Sisters Merciless.
Two fine young women, photographed in time-honoured fashion with the ubiquitous smiling policeman outside the home of the British Prime Minister. It is a scene impossible today; the days when disagreeing with the prevailing politics meant writing a letter in green ink to your local newspaper – whilst not forgetting to doff your cap to the vicar en route to the post box, have gone forever.
Today you must have an ‘event’ to mark your displeasure. You must destroy another human being, preferably several at the same time, to ensure that your voice is heard. It matters not that several of those humans being might have been of the same political hue as yourself – who knows what political persuasions could be sitting next to each other on the No 16 bus in the morning – the entire membership of the Libertarian Party, though they would probably be in a taxi.
What matters is that people should be ‘shocked’ by what you have done, prepared to make concessions to you in order that you shouldn’t be tempted to do it again. For we could all do it; there is nothing innately difficult about carrying a bomb into a crowded place, nothing intellectual about figuring out how to make that bomb. You merely need to believe that seeing the flag of which you approve flying over the public buildings that you frequent is more important than the life of total strangers.
Dolours Price and her sister Marian never stood a chance to think otherwise; they had been groomed since childhood to believe that unnatural practices were acceptable, normal even. That they should abuse their fellow human beings as their Father had, and their Grandfather before that. That sort of grooming is lauded in some circles, eulogised in song, feted by Hollywood celebrities, immortalised in art.
Price’s links to the IRA go back to before her birth. During the 1950s, her father, Albert, was interned by the Irish Government in the Curragh Camp, alongside Ruairi O Bradaigh, who would go on to become president of Sinn Fein and later of Republican Sinn Fein. Her aunt, Bridie Dolan, also an active republican, lost her sight and both hands after hand grenades she was handling exploded prematurely.
Dolours was not the first to believe that blasting human beings to smithereens was a reasonable response to the Irish political conundrum. That dubious honour belonged to James McCormick in 1939. He was bombing Coventry when the Luftwaffe was just a twinkle in Hitler’s eye. Dolours was the first woman though.
It was not only the terrible injuries inflicted on 200 Londoners outside the Old Bailey that frosty March morning in 1973, nor the death of one man that the Guardian this morning only grudgingly admit may have been the result of being caught in the bomb blast, that shocked us. It was the sheer disbelief that this carnage was the handiwork of two women.
We never quite allowed ourself to believe that it was intentionally so. When she tried to starve herself to death, we fed her. When she complained that she was suffering psychological injuries as a result of being so fed, we let her go home. There she became an alcoholic and a drug addict –
Price had been counseled for depression and alcoholism for more than a decade after being convicted of using forged prescriptions to acquire drugs in 2001.
She married the Belfast bus driver’s son, turned quintessential Hollywood ‘Irishman’, Stephen Rea, along the way. Stephen Rea was to become the ‘voice’ of Gerry Adams, when Margaret Thatcher stopped the BBC from hanging onto Adams’ measly words ‘live’ on the six o’clock news. Before she and Stephen divorced, she gave birth to two sons, Danny and Oscar – have they too been groomed to relish the thought of leaving parts of human limbs hanging from trees several metres away from their owner’s body as a political solution?
One of the ironical repercussions of Dolours’ girls ‘day out in London with fellow bombers’, is that today, the politicians in Downing Street are hidden away behind high gates. No longer can teenage girls be photographed next to the front door of Downing Street – we are more divorced from our politicians than we ever were in 1973. We are angrier than we ever were. We have less voice than we ever did.
Hundreds of people have lain in hospital beds in agony and anguish to achieve this result. Too many have died.
Dolours and her sister Marian were released from prison on ‘compassionate grounds’ in 1980. A Royal Prerogative of Mercy, which included a licence relating to the life sentence they received for their part in the Old Bailey bombings. Marian is now back in prison, recalled under that licence for continuing to take part in dissident IRA activities. There are calls for renewed ‘mercy’ for her.
Last night, Dolours died peacefully in her own bed. In Belfast, Northern Ireland. Still part of the United Kingdom.
Gerry Adams said: ”Dolours had a very tough life, like many people.
Nowhere near as tough as the life she inflicted on those who held different political views from her. Some would say – not tough enough.
January 27, 2013 at 10:32
-
Able, you seriously need to revise your bumper book of US – Mexican
history.
- January 27, 2013 at 12:19
-
ILTB
I’ll bow to your superior knowledge, but in what way, other than gross
oversimplification, was I wrong?
Texas as an entity was initially, obviously, Indian. It was claimed by
almost half the worlds powers for a while but ‘conquered’ by Spain and when
Mexico gained independence, I think in 1821, Texas was part of Mexico.
Mexico ‘colonised’ it and allowed immigration by North Americans (who
rapidly and significantly outnumbered the Mexicans in the territory). Due
to, amongst other things the lack of rights and militarisation of the
government, Santa Anna’s military attempt to put down ‘disagreement’ led to
‘revolution’ (The Mexican War – remember The Alamo). This resulted in the
formation of the independent nation of ‘The Republic of Texas’ (1834?).
