Loyalist March

[Renegade]

I see the loyalists are having another Sneck march. Doesn't that sound great! I used to be dead against these marches but I've changed my mind. I reckon these folks should be allowed to march in Inverness, once again towards the Portland Club, but I don't think they should stop there, they should just go right past it and straight into the Firth!

And here's another thing why are these marches going on but there is no "Inverness Mardi Gras"? Just imagine the outrage from the wee religious folks if this was going to happen.

[Scotty]

This is a topic worthy of debate and will likely bring some very real (and in some cases raw) emotions to the surface. Because this topic was raised last year, I know we have several posters on here who hold very strong opinions on this subject for varying reasons so I am issuing this blanket warning now before the subject really takes off in any direction.

We will not stifle the debate as it is a subject worthy of discussion. However, we will closely scrutinise this thread and at the first sign of it getting personal between posters, or descending into abuse (as it did last year) we will employ one or more of our site moderation options as we see fit.

[dead_ball_specialist]

Who is actually having the march?

Just wondering if it's fair to call it a 'loyalist' march i.e. perhaps those taking part are being stigmatized and don't actually stand for some of the things (northern ireland extremist politics etc) that are being projected on them.

So long as they aren't breaking the law I say live and let live.

[Charles Bannerman]

Who is actually having the march?

Just wondering if it's fair to call it a 'loyalist' march i.e. perhaps those taking part are being stigmatized and don't actually stand for some of the things (northern ireland extremist politics etc) that are being projected on them.

So long as they aren't breaking the law I say live and let live.

I tend to take the view that if we had said bye bye to the whole lot of them together in a oner in 1921, then not having a bunch of bigots taking a walk to the Portland Club on a Saturday afternoon would only be one of the very smallest of the many benefits accrued in the intervening years.

On the other hand that also begs the question: "What would these people find to be bigoted about instead if Ireland wasn't an option?"

Edited March 9, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[dead_ball_specialist]

We should have 'got rid of the whole lot of them in 1921'. They're a 'bunch of bigots'.

Sounds alot like you harbour some prejudices of your own. Surely the most sensible approach here is to just ignore them? Expressing hatred and intolerance for those taking part shows that you are no better than them.

[Guest Muir-Jaggie]

why do we have a thread about this???? WHO GIVES 2 FECKS ABOUT IT

[Guest birdog]

These marches always attract a very unsavoury bunch, on both sides of the debate. I think that these marches would be trouble free or even die out totally if those who took offence at what is essentially a celebration of historical battles never raised an eyebrow at their passing.

At the end of the day communities have the human right to celebrate and reflect on their history, lots of people may be of the opinion that this should not happen in Inverness as there is no historical link between Inverness and the events being remembered but we have to remember that there are people of Ulster extraction in the Highlands the same as anywhere else and Inverness being the capital of the Highlands that is probably the most logical site for them to congregate. St Patrick's day will see the bars of Inverness selling green lager and decked out in tricolours but no one will complain about that even though many British people died in the struggle for Ireland to be able to fly that flag.

Why should these marches be viewed as different to any other historical celebration? The fifth of November is celebrated by one and all, my neighbour who was pictured in the NoW walking out of Celtic Park on remembrance Sunday can be seen lighting fireworks every year, yet the event being celebrated on that day probably lead to worse treatment of Catholics on these Islands than any event in Ireland. You do not see Japanese or Germans lining up to spit and jeer VE or VJ day celebrations. You will not see British people in America disrespecting the fourth of July celebrations and I am very sure that American communities in the UK will be allowed to celebrate without fear of reprisals. Armistice day allows us to celebrate the heroics of our past warriors, why should people who want to do the same for soldiers who fought and died for their cause be denied the same right?

Yes these marches attract bigots on both sides but it is not the march itself which should be tackled it is the idiots and their viewpoints which need to be addressed, people who wish to march with the correct intentions should never be stopped from doing so. The bigots would disappear from these events if people would stop giving them a sympathetic ear. After all we as a species are nothing without our history, it needs to be remembered.

I will enter further into this debate if, like Scotty says, it is sensible and calm and not just me being accused of something I am not. I have no intention of getting as worked up about this as I did last year. For the record I take neither side in the Irish question, although I do have reason to, I am a confirmed athiest so I take no sides in the religious aspect of things. I like to think my views on this subject are from a totally nuetral standpoint.

