Ireland - back on your screens for the first time.

by hillary_step 9 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hillary_step

  Hello,

  The NATO alliance has pledged support with the US, a terrorist attack against one is an attack against all.

  The IRA is largely funded by its well honed and sentimental campaigns in the US that generate $100,000’s among the 78,000,000 people of Irish descent who live there. This cash is used to train its terrorists in Libya and other Middle Eastern states, establish a network of Mafia style activities in NI, including prostitution, ‘protection’ scams and above all drug trading. The IRA are said to have upward of 200 ‘sleeper’ cells operating around the world at any one time.

  The Protestants themselves have little to be proud of either, producing a generation of ‘Christian’ fanatics who have openly discussed the possibility of Concentration Camps for Catholics while turning drive-by shootings into an art form.

  What will happen the next time an IRA bomb kills a UK soldier, or the UFF/UDA shoots out some teenagers kneecaps or ankles in the Shankill Rd?

  Is ‘America’s New War’ as CNN describes it, as if it is introducing a new improved version, going to extend to Ireland? How will this affect the Irish vote?

  My advice to Presidents, never bite off more than you can chew, even if you are hungry.

  Best to you all - HS
• 

  Farkel

  For whatever it's worth, the IRA doesn't have the total destruction of the USA and the Western way of life as the prime directive of its agenda. At least the terrorism of the IRA is geographically targeted to a relatively small part of this earth.

  Shame on the UK for not giving them their own piece of dirt to rule as they please. Of course, I've not made a study of all the issues, but freedom of religion is a pretty basic concept and a cornerstone of our own (The USA's) rebellion against the UK. At least the IRA isn't trying to slam their values and religion down the throats of people by destroying thousands of innocents a full continent away.

  You can thank that DipFuck King Henry VIII for screwing everything up religion-wise on the British Isles. He created his own religion to give him an excuse to divorce and kill wives that no longer pleased him. If there was ever a more lame reason to start an entirely new religion, I'd certainly like to hear about it.

  Isn't it amazing that the religious troubles in Ireland today are the result of decisions made centuries ago by a useless and bloodthirsty piece-of-shit fat DipFuck like Henry VIII?

  Farkel

  "When in doubt, duck!"
• 

  ozziepost

  Steady on, Farkel, not so fast!

  I fear that you're being rather simplistic in your approach. Did King Henry VIII really start a "new religion"? Surely the religipon was, as it is now, the Christian faith. Sure, a new denomination was formed, but not a new religion IMO.

  When you say "Shame on the UK for not giving them their own piece of dirt to rule as they please." Methinks you protest too much. Please study the history of the conflict before making a sweeping statement that is in the mould of the WTS.

  "Of course, I've not made a study of all the issues..." It shows!

  Englishman, where are you?

  Cheers,
  Ozzie

  "It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness."
  Anonymous
• 

  Farkel

  : Sure, a new denomination was formed, but not a new religion IMO.

  Of course, it is all a matter of definition and you are splitting hairs. What difference does it make? The results are still the same.

  One of the cornerstones of the RCC is that the Pope speaks for God. That's a pretty heavy-duty cornerstone, yes? Hank VIII said "nope. He doesn't do that. I'm the head of the Church, not him."

  Sounds like a new religion to me. If I took all dub beliefs and started my religion with the only change being, "The GB does not speak for God. Come, follow me. Life's water is free. And may you have peace," would that be just a denomination or an entirely new religion? I'd bet you a cup of coffee that any dub worth his or her salt would say that was an entirely new religion. Ask Catholics if the Anglicans/Episcopals are just another denomination or an entirely new religion.

  That's all moot. The root causes of the Irish religious conflicts would not be what they are without the decision made by Hank VIII.

  Farkel

  "When in doubt, duck!"
• 

  Abaddon

  Would AN Englishman do, instead of THE Englishman?

  I think it is important that any US citizen who contributed in any way to the funding of the IRA now takes stock and reconsiders.

  For yes, they were funding terrorist attacks. Against civilians, most of the time - military targets have this annoying habit of carrying guns and shooting back. Shopping streets and outside pubs at night are far easier targets.

  The IRA's terrorism is 'geographically targeted to a relatively small part of this earth'; the whole of the UK, not just Northern Ireland. And the IRA have killed Catholics as well as Protestants. Pipe Bombs are religion-blind.

  And I'm, sorry Farkel; I suppose when you tend to be well informed about a wide variety of topics, it surprises people when you make statements showing you know very little about the Irish troubles.

  The UK would be delighted to give them 'their own piece of dirt to rule as they please', but the 'their' is comprised of two groups. There is complete freedom of religion in Northern Ireland, so I don't even know why you are bringing that up. Of course, the Catholics tend to kill Protestants, and the Protestants tend to kill Catholics, but that's why the UK government are still there.