Since then the Texans, of all racial types, have worked and developed a
booming economy and, as part of the USA, a system of rights and protections.
Certain Mexican ‘extremist’ organisations, in tandem with the massive influx
of Mexicans seeking employment and a better life in Texas and the US, have
demanded that Texas (as well as other areas supposedly originally Hispanic)
be returned to Mexico – The ‘Reconquista’.
So, in what way was I ‘wrong’? Please enlighten me.
- January 27, 2013 at 12:33
-
Able, is not correct that after being expelled from Spain an armada of
Jewish people were massed off the coast of Portugal at the same time
Columbus was readying for sale to India (America)?
That two weeks after
Columbus set sail so to the Jewish armada, eventually settling in
Mexico.
Could be yet another example of diaspora and those really in
control of the Spanish move at the time moved indentured servants to
Mexico to do their bidding, especially in the realm of commerce?
The same used by Europe to colonize South America :
https://www.lifeinthemix.info/2012/09/displacement-diaspora-currency-slave-traders/
- January
26, 2013 at 22:52
-
Frankie you are correct the corporation the United Kingdom has no
constitution, the simple fact is you fail to read my words I speak of Great
Britain, you remember that don’t you?
You can insult all day mucker but my
ancestors died to keep what I speak of intact, you of course are what they
fought against…corporate fascism.
So Ross was not bringing a case….and you
know this how?
English law is law, a statute is always a statute, you are failing to
understand why you need a solicitor… let me help, because you do not know
law.
- January
27, 2013 at 01:39
-
I’m surprised there is no mention of the alleged case here: http://mcwhirterfoundation.org/biographies.htm Proof of the
conspiracy, no doubt.
- January 27, 2013 at 01:51
-
Neither the United Kingdom OR Great Britain (isn’t it the same place?)
have a Constitution.
Corporate Fascist? Moi?? No… I don’t think so. Just someone who believes
in ascertainable facts, not wild completely unprovable theories that have no
basis in reality.
‘…let me help, because you do not know law’. Really? So… let me get this
straight… Facts being facts and all. I qualified in in 2001. I have a
masters degree in law (Distinction) and… I ‘do not know law’?
Hmmm. Maybe a little more than some!
- January 27, 2013 at 09:18
-
Frankie thanks, because I am trying to ascertain whether solicitors
understand the difference between the human and the legal person, from
your answer it is clear you are explaining you do not.
So layered is the law that only the highest barristers understand this
reality if what you are saying is correct.
Facts :
I have used this
knowledge for three years and each time I use it all claims disappear,
and, I no longer have any trouble at all with the police.
In fact I was
thanked by two detectives for reminding them of their oath and thus their
powers.
I have promoted this for two years and the simple fact is, it works and
places all constables back to sanity be that with me or those courageous
souls who have followed its merits.
I have paid no council tax for
almost four years because of course council tax is a personal property tax
with authority coming from a crown charter given to all boroughs, and that
breaches the constitution which prevents royal interference in
taxation.
The simple fact is we no longer have councils, we have royal; chartered
boroughs collecting taxes by deception and not for the realm but for
private enterprise.
On that basis you are either deceived as we all are, or naturally you
are protecting the racket and should be treated accordingly.
This is the fact of all facts, I am not a legal entity therefore all
statutory claims are void and apportioned to the true liable agent for all
legal persons, the crown under its copyright.
As for Ross, you are guessing and perhaps looking in the wrong places,
find the video I suggested and learn what you do not know.
-
January 27, 2013 at 16:04
-
‘…I have promoted this for two years and the simple fact is, it works
and places all constables back to sanity be that with me or those
courageous souls who have followed its merits’.
‘… I am not a legal entity therefore all statutory claims are void
and apportioned to the true liable agent for all legal persons, the
crown under its copyright’.
Or… In reality: ‘The police and the local authorities are humouring
me because they know I am raving mad, giving me a wide berth because
they can see mountains of paperwork if they lock me up’!
- January
26, 2013 at 12:01
-
Did you know that a Borough exists by royal charter from the Privy Council
with the power to collect tax direct to the Crown, breeching the removal of
the right for the crown to interfere in taxation. Not only that but the
council tax is not a service tax at all, it is a personal property tax, and a
scam by royal decree.
In that sense every council is in treason for hiding the fact while
claiming to show a financial chart explaining how the council tax is spent on
services.
And in Lancashire the entire council tax is collected by a
Billing Authority straight out of the commercial arena, it has no bearing on
the British realm at all.
Only the other week did I come across a gang of men breaking into a
property to change the meter, they said under magistrate warrant, the document
they showed me was no such thing and as I mentioned arrest they changed their
mind, left the meter and scarpered. This was E.on perhaps employing capita or
G4s gangsters.
- January
26, 2013 at 11:48
-
The simple fact is to take up office under constitutional doctrine demands
an oath, but not to the constitutional realm itself.
