed previously there are no bloodlines between the Irish
and Spanish. Yet it seems you agree there where Hibernian divisions
within the Spanish military. How can this be and there still be no
bloodlines?
>
> > You are still
> > not giving me anything about the slaughter of the Armada survivors by the
> > loyal Irish.
>
> Again I have already shown how 1300 men where put on the Girona by
> MacSweeney Bannagh. How O’Neill in Ulster sent provisions and aid to
> the survivors who had been shipwrecked in his territory. It is also
> known that Devil’s Hook(son in law of Irish pirate Grace O'Malley) and
> Sir Murrough-ne-Doe O’Flaherty offered refuge to Spanish survivors.
> The O'Rourke's of Breffni also aided the Spanish who landed of the
> coast of Leitrim. Brian O'Rourke also called Battle Axe was hanged in
> London for aiding Spanish survivors.
>
> You cannot tell me exactly how many Spanish ships landed in Ireland,
> how many spanish made it ashore in total. Nobody knows this
> information and any figures are at best a bit of an estimate.
>
> Yet you seem so certain of them yourself - that the entire characteristics
> of Irish appearance changed, but nobody can find any Spaniards!
For example, for centuries historians had dismissed rumours of a
spanish ship from the armada that had run a ground and sunk of
Inishbofin as a myth. Yet only a few decades ago an anchor of an
unknown ship of the same design used by the spanish at the time of the
armada was found of the coast of Inishbofin. Historians have now
revised this to a possible fact. The anchor was on display at some
small historical centre in Connemara a few years ago and probably
still is.
"that the entire characteristics of Irish appearance changed"
At no stage did I say this or make this claim.
I have clearly previously claimed that nobody knows how many Spanish
landed of the coast of Ireland from the Armada. On some occasions we
know how many where killed or aided by the Irish. However as I have
clearly demonstrated many Spanish sailors where infact aided by the
Irish clans and I have clearly identified some examples. If you
disagree with these then which ones instead of making some vague
remark such as "but nobody can find any Spaniards!" Since being found
resulted in execution I would doubt many wanted to be found.
>
> > That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> > issue.
>
> Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
> the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
> ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
>
> This is James Joyce, the renowned historian or the one one famed for
> sticking in any old bollocks that occurred to him?
Is this the level you have sunk too, attack the messenger. Joyce is
considered one of the most influential writers of the 20th century and
most of this writings are based on his observations. You comments do
not make his observations any less correct.
>
> > Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> > wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
>
> Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
> about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
> At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
>
> You might do well to read them all the way through.
>
> How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
> in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
>
> Read, analyse, conclude - not copy, paste, and step back beaming.
You sould try taking your own advise. For example you posted "The
remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning for
nationhood". I never claimed it was a yearning for anything. What next
are you going to start picking up on grammer or spelling mistakes?
In regards to nationalism, I posted the meaning of nationalism from a
modern and more traditional dictionary, I have clearly identified the
documented origins of the Irish nation, I have clearly quoted from a
document showing the Irish as a self aware nation in 1317. I have
identified different traits of nationalism, cultural, ethnic etc. To
deny that Irish nationalism existed before wolfe tone in light of the
evidence leads me to believe you are certainly lacking in the
analysing or concluding department. If I didn't post quotations or
links you would be attacking me for not doing so and if I do I am just
copying and pasting. This is just as weak as you complaining about the
length of time it took me to reply.
PS: I posted this on a mobile device, what a nitemare,
Sophistry Made Simple
**** Oh for fuck sake. The street mentioned by Joyce is 'Spaniards Walk' -
do you know of a street by that name? Do you know of the other streets he
mentioned?
> > How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army?
>
> Certainly showing a link between Britian and Ireland just as their was
> a link between Spain and Ireland at the time of the Armada! Yet you
> calimed their where no bloolines
> Er - what? Would you like to type that again?
Well you claimed previously there are no bloodlines between the Irish
and Spanish. Yet it seems you agree there where Hibernian divisions
within the Spanish military. How can this be and there still be no
bloodlines?
**** Are you really this stupid or are you doing a Ray on me? You are
making a claim for Spanish bloodlines in Ireland and supporting your point
by pointing out Irish people in Spain? You may as well claim an influx of
English genes because of all the Paddies on the canals in Britain.
***** What does this prove? That they found an anchor - literally big
swinging one. We KNOW that they were there, this is not disputed.
"that the entire characteristics of Irish appearance changed"
At no stage did I say this or make this claim.
**** You fucking did so. You claimed that the Irish, especially along the
coast, 'had darkened' - and I quote:
"did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became dark.
Especially around coastal areas"
I have clearly previously claimed that nobody knows how many Spanish
landed of the coast of Ireland from the Armada. On some occasions we
know how many where killed or aided by the Irish. However as I have
clearly demonstrated many Spanish sailors where infact aided by the
Irish clans and I have clearly identified some examples. If you
disagree with these then which ones instead of making some vague
remark such as "but nobody can find any Spaniards!" Since being found
resulted in execution I would doubt many wanted to be found.
*** We know that the majority of surviovors were butchered, some by
treachery, some by wreckers, almost all by Irishmen. We know that one ship
was helped, but was itself lost with few survivors. We know that some small
bands were saved from massacre and sent on to Dublin where they were then
killed anyway. We know that some small bands were sent on to Scotland. We
know that most were killed, we know that a tiny fraction were helped and
made it home.
*** Most of all, we know that in the end the only ones to stay were the dead
ones.
> > That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> > issue.
>
> Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
> the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
> ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
>
> This is James Joyce, the renowned historian or the one one famed for
> sticking in any old bollocks that occurred to him?
Is this the level you have sunk too, attack the messenger.