[MrsICTFC]

Yes these marches attract bigots on both sides but it is not the march itself which should be tackled it is the idiots and their viewpoints which need to be addressed, people who wish to march with the correct intentions should never be stopped from doing so. The bigots would disappear from these events if people would stop giving them a sympathetic ear. After all we as a species are nothing without our history, it needs to be remembered.

100% agree!

[Renegade]

The reason I caled it a "loyalist" march is because that is what it went under the by the Inverness Courier.

It's true what Birdog says that they have the right to do whatecer they damn well please as long as it's peaceful and doesn't attract the regular Rangers-loving nuts but I wouldn't really want to have anything to do with them. These groups are small and getting smaller and I be surprised that even by 100 years time these marches and loyalist/religious whatever shananigans you want to call it will have pretty much disappeared.

[Charles Bannerman]

We should have 'got rid of the whole lot of them in 1921'. They're a 'bunch of bigots'.

Sounds alot like you harbour some prejudices of your own. Surely the most sensible approach here is to just ignore them? Expressing hatred and intolerance for those taking part shows that you are no better than them.

You may be missing the historical niceties of this one. For a very long time the Irish had been desperate for independence from Britain and in the early years of the 20th century, the tide began to turn in that direction. WW1 put a halt to the process but it was addressed again quite soon after. In 1921 (the British cabinet actually met in Inverness town hall to discuss the issue) a treaty was signed which gave independence to the Irish Free State (what we now know as Ireland) but the six counties of Ulster remained British. This controversial arrangement to "pro treaty" and "anti treaty" (ie IRA) factions and a very unpleasant Irish Civil War. It also led to all the problems in Ulster after 1969.

What I am suggesting is that if the whole of Ireland had been allowed to go its own way at the time then much of this hassle and nonsense would have been avoided in the UK. As a side issue, it's interesting to speculate as to how major Celtic and Rangers would have been as forces in football without the benefit of being stoked up as institutions symbolic of a sectarian divide which might well have been a good deal less stark in Scotland.

As for the second part of your quote of what I originally said - are you actually suggesting that these people are not bigots and are really just ordinary folks who happen to have decided to take a walk along to the Portland Club on a Staurday afternoon?

Edited March 10, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[Guest birdog]

As for the second part of your quote of what I originally said - are you actually suggesting that these people are not bigots and are really just ordinary folks who happen to have decided to take a walk along to the Portland Club on a Staurday afternoon?

Charles you are an educated man, you know that making assumptions of a recognised group of people is prejudiced making this statement itself as bigoted as any.

Section 74 (2) specifies that an offence is aggravated by religious prejudice if;

A. at the time of committing the offence or immediately before or after doing so, the offender evinces towards the victim (if any) of the offence, malice or ill-will based on the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation; or

B. the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by malice and ill-will towards members of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation, based on their membership of that group.

[Guest birdog]

What I am suggesting is that if the whole of Ireland had been allowed to go its own way at the time then much of this hassle and nonsense would have been avoided in the UK. As a side issue, it's interesting to speculate as to how major Celtic and Rangers would have been as forces in football without the benefit of being stoked up as institutions symbolic of a sectarian divide which might well have been a good deal less stark in Scotland.

I have been thinking about this statement and do you not think that in taking this course of action the Government at the time would have been doing no more than shifting the problem to someone else to deal with?

Very few things about being British make me proud but the fact that the British government will defend the sovereignty of it's people is one admirable trait they do have. It is my understanding that the majority of Ulster residents at the time wished to remain under British rule and abandoning them would have been a poor decision, similarly abandoning the people of the Falkland Islands would have been an equally poor decision.

I do not believe that if the whole of the island of Ireland was handed over back then that Scotland would have less of a problem caused by the Irish question because the people of the South West of Scotland have had links to that island for centuries and there would undoubtedly have some form of uprising from the protestant community in Ulster leading to a civil war on the same scale as we have seen in the past and sadly re-emerging now, do you honestly believe that Scotsmen would not have gotten involved in said scenario in the same way that they have with the decision that was made then?

Edited March 10, 2009 by birdog

[Alex MacLeod]

Good points from all posters here. The discussions and arguements as to the rights and wrongs of the Irish / Ulster problems of the past will go on long after most of us are turned to ash.

As for the march itself....cant be a great deal of involvement in it if it finishes at the Portland. All central belt marches finish in a public park where theres plenty room for the thousands who take part.

If the people of Inverness dont want those marches then use your voting rights to stop them. With local elections coming up let your councillors (the people who give permission for the marches) know your views and make sure the councillor support for such is depleted.