The oath taken binds
you to uphold the realm of Queen Elizabeth II, and for 60 years oath takers
have not in any way upheld the constitutional realm and its common law, Bill
of Rights etc, it has implemented commercial statutes as precedent and then
claim them to be law.
In that sense we must ask…what realm indeed does the Queen represent?
Because it sure ain’t the British Constitutional realm by definition of action
over spin.
- January 26, 2013 at 14:25
-
Uh oh!! Tin foil hat alert!!
- January 26, 2013 at 14:46
-
I’m already wearing a rather natty alcofoil beanie, not for any
conspiratorial or even sartorial reasons, but to slightly conceal my
‘diminished supra-orbital hirsuteness’. But thanks for giving me an excuse
to wear it
- January 26, 2013 at 15:35
-
I think you have been wearing the hat all your lives, stuck in your
fantasy over stepping into reality…argue your case and show me you are
not just wind and piss…
- January
26, 2013 at 11:31
-
And for the main course :
In 1972 the greatly-respected Ross McWhirter
(Guinness Book of Records) summonsed the Attorney-General, claiming that
signing up the Treaty of Rome was illegal and a breach of the Bill of Rights,
forcing British subjects to be bound by laws invented in 1958 by foreign
powers, and therefore without the Queen’s Assent.
Ross claimed also that the Queen was in breach of her Coronation Oath.
Ross perhaps had not been aware of the possibility that the current Queen
took a different oath to that of her predecessors, leaving Britain without a
monarch since her coronation. Should this be fact then Queen Elizabeth II is
not the Queen of Great Britain, that in signing off to foreign contracts such
as the EU, the UN and trade agreements, suggests the corporate realm to which
the latter points belong, is the actual realm the Queen is the monarch of.
He was murdered before the case was tried, allegedly by the IRA, which has
always denied responsibility. In 1993 his brother Norris made a similar
charge, questioning the legality of the Maastricht Treaty and summonsing the
Foreign Secretary for treason.
The Attorney-General took over the case and then he dropped it as “not in
the public interest”. That breached the Bill of Rights by “suspending the
operation of law” and was contrary to natural justice in that the Attorney sat
in judgement on his own case.
It could probably be shown in court that all the EU treaties breach the
Bill of Rights because our politicians have agreed that EU law must take
preference over British law, established over 1,000 years. Another overt
attack on our Bill of Rights shows itself in the move to reform the House of
Lords, a situation set forth by Tony Blair.
- January
26, 2013 at 23:32
-
The Coronation Oath 1953: http://www.royal.gov.uk/ImagesandBroadcasts/Historic%20speeches%20and%20broadcasts/CoronationOath2June1953.aspx
And the Coronation Oath Act 1688 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMar/1/6/introduction
EU law takes precedence only where it has competence granted by Act of
Parliament so to do. Parliament retains the sovereign power to pass an Act
to repeal the European Communities Act 1972. As for international treaties,
they are covered by the provisions of the Vienna Convention.
Reform of the House of Lords? Was the immortal lizardoid Blair around
during the Commons debates in 1886 and 1888 that sought to restrict the
hereditary right of Peers to sit in the House of Lords? If so, that could
put him in the frame as Jack The Ripper.
- January
26, 2013 at 11:29
-
January 26, 2013 at 10:43
-
Given that the denizens of Anna’s Public bar and Snug are primarily British
(albeit expat), I’ll try and assist with a Northern Irish viewpoint.
My family were from County Down, but as Catholics in a predominantly
protestant area were caught up in the violence of “the troubles” and fled
after the farmhouse was fire-bombed, for the relative safety of Port Erin,
Isle of Man. The land on which the burnt remnants of the farmhouse sit remains
in the possession of my uncle and aunt, my mother having died of cancer in
2011.
For myself, I was brought up as an Irishman in exile, aware of both the
roots of my birth, but also the reason why we fled Ireland. Although, we
believed then and still believe to this day that Ireland should be united, we
also believed and still believe to this day that it can and should only be
achieved with the democratic consent of all the residents of Northern
Ireland.
I firmly believe that a united Ireland will come to fruition one day, but
it will be for my grandchildren to watch, not myself. Until that time, the
land in County Down will remain a burnt out ruin, a mute accusation to those
who set the fire all those years ago, but also a reminder that we will return
and rebuild someday.
Until the root causes of sectarian division are removed, the hatred and
animosity across the two communities will continue to throw-up bigoted
Catholics and Protestants who are all too ready to use violence to push their
views over the opposition. The future lies in both communities rejecting men
(and women of violence) and acknowledging that Protestant or Catholic, they
share a common bond of community with each other.
For this reason I expect to remain an exile in the wilderness until my
death, praying for a genuine reconciliation that I will never live to see.
- January
26, 2013 at 10:05
-
I have to say I am rather shocked at the apparent ignorance over the
Northern Ireland troubles. From the get go British Intelligence had their men
at the top of every tree in the IRA, it was a game, a deadly game. perhaps the
greatest effect from that game was the ability for intelligence to blackmail
the British government when it wanted a certain policy or removal of
such.
