But with the "UK" or any national identity you'll agee I am sure. Nationalism only exists to manipulate, take the Nazis, they took it so far that kids in the Hitler Youth denounced their own parents. People need to start copping on that the person living next door matters more than that stupid flag the government says is your identity. **** that. In the troubles you had people who lived streets apart who acted like they lived in separate worlds. ****ING INSANE! The world has gone batshit crazy and the media make it happen, they sell us **** and have us at each other's throats while the 0.0000000000001% not the 1%, piss all over us ROFL.
It is insane. And differences are now perpetuated by the education system - state (Protestant prayers and rugby/football) schools vs Catholic schools teaching Irish language, different sports etc. Culture as a weapon. Sad. In a way I think most people latch onto the national identity just to feel part of something. Just like football etc. I really can't understand people who feel really patriotic or nationalistic. Pearse, Hitler etc all the same nutjobs who killed anyone who got in the way of their vision. There are plenty of things to be proud of as a nation - rights, freedoms, culture etc but not borders or wars or soldiers.
That's a ridiculous comparison Yoda, compare Pearse to maybe Che Guevara but to compare him to a despot that was responsible for causing the 2nd World War and the deaths of an estimated 55 million people is way overboard tbf.
stop talking ****e on here. go back the the general election thread. this thread is for fighting and riding. As in colin mcgregor and tony mccoy....... be-gorragh? is that how you say it.
why are they wearing red roses? I get the ira gay reference but are the red roses another intended insult?
? They got married incognito cos it's not allowed in Ireland I rekon the thing means. what the actual **** are you on about They are terrorists for being a same sex married couple #rebels. Or Ireland, Never change
I thought ireland has civil partnerships so two men kissing is no problem you've the IRA main statement on the banner, in gree and balaclavas on them... its two gay terrorists obviously. my question is as paddypower likes to be controversial in these things was this enough or do the red roses mean something more.. as in they are symbol of labour party here and a tudor rose as well
The roses and suits is cos they got married, not quite the same as a civil partnership, being a same sex couple, so they are #rebels. Hency the balaclavas and the slogan The Irish state in all it's dealings does not acknowledge same sex couples exist anyway in how our laws operate. For example, if you are man on the dole and live with a woman earning 40 k a year, they'll cut you down to 20 quid a week until you prove you are not a couple. But if you are gay and living with a man who earns 2 million Euro a week, they couldn't give a ****, even if you tell them that you are gay and living with a man as a couple.
Tiocfaidh Ár Lá literally translates to our day will come. As Sisu says above the gays are in balaclavas because in law atm they are not equal to heterosexuals. The referendum is to give equal marriage rights to gays/ lezs/ trannies. E.g. their day will come on the referendum. It is a good ploy from PP though as i bet majority of British people who see it will draw the gay ira idea from it. Getting pp more exposure in Britain yet not losing any republican gamblers in Ireland as its got a dif meaning. Well done that man who came up with this billboard.
the whole point of paddy power is to be controversial and get publicity from this stuff. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ddy-Powers-10-most-controversial-adverts.html I doubt its got that different meaning in ireland as the dogs i nthe street know it was poking at ira. Its just yet another bit of controversy courting. I just wanted to know if the red rose meant anything i got the rest.... I reckon they are secretly labour voters under there.
Wasn't a comparison... Listed two people who killed innocents in pursuit of their ideology. Hitler more out of laziness than anything else granted. The veneration of Pearse, Connolly etc is very disturbing. Read the poetry of Pearse and others around the time of the Rising.. EDIT: On gay marriage it will be an absolute joke once NI is alone in the UK & ROI with its archaic law... Totally un-British and soon to be un-Irish. EDIT II: Not saying independence for the ROI wasn't the right thing for the Irish Catholic majority... It was. Just not the cowardly tactics or cult around its so called freedom fighters
this is rather nuts. comparing guys who wanted freedom and didn't believe that it was coming due to wwi starting a rebillion to 1930's expansionist dictator and mass murderer using todays morality pearce occurred 100 years ago next year. hitler occurred 20 years later in completely different and any should say unnecessary expansionist racist, arrogant, power hungry by todays standards thankfully in most of the world (bar russia maybe) hilters actions are viewed with disgust and rightly so. By todays standards in half the world is fighting for freedoms of one kind or another. anyone should be able to agree that freedom via say oh referendum in scotland is far nicer way to do things... applying today to decisions made and wars or risings of 100 years ago is rather pointless isn't it? its like saying why didn't the gauls or britons not simply negotiate with the romans.. surely the roman civilization would have benefited them all so much and why not just join up... thats the way this is going people decided to fight as the home rule promises were not kept as WWI was going on. before WWi political progress was made for home rule. right or wrong they decided to rise. Hitler decided to first take over germany then when he failed spent a year in jail wiring how he hated jews then took over Germany anyway then ended democracy in the country then went on expansionist megalomaniac attempt to take over the world. at the time the "free" countries around him all were quite worried by this and fought it obviously the two cannot be equated nor should be solely judged by todays values. At the time hitler was fought by our collective ancestors rightly for freedom and democracy and they were beaten.
Freedom and democracy Good one. Poland got smattered, Churchill did nothing, He gave away a chunk of Czech territory to Hitler without even asking the Czechs. Did nothing to help Belgium Luxembourg or Holland. Here's a little nugget, German uboats used to stop ships and ask for surrender, then sink the empty boats once all crews were on lifeboats. Churchill demanded that merchant ships engage and ram uboats and Britain actually punished those that did not take on this suicidal task. That forced German Uboats to 1 not ask for surrender, and 2 engage ships whislt submerged. Both of those were the cause of the vast majority of merchant shipping deaths. Churchill the fat alcoholic called for everyone but himself and his own, to give up their lives
welllllll...... yes he was but he asn't in charge chamberlain was and he tried to appease hitler and sign a treaty. The reality is the czechs got smashed and then they all did nothing. it was seen shortly after as a huge error. then poland got divided between stalin and hitler brtian and france declared war but were weak and came up with a defensive war where they didn't take up positions in Belgium until germany actually attacked so the 1940 debacle resulted from British forces advancing to lines that germans were going to over run by the time they got there and germany attacking at the point between the two which was poorly defended in ardennes. the plan the allies had in 1939/40 was piss poor granted but the did not do nothing they were simply incapable of understanding the model of war, unprepared and plced their forces poorly at the outset. belgium fell fast and nothing could be done. Denmark fell, norway fell... britain tired to react and ended up losing badly in greece, crete and norway. Our collective anchestors at least stood up despite their failings. and again judging their failings by todays standards is genius in hindsight.
As I said Mito, wasn't comparing the two. Could give lots of examples of movements which used or use violence against innocents unfortunately.Nazis were just a lazy choice. The most telling thing about the Easter Rising was that it wasn't initially supported by Dubliners precisely because of its violence against innocents. A different British reaction may have markedly altered history. Regardless I think it's completely fair to judge terrorists (lets not play words that's what insurgents who target civilian structures in civilian areas are) by today's standards because their rhetoric and image is still persuasive. I know people who are named after IRA men... I see murals all the time for the IRA, UDA etc. People get their ideology tattooed or put their flags up every year. Children grow up in a culture of 'our violence was ok'. So we as reasonable people who detest violence should look back and say that these people can never represent us. I mean go to the GPO in Dublin or tour the jail... You'd think these men were saints. And this is dangerous.
