Jamie Bryson and the Northern Irish 'Serbs'.

"I hold fast to the motto of our forefathers - For God and Ulster" - Jamie Bryson

"С ВЕРОМ У БОГА ЗА КРАЉА И ОТАЏБИНУ"

"With Faith in God for King and Fatherland" - Serbian Chetnik Motto

Look.

I don't have a vendetta against Jamie Bryson or anything like that, but his bull-headed insistence on destroying Unionism by taking it through the Carsonian graveyard and digging up the bones of old dead Unionism to assemble a Unionist Frankenstein is quite frankly alarming me.

And he's done it again.

Well, rather I did first.

 I added his blog to my list and now the temptation to read it is just too much.

His most recent contribution is by and large 'fine'.

http://jamiebryson.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/elections-2014-right-of-independent.html

He's talking about the rights of independent Loyalists to put themselves forward to represent people.

Fine.

Nothing wrong with that.

I do fear that it'll force the DUP further to the right, but, that remains to be seen so knock yourselves out.

The bit that did stick with me is this:

"The political views carried by those such as myself have recently been described as 'extreme' by those that wish to mould loyalism into a cuddly, re packaged brand that is more friendly and welcoming to those that are offended by every aspect of our cultural and religious identity..."

What fresh hell is this?

All the criticism leveled at Jamie might have been too in depth for him to absorb and I'm sure he's a busy chap, so, I'll keep this brief.

First of all, 'cuddly'.

I detect the Loyalist filter again.

We say "less offensive" or "less songs/banners about killing people" and he hears "Berlin Love parade"

Is this the 12th with the drinking removed? Not likely.

I highlighted before that (in theory) a Protestant can be a Republican. 

Though once common enough it is now very rare but still, it is possible.

This is in stark contrast to Jamie's Loyalism which would not do anything to remove Loyalism's obstacles to Catholics: The Lanark Way bonfire, bands with paramilitary regalia, songs about killing Catholics etc.

Even if they did remove them it's highly unlikely legions of Catholics would come knocking at the doors of Orange Halls to join bands.

BUT, what harm would it do to level the playing field a bit?

How can removing these elements result in a 'cuddly' creature that would destroy Unionism?

Also, who are these people who are offended by EVERY aspect of Loyalist (or Unionist or Protestant culture)?

From what I see most of the direct calls come from moderate Unionists NOT seasoned Republicans, they seemingly only stick their oar in  whenever there is potential political capital.
 Indeed, why kill the goose that lays the golden eggs?
If Loyalism's underbelly and sometimes vulgar displays make Unionism a cold house for Catholics then that makes life easier for those who would see Northern Ireland cease to exist.

But what of the majority who just have SOME irks with Loyalism that could easily be addressed?

Or does binary Loyalism not allow for the recognition of such middle ground?

Poor Show

Methinks he's just hearing what he wants to hear.

Spiffing!

The complaints are clear, they allude to a small part of Loyalist culture, not its keystone:

a/ Excessive drinking at some parades

b/ Songs about the murders or deaths of Catholics

c/ Inability to respect places of worship

d/ Paramilitary trappings
(Of course there are more such as attacking police with masonry and swords, but baby steps as they say...)

All could be clamped down upon with a bit of effort. 

The Loyalist band scene is more disciplined than what people give it credit for.

But There is a lack of will.

'Leaders' like Jamie are loath to encourage such will as they either see nothing wrong with this behaviour (which would beg the question how much of the Holy Bible has he actually read?) or they're digging their heels in as they resent being told what to do.

If that's the case then allow me to be the first to apologise.

Jamie. 

Mate.

I'm sorry you think that you have no option but to dig your heels in under the pressure.

I'm sorry if you think I'm talking down my nose at you from some aloof position that exists only in my arrogant mind.

I'm sorry if I/we give the impression that we don't care for working class Loyalists.

That's simply not true, but it's very hard to convince them of that.

Some of us see things differently and are denounced as Lundies for our different views (you'd think a Martin Luther inspired religion could appreciate speaking out against drunkenness and ungodly behaviour?) so we have to apply pressure in order to be heard.

The pressure isn't there to see the end of band culture.
On the contrary, if any one is presenting the case for banning parades altogether it is the Orange Order and your mates like Wille Frazer and the camp at Twaddell.

I'm/we're not asking you to change these things out of spite or for the sake of Getalongerism.

I'm/We're asking you to help change these things because they are, when judged on their own, fundamentally wrong. 

Comparing them to the Provo's murder campaign might make them seem 'good' but that's a pretty low bar to compare one's behaviour to.

I'm also asking you to do it because it's killing Unionism.