Take Ross Mcquirter of the famous twins from the Guinness records,
killed they say by the IRA for bringing a case of treason against the
Queen…why would the IRA do this? They denied responsibility.
The Brighton bombing another set piece by intelligence blamed on the IRA, I
could go on…
-
January 26, 2013 at 10:30
-
Please do, this is fascinating…
- January
26, 2013 at 14:29
-
I thought Ross McWhirter was murdered by the IRA because he put up a
£50,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of people
responsible for recent terrorist outrages.
However, Elvis Presley was indeed murdered by Aliens because he was about
to reveal the whereabouts of the Nazis’ secret Antarctic base where they
were were building UFOs using GM materials. The truth is out there on the
interweb if you have three minutes to spare.
- January 26, 2013 at 15:39
-
I thought Ross McWhirter was murdered by the IRA because he put up a
£50,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of people
responsible for recent terrorist outrages.
Could it be your thinking??
If your mind is full of garbage you will
of course always think the same.
-
January 26, 2013 at 18:53
-
@belinus: I think Brian is absolutely correct in his submission that:
‘…I thought Ross McWhirter was murdered by the IRA because he put up a
£50,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of people
responsible for recent terrorist outrages’.
Yes. That is because he was… according to Harry Duggan and Hugh
Doherty, the PIRA men who shot him (and were convicted of the murder).
Duggan, speaking of the murder said: ”McWhirter thought he lived in
Texas. He put a bounty on our heads. He asked to be killed’.
Could it be our thinking? No. ANY other interpretation of the facts
is, in fact (and to coin a recently used phrase) ‘garbage’.
I really do feel for you, old chap. Clearly, you have been a naughty
boy, haven’t you? Not taking your medication like you should…
- January 26, 2013 at 21:05
-
Well one can only assume you have no concept of black ops and the
fact for them to work they have to be credible. That aside are you not
understanding the fact Ross was bringing a case against the Queen when
this happened?
There is a great video around in which Norris explains the fact
that treason has been committed on all fronts when it comes to the
signatures to the EU, perhaps you might seek it out to gain insight
into the bravery of the brothers.
The simple fact is today, in the EU or out, all the statutes they
wanted are now in place and can be laid at the feet of Europe and will
not be removed, the only ones they do not like are those relating to
human rights which prevent, or should prevent, the indentured
servitude agenda playing out across the western world.
When you
grasp what i am presenting, everything makes perfect sense, at least
as to how a country protected by constitution has not been protected
by the constitution. Treason at the top is the only answer to this
reality playing out before us.
-
January 26, 2013 at 22:35
-
‘…are you not understanding the fact Ross was bringing a case
against the Queen when this happened?
No…. He wasn’t. He had, however, put up a £50,000 reward for
information leading to the conviction of people responsible for recent
terrorist outrages. Fact.
‘…When you grasp what i am presenting, everything makes perfect
sense, at least as to how a country protected by constitution has not
been protected by the constitution’.
Ummm. We don’t have a Constitution in the UK. It would therefore be
extremely difficult to be protected by something that does not
actually exist. Fact.
You know… generally, when people throw out a private theory, it
generally has at least some basis in reality i.e. that some of the
facts bear a different interpretation. In your case (and given
previous examples of your delusions regarding English law) they have
no basis on anything, except the delusions of someone who may have a
few ‘problems’.
Just why do you dream this stuff up? Surely, you must know, by
reference to the humorous reception that they generally get that no
one takes anything you have to say in the least bit seriously, which
is a shame, as if you stuck to ascertainable facts, instead of your
own alternate reality then your forthright style might win a few more
adherents.
- January 26, 2013 at 07:41
-
Wow, I’m gobsmacked at the comments. Especially considering the readership
here constantly rants about civil liberties. This could have been very deep
and meaningful, very relevant in today’s world. Sadly I see nothing more than
ignorance and hate.
And before readers jump the to wrong conclusion I disagree with the methods
of the IRA. Unfortunately the Northern Catholic Irish never had their version
of Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King (or the Vote).
- January 26, 2013 at 10:47
-
I doubt most here are actually advocating violence, it’s a sign of the
bitterness of how hypocritically the victims of the IRA have been treated
though, don’t you think? (seen many victims of IRA bombs feted, lauded and
showered with attention and benefits?)
As a comparison consider Texas. Once part of Mexico. Lost in a conflict
centuries old. The Mexican extremists (note I didn’t say all who move there
since the vast majority want nothing more than to work and live comfortably)
move there and demand (since Texans, of whatever ancestry, worked hard and
developed industry and wealth) that, on threats of violence and death, that
it is still part of Mexico (an economic basket-case with outmoded and
restrictive laws).
Do you believe it’s right that people who come from a separate nation
state, who fought and killed to separate said state, who then elect to move
to a country because it’s people, who remained in contact with the ‘mother
country’, had better lives, employment prospects and lives. And for them
then, because they’ve moved there en masse, to demand that they not only be
given equal rights in a foreign country, but that that country (and its
wealth) is actually theirs?
