Thursday, January 1, 2015

Tagged under:

New Year’s Greetings from Gerry McGeough

A chairde,

 
Here’s wishing you all a very Happy and Prosperous New Year! The past year, 2014, was of course the one during which the British were supposed to have left Ireland. At least that was the on record promise made some time ago by a leading Sinn Féin figure. Oh well, ho-hum!


Now we must bide our time until 2016 when an even more prominent Sinn Féin figure has publicly promised a British withdrawal from the Six Counties. While one is prepared to give the benefit of the doubt in all instances, it’s probably true to say that very few people seriously believe that the British State will begin to vacate its forces from Ireland in about twelve months from now. 

The real wonder is that supposedly astute politicians would tie themselves to such definite dates in the first place. Sooner or later all those who have placed their faith in these individuals will be disappointed by them.  

Sinn Féin leaders come and go of course, albeit at a glacial pace, and the fate of the Irish Nation is far more important than the ambitions of individual egotists. 

It is to be hoped that 2015 will mark the beginning of a serious debate that will end the cult of leadership and the curse of factionalism within the wider Irish Republican family. 

The cause of Irish freedom remains a noble one and Irish Republicans are a formidable people, forged in the fiery tradition of true Patriotism. Unity is strength. Let’s work towards it in 2015.

 
Éirinn go Brach!

Gerry McGeough

 

72 comments :

DaithiD said...

"Sooner or later all those who have placed their faith in these individuals will be disappointed by them"

But does not the disregard of all evidence that contradicts the Leadership line, even when subsequently proved as truth,
point to a deeper problem.It is quite clear people are aware of the situation (its not my anecdote but there was one
comment about Brian Keenan on his deathbed here recently privately admitting as much),so the lies told "to" them are really lies
"for" them. To allow them to defer responsibility to Leadership in good conscience. This is where the struggle lies.

menace said...

Athbhliain faoi mhaise dáimh Gearóid, can McGeough, agus gach dúinne.
Your comment Gerry shows a lack of surprise at the one time rantings of our, one time, government. Leading more young Irish to believe only they have the truth, while all the time, selling out on those values our hero's fought for.
This year will see them progress in their support in all of Ireland with a likely election in the free state and a brit election here in occupied Ulster.
Fortunately the electorate of Dublin South West had the sense to listen to the alternative oof the AAA but the mass panic is now replaced with strategic planning and even more lies; the unfortunate fact Gerry is, the brit's will still be here when your, and my, children's grand children are drawing their pensions, hopefully the departure will be of lying bastards who sold the goal for a wee pension and dinner with US presidents

larry hughes said...

More realistic prediction for 2016 is SF taking their seats at Westminster.

Henry JoY said...

Gerry,

regrettably Elvis has long left the building. All the novenas, all the First Fridays and all the republican myth and lore in the world ain't bringing him back.

Sadly Menace has got it nailed down, the Brits will be here for a long time to come. Get used to it.

(And a happy and prosperous new year to you too).

menace said...

Lorenzo, I hope to God you're right, this is one 'strategic move' even Mary-Lou MacMiddleclass and the often credible Pearse could not pull off, even with the support of the balls spouted by the chief agent in Derry.
With this move their attacks on Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, SDLP and even the sticks, would be impossible to maintain, how would this be exploitable by the above mentioned political parties,even the Unionist parties, who have something to fear from the pseudo socialism spouted from Connolly House.
Anthony, or others, is it possible to obtain Contacts in free state media to highlight the difference in Sinn Féin policies in both Irish jurisdictions so enlightening our relatives.

mcclafferty32 said...

Clearly you don't do irony very well, Henry Joy. Can't you see the subtle sarcasm that runs through Gerry's statement from beginning to end? Of all people he is under no illusions about anything and was predicting all these developments years ago when most republicans still naively parroted the "I trust the leadership" line and viciously engaged in insulting Gerry McGeough as you clearly want to do. If you had any intelligence you'd be embarrassed by your stupid remarks, HJ. Maybe we should all pay a little closer attention to what Gerry is and has been saying. Despite all that Gerry has been through he is not in the least a defeatist as some appear to be.

AM said...

Menace,

they are well aware of it. Just as the Italians were aware of Berlusconi. Sometimes the mob favours Barabbas.

