Irish Sports
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
He thinks he is a lone voice as he doesn't read British tabloids.
I kindly reproduce for him an article from Peter Hitchin's in today's Middle England Daily Mail which I know will bring him great pleasure. Hitchen's has a good turn of phrase and Borne could do with some fresh stock phrases.
*******************************************************************************************
Actually we can’t do what we like with this country. We inherited it from our parents and grandparents and we have a duty to hand it on to our children and grandchildren, preferably improved and certainly undamaged.
It is one of the heaviest responsibilities we will ever have. We cannot just give it away to complete strangers on an impulse because it makes us feel good about ourselves.
Every one of the posturing notables simpering ‘refugees welcome’ should be asked if he or she will take a refugee family into his or her home for an indefinite period, and pay for their food, medical treatment and education.
If so, they mean it. If not, they are merely demanding that others pay and make room so that they can experience a self-righteous glow. No doubt the same people are also sentimental enthusiasts for the ‘living wage’, and ‘social housing’, when in fact open borders are steadily pushing wages down and housing costs up.
As William Blake rightly said: ‘He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars. General good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite and flatterer.’
Britain is a desirable place to live mainly because it is an island, which most people can’t get to. Most of the really successful civilisations survived because they were protected from invasion by mountains, sea, deserts or a combination of these things. Ask the Russians or the Poles what it’s like to live without the shield of the sea. There is no positive word for ‘safety’ in Russian. Their word for security is ‘bezopasnost’ – ‘without danger’.
Thanks to a thousand years of uninvaded peace, we have developed astonishing levels of trust, safety and freedom. I have visited nearly 60 countries and lived in the USSR, Russia and the USA, and I have never experienced anything as good as what we have. Only in the Anglosphere countries – the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – is there anything comparable. I am amazed at how relaxed we are about giving this away.
Our advantages depend very much on our shared past, our inherited traditions, habits and memories. Newcomers can learn them, but only if they come in small enough numbers. Mass immigration means we adapt to them, when they should be adapting to us.
So now, on the basis of an emotional spasm, dressed up as civilisation and generosity, are we going to say that we abandon this legacy and decline our obligation to pass it on, like the enfeebled, wastrel heirs of an ancient inheritance letting the great house and the estate go to ruin?
Having seen more than my share of real corpses, and watched children starving to death in a Somali famine, I am not unmoved by pictures of a dead child on a Turkish beach. But I am not going to pretend to be more upset than anyone else. Nor am I going to suddenly stop thinking, as so many people in the media and politics appear to have done.
The child is not dead because advanced countries have immigration laws. The child is dead because criminal traffickers cynically risked the lives of their victims in pursuit of money.
I’ll go further. The use of words such as ‘desperate’ is quite wrong in this case. The child’s family were safe in Turkey. Turkey (for all its many faults) is a member of Nato, officially classified as free and democratic. Many British people actually pay good money to go on holiday to the very beach where the child’s body was washed up.
It may not be ideal, but the definition of a refugee is that he is fleeing from danger, not fleeing towards a higher standard of living.
Goodness knows I have done what I could on this page to oppose the stupid interventions by this country in Iraq, Libya and Syria, which have turned so many innocent people into refugees or corpses.
But I can see neither sense nor justice in allowing these things to become a pretext for an unstoppable demographic revolution in which Europe (including, alas, our islands) merges its culture and its economy with North Africa and the Middle East. If we let this happen, Europe would lose almost all the things that make others want to live there.
You really think these crowds of tough young men chanting ‘Germany!’ in the heart of Budapest are ‘asylum-seekers’ or ‘refugees’?
Refugees don’t confront the police of the countries in which they seek sanctuary. They don’t chant orchestrated slogans or lie across the train tracks.
And why, by the way, do they use the English name for Germany when they chant? In Arabic and Turkish, that country is called ‘Almanya’, in Kurdish something similar. The Germans themselves call it ‘Deutschland’. In Hungarian, it’s ‘Nemetorszag’.