The parallels are telling, and perspective is everything.
-
January 26, 2013 at 13:11
-
Able,
But what about the Catholic Irish who already lived or had always lived
in Northern Ireland, they should have had same rights as anyone else
living there shouldn’t they?
- January 26, 2013 at 14:40
-
Lucozade
Absolutely! The Catholic population had many and obvious grievances.
But in a two-thirds Protestant state you would expect the majority of
jobs, housing, etc. to go to Protestants (considering how things even
now everywhere, there will have been bias, favouritism and corruption
galore as well). The issues of gerrymandering, boundaries etc. remain an
issue even now in mainland Britain, so NI is hardly unique. Like prefers
like also (not an excuse but a fact and again not a Protestant or
British thing alone. Try walking into a Scottish or Irish A&E after
closing time with an English accent to experience a different
perspective).
The demand for ‘one man one vote’ was patently a legitimate one. The
rule (in common with the rest of Britain) was for ‘rate payers’ only to
have the vote and, since the majority of ratepayers were Protestant, it
was functionally, if not intentionally, a bias against Catholics. I
class it as similar to the specious arguments used by the feminists in
stating that women only received the vote in 1928. They had had the vote
for some time but it was limited by property restrictions (exactly as it
had been for men until only 1918). So as such, it was a bias against the
poor and not directly aimed at one religious group. (I got in to trouble
whilst training as a nurse during one of a regular feminist tirade
against the ‘evil men’. I as a member of that group, an evil,
discriminating, power-hungry male, should have apparently been ashamed
of myself. By pointing out that each and every so called discrimination
also affected the men in that social class, and indeed that the tutors,
upper middle class ‘ladies’ all, had female ancestors who rather than
being discriminated against and patronised by males were more likely to
have been having my male ancestors flogged or sent to fight for them in
some godforsaken trench. It didn’t go down well as you’d imagine).
I wonder just what grievances the minority Protestant population of
‘Free’ Ireland had (not even considering what they would have been like
should a united Ireland have led to a Catholic State.
Half the problem is that people only ever chose to see their own
perspectives/experiences as legitimate (and everyone else is seen as
either ‘like me’ or ‘the other’). Empathy is a sorely lacking
quality.
- January 26, 2013 at 12:02
-
Alan,
I’ve always considered that point myself, the Catholic Northern Irish
have never really had a Martin Luther King type, like the black Americans
did, and also there would have been far more black Americans as America’s a
much bigger place so they would attract alot more attention…
There seems to be 2 sides/versions of the story, though I suppose you’d
only really know the truth if you were Catholic and from Northern Ireland
yourself and lived during those times…
- January 26, 2013 at 17:27
-
“though I suppose you’d only really know the truth if you were Catholic
and from Northern Ireland”
And that “truth” would be seen through the Irish Catholic microscope of
course and hence not totally an unbiased “truth”.
-
January 26, 2013 at 18:27
-
Wigner’s friend,
The ‘truth’ of what the situation was like for them I mean. If it was
really as bad as we’ve been led to belief or not. No-one can really.
know unless they were there that’s all…
- January 26, 2013 at 14:22
-
What ‘civil liberties’ did Ms. Price and her sister respect when they
participated in terrorism? What about the rights of the people blown up in
the PIRA campaign of hate? It sickens me to think that despite the IRA
actually having one of their own as a Government minister in Storemont
(McGuinness) Price and Co. still espouse violence, which is the reason why
her sister was returned to prison.
‘…Unfortunately the Northern Catholic Irish never had their version of
Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King (or the Vote)’. But… the vote is
exactly what they do have and, I suspect, matters would have progressed far
quicker if part of the population of that unhappy isle had not taken up arms
against the other. The lunatics of Sinn Fein and the other extremists on
both sides are to blame for setting back peace for decades.
The Troubles. What a waste of human life and still there are fools and
madmen on both sides. Which idiots had the bright idea of not flying the
Union Jack above Belfast City Hall every day? Is it not part of the UK?? Did
they not think that the scrofulous, cretinous and deeply bigotted Unionists
would come crawling out of their dwellings and go on the rampage? After all
it was what most of them were born to do!!
Bottom line. Price and her ilk are scum and so are the other lot. They
kind of deserve each other.
-
January 25, 2013 at 20:25
-
Ms Raccoon,
You write above: “Last night, Dolours died peacefully in her own bed. In
Belfast, Northern Ireland. Still part of the United Kingdom.”
CONVICTED republican terrorist Dolours Price has died suddenly at her Co
Dublin home.
Gardai are investigating after the veteran republican – and
former wife of well known actor Stephen Rea – was found dead from a suspected
drugs overdose in Malahide, north Co Dublin.
It is understood that the body
of Ms Price (62) – was found at her home on St Margaret’s Road in Malahide at
around 10pm.