*** Oh you are Ray, aren't you?
Joyce is
considered one of the most influential writers of the 20th century and
most of this writings are based on his observations. You comments do
not make his observations any less correct.
*** Spoken like a true Irish Joyce scholar, so in love with his writing that
it would besmirch his memory were you actually to read any of it.
> > Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> > wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
>
> Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
> about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
> At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
>
> You might do well to read them all the way through.
>
> How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
> in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
>
> Read, analyse, conclude - not copy, paste, and step back beaming.
You sould try taking your own advise. For example you posted "The
remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning for
nationhood". I never claimed it was a yearning for anything. What next
are you going to start picking up on grammer or spelling mistakes?
*** You see, that's what it means - read, analyse and conclude. Think about
it for a while, maybe it will come to you.
In regards to nationalism, I posted the meaning of nationalism from a
modern and more traditional dictionary, I have clearly identified the
documented origins of the Irish nation, I have clearly quoted from a
document showing the Irish as a self aware nation in 1317. I have
identified different traits of nationalism, cultural, ethnic etc. To
deny that Irish nationalism existed before wolfe tone in light of the
evidence leads me to believe you are certainly lacking in the
analysing or concluding department. If I didn't post quotations or
links you would be attacking me for not doing so and if I do I am just
copying and pasting. This is just as weak as you complaining about the
length of time it took me to reply.
*** All you have shown is that you don't really understand what you are
trying to talk about. Really.
Personally, I hate quotes and links, anyone can do it, it seldom proves
anything save that the poster hasn't actually read or understood it.
PS: I posted this on a mobile device, what a nitemare,
*** You can offer it up for the suffering souls of them that have to read
it.
freeireland
Oh for fuck self yourself, manners do not cost much. I have clearly
identified a street in Galway called Spanish Parade. I know this as I
stayed in a hotel on that location. This is pathetic avoidance of the
point. Clearly there are streets in Galway with a Spanish connection.
If I quote somebody claiming such I am just cutting and pasting and if
I demonstrate from my personal experience of Galway its not good
enough either.
>
> > > How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army?
>
> > Certainly showing a link between Britian and Ireland just as their was
> > a link between Spain and Ireland at the time of the Armada! Yet you
> > calimed their where no bloolines
> > Er - what? Would you like to type that again?
>
> Well you claimed previously there are no bloodlines between the Irish
> and Spanish. Yet it seems you agree there where Hibernian divisions
> within the Spanish military. How can this be and there still be no
> bloodlines?
>
> **** Are you really this stupid or are you doing a Ray on me? You are
> making a claim for Spanish bloodlines in Ireland and supporting your point
> by pointing out Irish people in Spain? You may as well claim an influx of
> English genes because of all the Paddies on the canals in Britain.
>
Whats with the pathetic insults? Bloodlines and family connections
work both ways. For example Beare in Cork gets its name from the
Spanish Princess Bera. O'Sullivan Beare marched from Glengariff to
Leitrim on the 31-12-1602 to 14-01-1603 in an attempt to join with the
O'Rourke¹s and then O'Neills. 1000 men left with Beare yet only 36
arrived. Some died in battles and from exposure though most settled.
These settles became know as the 'the Beres'. Just one blatent example
of a Spanish named tribe in Ireland.
The point it is it was disputed and declared a myth for 400 years. It
also clearly shows that nobody knows how many ships landed of the
coast of Ireland.
>
> "that the entire characteristics of Irish appearance changed"
>
> At no stage did I say this or make this claim.
>
> **** You fucking did so. You claimed that the Irish, especially along the
> coast, 'had darkened' - and I quote:
> "did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became dark.
> Especially around coastal areas"
Hair colour is hardly the entire characteristics of Irish appearence
is it?
>
> I have clearly previously claimed that nobody knows how many Spanish
> landed of the coast of Ireland from the Armada. On some occasions we
> know how many where killed or aided by the Irish. However as I have
> clearly demonstrated many Spanish sailors where infact aided by the
> Irish clans and I have clearly identified some examples. If you
> disagree with these then which ones instead of making some vague
> remark such as "but nobody can find any Spaniards!" Since being found
> resulted in execution I would doubt many wanted to be found.
>
> *** We know that the majority of surviovors were butchered, some by
> treachery, some by wreckers, almost all by Irishmen. We know that one ship
> was helped, but was itself lost with few survivors. We know that some small
> bands were saved from massacre and sent on to Dublin where they were then
> killed anyway. We know that some small bands were sent on to Scotland. We
> know that most were killed, we know that a tiny fraction were helped and
> made it home.
You cannot know that, as you clearly do not know how many actually
landed! One ship was not aided many where. Do you think one ship
carried 1300 men with arms. Just because 9 men requested transport to
Scotland from a catholic bishop does not mean the rest died. Thats an
assumption nothing more. I have also given other examples.
>
> *** Most of all, we know that in the end the only ones to stay were the dead
> ones.
I just want you to explain how you intend to prove that. Especially
considering how you cannot even tell me how many ships landed of the
coast of Ireland never mind the number of men?
>
> > > That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> > > issue.
>
> > Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
> > the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
> > ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
>
> > This is James Joyce, the renowned historian or the one one famed for
> > sticking in any old bollocks that occurred to him?
>
> Is this the level you have sunk too, attack the messenger.
>
> *** Oh you are Ray, aren't you?
yawn, not attacking me by association. As if this pathetic tactic has
never been used before. At least try and be original.
>
> Joyce is
> considered one of the most influential writers of the 20th century and
> most of this writings are based on his observations. You comments do
> not make his observations any less correct.
>
> *** Spoken like a true Irish Joyce scholar, so in love with his writing that
> it would besmirch his memory were you actually to read any of it.
lol, No doubt Joyce is not everyones cup of tea. Clearly as I have
quoted from him I have clearly read at least some of it.