The Queen: Not amused by Loyalism

Our support in Britain shrinks evermore.

People are embarrassed by 'our' actions.

You aren't a fan of Sinn Fein.

Yet you seem oblivious to the fact that every time Loyalists kick off it detracts from whatever 'Republicans' might be up to.

 The SpAd Bill was a red face for Sinn Fein and it happened only a few months ago, but since marching season kicked off it's now ancient history and SF have recovered from it.

Loyalism, in theory, should be the bulwark against Republicanism.

But the way you and other Loyalists are so predictably reactive and easy to manipulate means that time and time again Republican blunders are forgotten about and that Loyalists can be counted on to flair up when desired e.g. Richard Haass is on his way to town so Republicans organise a few parades and people like yourself go ape and then Mr Haass gets to see who the 'bad guys' are.

Alban Maginness is the one who makes
Loyalist Monkey dance?! Who'd have thought?!

DANCE. MONKEY. DANCE.

If you despise the 'cuddly' idea of Loyalism, then do the Orangemen at Rossnowlagh disgust you?

Rossnowlagh 12th: Nightmare?!

Do peaceful parades with no paramilitary trappings offend you?

Does the idea of a Catholic voting for the Union and going to a Northern Ireland football game make you shiver in dread?

If not, then what's your reason for not supporting some changes and a giving Loyalism a new lease of life?

What of this Bible based morality that you wish to entwine with Loyalism? Surely drunken behaviour, murderous songs and disrespecting the law are incompatible with Christian teachings?

Or do you intend to overlook those aspects?

Times have changed and it's now no longer just Nationalists who are against Loyalism, people like you are turning Protestants and Unionists against Loyalism too.

You're drawing a line in the sand that many can't cross and before you defiantly beat your chest and say that you don't need them, that a smaller group of determined people is better without dead-weight then please click on these links below:

You'll see what happened to a group of red, white and blue fleg loving non (anti?)-Catholics when they went against the wishes of their 'mainland' and what happened them at the hands of their numerically stronger Catholic neighbours (whom they pissed off at every opportunity despite pleads for co-operation) and how they preferred to stay within their 'Union' (Yugoslavia) even though the Union was clearly disintegrating:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm

or indeed

3-400 000 people fled to the 'mainland' in
 a single WEEK thanks to the narrow
 minded nationalism  of their politicians

http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/elich/krajina.html

or

The Republic of  the Serbian Krajina
The area in red.
Bigger than Northern Ireland.
A self-declared partitionist state
Many of their ancestors were 'planted' here to act as a military buffer
Paranoid of Catholic majority due to bloody history & political fear mongering
Defiant of international opinion and latterly their 'mainland' capital.
Became an economic burden to its mainland state
 Wiped out in less than a week...

 http://english.pravda.ru/world/europe/09-08-2010/114541-serbian_krajina-0/

Could lessons be learned?

1389: Battle of Kosovo, Serbia against the Ottomans

These guys love to celebrate battles from hundreds of years ago too...







Sound familiar?

KOSOVO: Is to Serbs what the Siege of Derry is to Loyalists

 They also have difficulty admitting that they don't control 'hallowed ground' anymore...







Sound familiar?

 It should be, for Jamie's rhetoric and visions are frighteningly similar to those of the  Republic of the Serbian Krajina ("Krai-eena").

And like the Republic of the Serbian Krajina he's on the overtly nationalistic, flag-covered, defiant, truth-denying, partisan road to destruction. And he (with others) will potentially take Northern Ireland with him.

Belgrade Sons of William?

Jamie Bryson's Blueprint to Destroy Northern Ireland?

I stumbled across Jamie Bryson's blog the other day.

Methinks that I have deliberately given his blog and twitter account a wide berth as I (believe it or not) have things to do and don't need any more distractions to take me from my other thangs.

However, this eye opener can't be left alone:
http://jamiebryson.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/for-god-and-ulster-traditional-loyalism.html

There's two ways of interpreting what he means:

a/ The first option is that Loyalism needs to be further entwined with Protestantism.

If this is what he means then it is a blueprint for the end of Northern Ireland.

Simple.

It rules out the theoretical possibility of 'Catholic Loyalists'.
 Contrast this to Republicanism which at least is 'theoretically' still open to Protestants (although bar the very odd exception it is pretty much a Protestant-free zone thanks to the IRA) and further reduces the chances of Catholic Unionists.

Without Catholics voting for the Union then NI is toast.

In theory some one who cherishes NI's place within the Union would do whatever it takes to preserve this position.

'War', murder and mayhem get palmed off as necessary 'defence' for Northern Ireland.