[Guest birdog]

If the people of Inverness dont want those marches then use your voting rights to stop them. With local elections coming up let your councillors (the people who give permission for the marches) know your views and make sure the councillor support for such is depleted.

Alex that is a nice sentiment but the council would be in breach of the European Convention on Human rights if they stopped these marches. I believe that the council have already tried to go down this route before.

[Alex MacLeod]

Can't be certain but I believe there are EU laws in place whereby large scale demonstrations must have permission on the grounds of public safety and that those giving the permission can veto the route for another. i.e. dont allow a march through areas where crowds cant be controlled, past areas that could cause flashpoints, churches etc.

I would substitute their route. Assemble at Dores and march in a straight line to Fort Augustus.

[Guest birdog]

Found the article here this march is not classified as a demonstration, as said before it is a historical commemoration.

Under the European Convention on Human rights, the council cannot prevent or control marches or parades on land which it does not own unless the risk to public safety outweighs the presumption of freedom of expression.

Also, there is not much that can be said on the safety issue as the previous two marches have passed without incident.

Edited March 16, 2009 by birdog

[Charles Bannerman]

What I am suggesting is that if the whole of Ireland had been allowed to go its own way at the time then much of this hassle and nonsense would have been avoided in the UK. As a side issue, it's interesting to speculate as to how major Celtic and Rangers would have been as forces in football without the benefit of being stoked up as institutions symbolic of a sectarian divide which might well have been a good deal less stark in Scotland.

I have been thinking about this statement and do you not think that in taking this course of action the Government at the time would have been doing no more than shifting the problem to someone else to deal with?

Very few things about being British make me proud but the fact that the British government will defend the sovereignty of it's people is one admirable trait they do have. It is my understanding that the majority of Ulster residents at the time wished to remain under British rule and abandoning them would have been a poor decision, similarly abandoning the people of the Falkland Islands would have been an equally poor decision.

I do not believe that if the whole of the island of Ireland was handed over back then that Scotland would have less of a problem caused by the Irish question because the people of the South West of Scotland have had links to that island for centuries and there would undoubtedly have some form of uprising from the protestant community in Ulster leading to a civil war on the same scale as we have seen in the past and sadly re-emerging now, do you honestly believe that Scotsmen would not have gotten involved in said scenario in the same way that they have with the decision that was made then?

I wasn't aware that a reply to this was solicited until it was referred to on a completely different thread.

When the British Cabinet met in Inverness Town Hall in 1921, they had two options.

1) Let the whole of Ireland go its own way which would have resulted in a Protestant minority in the North being discriminated against.

2) Do what they did, which has resulted in a Catholic minority in the North being discriminated against.

1) would certainly have led to some kind of armed Sectarian post separation struggle in the early 1920s. There was no perfect solution to this problem.

2) did lead to an armed Republican versus Republican post separation struggle in the early 1920s (the Irish Civil War) AND a further 30 years of Troubles in the late 20th century.

I am sure that the British Government, had they chosen 1), hence saving 30 years of late 20th century grief, could have created the option of allowing any Protestants who didn't like it there to come over to the UK. They could even have set up their own communities.... perhaps "New Larkhall"?

Alex... if they ever did manage to clamber ashore at Fort Augustus, having jumped in at Dores, I'm sure the participants in this straightforward "historical celebration" would have been delighted to have sought rescue at the former Fort Augustus Abbey, despite their disappointment at there no longer being any monks to greet them. You never know, better still maybe the monks' cellar would still have had a stash of bottles gifted by their old colleagues at Buckfast.

Edited June 11, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[Guest birdog]

As for the second part of your quote of what I originally said - are you actually suggesting that these people are not bigots and are really just ordinary folks who happen to have decided to take a walk along to the Portland Club on a Staurday afternoon?

Charles you are an educated man, you know that making assumptions of a recognised group of people is prejudiced making this statement itself as bigoted as any.

Section 74 (2) specifies that an offence is aggravated by religious prejudice if;

A. at the time of committing the offence or immediately before or after doing so, the offender evinces towards the victim (if any) of the offence, malice or ill-will based on the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation; or

B. the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by malice and ill-will towards members of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation, based on their membership of that group.

I wasn't aware that a reply to this was solicited until it was referred to on a completely different thread.

When the British Cabinet met in Inverness Town Hall in 1921, they had two options.

1) Let the whole of Ireland go its own way which would have resulted in a Protestant minority in the North being discriminated against.

2) Do what they did, which has resulted in a Catholic minority in the North being discriminated against.

1) would certainly have led to some kind of armed Sectarian post separation struggle in the early 1920s. There was no perfect solution to this problem.