Henry JoY said...

mcclafferty,

me thinks me sees the hidden paw, and yeah another treaty gone astray ... get over it ... the game is over and it wasn't a draw.

Yes, yes, you clown I'm so embarrassed by my stupid remarks. How could I have been so silly. Oh deary me.

Suppose it'd be sillier still to remind you that this was all foreseen and forewarned almost thirty years ago. Gobeshites wouldn't listen to the advice though, couldn't heed the voices of experience and got exactly what was predicted ... Free Staters of the Northern variety. Suck it up dickhead.

Its easy to mistake pragmatic appraisal of current realities for defeatism, so I'll forgive you that.

Your friend McGeough is too bound to too many outdated ideologies. Just another yesterday's man.

DaithiD said...

Henry, I didn't detect the level of irony that would render the whole article opposite in its apparent meaning, I read it the same as you. (The difference is im encouraged by it though).
If thats the case maybe its better that Sinn Feins opponents leave saying one thing/meaning another to them.

larry hughes said...

Menace

It has often occurred to me the Gerry/Marty show is a re-run of Redmond only they didn't lose an electorate, they hijacked one from the SDLP in return for turning their backs on everything they proclaimed along the way. They would surely crawl over broken glass for a chance to indulge themselves at Westminster I expect. Once those two are gone, SF will fall apart. There's neither politics nor economics anywhere in the party. They don't lead, they follow consensus for votes.

mcclafferty32 said...

HJ

I'm not a "clown or a dickhead"
I took offense to your snide religious comments about Gerry which has nothing to do with the sell out of SF. Gerry appears to be attacked more for his religious beliefs than for his political views which remain very much republican.

As for Gerry being "yesterday's man" that will never happen. He was silenced when he ran in the 2007 elections and received
a 20 yr sentence; let out on license under extreme parole conditions after serving 2 years. He could wind up back inside for jay walking if it suits SF or the PSNI. So that tells me Gerry McGeough is not so irrelevant or as you put it "yesterday's man".

menace said...

Lorenzo, mó cara beag, I had just been thinking along similar lines, tusa fosta Anthony, the fact is, particularly true in the case of Gerry, just what did our all Ireland Sinn Féin party do for Gerry, Marian McGlinchey, Martin Corey and others gaoled for what are termed offences, held in circumstances detrimental to their health.
Frankly, as I recall, the only people interested in their plight is the SDLP, or stoops, in Derry and Fianna Fáil.
The only thing likely to advance their cause this year is getting rid of that foreign git who's minister for justice and replacing him with someone from one of these parties which has some commitment to prisioners welfare in our country.

menace said...

Anthony, if they are well aware, and I've no doubt, like myself, you have drawn their attention to this in the past, why do they ignore the facts, permitting 'we ourselves' to advance support which, unless something major emerges to rock this, will lead to them being given in government next time out, even Michael Martin will drop his previous objection to get back into government with an Taoiseach Gerry.

sean bres said...

Disgraceful comments from a sneaky troll that have no place on here. How dare you talk to Helen like that you hateful piece of human garbage. If your so confident in your politics come out from behind your mask ya cretin. Great commentary from McGeough, a man who has led the way not for the first time and deserves a bit of respect for his contribution over the years

larry hughes said...

Helen,
never annoy yourself about comments. Thought anyone like Gerry standing against the pig-trough-process is victimised I am afraid his RC Gaelic vision for Ireland is not one I could support personally. I simply don't even detest the loyalists enough to make contemplation of such a scenario an option.

AM said...

This debate is better served by a change in tone. Name calling will hardly enlighten anyone. You are all capable of toning it down without taking away from the sharpness of your critique.

AM said...

Menace,

it comes up from time to time and probably will more so in future. Even Tommy Gorman on RTE alluded to it last week. But by and large it is what happens down down here that matters most to people here. We have a political culture that sometimes leads to people voting a rogue to rub it up another rogue.

Very few reckon Gerry will be Taoiseach whatever his ambitions. Mary Lou could be depending on the arithmetic and the freedom of other parties to remove the gasmasks if Gerry is off the scene. But I think Gerry would rather see Mary Lou in a secret grave than in the Taoiseach's office. So there is a chance that SF could take the Taoiseach spot but the chances are diminished by Gerry wanting it for himself rather than for the party.

mcclafferty32 said...

Larry. Totally respect your point of view.


mcclafferty32 said...