But making NI presentable to the taigs is a bridge too far; 'no' to admitting that the Ulster flag is unpalatable (and redundant as of the early '70's), 'no' to having an NI anthem at football games (it's deemed as 'de-Brit-ising' NI, but it's OK for the Commonwealth team to have an NI anthem, somehow), 'no' to having a flag-flying policy in line with most of the rest of the UK, 'no' to having a common sense approach to parades, 'no' to reducing drunkenness at parades...

These are apparently unacceptable. Particularly because 'themuns' don't change anything.
'Themuns' aren't in danger of losing their country thanks to shifting demographics...


OR


b/ Perhaps he means that Loyalism should adopt some old school Protestant principles.

As much as I'm not religious I have to say that I can't disagree with this one.

Let's explore some old school Protestant practices and their potential.

Old School Protestant: Francis Hutcheson.
Ulster-Scot.
Presbyterian. Philosopher.
Father of Scottish Enlightenment.
Icon of Liberals worldwide - LUNDY!

Respect for the House of God - Now, I'm sure that in the eyes of many Loyalists Catholic chapels are not considered true houses of God.
However, it's never been fully explained to me how playing extra-loudly when marching past them, urinating on them or even just stopping and playing outside them at all is necessary to the survival of Loyalism.

All Loyalist bands take rests on parades.
How much of a loss would it be to make chapels the designated rest points for bands?
The flutists can catch their breath back for a wee minute.
No one loses.

How many Catholics have been converted to Protestantism by hearing bands march past their church while worshipers on the inside can't hear any part of the christening or confirmation?

Are they likely to think "Man, can they not just back off for a few minutes" or are they likely to think "I have seen the light!"?

The Protestant appetite for proselytising has waned somewhat, they seemingly want  Catholics to convert neither to Protestantism nor Unionism.

Or at least that is the impression one would get from the Belfast OO and various Loyalist groups.

Old School Protestant: Edward Carson.
Father of Northern Ireland.
Leader of Anti-Home Rule movement
A co-founder of the UVF
Spoke Irish - LUNDY!

Sobriety - If the OO, bandsmen and various Loyalists were to insist upon sobriety at parades, festivities and protests then life in NI would be different.

11th night bonfires would be less intimidating.
Same for many of the marches.
It would give the OO's stance that it is a religious organisation some credibility.
Families at 'the field' would be less intimidated by louts and a better day out could be had by them (families, not the louts, they'd be rather miffed I imagine).
The potential for violence would be much reduced.
As would the credibility for anti-OO protests. To reduce drunkenness, violence and intimidating behaviour would be to rob 'residents groups' of their chief arguments.

As a consequence there would be less images of 'Loyalist bad guys' beamed around the world.

Not to mention less ammunition for satirical publications and web pages.

Why give them so much ammunition so freely?

Old School Protestant: Lt Col Blair Mayne
SAS hero in WWII
Irish rugby player
Legend
Loved Irish culture - LUNDY!

If Jamie is indeed calling for a more 'Protestant' attitude to Loyalism by taking in the above points then I for one would welcome it.

As would liberals, Catholics, the Police, the Media, the British Government and indeed most people in Northern Ireland.

He may not be calling for sobriety and civilised behaviour in which case I would ask him to expand on his points.
But, if this is what he is suggesting and calling for then it begs a question.

IF THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE CALLING FOR THEN WHY DO YOU AND OTHERS HAVE A HISSY FIT EVERY TIME PEOPLE ATTACK LOYALISM FOR THESE VERY UNDESIRABLE TRAITS?

My own suspicion for such a contradictory standpoint is the old 'Loyalist filter'.

I used to have one too.

It's a mechanism in the brain that ignores everything some one says if they are deemed to be critical of any aspect of Loyalism, Unionism or Protestantism.

It has no sense of perspective and will not take into consideration the background, standing, intelligence, loyalty or CV of the accuser; once they have spoken their Lundy-like words will be re-arranged into a format that is easier to digest and throw back.

For example:

Catholic resident on marching route: "Lads, I have no problem with ye's having yer big day and all that, but do you have to play the Billy Boys, piss up against my wall and take pleasure in letting on-lookers call my weans fenian bastards as they're playing in the garden? Plus I don't much appreciate that UVF fleg on the lamp-post, they killed my cousin..."

*PUT THROUGH LOYALIST FILTER*

Interpreted as: "I hate you Proddy bastards and want to see you driven into the sea. You have no right to be in this land and we'll be waiting to strike in the night like it's 1641..."

HENCE TYPICAL RESPONSE:

"You were able to tolerate 30 years of IRA murder and ethnic cleansing of my people and now you want to strip us of what we have left!? Why can't you just respect our culture and right to march??!!"