>
> > > Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> > > wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
>
> > Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
> > about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
> > At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
>
> > You might do well to read them all the way through.
>
> > How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
> > in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
>
> > Read, analyse, conclude - not copy, paste, and step back beaming.
>
> You sould try taking your own advise. For example you posted "The
> remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning for
> nationhood". I never claimed it was a yearning for anything. What next
> are you going to start picking up on grammer or spelling mistakes?
>
> *** You see, that's what it means - read, analyse and conclude. Think about
> it for a while, maybe it will come to you.
No this is reading and then jumping to the conclusions you want to
draw.
>
> In regards to nationalism, I posted the meaning of nationalism from a
> modern and more traditional dictionary, I have clearly identified the
> documented origins of the Irish nation, I have clearly quoted from a
> document showing the Irish as a self aware nation in 1317. I have
> identified different traits of nationalism, cultural, ethnic etc. To
> deny that Irish nationalism existed before wolfe tone in light of the
> evidence leads me to believe you are certainly lacking in the
> analysing or concluding department. If I didn't post quotations or
> links you would be attacking me for not doing so and if I do I am just
> copying and pasting. This is just as weak as you complaining about the
> length of time it took me to reply.
>
> *** All you have shown is that you don't really understand what you are
> trying to talk about. Really.
> Personally, I hate quotes and links, anyone can do it, it seldom proves
> anything save that the poster hasn't actually read or understood it.
Thats a strong point you make. To claim someone does not understand
what they are talking about when you cannot explain why shows a
lacking in your part not mine. Or are you going to waste some more
bandwidth trying to associate me with some other person or group or
childish name calling.
>
> PS: I posted this on a mobile device, what a nitemare,
>
> *** You can offer it up for the suffering souls of them that have to read
> it.
Nobody has to read my posts at all, maybe I'll offer it up to those
who feel compelled to read it though. Can you understand the
difference.
Sophistry Made Simple
****Joyce spoke of Spaniards Walk - can you identify that one? Did he make
a mistake? Can you identify the other streets, perhaps he made some
mistakes there too?
I know this as I
stayed in a hotel on that location. This is pathetic avoidance of the
point. Clearly there are streets in Galway with a Spanish connection.
If I quote somebody claiming such I am just cutting and pasting and if
I demonstrate from my personal experience of Galway its not good
enough either.
****Just answer the questions. Don't give me your tourist crap, or the sort
of shite that paints rosy pictures of galleons nestling safely under the
guns of the Spanish Arch when the thing was built to defend against them not
to welcome them.
>
> > > How many divisions of Irishmen served in the British Army?
>
> > Certainly showing a link between Britian and Ireland just as their was
> > a link between Spain and Ireland at the time of the Armada! Yet you
> > calimed their where no bloolines
> > Er - what? Would you like to type that again?
>
> Well you claimed previously there are no bloodlines between the Irish
> and Spanish. Yet it seems you agree there where Hibernian divisions
> within the Spanish military. How can this be and there still be no
> bloodlines?
>
> **** Are you really this stupid or are you doing a Ray on me? You are
> making a claim for Spanish bloodlines in Ireland and supporting your point
> by pointing out Irish people in Spain? You may as well claim an influx of
> English genes because of all the Paddies on the canals in Britain.
>
Whats with the pathetic insults? Bloodlines and family connections
work both ways. For example Beare in Cork gets its name from the
Spanish Princess Bera. O'Sullivan Beare marched from Glengariff to
Leitrim on the 31-12-1602 to 14-01-1603 in an attempt to join with the
O'Rourke¹s and then O'Neills. 1000 men left with Beare yet only 36
arrived. Some died in battles and from exposure though most settled.
These settles became know as the 'the Beres'. Just one blatent example
of a Spanish named tribe in Ireland.
***You stupid man, Bere, Beara, whatever, long predates this period, it
predates even the entity that became known as Spain. You haven't addressed
the one single point at issue - your claim that so many Spaniards survived
the wrecks of the Armada that they intermarried in such great numbers as to
change the very colouration of the Irish.
***Yet you are convinced that so many survived to change the appearance of
the entire Irish people. The finding of a single anchor does nothing to
prove or disprove anything.
>
> "that the entire characteristics of Irish appearance changed"
>
> At no stage did I say this or make this claim.
>
> **** You fucking did so. You claimed that the Irish, especially along the
> coast, 'had darkened' - and I quote:
> "did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became dark.
> Especially around coastal areas"
Hair colour is hardly the entire characteristics of Irish appearence
is it?
***Pretty big part if it's red.
> I have clearly previously claimed that nobody knows how many Spanish
> landed of the coast of Ireland from the Armada. On some occasions we
> know how many where killed or aided by the Irish. However as I have
> clearly demonstrated many Spanish sailors where infact aided by the
> Irish clans and I have clearly identified some examples. If you
> disagree with these then which ones instead of making some vague
> remark such as "but nobody can find any Spaniards!" Since being found
> resulted in execution I would doubt many wanted to be found.
>
> *** We know that the majority of surviovors were butchered, some by
> treachery, some by wreckers, almost all by Irishmen. We know that one ship
> was helped, but was itself lost with few survivors. We know that some
> small
> bands were saved from massacre and sent on to Dublin where they were then
> killed anyway. We know that some small bands were sent on to Scotland. We
> know that most were killed, we know that a tiny fraction were helped and
> made it home.
You cannot know that, as you clearly do not know how many actually
landed! One ship was not aided many where. Do you think one ship
carried 1300 men with arms. Just because 9 men requested transport to
Scotland from a catholic bishop does not mean the rest died. Thats an
assumption nothing more. I have also given other examples.