  And also 'no taxation without representation' was more the point of the American War of Independence than religion; please cite one instance where the British government took action against any religious group in the North American Colonies.

  ozziepost is right regarding the Church of England not really being a new religion.

  As for the 'isn't it amasing', we Westerners should note that many of the problems of Asia and Africa stem from arbitary boundaries drawn up during the colonial era that were maintained after independence.

  In England, the suspension of local government during the troubles of the seventies was a lethal mistake on the British governments part.

  But since then the generations-old hatred of the Roman Catholics for the Protestants and vica-versa have stimied all attempts for peace.

  In the end it's men obsessed with power, reluctant to give up their guns, and very little to do with religion nowadays.

  Keep on rocking in the free world...
• 

  Julie

  Greetings to All:

  Farkel is right to an extent on Henry VIII. While he didn't personally start a new religion (he remained very piously Catholic, "more Catholic than the Pope" I believe the saying goes) but there were rumblings of Reformation around Europe at the time.

  Not only did the break with Rome solve that pesky marriage to Katherine problem but boy what a windfall for the royal coffers! I think we can all agree that while ol' Henry didn't change the faith he opened the door that enabled many changes to happen in the next generation. To break with Rome was really something then, only someone with an ego the size of Henry's would have done such (Luther was not much better). Of course many newly enriched nobles were in no hurry for reconcilation with Rome and return of ill-gotten gains.

  As to Ireland--I wish they would knock it off for the love of Mike. I mean Protestants and Catholics, for the most part, have quit killing each other long ago. Surely there must be something that can be done, besides violence. That needs to stop.

  Hope they get it together before I return to my dad's homeland--
  Julie
• 

  hillary_step

  Hello,

  The point is, that the US by solidifying the 'one-for-, all-for one, pact with NATO must by its own edict react when the sovereignty of the UK is attacked by the IRA, a terrorist group largely funded by US citizens and almost exclusively trained by Islamic fundamentalists.

  Can the President afford to isolate the prospective Irish vote by fulfilling his own rules of 'war'? - hardly likely. Is this a case of the Two And A Half Musketeers....again! It seems so.

  I mentioned in another post recently, the naiveté of US foreign policies, and the historical stupidity of the US foreign diplomatic corps in understanding the thinking of anything that does not come John Wayne shaped. The hole that the US has dug for itself with this NATO alliance, which certainly suits European aims, will be filled with some embarrassed faces before the war is won.

  I love the US and it's people, its politicians however, are once again being played like fiddles by their international counterparts.

  HS
• 

  GinnyTosken

  Hillary_Step,

  Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is backpedaling a bit from President Bush's vow to "rid the world of evildoers." On National Public Radio this morning, he said something to the effect that completely eliminating terrorism is setting a threshhold that is too high. Focus will be on terrorists who act on a worldwide scale.

  I tried to find an exact quote, but could not. A closely related article is here:

  http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Attacks-Military.html?searchpv=aponline

  (You may have to register with the New York Times to read it.) Here's the first few paragraphs:

  September 25, 2001

  Rumsfeld More Modest on Terror Goals
  By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
  
  Filed at 11:10 a.m. ET

  WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. campaign against terrorism will not completely eradicate it, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld says.

  Although President Bush has vowed repeatedly to ``rid the world of evildoers,'' Rumsfeld said Monday that U.S. goals were more modest.

  ``The only way we can defend the way of life of Americans, free people, is to not think you can defend against every conceivable terrorist everywhere in the world,'' Rumsfeld said. Eliminating terrorism, he added, is ``setting a threshold that is too high.''

  Bush has said repeatedly that his intention was to ``rout out and whip terrorism.''

  "Rid the world of evildoers" always reminds me of the cry of the Masked Avenger in Woody Allen's Radio Days--"Beware, evildoers, wherever you are!"

  Ginny
• 

  Englishman

  Shame on the UK for not giving them their own piece of dirt to rule as they please

  Shame on you too Farkel, for not knowing that we did that 80 years ago, you never heard of Southern Ireland? Capital is Dublin? Or Northern Ireland, capital is Belfast?

  Oh yeah, S. Ireland is a lot bigger too, thats what we handed over.

  Englishman.

  Nostalgia isn't what it used to be....
• 

  hillary_step

  Hi Ginny,

  Thank you for the interesting link.

  Looks like the President is already downscaling his ambitions.

  The US and the NATO alliance stands no hope of emasculating Islamic, Irish, Basque, Tamal, etc. etc. terrorist activities without sitting it out at the diplomatic table. The battle against Osamar bin Laden might be won by weapons but the real war against terrorism, despite the Presidents claim that 'the time for talking is over', will be won, if that is a possibility, only by understanding, knowledge and patience and this over a shiny conference table.

  Frustrating and galling this may be, expecially when we want justice to be seen to be served, but it is historically the only way that seems to work.

  HS