2) did lead to an armed Republican versus Republican post separation struggle in the early 1920s (the Irish Civil War) AND a further 30 years of Troubles in the late 20th century.

I am sure that the British Government, had they chosen 1), hence saving 30 years of late 20th century grief, could have created the option of allowing any Protestants who didn't like it there to come over to the UK. They could even have set up their own communities.... perhaps "New Larkhall"?

Alex... if they ever did manage to clamber ashore at Fort Augustus, having jumped in at Dores, I'm sure the participants in this straightforward "historical celebration" would have been delighted to have sought rescue at the former Fort Augustus Abbey, despite their disappointment at there no longer being any monks to greet them. You never know, better still maybe the monks' cellar would still have had a stash of bottles gifted by their old colleagues at Buckfast.

Charlie nice long post, I'll read it later. I was wanting your thoughts on the first quote in this post but, like yourself, I shall just make assumptions and see this as avoidance tactics :D

EDIT having now read your post I can see that I was correct in my judgement of you, your comment on the "new Larkhall" is as bigoted as the "Famine song", which in my opinion is not that racist/bigoted but under Scots law has been proved to be so.

Edited June 11, 2009 by birdog

[Johnboy]

Think you'll have to put your sash away for this season Birdy, mate...

Just heard that all loyalist marches, apprentice boys parades, etc, etc, have been cancelled due to the flu pandemic!

[Guest birdog]

Think you'll have to put your sash away for this season Birdy, mate...

Just heard that all loyalist marches, apprentice boys parades, etc, etc, have been cancelled due to the flu pandemic!

Hehe, for your information I am anti-bigotry from both sides of the Irish fence as said before. Otherwise I would not have contacted Mike Smith about our fans singing the "Bobby Sands" song early in the last season and I certainly would not have complied with his request to give a statement to the police. My views on this subject, as stated before, are based solely on the human rights aspect of the discussion.

[Charles Bannerman]

EDIT having now read your post I can see that I was correct in my judgement of you, your comment on the "new Larkhall" is as bigoted as the "Famine song", which in my opinion is not that racist/bigoted but under Scots law has been proved to be so.

Ooeerrr... Jiings, Crivvens Helpmaboab...time to make a sharp exit to avoid getting nicked by the Pr**dy Thought Police then!

Now where's the best place to hide? :P

I know! :P Blend into the crowd at an Orange Walk! Plenty coming up with July 12th just over a month away. They'd never think of looking there!

OK. Better get the right "camouflage" equipment from the Orange Shop then. They do a great bargain in Walking Kits. You get a black umbrella, a bowler hat, a bottle of Buckfast, a flute, a "one size fits all" sash and a toilet roll (based on the obseravtion that people on these parades always seem to walk along as if they've just done a great big whoopsie in their trousers)....all for the knockdown price of ?16.90!

Sorted! Whew! :019:

Edited June 11, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[Yngwie]

Just heard that all loyalist marches, apprentice boys parades, etc, etc, have been cancelled due to the flu pandemic!

:019:

Not a flute pandemic?

[Guest birdog]

EDIT having now read your post I can see that I was correct in my judgement of you, your comment on the "new Larkhall" is as bigoted as the "Famine song", which in my opinion is not that racist/bigoted but under Scots law has been proved to be so.

Ooeerrr... Jiings, Crivvens Helpmaboab...time to make a sharp exit to avoid getting nicked by the Pr**dy Thought Police then!

Now where's the best place to hide? :P

I know! :P Blend into the crowd at an Orange Walk! Plenty coming up with July 12th just over a month away. They'd never think of looking there!

OK. Better get the right "camouflage" equipment from the Orange Shop then. They do a great bargain in Walking Kits. You get a black umbrella, a bowler hat, a bottle of Buckfast, a flute, a "one size fits all" sash and a toilet roll (based on the obseravtion that people on these parades always seem to walk along as if they've just done a great big whoopsie in their trousers)....all for the knockdown price of ?16.90!

Sorted! Whew! :019:

Excellent post. It certainly shows your true colours, and I'm not referring to the bigotry I already knew this. Have you been taking lessons from your pupils on how to get in the last word when your argument fails?

[Charles Bannerman]

It's called satire, birdog - on a subject which lends itself ideally to that particular device!

Edited June 11, 2009 by Charles Bannerman

[Guest birdog]

I think I shall withdraw from the discussion now before it turns into the insultfest that I would rather avoid on these forums now, I have made my point and others can make their own minds up on the subject.