Dozens Attend Anti-Windsor Protest

by éirígí - éirígí Sat Feb 23, 2008 21:06

Couple more photos from todays protest.

by Sean glow Sat Feb 23, 2008 22:40

It was encouraging to see that at least some republican groups are doing something about the fact that while six counties in Ireland are still occupied we have the head of some of the divisions of the occupiers forces coming to events in this country as if all is well between our two states.

Good to see so many young people in the crowd as this is the lifeblood of any continuning struggle against British occupation of part of our country. Keep up the good work.

by Bob the builder Sat Feb 23, 2008 23:21

I'm surprised, and pleased, at the size of the picket. Like many others I was sceptical when eirigi emerged on the scene a couple of years back but since then they appear to have grown consistently. Obviously its early days yet - and we've all seen a few false dawns - but it appears that radical republicanism, in Dublin at least, has found a credible organisation around which to focus. Long may it continue.

by Angelic Upstart - none Sun Feb 24, 2008 01:38

As someone who has become very disillusioned with 'mainstream' republican politics in recent years, this group really are a breath of fresh air.
Let's hope it is the start of something positive within radical republicanism. Great stuff.

by Gary Sprake Sun Feb 24, 2008 01:53

There should be a referendum in Ireland about future British royal visits to this country. From what we have seen today, the no side could get at least sixty votes. If there was an exceptionally low turnout this could well amount to about 0.0001% of the overall tally. Although, given republicans reputation for voting early and often, the number of no voters could rise to about 120.

by neamhshuntasach Sun Feb 24, 2008 02:09

Having browsed numerous non political Irish forums in recent weeks there have been a good few threads regarding the queens visit to Ireland and to my disbelief the amount of people posting that they have no problem with her visiting was astounding. One thread had over 300 replies to which i read all of them and i was the first one to even hint towards her not being welcome. These are just normal people spread throughout the country and none of them care. You will always get the republican minded people who will band together for a cause but the truth seems to be that most people outside that element on this island just don't care anymore or perhaps never have. they are so detached from what is happening just a couple of miles up the road from them. it's quite disheartening really.

by The coming visit Sun Feb 24, 2008 13:58

I feel sorry for her having to meet this guy.

by mystified Sun Feb 24, 2008 17:03

Lyncher 32, all the patriots above put their names to articles and poems that they wrote. I can't see anything on your website about who is involved and where. Did I miss a page on your committee?

by ex-shinner Sun Feb 24, 2008 17:33

Fair Play to all concerned.

by HRH Sun Feb 24, 2008 20:35

This is awful. Hardly any of the ladies are wearing hats.

by Jim Larkin Mon Feb 25, 2008 09:45

HRH is just a harmless old biddy.

British rule in Ireland is not normalised.

The current settlement has historical parallels in the 1922 settlement which was half a loaf better than none at all.

Republicans now share power in Northern Ireland as equals with Unionists.

In a generation hopefully Republicans and Unionist conflict will soften as the people of Northern Ireland look back on the past and wonder what the hell were they fighting about just as once lethal Fine Gael/ Fianna Fail divide barely even registers among young voters today.

Who knows what the future will be - an independent Northern Ireland or a United Ireland?

What is certain now is that the era of the bullet and the bomb can permanently be history if we want it to be.

The activities of dissident republicans, well meaning patriots, demonstrate that old habits die hard.

The recent departure of Paisley Jnr demonstrates that when Big Ian departs that his enduring legacy and the adamantine connection between the Free Presbyterian church and the DUP will be fatally undermined.

Peter Robinson, a secular politician, seems a likely a leader , though this not a certianty, who may reach out to the centre Unionists rather than the extreme.

I foresee a normalisation of politics in the province - a spirited interaction between left and right, republicanism and unionism, parochial and internationalist opinion.

The Big Questions will decided in the democratic assemblies not with guns.

All southerners and northern nationalists hope to see a united island of ireland.

But we do not want an alienated loyalist community to be backed into a corner and fighting a war with an "occupying" Irish Army and Gardai, with bombs in Dublin just as we witnessed a cornered republican community fighting British occupiers with bombs in London.