Dolours Price died on Wednesday at St Margaret’s Road, Malahide, County
Dublin.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21199385
- January 25, 2013 at 20:54
-
I think you’ll find that a drug overdose is normally quite a peaceful
death.
The Guardia have now denied that they are investigating her death, saying
they are leaving it to the Coroner.
But yes, you are quite right, she did die in Dublin not Belfast.
-
January 26, 2013 at 03:21
-
Certainly a death more peaceful than that experienced by the terrorists
victims.
- January 25, 2013 at 20:06
-
I tried not to (honest), but I have to add the fact that whilst they want
‘nothing to do with Britain’ they still show a remarkable ability to access
the free accommodation, health care, education and employment here (all whilst
complaining bitterly of something which happened in C16). Then of course they
send most of their disaffected, useless, alcoholic, drug users, ‘travellers’
or anyone else they want to dump (Ireland has one of the lowest mental health
problems in the developed world. Why? Because after six months they send/come
here for free benefits).
I hope the Scots do vote for independence. Because then, at least, we can
send all their unemployed, alcoholics, etc. back. With the Irish, Scots (and
most of the EUs and worlds feckless) gone we’d be so much better off. I’m not
holding my breath though.
Rant over. Climbing off soap-box and going for a lie down
-
January 25, 2013 at 20:21
-
Hold hard – don’t forget they’re all in the cuddly, compassionate EU, so
we have no power to send any of them back anyway……… unless we get that
referendum and get the right result, of course.
- January 25, 2013 at 20:29
-
Sorry, I’m probably wrong (as usual), but if the Scots do decide on
independence wouldn’t that mean ‘The UK’ no longer exists? And as such any
and all Treaties are null and void requiring renegotiation for admission
etc.? Or am I being hopelessly optimistic again?
Don’t shatter my illusions – it’s all I have left! Oh, and “Hold hard”
onto what exactly ;-p
-
January 25, 2013 at 21:18
-
If the Scots leave (and that’s a big ‘if’), there still exists the
United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
- January 25, 2013 at 20:59
-
Re: “I hope the Scots do vote for independence. Because then, at least,
we can send all their unemployed, alcoholics, etc back.”
I take it the English will be wanting theirs back too then?
P.s Scotland and Ireland will still be part of the E.U so I wouldn’t hold
your breath, lol
- January 26, 2013 at 10:31
-
Engineer
But don’t the treaties list ‘The United Kingdom of England, Scotland,
Wales and Northern Ireland’? If ‘Able and Sons’ signed a contract and then
‘the Sons’ set up an independent company, wouldn’t all have to
renegotiate? Just asking?
Lucozade
Oh absolutely! Just wondering how many pissed Londoners there are
staggering around Glasgow though. Most ‘expatriate English’ in Scotland
are of the ‘employed in the area’ , retired or ‘lifestyle’ types I’d guess
(admittedly my limited opinion only). With the many attacks against
English throughout Scotland as well as the threats of tax and other actual
and proposed restrictions, apocryphal I know, but have you noticed the
recent (last couple of years) significant rise of high-end and lifestyle
houses on the market in Scotland? (again admittedly some/most may be due
the general poor financial climate and the ‘apocryphal’ exodus includes
not only English, but foreign and Scots ‘Rich’).
Do I have issues with Irish/Scots? Not only no, but Hell no! the vast
majority who come here do so to work and contribute as they always have. I
have issues with hypocrisy. To scream and shout about wanting/demanding
‘independence’, no contact, no representation, etc. from England – and
then to use England to fund your poor, indigent, etc., to have more
representation than most of the rest of England (compare/contrast the
numbers and power of Scotlands representation with that of, say, Cumbria)
is hypocritical, is it not?
-
January 26, 2013 at 11:49
-
Able,
I don’t know, there does seem to be whole villages down near the
boarders (I say the boarders because I haven’t really been in the north
of Scotland for any subsantial period of time or long enough to pass
comment) that seem to be full of English people, perhaps as many as
there are Scottish people, Glasgow seems to be an exception, but there
seems to be English people everywhere else in Scotland. Most work I
suppose, or have a partner that does if they’ve got kids, i’ve met the
odd one thats been out of work occasionally, and the odd one who hasn’t
worked in years (i.e my auntie), but I would have thought the reason
most people move anywhere is to either get a job or because their wife,
husband, girlfriend or boyfriend stays there?
I don’t think all Scottish people want ‘independence’, especially if
they’ve really thought about it. I don’t think the type of people that
are permenately on the dole are the type of people who bother to go to
the polling station or even registering to vote anyway though, so
they’ll probably not get their say.
I think heard somewhere they where thinking of lowering the voting
age to 16 for that purpose, which seems like a dodgy trick if you ask
me, i.e, maybe we can get daft 16 year olds who don’t know what to vote
for to think voting for independence is a good idea…? Hmmm…
You can
spot the logic there a mile off…
I don’t get what difference it makes whether your on the dole in
England or Scotland anyway? Does the money come from a different place?