Old School Protestant: Henry Joy-McCracken
Presbyterian
Libertarian
Rebel leader - LUNDY!

Ordinary NI citizen with non-partisan points of view: "Chaps, do ye's have to put up so many flags? Come winter time they look like crap and they don't make any sense. Why's there an independence flag beside a Union flag? That's a contradiction. And WTF the Israel flag? Did they not used to send British soldiers home in body bags?"

*PUT THROUGH LOYALIST FILTER*

Interpreted as: "Being as some one who does not participate in marching (anymore) I have done the only plausible thing for anyone to do which is to inexplicably turn into a lundy and pursue a vindictive campaign against loyalist culture as I'm sensitive as to how the fenians feel.
It is the only path to take because as far as loyalism is concerned 'you are either with us or against us' and as I have voiced an opinion different to yours I must therefore be against you."

HENCE TYPICAL RESPONSE:

 "You liberal types are the cancer that has created this mess in the first place! By trying to please every one you have robbed loyalism of its pride. Your weakness will spell doom for Ulster! Vile traitor! Lundy!"

Old School Protestant: Arthur Wellesley
1st Duke of Wellington
Leader of Allied armies at Waterloo
Hero of British Empire
Oversaw Catholic emancipation
Valued his Catholic Irish soldiers - LUNDY!

Local business owner whose business is adversely affected by a particular parade: "Is there anyway we could arrange things so that people aren't intimidated and don't head off to Dublin/The Canary islands for a couple of weeks? Or even just have a good vibe for tourists? Things are hard mate, Belfast's rates are ridiculous and the landlord bought this building during the boom and has a big mortgage to pay off so I have to cough up the dough, plus I've protection money on top of that..."

*PUT THROUGH LOYALIST FILTER*

Interpreted as: "I don't care how much money your stupid parade brings into the city. According to the Newsletter it is £5 000 000 000 billion but I don't care such is my hatred for your culture and religion. Even though I may or may not be a Protestant and/or Unionist. Take your charity parade else where for I shall feed my children on hatred of you alone and shall pay my rent and rates from a special secret trust fund created by the IRA and their American friends"

HENCE TYPICAL RESPONSE:

"Months of hard work and discipline go into the creating of this parade and you ingrates are so blinded by hatred and greed that you would see us march in a ghetto just so you can sell coffee and wine to liberals and homosexuals! Just give our culture respect and you will see it is inclusive! Why must you hate so much!"

Robert Lundy
Cleared by Parliament of treachery
Hero of Battle of Almansa, 1707
Thought Derry was indefensible and was suspected of loyalty to his unfairly deposed British king - LUNDY!

Psychologist: "You do understand that if you removed offensive symbols such as UDA flags from parades and stopped playing songs that advocate sectarian murder then it's less likely that people will take offense? While you're at it, the inconsistent messages given by current practices at NI football games make it a cold house for Catholics and give them even less incentive to support NI football team"

*PUT THROUGH LOYALIST FILTER*

Interpreted as: "A United Ireland would be much easier for us to achieve if you removed certain symbols. They act as magical talismans against unification and are the only thing holding back the papist plot to over throw Ulster"

HENCE TYPICAL RESPONSE: "You wish to strip us of our Britishness!"


Quite simply, you're either with us or you're a Republican.

There is seemingly no middle ground.

Needless to say such a wacky digital view of the world has made us a topic of ridicule, a great example is that of Harry 'The Provo' Enfield with his William Ulsterman sketch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEsFtiruIok

William Ulsterman: More reasonable than a real Ulsterman...
LUNDY!

If Jamie sincerely wishes to bring a Godly inspired sense of discipline, respect and sobriety to Loyalism like the days of old (such is the perception) then this would be a great thing for all, except for perhaps some Republicans and people who love to take the piss out of Loyalism.

But then maybe some Republicans will start to react accordingly and satirists will bring their cross-hairs to bear on them to fill the vacuum.
But in the meantime, hard-line Loyalists are hogging the limelight with their contradictory messages, imagery, fleggery and violence and as such are low-hanging fruit that quite frankly deserve ridicule

First of all, if Jamie can whip everyone in Twaddell into shape, free from loyalist dogma & hypocrisy then he might be destined for the history books as a figure for good as opposed to fodder for comedy material.

Over to you Jamie

The Truth Please. The Old School Straight Talkin' Protestant Truth

There is a pastime in Northern Ireland that involves going through the history books and excavating every little bone of evidence that shows how different we Ulstermen are.

As a rule, people of a Catholic background just cut to the chase and regard themselves as Irish, leaving the Ulster room vacant for others to occupy.

As such, it is fair to assume that anyone who introduces himself as an Ulsterman is likely to be a Protestant Unionist.