Menace.

Correct. It was Mr. Pat Ramsey and Mr. O'Cuiv who took a very active role with regard to how the prisoners were being treated. They went to bat for them regardless of their political affiliations. They left SF in the dust when it came to making sure MP, MC and GM were represented inside and outside of prison and tried their very best to get them released on medical grounds. SF only offered lip service and that came about over 3 years after McGeough's arrest. They were embarrassed by the fact their supporters in the USA and Ireland were calling for McGeough's release and they were the only political party doing nothing to help McGeough.

mcclafferty32 said...

Thank you Sean.

menace said...

Anthony, agreed entirely on Monday being the most likely St Taoiseach, although the old guard may not take too well to the idea.
Tommy Gorman can allude all he wants, the simple fact is, free state media have refused the many attempts made by many from the occupied part of Ireland, to outline the hypocrisy of SF in opposition and SF in government. Until mainstream media is prepared to offer people an alternative to the constant lies peddled by SF nua, none of whom seem to know didley squat about what their party's policy is on water charging and household charging in the six counties, while never mentioning their full support for big developers and PFI/PPP initiative here, it is indicative of their confusion with regard to all Ireland government and citizenship, problem is most are reared in either jurisdiction and, therefore know equally little about the major differences in policy delivery and implementation in either part.
Now, if your contacts are better than mine, undoubtedly they are, is it not time to begin the education now rather than whenever it's too late and ML is Taoiseach and our fellow Irish citizens are suffering the same policy u turns we have here.
Helen, was speaking to a gaisun the other day who sang your praises in respect of those people also, don't sell yourself, and the others, short.

Henry JoY said...

Dáithí

you didn't detect the level of irony that Helen suggests because it wasn't in it or if it was it was half-hearted!

I'm not familiar with the 'call-sign' mcclafferty32 as its not a regular on here. In truth I thought it was McGeough himself rather than one of his aficionados. Then a 'seanbres' pointed out its 'Helen' ... (sigh) ...(thank you so much Sean). Its said in special forces training they urge 'take the women out first'. (Before the misogynistic accusations come forth, I assure readers I understand and endorse the logic and psychology behind such advice).

Sean, human garbage is a very strong term, its sometimes used by proponents of causes of which I assume Gerry McGeough supports (even if not necessarily methods I could assume he supports). An example of which can be seen (not for the squeamish) here .

I also note that neither 'seanbres' nor 'mcclaferty32' address the thrust of my argument. Not surprising really.

Henry JoY said...

Indeed Sean, McGeough deserves some credit for his efforts as does all who pursued what some of us once perceived a noble cause.

However after the die was cast at the Mansion House in 1986, and as history confirms, all efforts made by the Provisionals for implementation of the 1916 Republic were as fruitful (or as fruitless, depending on your perspective) as those of Freddie Scapatichi.

The consequences of that change in direction are now enshrined in international agreements and law.
Rather than face that reality you choose to use me as a metaphorical punch bag ... squealing and hurling insults ... eventually Sean you'll have to face yourself, ask questions of yourself and of all those who blindly followed.

Then, when the dust settles, you could ask yourselves, in light of what you now know, keeping in mind what's possible, what's realistic and achievable, and baring in mind the miscalculations made in the past ... where do we go from here? (Not easy to answer).

I wish you no harm on that journey but I'd prefer if you didn't jeopardise the safety of those I cherish and care about. If you, McGeough and whoever are inclined to pursue the Republic, most reasonable people will need a convincing plan before we could begin to contemplate about committing.

AM said...

Menace,

the old guard will not approve but they can swallow just about anything despite having early and on frequently demanded that everybody else vomit at the taste.

Whatever educative function we perform it started a long time ago.

The official discourse does peace processing but has a one dimensional view of it - hard to break down.

sean bres said...