***The Girona was helped and then sank. You have given no examples
whatsoever of survivors remaining here, none of any staying alive - not one.
>
> *** Most of all, we know that in the end the only ones to stay were the
> dead
> ones.
I just want you to explain how you intend to prove that. Especially
considering how you cannot even tell me how many ships landed of the
coast of Ireland never mind the number of men?
****This is the kind of shite that kept me from answering this for so long.
The records kept by the Spanish were meticulous, and can still be inspected.
The number of ships returning are known, the fates of most are documented,
the rest disappeared without a trace. A legation was sent to Ireland to
discover the fate of the survivors - only one was found. This is historical
fact. You are welcome to show how many you think landed here, how many
remained here, and being all males how many Spanish surnames they bequeathed
to posterity.
> > > That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> > > issue.
>
> > Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
> > the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
> > ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
>
> > This is James Joyce, the renowned historian or the one one famed for
> > sticking in any old bollocks that occurred to him?
>
> Is this the level you have sunk too, attack the messenger.
>
> *** Oh you are Ray, aren't you?
yawn, not attacking me by association. As if this pathetic tactic has
never been used before. At least try and be original.
>
> Joyce is
> considered one of the most influential writers of the 20th century and
> most of this writings are based on his observations. You comments do
> not make his observations any less correct.
>
> *** Spoken like a true Irish Joyce scholar, so in love with his writing
> that
> it would besmirch his memory were you actually to read any of it.
lol, No doubt Joyce is not everyones cup of tea. Clearly as I have
quoted from him I have clearly read at least some of it.
***Joyce went to Galway twice in his whole life, what he didn't know he made
up. I've been there more times this week alone.
> > > Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> > > wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
>
> > Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
> > about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
> > At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
>
> > You might do well to read them all the way through.
>
> > How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
> > in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
>
> > Read, analyse, conclude - not copy, paste, and step back beaming.
>
> You sould try taking your own advise. For example you posted "The
> remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning for
> nationhood". I never claimed it was a yearning for anything. What next
> are you going to start picking up on grammer or spelling mistakes?
>
> *** You see, that's what it means - read, analyse and conclude. Think
> about
> it for a while, maybe it will come to you.
No this is reading and then jumping to the conclusions you want to
draw.
***Being stupid again.
> In regards to nationalism, I posted the meaning of nationalism from a
> modern and more traditional dictionary, I have clearly identified the
> documented origins of the Irish nation, I have clearly quoted from a
> document showing the Irish as a self aware nation in 1317. I have
> identified different traits of nationalism, cultural, ethnic etc. To
> deny that Irish nationalism existed before wolfe tone in light of the
> evidence leads me to believe you are certainly lacking in the
> analysing or concluding department. If I didn't post quotations or
> links you would be attacking me for not doing so and if I do I am just
> copying and pasting. This is just as weak as you complaining about the
> length of time it took me to reply.
>
> *** All you have shown is that you don't really understand what you are
> trying to talk about. Really.
> Personally, I hate quotes and links, anyone can do it, it seldom proves
> anything save that the poster hasn't actually read or understood it.
Thats a strong point you make. To claim someone does not understand
what they are talking about when you cannot explain why shows a
lacking in your part not mine. Or are you going to waste some more
bandwidth trying to associate me with some other person or group or
childish name calling.
*fuck no, unless you can come up with something to back up your ridiculous
assertion I have no intention of wasting any more time on you. It's also
already been explained to you by several people the difference between a
national identity and the modern concept of nationalism and it is very clear
that you simply cannot grasp what that difference is, or indeed the very
meaning of nationalism itself. Your confusion is evident, but I do not
intend to waste any more time trying to get it into your head either.
Hal Ó Mearadhaigh.
> "freeireland" <kmce...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:194ae50a-897d-4f69...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>>>> Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole
>>>>> Spanish
>>>>> thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse
>>
>>>> "The old Spanish houses are in ruins and tufts of weeds are
>>>> growing in the splays of the bay windows. Outside the town walls
>>>> rise the suburbs, new, gay and thoughtless of the past. However,
>>>> it is enough to close one’s eyes against this unsettling modernity
>>>> just for a moment, and the ‘Spanish City’ can be seen in the
>>>> shadows of history."
>>
>>>> -James Joyce
>>
>>>> Joyce goes further naming streets such as Madeira Street, Spaniards
>>>> Walk, Velasquez Palmyra Avenue clearly indicating a latin european
>>>> connection. The Hibernian divisons in the Spanish army and the
>>>> migration of Irish to Spain.
........"SNIP of nonsense".......
The Spanish Armada WAS wrecked off the Irish West coast and also the
Hebridean coast:
"
Columbia Encyclopedia: Spanish Armada
(ärmä'də) , 1588, fleet launched by Philip II of Spain for the invasion of
England, to overthrow the Protestant Elizabeth I and establish Philip on the
English throne; also called the Invincible Armada. Preparations, under the
command of the marqués de Santa Cruz, began in 1586 but were seriously
delayed by a surprise attack on Cádiz by Sir Francis Drake in 1587. By the
time the expedition was ready Santa Cruz had died, and command was given to
the duque de Medina Sidonia. The Armada consisted of 130 ships, including
transports and merchantmen, and carried about 30,000 men. It was to go to
Flanders and from there convoy the army of Alessandro Farnese, duke of
Parma, to invade England. It set out from Lisbon in May, 1588, but was
forced into A Coruña by storms and did not set sail again until July. Medina
Sidonia's orders were to proceed straight up the English Channel and refuse
battle until he had made junction with Parma. This gave the initiative to
the English, whose main fleet, commanded by Charles Howard (later earl of
Nottingham), sailed out from Plymouth to achieve the windward side of the
Spanish and attacked at long range. Three minor actions followed, in which
the Armada was somewhat damaged but its formation unbroken. On Aug. 6,
Medina Sidonia anchored off Calais, from which position he hoped to make
contact with Parma. The following night the English sent fire ships into the
anchorage, causing the Spanish fleet to scatter, and then attacked (Aug. 8)
at close range off Gravelines. Unable to re-form, the Armada was severely
battered, but a sudden change in the wind enabled most of the ships to
escape northward. In attempting to sail home by Scotland and the west coast
of Ireland, the Spanish ships were dispersed by storms; their provisions
gave out; and many of those who landed in Ireland were killed by English
troops. Only about half the fleet reached home.