To be fair, I understand this. I don't necessarily agree with it (in the context of "NO! I'm not Irish! I'm from Ulster!") but I see where it comes from.

If you've grown up watching people who have killed your friends, family, neighbours (or at least tried to) take pride in their IRISH(!) identity then that which they cherish most could be turned by the machinations of spite into that which you hate the most.
i.e. If it's good enough for Gerry it's certainly worthy of contempt.

Irishman

Irish man (Ulsterman)

Irish man (Ulsterman)

Ulsterman (Irish man)

So from this tragic version of 'Simon Says' we have a cultural demarcation. "If Mr X is Irish then I'm the polar opposite", in the ironic case of Northern Ireland, the perceived idea of the polar opposite is the identity that has been intertwined with Irish identity for centuries, British.

During the lifetime of the Empire dual nationalities were a common theme if not a necessity. Nearly everyone was British (some more British than others, as is still the case today) so everyone had to have another label, be it Irish, Scottish, Bengali, Australian, Gujarati... (even Ghandi was a proud Brit for a while and James Joyce never ever owned an Irish passport...)

Ghandi: Formerly a proud Brit (not an Ulsterman)

After the painful severance of Ireland and the UK this dual mask was discarded. Although picked up in the North by some, it rotted and festered with each passing year.
 With each political convulsion that passed the mask weakened accordingly. It would seem that the death blow was dealt when the troubles kicked off.
Another great irony of Northern Ireland, that the Provos' campaign to 'free' Ireland from the British resulted in the sudden appearance (conversion?) of hundreds of thousands of Brits where previously there had only been Irishmen.

Since then we have staggered along tightly embracing our identities, conveniently hacking off the parts that where too similar to the other sort. The taigs get Irish music, the huns get lambegs and decent marching bands. Nationalists get the Gaelic games and the Unionists do as the British do and stick with rugby and football, thank you very much.
The nationalists get the Gaelic languages so any Protestant who understands leprechaun-speak must keep their head down and officially no longer exist. Historical significance be damned. As for you lol. 1303, well, look how you ended up...

The fact that most of these elements were shared within living memory matters not a jot, it's all about sticking to the  ideas of identity that have been salvaged from the rubbish tip of Imperial Ireland.

What may have facilitated this demarcation was a particularly Northern trait, one inherited from Scottish settlers (or so I imagine), that of straight talking.
I've fallen afoul of it numerous times in my teenage years. Aspirations, dreams and plans have all suffered the inevitable fall to earth after a small word from an elder relative or neighbour.

At least one knows where one stands with an Ulster Presbyterian.

Or at least one did.

Now they're more vague.

Despite repeated questions about why drunken unchristian behaviour is tolerated so much in SOME OO events (and related events) the straight talking becomes awkward zig-zagging, ducking and back tracking.

There has been a flurry of internet activity in Northern Irish political circles since the dawn of Willie Frazer and Jamie Bryson.

Willie, understandably has an axe to grind and all things considered I can't blame him. I haven't suffered a fraction of what he suffered. Indeed, the teenage Willie Frazer is ironically a blue print for an ideal of how Northern Ireland could be; a Northern Irish Protestant with a military family background who plays GAA games with no insecurities about his political or religious allegiance.

However, the IRA did what they say they needed to do and Willie's life trajectory changed accordingly.

Willie Frazer: What could have been...

I myself have a go at Willie now and again as I believe his retro mash-up version of unionism that comprises of imperial era Unionist sloganeering & imagery, fear mongering and fleggery (not to mention a spot of Islamophobia) is doomed to steer mainstream unionism further right when it needs to be not only going left, but doing a U-turn, backing up 100 miles and then just hanging around for a while.
With his way unionism will go the way of Protestant Belfast's most famous export (the Titanic, keep up ffs).

By far and away the most articulate, creative, funny and indeed inspirational critic of Willie's silliness is Loyalists Against Democracy (if you're reading this then you've definitely heard of them, unless you've made a Google error...).

Recently they published a piece by Brian John Spencer, a writer, artist, banjo enthusiast, contributor to sluggerotoole.com and God knows what else.


It is a fantastic piece that is peppered with frustration at the caricature that Loyalism and indeed Unionism has become.

As such, I saw a criticism of this piece.

What struck me was the formulaic fashion of the criticism: "(he is) intolerant to the fact that parades are not all about drunk yobs but they provide a positive role in communities"

Not a mention on the points of the blog. No. What BJS DIDN'T say out weighs his criticism. He has no capital to pay for his argument as he had no disclaimer.

This is not an isolated example, Northern Irish politics and debates are so infused with deflective arguments and defensiveness that the term 'whataboutery' was coined.