So you 'thought it was McGeough' and that somehow excuses your disgusting comments? Gerry McGeough and his family are some of the nicest people you'll meet, the words 'clown' and 'dickhead' apply no more to him than they do to Helen. You make out as if you know the guy but kinda like an earlier story that you told weeks ago, that you knew Dermot Crowley and Tony Aherne, I'd say that's pure and utter make-believe - in your own head and nowhere else, the stuff of a fantasist. I suppose you know John Hume. That aside, your attitude and words are the stuff of a lowlife, safely ensconced behind a moniker who can attack decent people as he likes. It shouldn't be permitted. Helen, have a great new year and pay no heed to this moron, he's not worth a second thought and his insults have zero value. If you expect me to take your opinion seriously come out from behind your mask. We'll not hold our breaths. Monikers are fine for debate but not when used to carry through an agenda like yours. That's what's known today as trolling

grouch said...

as you are a big part of the pensive quill now hj, maybe u shud say who you really are. people would have more respect for your insults then. you could say the same about me, but the bastards underground in palace barracks know who i am, even if u dont. u shudnt come on here and insult gerry and republicanism in general and expect an easy ride if u are hiding behind a moniker. u keep harping on about republicanism being a spent force and yesterdays scene. can you tell me then please, why are the banking cabal who have taken over both wall street and washington so intent on destroying the constitution. republicanism is a real and in fact, the only threat to the dominance of banks and corporations. the founding fathers warned us over 200 years ago about these guys. thats why mi5 got rid of eire nua. im not into political parties, but if rsf werent so dumb about so called armed struggle they would be a potent little party.

"the U.S. Constitution is Indian Law and thats why i love it" - russell means, defender of the republic of Lakota. now theres a real republican for you hj. from the tribe who bet the us army ON THE FIELD OF BATTLE!!! mitakuye oyasin.

Henry JoY said...

Sean, the intensity of your responses could be likened to a wobble, a wobble before a breakdown or a breakthrough.

I sincerely hope its a breakthrough.
Face up to it, Elvis has really really left the building and there's no way back for him.

Give up your auld delusions. Life has so much more to offer. I'm sure you have so much more to offer too.

Tain Bo said...

Henry,

well done, playing the person the façade fissures…yawn.

AM said...

Sean,

you say in respect of Henry Joy allegedly trolling that 'it shouldn't be permitted.'

The site has a place for trolls so we don't encourage them in the main discussion area. People who abuse monikers have no place here. But nothing has been proven.

If you feel he is trolling then you can make a complaint and it will be dealt with. I won't adjudicate on it but will pass it to three of both you and his peers - others who comment on the blog. They can decide if or not he is out of order.

sean bres said...

As far as I'm concerned he's free to comment, it's your blog. But calling the likes of hardworking political activists like Helen McClafferty a dickhead is surely beyond what's acceptable given we don't know this arsehole from Adam. I want no truck in anyone being banned, I think people are wise to this idiot by now anyway

grouch said...

whats all this about elvis - it isnt proven that elvis is dead either. and jim morrison runs a b&b on the aran islands (im not saying which one).id rather be 'deluded' and have the 'republican neurosis' as you call it than be someone who mentally masturbates and then shoots your polysyllabic load all over the pensive quill.

menace said...

Henry, I'm not one for attacking individuals so I'll agree with you, Elvis has certainly left the building, however, he left in a box, Gerry, as I remember, left with a smile and a wave and is as entitled to his opinion, and to express it as are you but personalising this by making mention of Gerry' s personal moral beliefs, one's I wholeheartedly share, do little to contribute to the above article.
Would it not be better to undertake constructive criticism of those parts of the above piece rather than snipe at a well respected man's views on the sanctity of life, marriage and family life?

AM said...

Sean,

people have been called worse on this blog. They use the language of the streets here. Not anything to get overly upset about. Helen seemed philosophical about it. The "suck it up dickhead" makes the launcher look worse than the target. Probably why Helen was philosophical about it.

It is never a good thing for people to hide behind pen names for the sake of abusing other commenters particularly those prepared to stand over their views and expose themselves to flak for doing so.

But if you are not making a complaint then things remain as they were. I doubt it would have resulted in a ban for him anyway. There have been worse disputes than what went on here.

Henry JoY said...

AM

Sean calling me a troll is just another ad hominem tactic.

Right from the very first time I commented here he has never managed to sustain a debate with me without regressing into an infantile rage (I wonder why?)
On this occasion and like Ms McClafferty he fails to engage my substantive point that republicanism as we knew it is well and truly over.

Mr McGeough is very public about his strong commitment to his faith and as such comments about that I believe are fair game. In all truth it would be like critiquing Dana's political philosophies without referencing her strong faith.