Did someone hope that British and American TV would be there? I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: spontaneous demonstrations take a lot of organising.
Refugees don’t demand or choose their refuge. They ask and they hope. When we become refugees one day (as we may well do), we will discover this.
As to what those angry, confident and forceful young men actually are, I’ll leave you to work it out, as I am too afraid of the Thought Police to use what I think is the correct word.
But it is interesting that this week sees the publication in English of a rather dangerous book, which came out in France just before the Charlie Hebdo murders. Submission, by Michel Houellebecq, prophesies a Muslim-dominated government in France about seven years from now, ushered into power by the French Tory and Labour parties. What they want, says one of the cleverer characters in the book, ‘is for France to disappear – to be integrated into a European federation’. This means they’d much rather do a deal with a Muslim party than with the National Front, France’s Ukip equivalent.
If any of this sounds familiar to you, I wouldn’t be surprised. It’s amazing how likely and simple the author makes this Islamic revolution sound.
Can we stop this transformation of all we have and are? I doubt it. To do so would involve the grim-faced determination of Australia, making it plain in every way that our doors are open only to limited numbers of people, chosen by us, enduring the righteous scorn of the supposedly enlightened.
As we lack the survival instinct and the determination necessary, and as so many of our most influential people are set on committing a sentimental national suicide, I suspect we won’t.
To those who condemn reasonable calls for national self-defence as bigotry, hatred and intolerance (which they are not), I make only this request: just don’t pretend you’re doing a good and generous thing, when you’re really cowardly and weak.
Lots of Love,
Ozy xxx
I kindly reproduce for him an article from Peter Hitchin's in today's Middle England Daily Mail which I know will bring him great pleasure. Hitchen's has a good turn of phrase and Borne could do with some fresh stock phrases.
*******************************************************************************************
Actually we can’t do what we like with this country. We inherited it from our parents and grandparents and we have a duty to hand it on to our children and grandchildren, preferably improved and certainly undamaged.
It is one of the heaviest responsibilities we will ever have. We cannot just give it away to complete strangers on an impulse because it makes us feel good about ourselves.
Every one of the posturing notables simpering ‘refugees welcome’ should be asked if he or she will take a refugee family into his or her home for an indefinite period, and pay for their food, medical treatment and education.
If so, they mean it. If not, they are merely demanding that others pay and make room so that they can experience a self-righteous glow. No doubt the same people are also sentimental enthusiasts for the ‘living wage’, and ‘social housing’, when in fact open borders are steadily pushing wages down and housing costs up.
As William Blake rightly said: ‘He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars. General good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite and flatterer.’
Britain is a desirable place to live mainly because it is an island, which most people can’t get to. Most of the really successful civilisations survived because they were protected from invasion by mountains, sea, deserts or a combination of these things. Ask the Russians or the Poles what it’s like to live without the shield of the sea. There is no positive word for ‘safety’ in Russian. Their word for security is ‘bezopasnost’ – ‘without danger’.
Thanks to a thousand years of uninvaded peace, we have developed astonishing levels of trust, safety and freedom. I have visited nearly 60 countries and lived in the USSR, Russia and the USA, and I have never experienced anything as good as what we have. Only in the Anglosphere countries – the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – is there anything comparable. I am amazed at how relaxed we are about giving this away.
Our advantages depend very much on our shared past, our inherited traditions, habits and memories. Newcomers can learn them, but only if they come in small enough numbers. Mass immigration means we adapt to them, when they should be adapting to us.
So now, on the basis of an emotional spasm, dressed up as civilisation and generosity, are we going to say that we abandon this legacy and decline our obligation to pass it on, like the enfeebled, wastrel heirs of an ancient inheritance letting the great house and the estate go to ruin?
Having seen more than my share of real corpses, and watched children starving to death in a Somali famine, I am not unmoved by pictures of a dead child on a Turkish beach. But I am not going to pretend to be more upset than anyone else. Nor am I going to suddenly stop thinking, as so many people in the media and politics appear to have done.