So, without further ado and whataboutery, I shall offer some criticisms to Unionism and I say this as someone who has grown up in their orange nursery:
As a baby and toddler I was taken to parades, as a teenager I joined a pipe then flute band, walked with the Order in the years outwith that period, painted the Orange hall as a summer job, had a cassette collection of flute band tapes (like many teenagers my first purchase was 'Blood and Thunder'- Pride of the Village, Belfast).
Hardly a CV that will have the powers-that-be in Schomberg House cancel their lunches but certainly one that shows I know how they think. Or at least thought.

I am forlorn at the death of the straight talkin' Protestant and the subsequent frustration that has been borne from the unanswered questions posed by liberal types, rebels and Lundys alike.

So, in the fashion hinted at by the critic of BJS, I shall attach an unnecessary disclaimer and acknowledgement to each question/criticism to alleviate myself of any notion of ignorance.

1/ The 12th.
I know that the 12th is supposed to be a family day out. It is an endearing sight to all those in the community who will see 3/4 generations of the same family walk (or travel by hired cars) in the lodge together. Octogenarians with 5 year olds and all those of the generations in between. It's difficult to see the malice in such a picture.
Add to this the religious aspects of worship at 'the Field', the community efforts involved in keeping the lodges and bands fed and watered and the satisfaction of a job well done (especially as the rural lodges will be sacrificing productive hay baling time), well, it's easy to see why they would take resentment in such criticism of a rural idealistic picture, a picture of family interaction and sobriety.

I remember it all fondly.

What I don't fondly cherish is nearly being done in at a Glasgow 12th by a drunkard for 'looking too fenian'. I don't fondly cherish the memory of seeing a shaven headed young man in Belfast drunkenly staggering about with blood spurting from his head.
That's not how it's supposed to be.
I don't fondly like the atmosphere of Belfast  city centre on the 12th. It is in stark contrast to that OTHER Orangefest, the jovial Orange day in the Netherlands when they celebrate their monarch's birthday. Properly and without affront

Red. White. Blue. Crown. Sound familiar?

The Dutch version of 'the Field'

Orangefest, Dutch style

NOT the River Lagan

Queen Beatrix. Their Queen participates!

Not an inflatable Union Flag hammer in sight...

Orangemen.

Bunting

And before you blame the disparity on 'themuns' please be
aware that the majority of Christians in the Netherlands are Roman Catholics and not by a small margin either, greater by some two million souls or there abouts.





Given the contempt with which some God fearing Ulster Protestants hold the 'liberal and morally loose' Dutch is it not a delicious irony the differing levels of drunkeness, violence and public disorder between the two Orangefests?
And that the moral looseness of NI's (minority of) drunken followers and hangers on is forgiven if they make their way to support the next place of contentious parading and civil disobedience against the state?








All that L.A.D, BJS and other 'unprincipled liberals' ask is why then is the drunkeness and bitterness at SOME (not ALL) parades tolerated at all let alone NOT clamped down on?

"A bit of crack" doesn't sell.
 These parades are organised.
 The have direction, procedures and people to complain to.
There is a hierarchy.
  Yet the drunkenness continues unchallenged.
No one will be reprimanded for singing "what shall we do with the fenian bastard".

A lodge full of Christians can be seen walking behind a band that flies the name/colours/standard of a group that used to actively hunt and kill people.
Why is this tolerated?
Are Christian principles satisfied?

Sometimes a defence will start with the enfeebled words of "but themuns do..."

Since when did independently minded Protestants start acting in accordance with an inferior guide to morality? Is the Bible no longer good enough? Has the word of God been replaced with "well, Paddy did this so we can do that..."?

Why is there never an official release from the Orange Order or indeed unofficial releases from lodges, Protestant groups and bands explaining exactly why the drunken aspect (that clashes with Christian principles and a family atmosphere) is tolerated?

Why are there no (or at least very few) directives from above declaring that there will be punishments for any one/band/lodge found guilty of sectarian singing or chanting?

The great 'get out of jail free card' of what 'themuns' do is always lurking in the background ready to suffocate any chance of a decent debate as demonstrated by OrangeMOPE Jamie Bryson who recently stated that the song 'the Billy Boys' is no more offensive than 'the Fields of Athenry'.
What the inarticulate cretin could have said to give his argument 'some' substance was that when considered from a binary aspect of offensive - non-offensive then both songs are unappealing/offensive to people on the 'other side of the fence'.

What he ignores is the implication of sectarian murder in the Billy Boys 'hidden' in the lines "we're up to our necks in fenian blood..." (either it implies murder and killing or a ghastly unexplained event that has come to pass in a Catholic blood bank).
The fields of Athenry contain no such inferences.

