Minute's silence; now we've got soldiers parading on Saturday

[Bunter]

I've tried not to comment on this thread but I cannot keep my fingers off the keyboard on this one! Sorry it is so long but I'm sure you can stop if you get bored.

As a currently serving Army medic of many years Service who has seen what level of casualties we are treating, I am in the position of seeing what war does.

Some posters here are clearly anti-military, which is their right, perhaps seeing the services as an imperialist tool of oppression (which they can of course be) whilst hopefully not ignoring the reality that the organisations exist to implement policies decided on by a democratically elected government; re-elected over the period of the Iraq disaster. And yes I know it was a cabinet/Blair decision but you know what I mean.

Anyway, it is disappointing nevertheless to see by their language that the sight of British soldiers offends people so much when my own opinion is that it is the politicians you should be after. It is easy to experience some disquiet over their appearance at Tynie; acknowledging their contribution in any way for some would be tantamount to giving approval for Afghanistan and some cannot forgive the Army for actions carried out by some of those serving and those who are long dead.

I myself have a bit of an issue about people falling over themselves to put soldiers on display ( a rather recent phenomenon) and the only justification I can accept for them being there is that the sight of currently serving soldiers in a remembrance event acts as a link between the present and the past and reminds people that these things are still around. Another 5 killed yesterday I notice.

Moving away from the soldier presence, much of the other unhappiness about what is happening over the event is inevitable. People are being asked to do things as part of a 'captive audience' and that will always get people's backs up.

The Tynie remembrance event is not the only one in the UK so they cannot be blamed for the idea of remembrance at a football ground but it is the stuff particular to Hearts that makes the Tynie one more contentious than others IMO. There is an element of distrust, and a perception that elements of Hearts support and organisation are focusing too much on one group of individuals and not on the wider all-inclusive group that we should be remembering.

I can understand jambo pride about MacCrae's Battalion but find the preponderance of poppies and memorial symbols used on kickback as being a bit obsessive and I distrust some of their possible motives. This is in no way attempting to be critical of those involved in the formal activities of Contalmaison or the clock services who are entirely laudable, but is more to do with the way some appear to partition the deceased of conflict into a 'hearts-related' group and 'others'.

Hearts fans who cannot understand why people might be distrustful of their remembrance focus are probably not part of that partisan group and they need to stand back and see how some of the very visible focus on MacCrae's might be viewed. Many of those festooned with poppies on kickback do not have a good reputation on Hibsnet and so the worst will be assumed regarding their motives. It's then an easy step to tar a large number of jambos with the same brush - unfair, but human nature I'm afraid.

I can say as a soldier that all of the remembrance events I have attended, and that's a lot, remember the innocent victims of conflict as well as the military ones, no one group of victims is more deserving than others, and there is a mistrust that the Tynie focus might be too narrow.

Nevertheless, if you are of a mind to participate in the remembrance activity but distrust Hearts' actions, it might be as well to just accept that the majority of the hearts fans are not using it for one-upmanship but are just doing the same as you are.

I do not expect anyone intends to create a scene even if they disapprove, the embarrassment will probably happen when somebody comes up the steps singing away totally oblivious to the fact that the silence has started. I am sure some will be able to feel suitably sef-righteous and superior if that happens.

Ok, I've gone on a bit here so I apologise. I hope 50% of the soldiers on display enjoy the event and that we get it right up the jambos.

GGTTH

:notworthy:
That is superb, sir. A quality, reasoned post that should be read & remembered.

[Andy.1875]

Remember, as well as keeping your mouths shut, keep your mobiles on silent as well. Could spoil the moment if 'Glory, Glory to the Hibees' or some other tune rang out thyrough the silence.

I've attended a few ceremonies where they've been disrupted by someone's mobile ringing.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I've tried not to comment on this thread but I cannot keep my fingers off the keyboard on this one! Sorry it is so long but I'm sure you can stop if you get bored.


Thanks for taking the time to post that, you have summed up the situation perfectly for me. It's not so much disrespect as distrust of a certain element of the Hearts support using the event inappropriately, (I apologise if that looks like I'm putting words in your mouth).


:top marks

[Phil D. Rolls]

Remember, as well as keeping your mouths shut, keep your mobiles on silent as well. Could spoil the moment if 'Glory, Glory to the Hibees' or some other tune rang out thyrough the silence.

I've attended a few ceremonies where they've been disrupted by someone's mobile ringing.

I think that is one of the things that could make a mockery of the whole silence. What's the chances of everyone in the crowd remembering to switch off their phones? Another reason why a football match with its boisterous crowd is not the best place to be doing this.

[Ed De Gramo]

Problem is that there's always 1 (usually sozzled)...and then some of the crowd being silent start shouting for them to STFU which in turn leads to the opposition doing the same...

Silence for 1 minute to remember those who who have tragically lost their life in battle....if you cannae respect that then there's something really wrong (having scanned the whole thread, it seems that there will be silence so thats good)

:notworthy::notworthy:

[Dinkydoo]

I don't really think this should even be up for debate to be honest. It's obvious to me that this is about remembering the people that have lost thier lives through this war whether you agree with the reasoning behinde it or not.

At the end of the day, the innocent civilians and our troops didn't really get much of a choice did they....?

"Well, ken what, I don't really agree wi this so nah, think I'll pass." - doesn't quite work like that.