Bibliography
See G. Mattingly, The Armada (1959); A. McKee, From Merciless Invaders
(1964); W. Graham, The Spanish Armadas (1972).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.answers.com/topic/spanish-armada
Also, many hundreds of Spaniards DID land in Ireland and intermarried. There
is no denying the "Spanish" look which exists down the West coast of
Ireland.
AND:
Due to a lack of accurate maps and nautical drawings, the more than half the
ships ran aground off the coast of Ireland. The weather kept pushing the
ships into the legs of Ireland, and the captains let it. They took the
beating not knowing how precariously close they were to the shore and rocks
until it was too late. (13) The winds were pushing the ships to the limit
and in the end the ships were not able to make it because of a lack of
knowledge and just fatigue. Finally, the straggling fleet of the once
powerful Armada landed in September 1588 in Santander, Spain. The ships were
badly damaged, as were the men abroad.
http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/armada.htm
I suggest you all do a Google!
LOL!
--
Hal Ó Mearadhaigh.
(Glac bóg an saol agus glacfaidh an saol bóg thú).
Sophistry Made Simple
"Hal Ó Mearadhaigh." <home...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6egphgF...@mid.individual.net...
> Sophistry Made Simple wrote:
>> "freeireland" <kmce...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:194ae50a-897d-4f69...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>>>> Fair enough - but it was rubbish, you are way off on this whole
>>>>>> Spanish
>>>>>> thing, dragging Galway in was making it even worse
>>>
>>>>> "The old Spanish houses are in ruins and tufts of weeds are
>>>>> growing in the splays of the bay windows. Outside the town walls
>>>>> rise the suburbs, new, gay and thoughtless of the past. However,
>>>>> just for a moment, and the ‘Spanish City’ can be seen in the
>>>>> shadows of history."
>>>
>>>>> -James Joyce
>>>
>>>>> Joyce goes further naming streets such as Madeira Street, Spaniards
>>>>> Walk, Velasquez Palmyra Avenue clearly indicating a latin european
>>>>> connection. The Hibernian divisons in the Spanish army and the
>>>>> migration of Irish to Spain.
>
> ........"SNIP of nonsense".......
>
> The Spanish Armada WAS wrecked off the Irish West coast and also the
> Hebridean coast:
SNIP waste of time cut and paste, do you seriously think you were adding
something anyone didn't know here?
> http://www.answers.com/topic/spanish-armada
Thereby showing it was you that needed to look it up.
> Also, many hundreds of Spaniards DID land in Ireland and intermarried.
> There is no denying the "Spanish" look which exists down the West coast of
> Ireland.
Oh right, he knows so much about it that he had to look it up on fucking
answers.com. So some people in Connemara have dark hair - wow! They must be
Spanish - there's absolutely no other explanation! And the Spaniards must
all have been women because they left no surnames. Strangely no christian
names either. And no Spanish words made their way into the local dialects.
Italians traded with Spain and they have all got dark hair - wow! They must
all be Spanish too - and, and, and the Greeks, and the Arabs, my lord, those
Spanish women really got around.
> AND:
> Due to a lack of accurate maps and nautical drawings, the more than half
> the ships ran aground off the coast of Ireland. The weather kept pushing
> the ships into the legs of Ireland, and the captains let it. They took the
> beating not knowing how precariously close they were to the shore and
> rocks until it was too late. (13) The winds were pushing the ships to the
> limit and in the end the ships were not able to make it because of a lack
> of knowledge and just fatigue. Finally, the straggling fleet of the once
> powerful Armada landed in September 1588 in Santander, Spain. The ships
> were badly damaged, as were the men abroad.
>
> http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/armada.htm
>
> I suggest you all do a Google!
I suggest you fuck off and read a few books on the subject and come back
when you don't have to cut and paste somebody else's work when you haven't
got anything of your own to say. I have to wonder just what kind of a
stupid cunt jumps into a thread like this with a contribution like that. Oh
right - it's Merrick, isn't it?
Hal Ó Mearadhaigh.
It was obvious from your remarks that YOU certainly did not!
>
>> http://www.answers.com/topic/spanish-armada
>
> Thereby showing it was you that needed to look it up.
At thge very least I took the time and trouble to indeed look it up, which
you, in your arrogance and self important opinionated style, has failed
completly to do!
>
>> Also, many hundreds of Spaniards DID land in Ireland and
>> intermarried. There is no denying the "Spanish" look which exists
>> down the West coast of Ireland.
>
> Oh right, he knows so much about it that he had to look it up on
> fucking answers.com.
Plenty more where that came from!
>So some people in Connemara have dark hair -
> wow! They must be Spanish - there's absolutely no other explanation!
They not only have dark hair, they have darkish skins as well. Swarthy is
the word. Very different from the buck standard pale skins and reddish hair
of the restof Ireland.
> And the Spaniards must all have been women because they left no
> surnames. Strangely no christian names either. And no Spanish words
> made their way into the local dialects.
<SIGH> Just have a look at the sic. "Irish" names of various towns within
Ireland and try to see where they derived those names from? There is another
thread doing exactly that.