The child is not dead because advanced countries have immigration laws. The child is dead because criminal traffickers cynically risked the lives of their victims in pursuit of money.
I’ll go further. The use of words such as ‘desperate’ is quite wrong in this case. The child’s family were safe in Turkey. Turkey (for all its many faults) is a member of Nato, officially classified as free and democratic. Many British people actually pay good money to go on holiday to the very beach where the child’s body was washed up.
It may not be ideal, but the definition of a refugee is that he is fleeing from danger, not fleeing towards a higher standard of living.
Goodness knows I have done what I could on this page to oppose the stupid interventions by this country in Iraq, Libya and Syria, which have turned so many innocent people into refugees or corpses.
But I can see neither sense nor justice in allowing these things to become a pretext for an unstoppable demographic revolution in which Europe (including, alas, our islands) merges its culture and its economy with North Africa and the Middle East. If we let this happen, Europe would lose almost all the things that make others want to live there.
You really think these crowds of tough young men chanting ‘Germany!’ in the heart of Budapest are ‘asylum-seekers’ or ‘refugees’?
Refugees don’t confront the police of the countries in which they seek sanctuary. They don’t chant orchestrated slogans or lie across the train tracks.
And why, by the way, do they use the English name for Germany when they chant? In Arabic and Turkish, that country is called ‘Almanya’, in Kurdish something similar. The Germans themselves call it ‘Deutschland’. In Hungarian, it’s ‘Nemetorszag’.
Did someone hope that British and American TV would be there? I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: spontaneous demonstrations take a lot of organising.
Refugees don’t demand or choose their refuge. They ask and they hope. When we become refugees one day (as we may well do), we will discover this.
As to what those angry, confident and forceful young men actually are, I’ll leave you to work it out, as I am too afraid of the Thought Police to use what I think is the correct word.
But it is interesting that this week sees the publication in English of a rather dangerous book, which came out in France just before the Charlie Hebdo murders. Submission, by Michel Houellebecq, prophesies a Muslim-dominated government in France about seven years from now, ushered into power by the French Tory and Labour parties. What they want, says one of the cleverer characters in the book, ‘is for France to disappear – to be integrated into a European federation’. This means they’d much rather do a deal with a Muslim party than with the National Front, France’s Ukip equivalent.
If any of this sounds familiar to you, I wouldn’t be surprised. It’s amazing how likely and simple the author makes this Islamic revolution sound.
Can we stop this transformation of all we have and are? I doubt it. To do so would involve the grim-faced determination of Australia, making it plain in every way that our doors are open only to limited numbers of people, chosen by us, enduring the righteous scorn of the supposedly enlightened.
As we lack the survival instinct and the determination necessary, and as so many of our most influential people are set on committing a sentimental national suicide, I suspect we won’t.
To those who condemn reasonable calls for national self-defence as bigotry, hatred and intolerance (which they are not), I make only this request: just don’t pretend you’re doing a good and generous thing, when you’re really cowardly and weak.
Lots of Love,
Ozy xxx
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 19
|
By:
I read Irish papers and I have never come across a single article giving the other side.
A while back Mark Steyn had a syndicated column in the Irish Times,Fintan OToole got rid of it as it was against the ethos of the paper This is the quote from wmfb you are refering to. It clearly states that no alternative opinion is being offered in the Irish media. Only one side of the story is told. If the person giving the alternative opinion is over 50, they are tolerated on the basis they are old and that they are set in their ways. If someone under the age of 40 offers an opinion that doesn't involve exporting our own well educated people and importing people who are unwilling or unable to work, they are considered racists and are found guilty w/o trial. |
|
By:
Actually the quote I was refering to was where he said he didn't read British papers, not that it matters much.
Personally, I try to read a wide collection of global media, and derive most pleasure from The Economist and The New Yorker. They are there at the tap of a button, thankfully we need no longer restrict ourselves to the parochial view of the likes of 'The Kerryman'. |
|
By:
Excellent article from hitchins.