This sadly is the road we will go down if there is ideological inflexibility toward the question of accomadating the loyalist tradition in a future 32 county Irish Republic.

by lyncher - eirigi Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:00

the men in the pictures are linked to republicism they wanted an irish independent state
they died for it the same articles they put their name to we support and would like to see them implemented 100 years later would ya agree that we need a new fresh party eirigi also distributed 5000 posters of the proclamation to homes free of charge

by Jim Larkin Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:34

The majority of the people on the island of Ireland want a united Irish 32 county republic.
30 years of violence have demonstrated that a united ireland cannot be achieved by forcing the loyalists to give in nor has it forced the Brits to pull out - what it did achieve was an equal between republicans and loyalists in the northern assembly - loyalist have no option but to respect and take into account republican views on the governance of the provence.
Republicans must ask deep soul searching questions about how loyalists are going to be peacefully persuaded to join a 32 county Republic.
Personally I believe that it is an impossibility.
As long as loyalist are either in the majority or else become a hypothetical 49% minority if demographics changed in the coming years the issue that would dominate is how this community could be persuaded to join with Dublin without a new conflict begining.
No-one is seriously suggesting ethnically cleansing Northern Ireland of its loyalist population.
No-one is seriously suggesting that a 51% majority of republicans would lead to a united ireland instantly without loyalists starting a war against the occupying Irish Army and Gardai on their streets.

Either republicans are going to have to abandon some deeply cherished beliefs or the whole idea of a united ireland is going to have to be shelved permanently.

First of all the Irish Anthem, the Irish Flag, the Harp symbol, the Angelus etc Traditional Republican and Catholic Irish symbols be unacceptable to loyalists.

Likewise God save the Queen, the poppy, the orange parades, the union jack etc would be unacceptable to republicans.

I personally believe it is highly unlikely that either republicans or loyalists would be prepared to compromise on these issues - it is simply a non-runner - a loyalist without his sash, drum and sash and cherished memories of 1690 or a republican without the tricolour and a tearful appreciation of 1916 heroics is like imagining Christmas without a tree or Easter without eggs.

If both communities would not agree to compromise on even these most petty issues then I cannot for the life of me seeing them change on larger issues to do with unification or loyalism.

Parroting the same lines from the proclaimation, remembering the Fenian dead, recounting the sacrifice of the 1916 martyrs is speaking to the converted.

I am not even going to mention the glorification of dead IRA heroes of the recent Troubles who loyalists class as murderers and criminals.

These symbols and traditions are at best meaningless and at worst hateful to the loyalists.

As long as republicans ignore the traditions of the loyalists, gloss over their deeply held their worldview, then there is no way in hell there is going to be a United Ireland, not now or ever.

by lyncher - eirigi Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:16

ya no what they say jim time is a great healer
i agree its hard to see the loyalists wanting to be part of a united ireland.
i also taught it be hard for them to share power with sinn feinn.
i think we have moved a little bit closer to a united ireland.
no one in their right mind would like to ethnically clence the minorty of any religion on this island.
i would like to see a united ireland instead of a independent state of northern ireland as that would take another 100 years to resolve if ever and a 51% of the population has the majority in a referendem.
if the loyalists decided to go to war im sure its one they will lose;
we will be inviteing them to be part of our state the goverment of this country already bends over backwards to help maintain a good friendship with the loyalists aswell as our president this work should not go unnotised as it be crusial link when the time comes as for the national anthem its part of our culture they will have to accept with every thing else just like the chinese do the muslims the blacks yanks etc these are the new minortys on our island we respect them and we will respect our loyalist and prod friends and their traditions .
i think if a united ireland was announced from the republican side it would be the beginning of the healing process and if all went well and we had imporetant debates about it and irioned out the little things witch when approached are quite big we can all live happily ever after.

by Truth Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:54

Read their site,it was actually 70,000 delivered

by lyncher - eirigi Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:18

sorry and thanks for the correction,
late night last night.
but you know the point i was trying to make.

by jim larkin Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:19

"ya no what they say jim time is a great healer"

The Loyalists still bitterly remember massacres of planters by the Irish Catholics and a primitive fear persists that once a united ireland is declared they will scalped by the injuns.

"i agree its hard to see the loyalists wanting to be part of a united ireland.i also taught it be hard for them to share power with sinn feinn."

Just because that stuck up girl who hates you agrees to be civil with you does not mean she wants to have sex with you.

"i think we have moved a little bit closer to a united ireland."

I think we have more chance of the lion laying down with the lamb.

"no one in their right mind would like to ethnically clence the minorty of any religion on this island."

It was never about religion - it's a tribal thing.

"i would like to see a united ireland instead of a independent state of northern ireland as that would take another 100 years to resolve if ever and a 51% of the population has the majority in a referendem.
if the loyalists decided to go to war im sure its one they will lose;"

Ok so now we're down to brass tacks - explain how the loyalists would lose? Do you mean a united ireland would be forced on them once they lost? How many would die on both sides? Would the Irish society and economy and our international reputation be irreparable damaged?