>Italians traded with Spain
> and they have all got dark hair - wow! They must all be Spanish too -
> and, and, and the Greeks, and the Arabs, my lord, those Spanish women
> really got around.
READ this, and try not to be so bloody supercilious and superior!:
Return to Spain
The Spanish fleet sailed around Scotland and Ireland into the North
Atlantic. The ships were beginning to show wear from the long voyage and the
crews were running short on supplies. Shortly after reaching the latitude of
Ireland, the Armada ran straight into a hurricane. To this day, it remains
one of the northernmost hurricanes on record. The hurricane scattered the
fleet far and wide.
Related Topics:
Scotland - Ireland - Latitude - Hurricane
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Many of the ships wrecked on the shores of Ireland. Some of the crews were
slaughtered by English armies in the area. Others took refuge with the
Irish, who were sympathetic to the Catholic cause. Contrary to popular
belief, the Black Irish did not originate from these Spanish sailors.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Records are incomplete, but it is believed that between a third and a half
of the Spanish fleet returned to Spain. Many of the men were near death from
disease, as the conditions were very cramped and most of the ships ran out
of food and water. Many more of the sailors and soldiers died in Spain or on
hospital ships in Spanish harbours from diseases they contracted during the
voyage.
http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/spanish-armada/execution.html
I deliberately left in the item about the "Black Irish" as that is merely a
red herring in this discussion.
>
>> AND:
>> Due to a lack of accurate maps and nautical drawings, the more than
>> half the ships ran aground off the coast of Ireland. The weather
>> kept pushing the ships into the legs of Ireland, and the captains
>> let it. They took the beating not knowing how precariously close
>> they were to the shore and rocks until it was too late. (13) The
>> winds were pushing the ships to the limit and in the end the ships
>> were not able to make it because of a lack of knowledge and just
>> fatigue. Finally, the straggling fleet of the once powerful Armada
>> landed in September 1588 in Santander, Spain. The ships were badly
>> damaged, as were the men abroad.
>> http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/armada.htm
>>
>> I suggest you all do a Google!
>
> I suggest you fuck off and read a few books on the subject and come
> back when you don't have to cut and paste somebody else's work when
> you haven't got anything of your own to say.
It is obvious from your woefully inaccurate and bullish and rude comments,
that you yourself have a lot of reading and also learning of common good
manners to do before anyone can possibly take you seriously.
>I have to wonder just
> what kind of a stupid cunt jumps into a thread like this with a
> contribution like that.
More self opinionated arrogance I see. The reason I "jumped in" as you call
it, was that your rudeness and general bad behavior, not to mention lack of
knowledge and highly illogical argument, attracted my attention.
Oh right - it's Merrick, isn't it?
Yes, it is. I do not have to hide behind pseudonyms to express my opinions
here or elsewhere, unlike your self.
I am not good at arguing with total arseholes, so will not be dealing with
you in future, you doubtless will be glad to hear!
Sophistry Made Simple
Same old Merrick, thick as ever.
>>> http://www.answers.com/topic/spanish-armada
>>
>> Thereby showing it was you that needed to look it up.
>
> At thge very least I took the time and trouble to indeed look it up, which
> you, in your arrogance and self important opinionated style, has failed
> completly to do!
The difference is that I didn't have to.
>>> Also, many hundreds of Spaniards DID land in Ireland and
>>> intermarried. There is no denying the "Spanish" look which exists
>>> down the West coast of Ireland.
>>
>> Oh right, he knows so much about it that he had to look it up on
>> fucking answers.com.
>
> Plenty more where that came from!
Well go and take it to someone who needs to hear it.
>>So some people in Connemara have dark hair -
>> wow! They must be Spanish - there's absolutely no other explanation!
>
> They not only have dark hair, they have darkish skins as well. Swarthy is
> the word. Very different from the buck standard pale skins and reddish
> hair of the restof Ireland.
Oh lordy! Some Irish people have dark hair - and they are tanned too! They
must be Spanish!!! It's the only possible explanation!!!!!
>> And the Spaniards must all have been women because they left no
>> surnames. Strangely no christian names either. And no Spanish words
>> made their way into the local dialects.
>
> <SIGH> Just have a look at the sic. "Irish" names of various towns within
> Ireland and try to see where they derived those names from? There is
> another thread doing exactly that.
Name one.
>>Italians traded with Spain
>> and they have all got dark hair - wow! They must all be Spanish too -
>> and, and, and the Greeks, and the Arabs, my lord, those Spanish women
>> really got around.
>
> READ this, and try not to be so bloody supercilious and superior!:
Some of us are already quite familiar with the events and didn't have to
look it up in the last five minutes, thank you for your time and effort.
Now fuck off unless you have something to actually contribute that doesn't
involve pasting chunks of unread webpages.
SNIP
> Records are incomplete, but it is believed that between a third and a half
Records are not incomplete, Spanish records are meticulous.
>>> I suggest you all do a Google!
>>
>> I suggest you fuck off and read a few books on the subject and come
>> back when you don't have to cut and paste somebody else's work when
>> you haven't got anything of your own to say.
>
> It is obvious from your woefully inaccurate and bullish and rude comments,
> that you yourself have a lot of reading and also learning of common good
> manners to do before anyone can possibly take you seriously.
>
>>I have to wonder just
>> what kind of a stupid cunt jumps into a thread like this with a
>> contribution like that.
>
> More self opinionated arrogance I see. The reason I "jumped in" as you
> call it, was that your rudeness and general bad behavior, not to mention
> lack of knowledge and highly illogical argument, attracted my attention.
Well then you can jump right out again. If a little knowledge is a
dangerous thing you need to take out life insurance.
> Oh right - it's Merrick, isn't it?
