John Bruton is a Carsonite.

Alliance

Active member
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
162
pfinnegan said:
Carson is Ian Paisley's hero. Carson's arguments are Paisley's arguments. Carson is still influential.
Well obviously, like yourself, Paisley doesn't have the first clue about Sir Edward Carson, who by the by, is a "hero" of mine. :p
 


BarryW

Active member
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
262
merle haggard said:
He said so in a long embarassin speech and afterwrds maintained that meeting him was the proudest day of his life
As you well know, he said nothing of the sort.

pfinnegan seems to have problems with little things like.....erm.....facts, so please tell me that you don't suffer the same affliction
 

32

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
84
merle haggard said:
Prince Charles is John Brutons hero ffs . He said so in a long embarassin speech and afterwrds maintained that meeting him was the proudest day of his life . Which means hes prouder to have met him than to have been made leader of Fine Gael , Taoiseach , the birth of his kids .


Bang on Merle.

It makes me sick to think that that fawning excuse of a politician Bruton should even begin to believe that meeting the commander in chief of the paratroopers was a proud moment.

He is a quisling.
 

jmcc

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
45,207
pfinnegan said:
Redmond is John Bruton's hero.
Thinking that the rest of FG would consider themselves Redmondnite simply on the basis of Bruton claiming Redmond as a hero is quite stupid.

His views on partition are very close to de Velera's. I did not imply that Redmond shared de Valera's political ideology. Don't assume that everyone who opposes partition is republican.
It seems that you don't have a clear understanding of what being anti-partitionist is. You are mixing up being anti-partitionist in favour of an Ireland within the United Kingdom with being anti-partitionist in favour of a free and independent Ireland.

Now run along and please read some more history.

Regards...jmcc
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
10
I advise you to get the full transcript of such the speech.

What you will have noticed is that the reason for that day being so great in the eyes of John Bruton, was that it represented of two cultures coming together in a way that possibly had not been seen in hundrerds of years. The fact that an Irish elected leader can meet with the heir to the British throne and have cordial relations.

Now if you ask me, the symbolism surrounding the event, and what it transpires to in the general wasteland that was British -Irish history is pretty significant, although i do admit, JB might have used better means to portray his delight at this watershed.

Still regardless of how it looked, one look at the transcript will enable you to see that this was significant in JB's life not because oCharles Windsor was present, but because of what it represented. Now it may have looked terrible through green glasses, but i for one don't think that what the meeting represents is a bad thing.
 

pfinnegan

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
19
voiceofretribution said:
'He continued to lead the Unionists but when the Government of Ireland Act 1920 was introduced, advised his party to work for the exemption of six Ulster counties from Home Rule as the best compromise (a compromise he had previously rejected). This proposal passed and as a result the Parliament of Northern Ireland was established. After the partition of Ireland, Carson repeatedly warned Ulster Unionist leaders not to alienate northern Catholics, as he accurately foresaw this would make Northern Ireland unstable. In 1921 he stated: "We used to say that we could not trust an Irish parliament in Dublin to do justice to the Protestant minority. Let us take care that that reproach can no longer be made against your parliament, and from the outset let them see that the Catholic minority have nothing to fear from a Protestant majority." His calls went unheeded.'

[edit]

He initially argued against partition of any kind, believing that one Iirsh state within the Union was the best way for the island of Ireland to Progress, but following the passing of the 3rd home rule bill, he had no option but to support a parliament for ulster.

And you might also like to note that not only do FG support partition as it stands, (the good friday agreement) so do FF, PD's Labour, Greens, Sinn Fein, the SDLP, the UUP and 70% of the people on this entire island.
Judge
Be careful about using wikipedia. It's not totally accurate. I prefer Hansard.

On JANUARY FIRST 1913 Carson proposed an amendment to the 1912 Home Rule Bill that proposed excluding the nine counties of Ulster.
 

Alliance

Active member
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
162
:roll:

I give up on this one...
 

BarryW

Active member
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
262
pfinnegan - have you got any evidence whatsoever to back up the claims of this thread?