-
January 26, 2013 at 12:21
-
Able – it didn’t seem to stop the world turning when Yugoslavia and
Czeckoslovakia split up, nor did it seem to be much of a problem when
East and West Germany glued themselves back together again.
If Scotland splits off, everybody will cope somehow. The United
Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland will bumble on. Scotland
will bumble on. No doubt diplomatic relations would be fairly good. I
dare say there would be a bit of paperwork to do ammending various
contracts, agreements and so on, but nothing beyond the wit of
humans.
-
January 26, 2013 at 12:45
-
P.s “Does the money come from a different place”
I know it comes from the tax payer but does ot make a difference
where abouts in the country your signing on from?
-
January 27, 2013 at 11:59
-
Lucozade
I’m not sure about whole villages but, living just the other side
of the border, personally I think it shows the futility/naivite of
these arbitrary geopolitical dividing lines. Talking to anyone
originally from both sides of the border and the chances are they
‘may’ state they are Scots or English, but they ‘will’ state they are
a borderer (think Reivers).
The money? I’ll bow to superior knowledge but I’d guess it, funded
by taxation, it comes from all over, though the bulk from the
South-East of England (we better just not even mention ‘oil industry
profits’
)
Engineer
True.
“nothing beyond the wit of humans”, but what about politicians?
- January 25, 2013 at 20:01
-
I shed no tears for this woman, may she and all her ilk rot in the deepest
circles of hell
- January 25, 2013 at 19:57
-
Good riddance!
The Irish (and the Scots for that matter) were, and still are, a tribal
culture. Significant research in the US into black, and particularly gang,
culture has revealed that, rather than being based on some spurious African
heritage, the black slaves copied their white neighbours (immigrant Irish and
Scots – think feuds, etc.). So, if it wasn’t religion, it would be something
else. (I won’t mention the fact that both cultures/nationalities exhibit the
zeitgeist of transforming any member of their own nationality who is either
rich/powerful or does something they disagree with into an Englishman, whilst
anyone with any link, however vague or fleeting, who does something they
approve of is automatically a true born Scot/Irishman. *!&$*s)
The thing about Ireland which annoys me the most (after the murders of
innocents, the hypocrisy,….) is that Britain gave them everything they asked
for. All but a tiny corner to allow the Irish Protestants to have somewhere
for themselves. They, and the British, built an industrial power-house. At
which point all the Catholics moved there to get jobs and a better life, none
being available in ‘Free’ Ireland. Then? They start demanding the results of
all that Protestant and British capital and labour for themselves (Let’s also
remember why British troops even went there in the first place. To stop the
Protestants from wiping out the Catholics in protecting themselves. The first
action on arriving was to disarm the B-specials. Catholics only exist in NI
because British troops saved them). They were. and are, nothing more than
grubby, greedy gangsters (as anyone with any experience of the ‘troubles’
knows already). They should have never been given some vague political
legitimacy – criminals should be treated as criminals! Hang all the murdering
scum!
-
January 25, 2013 at 20:19
-
By coincidence, much of paragraph 2 could equally apply to the mass
Muslim influx into Britain.
-
January 26, 2013 at 09:23
-
So True! So True!
- January 25, 2013 at 19:26
-
Dolours Price (21 June 1951 – 23 January 2013)… No great loss to anyone.
Pity she didn’t ‘catch a bullet’ when on active service for the PIRA. Her
sister is, quite rightly, banged up at the moment and long may it remain so.
If she had her way there would be no peace process (or what passes for one in
that benighted part of the UK) and whatever the imperfections of the present
state of affairs, that cannot be right.
- January 25, 2013 at 18:09
-
She didn’t get a long enough sentence.
I feel so sad for the people who were injured and lost their lives as a
result if these bombings and their families and loved ones. I also have alot
of sympathy for the Catholics in Northern Ireland who suffered poverty and
discrimination, it would have been really hard for them, but I don’t think
violence and killing people is the answer, no one wins, and I don’t believe
that is how the blacks in America managed get their civil rights…
That said, you would have thought the government would have stepped in and
done/changed something before it got to the stage were some people felt that
things were so bad they had no choice but to resort to such drastic violence,
wouldn’t you?
I suppose there has been a culture of violence since history began though.
How did the British conquer all the countries they conquered in the first
place?
I think it was the British government that stirred up the whole
Protestant/Catholic thing in Ireland back in the 18th century in a bid to stop
the whole of Ireland rising up against them, after the plantations that
happened from the 16th century onwards, where the Irish Catholic landowners
were replaced with British Protestant ones, in order to use the land to grow
crops for Britain.
The whole Catholic/Protestant situation in Ireland and the fact that
Catholics were being discriminated against should have been nipped in the bud
long before it could ever have got to this stage and so many ordinary people,
that had nothing to do with any of it would suffer…
- January 26, 2013 at 13:51
-
I think sometimes us English have little idea of the differences to be
found in Britain.
Never been to Ireland but as a soft southerner I did a
three year spell working in Springburn, not the loveliest part of Glasgow.
Admittedly a long time ago, in the ’70′s.