>
> Yes, it is. I do not have to hide behind pseudonyms to express my opinions
> here or elsewhere, unlike your self.
> I am not good at arguing with total arseholes, so will not be dealing with
> you in future, you doubtless will be glad to hear!
There's nothing like a happy ending, is there.
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
This is nothing more than side tracking and a lame attempt at avoiding
the point. Clearly I have shown a street from personal experience that
clearly called Spanish Parade that even exists to this day. For one
who claims todo any research you should do your own on James Joyce.
Again for somebody who claims to spend a lot of time in Galway you
certainly have not visited the Galway City Museum. If the Spanish Arch
was built to keep the Spanish out then why was it historically called
The Blind Arch or Head of the Wall. There is no evidence to indicate
the reason why the arch was built other than an extension to the
cities walls and the Spanish Arch name came about much later more
likely in the 19th century. I am surprised anyone who spends as much
time in Galway as you does not know this. Though I would be willing to
write to the Galway musem on your behalf to correct them if you can
provide one shred of evidence to prove they are wrong and you are
correct.
I had at no point claimed it was part of the Armada, though clearly
they had ties to Spain.
Quite the contary until the anchor was found the existance of the ship
was disputed by historians and declared a myth.
>
> The point it is it was disputed and declared a myth for 400 years. It
> also clearly shows that nobody knows how many ships landed of the
> coast of Ireland.
>
> ***Yet you are convinced that so many survived to change the appearance of
> the entire Irish people. The finding of a single anchor does nothing to
> prove or disprove anything.
"As for the spanish armada, did you never thhink why the Irish red
hair suddenly became
dark. Especially around coastal areas"
Thats hardly the entire Irish people. How dare you misrepresent what I
said.
>
>
>
> > "that the entire characteristics of Irish appearance changed"
>
> > At no stage did I say this or make this claim.
>
> > **** You fucking did so. You claimed that the Irish, especially along the
> > coast, 'had darkened' - and I quote:
> > "did you never thhink why the Irish red hair suddenly became dark.
> > Especially around coastal areas"
>
> Hair colour is hardly the entire characteristics of Irish appearence
> is it?
>
> ***Pretty big part if it's red.
Look I will not let you misrepresent what I posted, and its widely
availble to read. Why can you simply not admit that infact I did not
say "that the entire characteristics of Irish appearance changed".
This is a gross missrepresentation of what I said and I ask you to
refrain from doing so or I will continue to point them out.
Hair colour is only one of many characteristics of any person for
example, eye colour, skin tone/colour, skin texture, level of body
hair, height, eye shape, nose shape, moth shape, etc etc. The only
one I actually mentioned was hair colour.
>
> > I have clearly previously claimed that nobody knows how many Spanish
> > landed of the coast of Ireland from the Armada. On some occasions we
> > know how many where killed or aided by the Irish. However as I have
> > clearly demonstrated many Spanish sailors where infact aided by the
> > Irish clans and I have clearly identified some examples. If you
> > disagree with these then which ones instead of making some vague
> > remark such as "but nobody can find any Spaniards!" Since being found
> > resulted in execution I would doubt many wanted to be found.
>
> > *** We know that the majority of surviovors were butchered, some by
> > treachery, some by wreckers, almost all by Irishmen. We know that one ship
> > was helped, but was itself lost with few survivors. We know that some
> > small
> > bands were saved from massacre and sent on to Dublin where they were then
> > killed anyway. We know that some small bands were sent on to Scotland. We
> > know that most were killed, we know that a tiny fraction were helped and
> > made it home.
>
> You cannot know that, as you clearly do not know how many actually
> landed! One ship was not aided many where. Do you think one ship
> carried 1300 men with arms. Just because 9 men requested transport to
> Scotland from a catholic bishop does not mean the rest died. Thats an
> assumption nothing more. I have also given other examples.
>
> ***The was helped and then sank. You have given no examples
> whatsoever of survivors remaining here, none of any staying alive - not one.
>
You have not given any examples of any dying does that mean none died?
"We know that the majority of surviovors were butchered"
Here is the reality, you do not even know how many ships landed of the
coast of Ireland never mind how many men made it ashore to be
butchered.
>
>
> > *** Most of all, we know that in the end the only ones to stay were the
> > dead
> > ones.
>
> I just want you to explain how you intend to prove that. Especially
> considering how you cannot even tell me how many ships landed of the
> coast of Ireland never mind the number of men?
>
> ****This is the kind of shite that kept me from answering this for so long.
> The records kept by the Spanish were meticulous, and can still be inspected.
> The number of ships returning are known, the fates of most are documented,
> the rest disappeared without a trace. A legation was sent to Ireland to
> discover the fate of the survivors - only one was found. This is historical
> fact. You are welcome to show how many you think landed here, how many
> remained here, and being all males how many Spanish surnames they bequeathed
> to posterity.
>
This is shabby research, an envoy of King Phillip II of Spain actually
found 8 spaniards in 1596. This is not the first time I had to
correct your research. Can you tell me how long this legation was in
Ireland, or what parts of Ireland he looked?
> > > > That Galway traded with Europe in the Middle Ages is not the
> > > > issue.
>
> > > Galway traded with a lot of nations yet Joyce still refered to it as
> > > the 'Spanish City' not the Italian City. He also mention the Spanish
> > > ruins not the Italian. Why would any trader build settlements.
>
> > > This is James Joyce, the renowned historian or the one one famed for
> > > sticking in any old bollocks that occurred to him?
>
> > Is this the level you have sunk too, attack the messenger.
>
> > *** Oh you are Ray, aren't you?
>
> yawn, not attacking me by association. As if this pathetic tactic has
> never been used before. At least try and be original.