However, from Jamie's point of view, an offensive song is an offensive song is an offensive song and that's that.
There are no levels of offensiveness, it is only digital.
How he can be so digital when the song he defends openly celebrates sectarian murder I don't know but I imagine that he is not alone in that regard.

Jamie Brysom: Downhill ever since this peak...

A great source of deflection for the controversy surrounding OO parades is the GAA. Although never officially admitted would one be unfair by concluding that the OO et al feel they have no case to answer until themuns (the GAA) 'get their house in order' (as in make it more inviting to people of a Protestant and Unionist background)?

Again, why do Christians have to wait on some one else to act before they set to the task of enforcing their own principles?

Also, if one looks at the trends over the years it would imply that in 100 years there'll be hardly any Orangemen left and the GAA will be huge. So why do the GAA have to do anything? From their point of view they have time on their side. And IF making changes in the GAA results in a stronger Orange Order then why would they bother changing anything?
Is it in their interest to see a stronger Orange Order?
So, perhaps the OO should use a bit of initiative and NOT wait on themuns to 'do something' first (if that is indeed what they are thinking, mere speculation on my part)

2/ Flegs (and some more parades...)


Unionists see the other sort having their flags.
So naturally, Unionism has its own flags.
Loads of them.

On one solitary lamp post it is not beyond the realms of possibility that one could see a Union flag, an Ulster flag (redundant as of the early 70's), an Independence flag (by definition NON-Unionist) and an Israeli flag (a state that gained independence partly through a murder campaign directed against British soldiers. Irony any one?)

NOT the Netherlands...

 





Many people outside the harder fringes of the Unionist movement see the plastering of flags all over the place as a turn off.

Outsiders, as in foreigners/potential tourist pounds agree.

It is overkill.

This tourism-pound argument is ignored or palmed off simply as a concern for money rather than 'culture'.

Again ironic, as one of the key arguments for Northern Ireland's retention within the UK was economic based.

Indeed, even now it is cited as a key argument against unifying the land with our bankrupt neighbour down south.

Yet somehow it plays second fiddle to parades and fleggery.

As some one who used to carry various flags at various parades over the decades I would like some one to explain to me how we've went from cherishing our flags to having them adorn the waists of drunken louts who lob projectiles at the police and why we should allow this to continue?

Of course most Unionists don't behave in this manner but when some do there is very little in the way of criticism for these idiots who humiliate Unionists in the eyes of their counterparts in the rest of the UK, indeed, just the opposite, there is always some sort of fumbled defence.

What, pray tell, is the plan for when more and more areas achieve a non-unionist majority?

"Faugh u Allagh"?

Is the Protestant Coalition's Muslim bashing likely to endear Muslims to the Union flag? Are the Chinese communities in NI going to be sorry to see efforts to curtail such overtly nationalist (as in British nationalist before you say anything) symbols?






The more vocal and active parts of the Unionist community have a choice to make the Union flag a flag for all or just 'are fleg' and risk making it an unofficial flag of the underclass.

What benefit is there to the maintenance of the Union by forming an association between the Union Flag and hard line Loyalism?
With such a perceived links are Catholics more or less likely to resent the Union flag?

The 12th, Co Donegal

How would Unionist culture be harmed if the was some sort of coherent strategy applied to the erection of flags?
 Would a town suffer by NOT having shredded, weathered flags flapping around in the winter gales?

Canada

If I'm missing a bigger picture and it is the case where drunken louts, sectarian songs, the disregarding of basic Christian principles, the burning of religious and state emblems ARE actually necessary to the survival of a culture that has spawned liberals, rebels, generals, frontiersmen and presidents then I welcome the opportunity to be enlightened and to have someone explain why exactly we require or at least tolerate this cancerous underbelly.

Belfast...

If my points can be conceded as having some merit (not necessarily a lot) then please follow in  the steps of your ancestors and go against the grain.
Take one on the chin, offend those who need offended by defending the truth and write to the Order, the Apprentice boys, your Unionist representatives and inform them that no longer will you tolerate your culture being trailed down by those who don't respect it.

Also Belfast

You can't blame Republicans so much anymore as they don't have to do very much anymore, drunken, hate-filled 'Loyalists' are doing their work for them.

You'll not be thanked for what you do but then nor should you.


After all, rebelling, truth-telling and defiance were once upon a time the most 'Protestant' things that one could do, unlike now.

The contact address for the Orange Order is info@grandorangelodge.co.uk

NOT. CRITICISING. THIS.

DEFINITELY. CRITCISING. THIS.