My original post was more tongue in cheek rather than downrightly hostile. And if you look closely at mcclafferty32's first response ("If you had any intelligence you'd be embarrassed by your stupid remarks") you ought see she was essentially using ad hominem tactics rather than debating.
The strength of my rebuttal was I believe allowable.

Anyways Anthony (as I see it) you've washed your hands of your responsibilities with your triumvirate announcement. If you really want to censor a dissenting voice who sometimes takes a well-considered contrarian position, make sure Táin Bó is on the bench (lol).

sean bres said...

That's easy said Anthony but people close to the debate have commented elsewhere in private and are rightly outraged by this 'Henry Joy' and that his snide comments are given free pass. Gerry McGeough is a human being, an ordinary man, and deserves better than attempts to ridicule him from a faceless cretin like this 'Henry Joy'. He's earned respect the hard way. Same goes for Helen. The less said the better but in my view he has already abused his ability to comment from behind a moniker, it's not unproven when it's there in type for all to read. His politics have zero substance, as his transformation on here over the last 5-6 months tells anyone who's been watching. He's either a complete fantasist or a sneaky troll with an agenda - if not both. He's free to do as he pleases but calling decent people like McGeough or Helen, who have the courage to put their politics on public record for us to scrutinise, the calling of their like as dickheads or whatever is the kind of shite I thought was reserved for Facebook or the like

AM said...

Sean,

I have been called worse and have not banned people for it. You seem to want him silenced but are unwilling to initiate the action that would allow others to make a call. I could simply ban him and that would be the end of it but would it be the right thing to do? Would I just be getting rid of him because of the contrarian position?

I know Gerry McGeough - he is used to worse and is robust enough not to be in the slightest upset about anonymous abuse. Nor do we do iconography here - people have been called worse. If we move against someone for having a go at Gerry McGeough then we will be asked to accord Gerry Adams the same shield law. And if we don't we are then open to the criticism of Our Gerry good - your Gerry bad.

People are given free pass here because the alternative to giving free pass is a curtailment of discussion. If they go over the top and are completely out of order then they are pulled up on it. Henry Joy is out of order but again it is at the mild end of the spectrum.

I accept what you say about Gerry and Helen having the courage to stand over what they say and there is an obligation on the blogger to protect the named from the nameless but it has to be something that is not trivial. Had he called Gerry or Helen child abusers or extortionists then it would be different. But dickhead and clown?

sean bres said...

That's fair enough Tony and I understand what you're saying about the principle of universality in these situations - I never suggested the man should be blocked, just that he should be careful who he insults. McGeough is big enough and boul' enough and been around the block long enough yeah but that don't justify directing abuse at Helen. Say no more. This idiot seems to believe people have a fear of debating with him when the truth is it's of zero interest what he has to say given the stupendous u-turns we've witnessed in his short career. How can I take anything you have to say seriously? I'd rather soak my head in a bowl of freezing water for an hour than get involved in discussion with this snake

Tain Bo said...

Henry,

At this stage the bench is too rough on my bones I will stick to my scratcher. I appreciate your generous nomination, though that would be doing me a favour. On this first wee minor verbal fisticuffs bout I wasn’t taking side nor chanting give us Barabbas. You were doing so well dodging me I will chalk it up to one failed New Year resolution.

How about we take Anthony up on his judgment and we go before the court of posters Ban me or Ban you and to make it fair Larry gets 3 votes in your favour and the loser has to stay away from posting? I will cast my vote for you so you are already 4 up.

AM said...

Henry,

I don't see Sean thinking you are a troll as an ad hominem attack. He genuinely believes you are one.

He is under no obligation to engage with you anymore than he would be if you were on the street wearing a mask.

I don't care about you attacking Gerry McGeough's beliefs, whether they are religious or not. All beliefs can be ridiculed and mocked. But while you fail to stand over your views and use the shield of a moniker don't expect people like Sean who shun the use of a moniker like a plague to engage with you.

I didn't wash my hands of it but was looking at ways to resolve issues fairly - to you as much as others. And that in spite of you having no rights here on the basis of invisible people invisible rights. We will always prioritise those who have the temerity to take what they give.

sean bres said...

Nail on the head Mackers. Enough said on this, what's the point in banning him anyway, he'd likely return as 'Dick Turpin' or something else. Happy New Year and just for the record I thought it was a great piece from McGeough, not sure if I said that earlier. The man clearly still has a lot to offer and we can only hope this is the first piece of many

AM said...