Forget the industrial problems,
they were dire, but I had to ask what FKB and FTP sprayed on every bridge
meant. I was also shocked to find the high street of the small town I lived
in to be taken over by a regiment of very intimidating marchers, just like
the newsreels of NI. And the thinly veiled questioning to find out one’s
religious preference.
Soon after my arrival at the factory, one of the
hands approached me, apparently delegated to ask where I was from. I told
her; ‘where’s that?’ she said. ‘it’s in Berkshire’, I said, ‘to the west of
London’. ‘you’re English!’, she said, didn’t quite spit, and stamped
off.
-
January 26, 2013 at 17:16
-
Binao,
I feel like i’ve met that woman, but it’s more likely people in Glasgow
are just all the same -sheep.
Not all of them, just the really lowest class ones (which there are an
abundance of) – All exactly the same, like clones.
- January 26, 2013 at 19:35
-
To be fair Lucozade, I wasn’t badly treated. I do think when you’re
on someone else’s turf you have to adapt your outlook. Even the implied
threat in the feral child’s offer to ‘mind your car for a pound
mister’.
I haven’t forgotten a meeting with a quite senior union guy.
He looked round the table at the English (of course) management, and
said ‘look, I know you think of us all as neds, but…. ‘; and he was
right, that’s exactly what the English mindset was. Don’t think it
helped. Seen it in other countries too.
-
January 26, 2013 at 22:49
-
Binao,
“look, I know you think of us all as ned’s, but…”
Only the ones that go out their way to act like ned’s I dare say –
it is optional, lol…
Yeah I don’t think the woman was trying to make you feel bad as
such, just completely ignorant to any culture or differences outside
her own little Glasgow, ned bubble.
I met a boy who’d been staying in Glasgow for a few years but had
come up from the south of England, probably near where your from, and
he kept slipping out of his normal accent and into this broad neddy
Glasgow accent, complete with all the slang of the day.
It was hilarious, but all the ned’s seemed to think his neddy voice
was the ‘normal’ and his other one was ‘pure weird’ – you’d think
they’d never been out of Glasgow before. Like showing anything other
than complete ignorance is just completely unacceptable.
Still glad you enjoyed it through there.
- January 25, 2013 at 16:34
-
Correction! Even Hindley died in hospital.
- January 25, 2013 at 16:13
-
Prisoners rarely die in the prison these days. Even the most violent will
get compassionate parole or transfer to the local hospice. Myra Hindley was a
rarity in this regard.
- January 25,
2013 at 15:35
-
She should have died in a prison hospital. Through I’d have preferred to
see the murdering bitch gunned down by the SAS like the three scum in
Gibraltar…
- January 25, 2013 at 16:38
-
…the problem with gunning down IRA soldiers is someone somewhere will
compose a rebel song about them before the bullet casings have cooled..and
by the time the government enquiry about it sat there would be a Hollywood
film. In other words, right or wrong, she would have become a martyr…an
Irish Ensslin was just about the last symbol that Ireland needed or
needs.
-
January 25, 2013 at 17:14
-
“soldiers”? My father was a soldier, 1939-46 (RA & LRDG since you
ask).Even when operating behind the lines he wore identifiable uniform and
avoided civilian casualties. The IRA were not “soldiers” in any meaningful
sense.
- January 25, 2013 at 17:18
-
Irish terrorists are not soldiers they are murdering sum, I disagree
with gunning them down when hanging is a better alternative.
- January 25, 2013 at 14:22
-
History is such bunk that I had no personal recollection of the woman, but
did note that Downing St. was fenced off in 1920, but then in 1922 after the
Irish Free State was agreed, access to the public was restored. We had no such
Peace Dividend after the 1980′s and as your piece makes clear, with the
climate of violence that surrounds “Civil Rights” these days, nor will we ever
be allowed to return. It’s a particular shame because once upon a time it was
a neat shortcut to Horse Guards Parade…..
Ms Price is interestingly implicated in another matter of “Historic
Allegations”, so trendy just now.
http://bostoncollegesubpoena.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/adams-rejects-dolours-price-claims-over-ira/
- January 25, 2013 at 18:53
-
Re: “Ms Price is interestingly implicated in another matter of “Historic
Allegations”, so trendy just now”
I thought for a moment that link was going to reveal she’d made
allegations against Jimmy Savile too, lol
- January 25,
2013 at 13:01
-
Price helped kidnap mother of ten Jean McConville, whom the IRA then
murdered and secretly buried. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_McConville
- January
25, 2013 at 12:51
-
Nothing like reminding the Brits of the religious divide, and as we can see
it takes only a flag.
With 2013 the year they expect to remove children by
the thousand, especially so after the room tax kicks in in April, families on
benefits are going to be torn asunder as they fail to upkeep their rents. I
see anger in the future.
And just to keep the eyes of the masses elsewhere,
why lets get those Northern Irish to remind us of sectarianism, and who knows,
it might just spill onto the mainland.
{ 65 comments }