If you think I'm wrong and that these points don't need addressed then please enlighten me as to why I'm wrong only explain the matter on its own merit without resorting to comparisons of other groups or associations.

Petitions: Worth a Shot.

NEW NORTHERN IRELAND ANTHEM PETITION:   http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/northern-ireland-football-team-anthem-change/

The horror. The horror.

After a year of horror which gave to Northern Ireland various spectres including Loyalist violence, attacks on security forces, the ascent of Jamie Bryson & Willie Frazer, fleg protests and the formation of the Protestant Coalition amongst other set backs one would be sorely tempted to give up on Northern Ireland and to just stand back whilst Unionism attempts to free its feet from the quick sand by using its hands and to then free said hands from the quick sand by using its face.

Welcome additions to the scene include NI21 and Loyalists Against Democracy, two groups which show that not everyone in Northern Ireland is completely out of their tribal minds.

These latter two were forced into existence by the narrow mindedness of others leaving them feeling that they could stand idly by no more and that they must 'do something'.

Your narrator wishes to 'do something' too, event if it is of no real consequence.

As man of no influence there is very little your humble narrator can do except drop in the odd unwanted fact now and again as well as suggesting the occasional crazy plan or unworkable notion.

To this end, your narrator wishes to give a helping hand to a few topics doing the continual rounds at the moment.

Yes, flegs are included.

The Newsletter's Letters Page

There is much hullaballoo over on planet Newsletter and various knickers have been worked into various twists:

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/regional/time-right-for-a-new-northern-ireland-football-anthem-1-5489666

and

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/regional/petition-for-new-football-anthem-1-5491591





Meanwhile, over at Slugger things got a bit lively on matters related to the IFA, their appointments and Windsor Park:

http://sluggerotoole.com/2013/09/11/culture-minister-faces-down-ifa-over-reappointment-of-martin/#comments

As usual, instead of seeing much needed changes as a step in the right direction the proposals to have a regional anthem for NI and to have a new stadium away from Windsor Park have been pretty much dismissed as a sop to 'tha fenians' and as 'chippin away at are Britishness'.

'Northern Irishness' is given secondary consideration yet again.


So, sticking with those topics, your narrator has drunkenly stumbled into the following three conclusions:

1: Northern Ireland needs a new stadium in a neutral area

2: Northern Ireland needs an anthem of its own

3: Northern Ireland needs a flag of its own.

If the balance is corrected and Northern Ireland's football fan base still remains relatively free of people from a Catholic background then so be it.
Nothing will be lost by doing the right thing and bring Northern Ireland's team more in line with other UK nations.

Your befuddled narrator

Certainly, despite much begging, no one has explained to your easily befuddled narrator how exactly Northern Ireland loses out by having its own flag (like Scotland, Wales and England) or by having its own regional anthem (like Scotland and Wales) or by having a stadium that isn't set in an area that 1/2 the population would rather not visit (like Scotland, your narrator can't comment on Wales or England on that one).




Your narrator welcomes enlightenment on the matter as so far the main arguments appear to be something along the lines of "why should we change anything for the fenians?" or "they all support the Republic any way so what's the point?" or the ever present "chipping away at our Britishness!" (again, what is Britishness? Read the excellent post by Hawf Nelson: http://loyalistsagainstdemocracy.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/you-are-invited-to-present.html)


Hardly concrete arguments for not seizing the moral high ground and doing the decent thing.

"Did someone say 'fleg'?"

As for the 'fleg' well, this has been discussed ad nauseum:

http://amgobsmacked.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/the-ulster-flag-banner.html

and indeed

http://amgobsmacked.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/marketing-filthy-word-deleted-from.html




The three changes suggested earlier aren't intended to be a magic switch, more of means to give potential change some breathing space while
 at the same time bringing us more in line with the rest of the UK.


So, if you agree then there are new petitions that you can sign:

For a change in anthem: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/northern-ireland-football-team-anthem-change/

For a change in flag: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/a-flag-for-northern-ireland/

We'll leave Windsor for another day, there's much ado about it at the moment....


ADDITIONAL:

A frequently occurring stumbling block in the above mentioned disputes is a whataboutery based on themuns.
Namely "why should Norn Iron change anything whenever THEY don't?!"

'They' in this case being all Ireland sporting teams.

Well, your humble narrator would love nothing more than to see an all Ireland flag and an all Ireland anthem for when the island is playing as one.
 The tricolour is quite simply not the flag of Northern Unionists and that's that.

However, it's a poor attempt to wriggle out of the corner.

Perhaps if we were to first address the inconsistencies behind the IFA's current policies then we would perhaps stand on a higher moral platform from which to berate other sporting bodies.

Food for thought.