>
>
>
> > Joyce is
> > considered one of the most influential writers of the 20th century and
> > most of this writings are based on his observations. You comments do
> > not make his observations any less correct.
>
> > *** Spoken like a true Irish Joyce scholar, so in love with his writing
> > that
> > it would besmirch his memory were you actually to read any of it.
>
> lol, No doubt Joyce is not everyones cup of tea. Clearly as I have
> quoted from him I have clearly read at least some of it.
>
> ***Joyce went to Galway twice in his whole life, what he didn't know he made
> up. I've been there more times this week alone.
Yet you clearly did not know of Spanish Parade and clearly where
unknowledgable in regards to the history of the Spanish Arch.
>
> > > > Try and post something you researched yourself this time - I'm sick of
> > > > wading through your arid reams of copy and pasting.
>
> > > Then stop whinging and don't bother. How do you research anything
> > > about the armada without reading material, its not as if I was there.
> > > At least I have provide references(most of them pretty credible).
>
> > > You might do well to read them all the way through.
>
> > > How else could I have proven that Ireland was self aware as a nation
> > > in 1317 without using quotations from the period in question.
>
> > > Read, analyse, conclude - not copy, paste, and step back beaming.
>
> > You sould try taking your own advise. For example you posted "The
> > remonstrance was not a declaration of national yearning for
> > nationhood". I never claimed it was a yearning for anything. What next
> > are you going to start picking up on grammer or spelling mistakes?
>
> > *** You see, that's what it means - read, analyse and conclude. Think
> > about
> > it for a while, maybe it will come to you.
>
> No this is reading and then jumping to the conclusions you want to
> draw.
>
> ***Being stupid again.
yawn, surpised you haveb't mention Ray again.
Look, don't try and bully me into accepting your point of view your
wasting your time, or pushing the everyone else line agrees with me.
Save it for whatever playground you goto. You or nobody else at any
time has even attempted to define what modern nationalism even is. The
fact that nationalism has many forms and there is not one fits all
definition. Again I have shown that written evidence exists of the
Irish origin myths/history. Its not my fault you cannot tell the
difference between a revolutionary and a nationalist, modern Irish
parlimentary nationalism and revolutionary republicanism. To further
compound your ignorance on the subject you even tried to claim
difference in Irish nationalism in Northern Ireland than in the
republic. Incase you have not noticed there are no revolutionaries in
Ireland today.
Nationalism and national identity are both linked. How can you have
one without the other? Which one comes first?
Wolfe Tones revolutionary ideals have no place in modern irish
nationalism today. His polices led tothe creation of Sinn Fein (who
have also abandoned revolution), the IRB, the Fenians etc. Modern
constitutional nationalisism grew out of O'Connell, Parnell and
Redmond. Modern Irish nationalism is not only based on O'Connell's
ideology but the method of political organisation he adopted.
Tell me what did wolfe Tone bring to Irish nationalism that was not
already there and what part of his idealogy is still in use today?
Maybe you should explain what the concept of modern Irish nationalism
is and the date it first existed then?
Sophistry Made Simple
On 20 Jul, 02:28, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> the rest disappeared without a trace. A legation was sent to Ireland to
> discover the fate of the survivors - only one was found. This is
> historical
> fact. You are welcome to show how many you think landed here, how many
> remained here, and being all males how many Spanish surnames they
> bequeathed
> to posterity.
>
This is shabby research, an envoy of King Phillip II of Spain actually found
8 spaniards in 1596.
**** Checkmate - 8 survivors, I finally got you to admit it. Well you
walked right into that one, now you can fuck off and take the rest of the
bollocks you've been talking with you.
freeireland
wrote:
> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4f26d396-c90a-4493...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On 20 Jul, 02:28, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
> wrote:
>
> > "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > The number of ships returning are known, the fates of most are documented,
> > the rest disappeared without a trace. A legation was sent to Ireland to
> > discover the fate of the survivors - only one was found. This is
> > historical
> > fact. You are welcome to show how many you think landed here, how many
> > remained here, and being all males how many Spanish surnames they
> > bequeathed
> > to posterity.
>
> This is shabby research, an envoy of King Phillip II of Spain actually found
> 8 spaniards in 1596.
>
> **** Checkmate - 8 survivors, I finally got you to admit it. Well you
> walked right into that one, now you can fuck off and take the rest of the
> bollocks you've been talking with you.
Yawn, Once again its just over your head. I will treat this as the
knee jerk reaction it clearly is. All this shows is your research on
the envoy in question is once again flawed. The envoy was not in
Ireland to look for surviors of the Spanish Armada or any Spanish and
you certainly can not tell me what parts of Ireland he searched.
Though I am waiting patiently for your sources on the Spanish Arch or
did you just make that up off the top of your head as well.
I am also waiting for your definition of "modern Irish nationalism".
For a person who lectures others about research you are without doubt
found lacking in that department.
Sophistry Made Simple
"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
news:f7lf84tjvn5thoivo...@4ax.com...
> Scríobh "Sophistry Made Simple" <spam...@yourplace.com>:
>>
>>"freeireland" <kmce...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:4f26d396-c90a-4493...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>On 20 Jul, 02:28, "Sophistry Made Simple" <spamal...@yourplace.com>
>>wrote:
>>> "freeireland" <kmcel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> The number of ships returning are known, the fates of most are
>>> documented,
>>> the rest disappeared without a trace. A legation was sent to Ireland to
>>> discover the fate of the survivors - only one was found. This is
>>> historical
>>> fact. You are welcome to show how many you think landed here, how many
>>> remained here, and being all males how many Spanish surnames they
>>> bequeathed to posterity.
>
> surname is passed on.
Not all raindrops hit the ground, not all dogs bark, not all bears shit in
the woods. Have the media been alerted?