"we will be inviteing them to be part of our state the goverment of this country already bends over backwards to help maintain a good friendship with the loyalists aswell as our president this work should not go unnotised as it be crusial link when the time comes as for the national anthem its part of our culture they will have to accept with every thing else just like the chinese do the muslims the blacks yanks etc these are the new minortys on our island we respect them and we will respect our loyalist and prod friends and their traditions ."

The work of the president and other well meaning bleeding hearts would be undone if republicans tried to push further.
Back to my analogy of the girl - just because a girl agrees to talk to you in a civil fashion does not mean you can drop the paw.
Interesting point about minorities.
The chinese, the muslims, the blacks etc who have come to ireland have inevitably created a multi-cultural society - they do not have the share the same aspirations as ethnically Irish Catholic Nationalists.
Two key events have been overlooked by Northern Republicans in relation to the south - the Eamon Casey scandal which opened the floodgates that discredited the Catholic Church in Ireland and the effects of the materialistic Celtic Tiger - which have diminished the standing of the idealist Irish Catholic Nationalist position which is lampooned by many young people today.

"i think if a united ireland was announced from the republican side it would be the beginning of the healing process and if all went well and we had imporetant debates about it and irioned out the little things witch when approached are quite big we can all live happily ever after."

Wishful thinking at best I think.
It reminds me if the "What If?" academics who claim that if 1916 and the Great War had not happened then Ireland would have won its freedom from Britain by peaceful means - the inevitable would have been a civil war between the unionist volunteers (who would have been decimated at the Somme) and the irish volunteers (who would not have been decimated on the Somme either).

The Brits thought they could defeat Fenianism with kindness - they reformed most the injustices that gave rise to the land war of the 19th century and by the turn of the 20th century a large portion of Irish people were no longer tenants but owned their own lands after Brit reforms. The Catholic Emancipation Act allowed religious freedom too.

But the big question had not been adressed - Irish political independence.

If Irish Republicanism tries the same tactic - including loyalists in a 32 county republic by killing loyalism with kind government policy the loyalists might well say the same thing Fenians did in the past - "shove it" and demand their political independence or the return of British rule to Northern Ireland.

Imagine the spectacle of loyalist politicians in the Dail and announcing a motion to separate from the 32 county republic on the first day of business?

Talk of a united ireland this soon after 30 years of Troubles is far too soon.

It's like whipping it out on the first date.

by Séamus Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:32

It's interesting that "Jim Larkin" (not the real one, obviously - he was an Irish-Irelander) conflates Republicanism with Catholic Nationalism, though the two ideologies have been at odds since the earliest days of both. Then of course there's been the eternal hostility of the Catholic Church towards Republicanism, and "Jim"'s model is blown over like the straw man it is.

by mystified Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:34

OK Lyncher, I'll go along with most of that. But if you don't put eirigi's committee on the website with a short mention of what each has done for the benefit of pobal na-heireann, no-one is going to take you very seriously.

Most people will say that the men of 1916 were brave, but they knew more about what they were against than what they were for. We have drawn a line under the mess (here in the south) from 1921-1960. Most young people emigrated, voting with their feet, as Lenin would have said.

No unionist wanted to join us. The whole point of a 32-county republic was for the Belfast business world to pay lots of taxes to the new state, not to protect the minority there. Sorry if you missed that.

And now it's clear that most people don't want to speak Irish, don't want to obey the church, don't want to live in a Cuba-type place and don't want to pay what the Brits are putting in to the north. There's still lots of room for social justice movements though.

by Jim Larkin Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:53

Central to the idea of Irish independence from Britain for most of the history of this idea was that the resulting independent Ireland would homogenously racially Irish, Nationalist, Gaelic-speaking, Republican and Roman Catholic.
Jim Larkin, Connally and internationalist socialism were largely sidelined by the popular movement whether it was Fine Gael or Fianna Fail dominated by Catholicism and a tribal hatred of British and other foreign cultural intrusions in the pious island of saints and scholars and girls dancing at the cross roads.
The split between the Provisional Sinn Fein and Official Sinn Fein was largely due to a distrust of the full blown socialist idealism among the Officials which hoped to create solidarity between the Catholic and Protestant working class.
The hatred that persists in Northern Ireland is tribal - the enemy is the "hun" - Ethnically British, English speaking, Unionist and Protestant. To mark themselves separate and independent from the Brits and the Hun, the Irish must be equally bigotted in return.
The presence of Roman catholic priests in republican movement confirms the ethnic and religious tribal nature of the Sinn Fein/IRA republican movement.
Socialism never played a significant part in the conflict at any stage.
Peaceful socialists like John Hume and Eamon McCann and others who had not a sectarian bone in their body and the radical secualr socialists who believed in violent revolution may well have sparked the conflict against the unjust unionist dominated establishment but ugly Catholic Irish Nationalist extremism soon reared its ugly head and dominated the conflict for the remainder of the 30 years of the Troubles.
Only a fool would suggest that the division of Catholic and Protestant communities by rival paramilitary gangs was not a direct result of the sectarianism of the IRA and the UVF.