1) John Bruton supports Partition
2) Fine Gael supports partition

Have you got ANYTHING to back these claims up?
 

merle haggard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
5,434
voiceofretribution said:
I advise you to get the full transcript of such the speech.

What you will have noticed is that the reason for that day being so great in the eyes of John Bruton, was that it represented of two cultures coming together in a way that possibly had not been seen in hundrerds of years. The fact that an Irish elected leader can meet with the heir to the British throne and have cordial relations.

Now if you ask me, the symbolism surrounding the event, and what it transpires to in the general wasteland that was British -Irish history is pretty significant, although i do admit, JB might have used better means to portray his delight at this watershed.

Still regardless of how it looked, one look at the transcript will enable you to see that this was significant in JB's life not because oCharles Windsor was present, but because of what it represented. Now it may have looked terrible through green glasses, but i for one don't think that what the meeting represents is a bad thing.
the man used these exact words . Refferring to him as your highness he declared " you personally represent much of what we aspire to"

Tell us now what that was supposed to mean then . Spin John Brutons way out of that :lol: :lol:
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
10
pfinnegan said:
voiceofretribution said:
'He continued to lead the Unionists but when the Government of Ireland Act 1920 was introduced, advised his party to work for the exemption of six Ulster counties from Home Rule as the best compromise (a compromise he had previously rejected). This proposal passed and as a result the Parliament of Northern Ireland was established. After the partition of Ireland, Carson repeatedly warned Ulster Unionist leaders not to alienate northern Catholics, as he accurately foresaw this would make Northern Ireland unstable. In 1921 he stated: "We used to say that we could not trust an Irish parliament in Dublin to do justice to the Protestant minority. Let us take care that that reproach can no longer be made against your parliament, and from the outset let them see that the Catholic minority have nothing to fear from a Protestant majority." His calls went unheeded.'

[edit]

He initially argued against partition of any kind, believing that one Iirsh state within the Union was the best way for the island of Ireland to Progress, but following the passing of the 3rd home rule bill, he had no option but to support a parliament for ulster.

And you might also like to note that not only do FG support partition as it stands, (the good friday agreement) so do FF, PD's Labour, Greens, Sinn Fein, the SDLP, the UUP and 70% of the people on this entire island.
Judge
Be careful about using wikipedia. It's not totally accurate. I prefer Hansard.

On JANUARY FIRST 1913 Carson proposed an amendment to the 1912 Home Rule Bill that proposed excluding the nine counties of Ulster.
Now repeat after me...

Carson initially opposed all forms of Home Rule until the Lords veto disappeared signalling the arrival of the 3rd home rule bill. He did so because he believed that an All Ireland within the Union was best for Ireland. He feared the repracussions of partition which might alienate certain societies. However at which juncture he had no choice but to chose a 9 county parliament of Ulster over a 32 county roman catholic statelet.

You do see the train of logic in Carsons developments
 

32

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
84
BarryW said:
pfinnegan - have you got any evidence whatsoever to back up the claims of this thread?

1) John Bruton supports Partition
2) Fine Gael supports partition

Have you got ANYTHING to back these claims up?

I would say that FG not organising in the 6 counties or running any candidates in elections there is a good indicator of their support of partition.
 

BarryW

Active member
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
262
32 said:
I would say that FG not organising in the 6 counties or running any candidates in elections there is a good inicator of their support of partition.
So Fianna Fail, Labour and the PDs all support partition? As do the SDLP - since they don't organise in the South?

What a load of bollocks.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
10
merle haggard said:
voiceofretribution said:
I advise you to get the full transcript of such the speech.

What you will have noticed is that the reason for that day being so great in the eyes of John Bruton, was that it represented of two cultures coming together in a way that possibly had not been seen in hundrerds of years. The fact that an Irish elected leader can meet with the heir to the British throne and have cordial relations.

Now if you ask me, the symbolism surrounding the event, and what it transpires to in the general wasteland that was British -Irish history is pretty significant, although i do admit, JB might have used better means to portray his delight at this watershed.