Sean,

you are totally free to ignore him until such times as he demonstrates the conviction you do. We don't compel people to engage.

We allow anonymity without actually approving it. You nailed anonymity earlier in the same way I do: useful for the dissemination of ideas but recreant when used as cover for hurling insults or seeking to expose others to harm that you will not expose yourself to.



larry hughes said...

AM

'But if you are not making a complaint then things remain as they were. I doubt it would have resulted in a ban for him anyway. There have been worse disputes than what went on here'.

I feel that for a midget I have set the bar way too high here. Tain Bo giving me 3 votes!? Needed smelling salts and tazered at the same time by the wife after reading that....made her year already!!

Kind of puts things in perspective Sean, chill amego. Personally I respect Helen and Gerry for their political fortitude on the one hand in the face of SF and their Judas agenda. On the other hand it is heart-breaking to see a total lack of vision other than the rear view mirror on offer. And Pat Ramsey and Eamonn O'Cuive certainly were the only people giving a hoot on the jail issue, along with Emmet Doyle.

Henry Joy has it nailed for me regarding Elvis being gone and never coming back. Things did get a tad rude there, but sure take a step back, tomorrow's another day.

Henry JoY said...

Tomorrow's another day and the bottle's nearly empty. I'll leave the my final thoughts on this with Nietzsche's words,

"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

DaithiD said...

Henry,
I shouldn’t of clicked that link. If those poor souls lived in lake somewhere, in America say, and were killed on that scale by industrial pollution, people would be falling over themselves to oppose it, quoting the % match to human DNA to imply its that ‘% immoral’.
PS What a strange thread.
I normally only comment to disagree with some aspect, I gain nothing from repeating consensus views.

grouch said...

"god is dead" - frederick nietzche, quoted from The Gay Science, 1882

"fred is dead" - God, 25 august 1900

AM said...

Trust you Grouch to inject humour into proceedings. I prefer Nietzsche to God but that is brilliant.

Feel te love said...

Republicanism is not dead, it appears its exponents are dead, incohernt or to busy chasing dreams rather than grasping reality. Maybe one day republicanism in its purest form, will have the support of enough people to ressurrect it.

I am glad you intervened mackers in the silliness above. You cant build gallows to get rid of opinion. It was nt so long ago Michael Henry was put into an isolation ward within this blog. He was really distasteful for many but I would have prefered he was allowed the freedom of the blog, as he was one of the faces of SF that needed exposed.

AM said...

Feel te love,

I take your point but I am not temperamentally inclined to wade through gibberish in defence of free speech for idiots. Henry Joy might not talk the sense that many people like but it is sense. Michael Henry talked utter bollix. He was given every opportunity. Having him pollute discussion rather than contribute to it is not a defence of free speech. He was given a gibberish spot of his own and declined to use it. Not my problem any longer. It would be great to have the patience but I don't.

There is a strong freedom to write ethos on this site but I am not at the beck and call of every one who comes along demanding that I let them be heard (even though you might be forgiven for thinking I am!) They can start their own blog if they are that concerned about it.

grouch said...

mackers, i know nothing about nietzche save that quote, because i havent read him. you said here before u never read the bible.i'll read a bit of nietzche tonight/tomorrow (and u know how much i dont like reading) and hope u might take down the good book and have a gander. here is my favourite quote which might apply to fred, who i sincerely hope is at peace. who knows what was going through his head on his syphilitic death bed. manys the atheist popped their clogs believing on their last day.

"Father in heaven, i thank you for hiding from the learned and clever what you have revealed to children".

and sure while im at it heres another one

"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had."

Saordonians are a happy little tribe.

Dixie said...

I've come across two ignoramuses, 'Pat Mac Murphy' and a 'mac tire' on Slugger who could be Henry Joy.

Mac Murphy was off for a while but came back to rant on a two month old Máiría Cahill thread giving me reason to believe he was on remand, likely having been caught in the act of sheep shagging.

I couldn't help but notice how alike Mac Murphy was to Henry Joy in the ignorant gulpin department. Not a bit wonder these boyos use fake names.

mcclafferty32 said...


If Gerry McGeough can provoke such a response with a simple New Year's greeting that effectively says nothing extraordinary and wasn't intended to, then I can't wait to see a real political analysis from him!

mcclafferty32 said...