It is utterly naive to believe that the loyalists who believe they are under siege however misguided they may be will join in a 32 country republic just because 51% of Catholics voted for it - the most bigotted elements of the loyalist community would not credit the opinion or the vote of a hell-bound Catholic.

Ingrained sectarianism cannot be wished away.

by LYNCHER 32 - eirigi Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:54

the irish also remember the massacres it was a war people were exspected to die and die they did.
if we get a united ireland trough politics as is the process now,
and the loyalists decided to pick up the gun after a united ireland is announced legally,
what are we suppose to do ,
we fight fire with fire and with us being a united ireland they be the minority.
if they did enter the dail they be a small party with not much power.
to be honest i dont pay attension to what other countries think off us do ya really think they care what we think about them.
as for the economy if their is money to be made here then the money will keep coming in as simple as that you dont need a war to affect a economy as we can see at the moment.
if 1916 never happened i wont go down that road we have a lot more history than 1916 with the brits.
did scothland ever get independece from the bris by peaceful means no.
when do you think is the right time to talk of a united ireland considering their is talk of it since the civil war.
ps.
THIS IS IN NO WAY LINKED TO HAVEING SEX WIPPING IT OUT ON THE FIRST DATE PLEASE KEEP THEM COMPARISIONS TO YOURSELF

by Curiousity - Killed the Cat Mon Feb 25, 2008 14:20

On a point of curiousity has anyone any idea how the RSF protest at Quinns went? Can't find any thread on it.

by Jim Larkin Mon Feb 25, 2008 14:24

"the irish also remember the massacres it was a war people were exspected to die and die they did."

It is this perpetuation of victim culture on both sides that sustains the hatred of both communities for eachother.
A hatred that serves no purpose but to create more massacres and more division and complications and kicks the can of unification further down the road.

"if we get a united ireland trough politics as is the process now,
and the loyalists decided to pick up the gun after a united ireland is announced legally,
what are we suppose to do ,
we fight fire with fire and with us being a united ireland they be the minority."

So how does the conflict conclude? A ceasefire line along the current border? The loyalist taking over the whole island of ireland with British help? The occupation of the north by the south resulting in an Iraq style loyalist insurgency with hit and run attacks over the border, bombings in dublin, dead Irish soldiers and Gardai and counter terrorism by the Irish state against the loyalist population? Give me a casualty figure especially civilian death estimates and how much money it would cost the Irish state to maintain a military presence in Ulster?

"By pushing for political unification
if they did enter the dail they be a small party with not much power."

Correction they would the support of the loyalist minority in the north east who would have a separatist agenda much like the Basques in North eastern Spain.

"to be honest i dont pay attension to what other countries think off us do ya really think they care what we think about them"

If the loyalists forced into a united ireland and began a war of liberation they might well recieve international support from the UN and the international community and a peace stabilisation force would probably be sent to keep both sides apart much like Serbia and Kosovo.
If you are going to go to war what nations are going to supply the weapons and ammunition to the Irish Army to fight the loyalists?

"as for the economy if their is money to be made here then the money will keep coming in as simple as that you dont need a war to affect a economy as we can see at the moment."

Do you think foreign nations will invest money in a country that is in the midst of a civil war? What if factories and business are destroyed or businessmen are kidnapped and murdered by the loyalists. That would scare away the money right quick.

"if 1916 never happened i wont go down that road we have a lot more history than 1916 with the brits.
did scothland ever get independece from the bris by peaceful means no."

If Scotland had gone to war for its independence there would have been partition been Catholics and Protestant Scottish states in the aftermath and Glasgow would be as divided and as violent Belfast was during our Troubles.

"when do you think is the right time to talk of a united ireland considering their is talk of it since the civil war."

We can only justifiably talk about a united ireland when the majority of loyalists want it. Otherwise we will have a war on our hands.
It would be a complete disaster for this island.