Spot on imo. For what its worth the first piece is the important bit, Its more than likely we won't be overly affected by this changing of Europe but our kids and grandchildren will. |
|
By:
I too like to get a global view but not as varied as yourself no doubt. The likes of the kerryman serve their purpose. They give a good overview of whats happening locally and give pride of place to community initiatives and local GAA. Another sign of your disdain for Irish culture to have such a sneering attitude towards local papers. As you say, it is great that it is so easy to get a variety of different views and sources of info from across the world but local papers still serve their purpose. If only the printing of the Kerryman was still done in Tralee, it would also create local employment help the local economy.
|
|
By:
Of course, local papers a
|
|
By:
Of course, local papers have great value. Hard to quibble with that.
I wold say they give pride of place to 'local sports' rather than 'local GAA' personally, but hey ho. That's probably just more of my sneering disdain for Irish culture. |
|
By:
Maybe it is just Kerry, GAA takes up most of the sports pages all year round
|
|
By:
Around the Pale, we have a diverse variety of sports on offer. Even 'foreign' ones. I am not entirely sure if this is healthy.
|
|
By:
are you still pretending you are not resident in this country?? I doubt anyone really believes you.
|
|
By:
Well if I am not resident in this country then I will have to apologise to Callit for inflating his phone bill on false pretences!
I probably also waited until I was on holiers to post Norn a donation for that injured jockey. Honestly! |
|
By:
* If I am resident in this country, rather
|
|
By:
I never said we didn't have a diverse offering of sports down here, just that the local papers devote more coverage to the GAA because of it's bigger popularity. For example there is a cricket club in Tralee but because of it limited popularity compared to the GAA,it gains less column inches. That is the way it should be. It is typical of the media up there in the liberal heartland of the country to devote excessive coverage to minority sports in the name of equality. It has led to slip in standards and an acceptance of mediocrity across the western world. Look at the BBC showing the womens FA Cup and British open but giving up coverage of much more popular male sports, all in the name of equality.
|
|
By:
I will be criticised for saying it but the best value read around is the Economist. At a time where the standard of journalism appears to be in terminal decline, it's a rare shining light and covers a broader spectrum of issues than its title might suggest
I would suggest that even those not interested in economics/financial markets would find its global perspective interesting. If any of ye have teenagers in the house, a subscription to the economist could be extremely beneficial to them.( a lot more than the ubiquitous wrote learning techniques) |
|
By:
Couldn't agree more. Should be essential reading for all.
|
|
By:
you're not very convincing. Contradict yourself a lot.
|
|
By:
I imagine you are easily confused, Fred.
|
|
By:
And what a morsel that was ,thanks.
That was a great article. I have always been impressed with Hitchens,his brother Christopher ( now deceased ) had differing views but was a brilliant entertaining speaker also. There are complimentary copies of the Daily Mail on the Curragh race days,I always thought it was utter bilge with childlike editorials,never saw any article like that in one. I presume his articles don't appear in the Irish version. |
|
By:
For DJ876.
Why would you think you would be criticised for reading the Economist ? What's wrong with rote learning ? The stuff i learnt by rote I still remember vividly,I remember my tables I remember some fairly trite poems I learnt then. Learning by rote is a good thing although I thought it was now out of favour. |
|
By:
Rote learning is completely acceptable for creating robots and for foundation education such as tables or elementary learning modules.
The curriculum/examination in Ireland at second level education and for a large proportion of third level education (level 8) is extremely predictable. Educators/students are easily able to predict the nature of examination questions, students are then prepped like robots with learning streams of answers with little or no understanding of the concepts they are writing about. The examination becomes a memory and regurgitation test, if it's possible to get students to engage with topics via methods such as reading the economist, it will stand to them in the long term. They could develop a deep understanding of topics which they can then apply to varied questioning (if they have a proper comprehension of the topic they will be able to digress) but critically they gain a level of knowledge/skills that is directly transferable into the workplace. |