Sean,
I actually thought Henry Joy was Michael Henry.

Tain Bo said...

Grouch,
God is dead is more a political statement than a religious one. An act of rebellion against the highly repressive western church of the times, the church created the idealism that the world is bad and with that man is bad also.

Reason was also dead for a free thinking man far ahead of his time.
With god being dead mankind is also dead as there is no supernatural force to explain Reason and nothing to define experiences. The upside of god, man, and reason being dead is the body is free, free to reinvent reason-self as the ubermensch to transcend the limits of traditional morality and live purely by the will to power.

All he was saying is man killed god and the church buried the evidence.

AM said...

Grouch,

feel free to read what you want. I find the life of Nietzsche interesting both his intellectual as well as physical existence. You don't have to be Oxford educated to like him. Hodgie loved him in the jail.

I don't read the bible and doubt I ever will. There is an ever expanding range of literature to get through and an ever decreasing time in which to do it. So we much choose carefully. Not that I always do as I found when I picked of a Dean Koontz book lately.

grouch said...

lectio divina is another way of reading/contemplating/meditating. words arnt there just to be analyzed, classified, theorized, intellectualized etc. language has a divine source but man thinks he invented language or controls it or that it evolved or something. the whole universe is sustained by sacred words. 'in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.' God gave us his word and we gave him back lies.

AM said...

I suppose you would have to believe in god first before buying into that

Peter said...

@Grouch
Lectio Divina posits that the Bible is "The Living Word" but the Bible in reality is a collection of individual books written by man not god. Take the Gospels, we do not have the original texts, we only have copies of copies. The earliest copies that remain were written around 300AD and all of them are different, contain mistakes, changes, passages added and taken away. It is impossible to know what the original said. The originals were written between 35-85 years after the death of Jesus and disagree profoundly with each other. Read Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus it is a real eye opener. I respect what you need to get you through this life, but for increasingly more of us organised religion will never be the answer.

grouch said...

i disagree anthony, u dont have to beleve, either way im not overly religious, peter, of course theres contradictions in the gospels,but they dont bother me.

AM said...

Grouch,

to assert that God give us the word would rule out disbelief in God. I don't see how it would be any other way. People are entitled to believe what they want either in God or not, and you seem fine with that. Religion plays no part in my life other than I comment on it every now and then.,

AM said...

Peter,

another book recommendation from you that I have opted to follow up.

I'm sorry we caused you such unintentional discomfort at Christmas! Thanks a lot

grouch said...

ok not sure what u mean, but i beleve a non-believer can acquaint themselves with the practice of lectio divina - then simply open the bible (or sacred text) and read a short passage at random and give it a go. it would be akin to a conservative western doctor reluctantly attendng a tai chi class to help his bad back, being cynical, only going coz the wife forced him, involve him standing in a position waving his arms around saying to himself what the fuck am i doing here, then at the end of the class he feels heat in his back and a certain amount of relief. im not a ball breaker anto, ok maybe a bit, all im saying is if u spend a lot of time reading, maybe the art/gift/method of reading itself is something to ponder and experiment with. or tai chi. its been keeping me sane for years.

Peter said...

No worries! She calmed down quick enough!
I get my money's worth here. I am interested in republican rhetoric and discourse and have a wealth of study material collated in the one place by your good self.

AM said...

Grouch,

I don't doubt that a non-believer can practice lectio divina. Although it tends towards reinforcing the Althusser (one of those French Marxists you probably do not warm to) position when he asked do people fall to their knees and pray because they believe in God or do they believe in God because they first fall to their knees and pray? It is a useful observation on the power of ritual within a society for reinforcing beliefs and discourses.

But a person can only accept that God provided the Word and was lied back to if they believe in God.

I need to be interested by what I read. The bible never held my interest. I know Dawkins recommends the St James bible as being beautiful prose.

AM said...