"ps.
THIS IS IN NO WAY LINKED TO HAVEING SEX WIPPING IT OUT ON THE FIRST DATE PLEASE KEEP THEM COMPARISIONS TO YOURSELF"

I think it is a perfect comparison actually. Forcing Northern Ireland into a United Ireland against the will of the majority of people living there is a recipe for war.

by IRBB Reader - none Mon Feb 25, 2008 16:19

read a colourful report and saw a few pics on the IRBB

http://admin2.7.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=8421

by Sharon . - Individual . Mon Feb 25, 2008 17:06

Hi 'Curiousity' !

That protest is covered on this 'Indymedia' thread -
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/86294&comment_limit=0&c...20793

- and the brief report included at that link contains two links to other sites , both of which contain more photographs of the protest .

Thanks !

Sharon.

by lyncher - eirigi Tue Feb 26, 2008 09:17

jim if ya say wait till the loyalists are ready we be waiting forever
if the majority of the north decided they wanted to be united
and a small minority didt and turned to violence what do you think our actions -reactions should be.
wait till their ready aswell.

by Jim Larkin Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:28

I've pretty much already spelt it out to you.
If the loyalists do not want to join a united ireland there is pretty much nothing you or anybody else can do about it unless you want to go to war with them which would convince them all the more that joining a united ireland would be a bad idea.
30 years of war has not convinced the loyalists to join a united ireland.
Why do you think that is going to change just because they have agreed to share power with republicans in Stormont?
There is no indication that the loyalists will change their position any time soon.
The united ireland might happen in the future but at the moment it is just a pipe dream like world peace or the fountain of youth.

by lyncher Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:11

so this is were the next generation will return to violence .as you say their is no other alternative for a united ireland in their lifetime so the passioate and brave will have no choice.this time the violence on our behalf will be lagitamet.

by lyncher Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:14

i was talking of a small minorty off loyalists as i think a lot would be willing for a united ireland in the next 10 yearsif relations stay well between the 2 groups

by Jim Larkin Tue Feb 26, 2008 19:53

At the height of the Troubles either in the period from 1919-1923 or from 1968 to decommissioning there were no more than a few hundred people actively involved in military activity on behalf of the republican movement.

During the War of Independence only a few pockets of the country saw real conflict - most of the country actually sat on the fence even the thousands who later claimed IRA pensions and medals after the war.

Likewise during the more recent Northern Troubles. While Belfast, Derry and South Armagh saw the lions share of the violence and violent incidents happened haphazardly over the remainder of the six counties, the vast majority of Irish people in the twenty six counties were largely unaffected and continued their lives as if nothing was actually happening.
Again it was only a few hundred armed men and women who actually fought the war.

The majority of Unionists and loyalist might be quickly cowed by Irish unification but thousands more would fight to the death.

The majority of the Irish population have been historically ill prepared and unwilling to fight for a united ireland (infact the long history of bitterness between Fine Gael and Fianna Fail factions demonstrates our willingness to fight eachother) and it is highly unlikely that faced with die-hard resistance from a loyalist insurgency that would inevitably result with an Irish Army of occupation in Northern Ireland that the Irish people would be willing to fight to the bitter end to crush resistence.

The British Army failed to suppress the IRA or snuff out Republican separatism in Northern Ireland.

It would be equally idiotic to expect the loyalists to be defeated either.

I don't buy it. The loyalists would give us all a bloody nose.

by lyncher Wed Feb 27, 2008 14:23

well jim.
all we can do is hope for the best.
the people of this island have a long roadahead of them.

by Jim Larkin Thu Feb 28, 2008 09:35

But I'm a realist not a pragmatist and certainly not a cynic..well not all the time.

by Dick Doyle Thu Feb 28, 2008 12:44

would 'freedom' give the people in the North of Ireland a Nationl Health service?

by Republican Thu Feb 28, 2008 15:08

Can i just point out that Eirigi is a totally pointless organisation. I don't accept that they stand for anything new or vibrant. They're just a small number of sheep following and even smaller number of ego maniacs. 30 people on Ballybough rd complainging about some pointless Brit Royal isn't Republicanism, it doesn't bring Irish unity one step closer, never mind a Socialist Republic.

They suit the agenda of the British & Irish establishment who want republicans to splinter and argue among themselves. Thos involved in eirigi should have a long hard think about what they want to achieve and what they're actually achieving.

by Grainne ni Seoige - Pro-Royal Lobby Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:13

Here is a link to Brian Leeson (éirígí) interview on seoige and o'shea about the protest last saturday. The usual RTE bias against all things republican is particularly obvious. Just note the number of interuptions that ni seoige gets in while Leeson is speaking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k-nbTv2A3w