Still regardless of how it looked, one look at the transcript will enable you to see that this was significant in JB's life not because oCharles Windsor was present, but because of what it represented. Now it may have looked terrible through green glasses, but i for one don't think that what the meeting represents is a bad thing.
the man used these exact words . Refferring to him as your highness he declared " you personally represent much of what we aspire to"

Tell us now what that was supposed to mean then . Spin John Brutons way out of that :lol: :lol:
As i said,

I don't necessarily agree with the way that he chose to signify such an event,

but if you want spin..

I presume he meant that the current British establishment can accomodate all creeds of religion and nationality such as Welsh speaking citizens, Scots and English races, while we in Ireland can't seem to accomodate two identities..
 

32

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
84
BarryW said:
32 said:
I would say that FG not organising in the 6 counties or running any candidates in elections there is a good inicator of their support of partition.
So Fianna Fail, Labour and the PDs all support partition? As do the SDLP - since they don't organise in the South?

What a load of ********.


Yes, all the above support, tacitly or overtly, partition.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
10
32 said:
BarryW said:
32 said:
I would say that FG not organising in the 6 counties or running any candidates in elections there is a good inicator of their support of partition.
So Fianna Fail, Labour and the PDs all support partition? As do the SDLP - since they don't organise in the South?

What a load of ********.


Yes, all the above support, tacitly or overtly, partition.
Any party who supported the GFA, implicitly supports partition as means of solving the problems of NI. Long term aspiriations are irrelavent in such arguments.
 

32

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
84
voiceofretribution said:
32 said:
BarryW said:
32 said:
I would say that FG not organising in the 6 counties or running any candidates in elections there is a good inicator of their support of partition.
So Fianna Fail, Labour and the PDs all support partition? As do the SDLP - since they don't organise in the South?

What a load of ********.


Yes, all the above support, tacitly or overtly, partition.
Any party who supported the GFA, implicitly supports partition as means of solving the problems of NI. Long term aspiriations are irrelavent in such arguments.

Agreed.

That is one of the reasons why I haven't supported the provos in years.
 

pfinnegan

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
19
BarryW said:
pfinnegan said:
John Bruton and a large number of Fine Gaelers like to think they are Redmonites but in fact they are Carsonites i.e. Southerners who support partition
pfinnegan said:
Bottom line; Carson supported partition, same as Fine Gael
This might sound like an outrageous question, but........have you got anything at all to back this up?

When did John Bruton ever say that he supported Partition?

Did you miss the recent Fine Gael Árd Fheis, where FG members voted unanimously to re-affirm their commitment to end Partition?
Well at the risk of sounding even more outrageous Michael Collins fought a civil war in support of partition and Fine Gael have always endorsed that position i.e pro-partition. Now they are anti-partition. Does that mean Fine Gael are now pro-de Valara. Well times they are a changing.
 

pfinnegan

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
19
BarryW said:
pfinnegan said:
Bottom line; Carson supported partition
And by the way, Carson was vociferously opposed to Partition - he only accepted it (as better than nothing) when it became clear that Home Rule was inevitable
If Carson was vociferously opposed to Partition he would not have accepted it. Redmond never did.
 

BarryW

Active member
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
262
pfinnegan said:
Well at the risk of sounding even more outrageous Michael Collins fought a civil war in support of partition
:? That is an incredibly warped version of history - and one which is completely wrong.
The Civil War was against people who refused to accept the democratic will of the people

pfinnegan said:
and Fine Gael have always endorsed that position i.e pro-partition
Can you give me one example of where Fine Gael have endorsed Partition? Just one?
 

pfinnegan

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
19
BarryW said:
pfinnegan said:
Well at the risk of sounding even more outrageous Michael Collins fought a civil war in support of partition
:? That is an incredibly warped version of history - and one which is completely wrong.
The Civil War was against people who refused to accept the democratic will of the people

pfinnegan said:
and Fine Gael have always endorsed that position i.e pro-partition
Can you give me one example of where Fine Gael have endorsed Partition? Just one?
Are you seriously suggesting that the Irish Civil War was not fought over partition? If so you are in a minority of one. If not then I suggest you read up on Fine Gael, Fianna Fail and Civil War politics in Ireland.
 


Top Bottom