Peter,

the darkest of clouds have their silver lining!

grouch said...

im not going to even google althusser but richard 'mild pedophilia never did me any harm' dawkins ( i reckon his pervy overlords/equals loved that comment), who reckons shakespeare would have been better had he been educated at cambridge and oxford, is a colossal elitist dick head who should be shot with the balls of his own shite. Jesus didnt go to college either. im not a violent person but he should be kicked from one side of england to the other and back again. he is setting up an elitist college for him and his elitist chums kids to be taught how to control the plebs which is what dawkins and his hero b russell are / were all about. b russell was one of the most evil little cretins to ever have come out of england and dawkins isnt far behind.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
. These quotes from Bertrand Russell give you a glimpse of what these "people" (?) have in store for us - what the elite want and are working towards for humanity:

"Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so."
-Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society p50, 1953

"Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers
and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt
of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of
sheep against the practice of eating mutton."
*- Bertrand Russell, "The Impact of Science on Society", 1953, pg 49-50*

"In like manner, the scientific rulers will provide one kind of education
for ordinary men and women, and another for those who are to become holders
of scientific power. Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile,
industrious, punctual, thoughtless, and contented. Of these qualities,
probably contentment will be considered the most important. In order to
produce it, all the researches of psycho-analysis, behaviourism, and
biochemistry will be brought into play.... All the boys and girls will learn
from an early age to be what is called 'co-operative,' i.e., to do exactly
what everybody is doing. Initiative will be discouraged in these children,
and insubordination, without being punished, will be scientifically trained
out of them."

"On those rare occasions, when a boy or girl who has passed the age at which
it is usual to determine social status shows such marked ability as to seem
the intellectual equal of the rulers, a difficult situation will arise,
requiring serious consideration. If the youth is content to abandon his
previous associates and to throw in his lot whole-heartedly with the rulers,
he may, after suitable tests, be promoted, but if he shows any regrettable
solidarity with his previous associates, the rulers will reluctantly
conclude that there is nothing to be done with him except to send him to the
lethal chamber before his ill-disciplined intelligence has had time to
spread revolt. This will be a painful duty to the rulers, but I think they
will not shrink from performing it."
*- Bertrand Russell, "The Scientific Outlook", 1931*

taken from matt rammelkamps blog.

the elite have always hated the lowly uneducated gallilean, and his ordinary disciples - fishermen, etc, no university lecturers etc. these people like dawkins wear a mask that the mms plays along with. they are however deeply malevolent characters as the above quotes show and i for one will never let a scumbag like dawkins be portrayed as anything other than what he is. a scumbag.

AM said...

Grouch,

I am still uncertain as to what might distinguish that comment from a hate filled rant.

Peter said...

Grouch
I'm an atheist and I find Dawkins hard to stomach. I much preferred Christopher Hitchens. You say the elite have always hated the Galilean but the catholic church was the elite for many centuries and they promoted the idea of 'worship the Galilean or spend eternity burning in hell'. I remember asking my sunday school teacher how long eternity was and he replied "Afetr a million years that's just the start!" Evil bastard. Surely you can see that the supernatural was invented to fill the gaps in knowledge that existed at that time. Now we know the universe is infinite the 'infallible' church no longer needs to burn the Giordano Brunos of the world at the stake for saying it. God is a man made construction.

grouch said...

If u want to know what hate is research these goons . It's all hidden in plain view . John holdren is obamas science czar. Forgive me if I hate the genocidal elite who are scientific in their methods of population control/destruction. They've carried out a few culls on this island. In case you missed it the first time, they want the likes of me sent to the 'lethal chamber'. My problem is I don't hate enuf.

AM said...

probably one reason for me not wanting to read the bible Grouch. When the Lord boasts about hating with a perfect hate it doesn't float my boat.

grouch said...

A disengenuous genius comment there Anthony. And quite beneath you.

Tain Bo said...

Religion persecutes itself; its foundation is built upon martyrdom and you can’t get anymore elitist than an almighty god that is the great decider who doesn’t seem to mind the competition from other almighty gods who also are the great deciders.

They control your life on earth and then decide that is not enough as they have to control your death.

The key word control any reasonable questioning is simply washed away with it is the mystery of god.

It would seem reasonable that something built upon persecution would continue to persecute and when challenged cry persecution. I still read the bible(s) but not for salvation just out of interest in contradictions others claim they find the light even though it is a dark and brutal place and a reflection of that period in history.

Henry JoY said...

Those that mercilessly gunned down journalists today in Paris (condolences and strength to all of us that grieve) are more likely to have characterised their victims as pieces of human garbage rather than as clowns or dick heads.

Where's the opportunity gone here on the Quill to criticise or poke fun at the words of our own self-appointed prophets (McGeough received less than 2% electoral support) or their (verbally at least) thuggish aficionados?