OK it might not be the most relevant time or place and if you don't "agree" with the minutes silence then sit and observe (nobody is forcing anyone to sit and actually think about the dead, only respect that other people wish to do so in silence).

You could always use the time constructively to think of funny chants to winde up the yams sitting not so far away from you... :devil:

[Dashing Bob S]

Minutes silence on Saturday - yes please. Army on the pitch - no thanks.

Unless they had live ammo, with rifles trained on the Wheatfield and under order to engage in repeat fire.

(This is obviously a joke.)










(Or at least, I think it is.)

[dangermouse]

I don't have time to wade through the whole of the thread. As coach of my son's under 13 football team I have been asked by the opposition coach that we observe a two minute silence before kick off on Sunday (we are playing away from home).

I have no problem with this and expect that the boys will do me proud. If a bunch of 12 year olds can stay quiet for two minutes I see no reason why a bunch of ADULTS cant keep silent for one.

It is done in the name of the millions of service men and women who have given their lives for this country and our freedom and I cant believe this has blown well out of proportion on here. I thought we were meant to be the more sensible fans in this city but some of the guff spouted on this thread makes me think that some of our supporters will be going to Tynecastle on Saturday with the sole reason of disrupting the minutes silence dragging us all down with them.

Our own club have asked that we pay our respects and remember those who have fallen in our name so lets put this to bed and keep quiet about it, especially just before kick off.

Rant over.

[Dashing Bob S]

I still cant believe this thread. Even if you dont really agree with the timing of the request to be silent for 1 minute, surely people must agree and respect the minutes silence itself. The SPL wants to show publicly its respect to those people who died in the wars.

How dare anyone ask you to be silent for 1 minute extra out of the 37,509,120 minutes you have in your lifetime!

Sounds to me like people just dont like things thrust upon them, however, if it wasnt for the people that we are being asked to remember for 1 minute extra, imagine the other things we would have had thrust upon us by now!

FFS, read the threads! There's not one person that I can see who is talking about disrupting/not observing this silence.

We are largely questioning Heart's cynical appropriation of it and the general appropriateness of the increasing encroachment of this sort of thing at football matches.

One does wish people would get off their knee-jerk tabloid high horses and have a proper debate instead of spoiling for a fight with a non-existent enemy.

Anybody who is daft enough to breach the minutes silence is likely to be some 'pissed-up jakey' or a group of daft young guys showing off to their mates, rather somebody who will argue about it on here.

We now live in an events-orientated culture and I simply have a inherent distrust of those who try to make a spectacle out of this. If people don't think that the Hearts memorial strips, (the 'charity' designation is the most cynical Trojan Horse to make this behaviour acceptable) Stewart's comments about the significance to the club of winning this particular game, the inclusion of servicemen marching etc etc are not an attempt by this sad and sordid club to appropriate this loss and grief for their own cultural branding and marketing purposes, then they are pretty deluded.

This is what I find insulting to the war dead. Yes, I'll observe the silence (and with good grace, as I believe everyone should) but I also reserve the right to criticise the shabby appropriation of the war dead. If that offends some of the 'poppy fascists' on here then I'm absolutely delighted, as you are inherently worth offending.

[mixumatosis]

It would surely be simpler to hold these things 15 minutes before kick off ? Just after the teams finish warming up, before they go back in. The tv cameras could still show the players gathered round the circle and the gates could safely be closed for a minute so that folk aren't singing on their way in without realising what's going on. Anyone who wanted to participate could make the effort to be there on time and anyone who didn't needn't be there.

Apologies if this has been mentioned, it's too much to read in a lunchtime !

[Hibercelona]

Some absulute drivel in this thread.

No one, absulutely no one has said anything about distrupting the silence, yet we've had posts along the lines off ''Anyone booing in block X row Y will get smashed'', "I am at a total loss as to why some people are unable/unwilling to observe a minute's silence", and to qoute this topper from Berlin to me " Quite a paradox. You having a go at people wanting to remember the sacrifice made by many so so that runts like you could enjoy freedom of speach." :faf::faf:

For the 1st two qoutes, please show me where anyone on this thread has said they won't observe the silence.

And Berlin for the last one, were am I having a go?


Some people should check, then check again, then make sure they ain't posting made up nonsense before hitting the submit button.

:top marks My thoughts exactly!

I wouldn't have a problem with the 1 minute silence at all if I was going to be there. It's important to respect those that have fallen. :agree:

As for the user that said "Hibs had a poppy strip not to long ago". Yes, that is correct, we did have one. But mistake me if I'm wrong, doesn't a poppy mark respect for everyone that died in the war?

Hearts on the other hand released a strip to mark respect to the 7 Hearts legends that died in the war. (It had nothing to do with anyone else)

And that makes me physically sick to be honest... as it would if any other team done the same thing.

Yes, every club around Scotland are having a minute silence... but who else is going to have British soldiers marching on the pitch to respect the "7 Hearts players" that died?

This is mostly about Hearts as people will soon find out on Saturday.

It's them that are doing the point scoring not us.

[soupy]

I personally dont have a problem with it,let them do what they want, its their hoose, but can we not just respect it and get stuck right into the manky mob, straight fi kick off.....

GGTTH:notworthy:

[Marooned In Oz]

I've tried not to comment on this thread but I cannot keep my fingers off the keyboard on this one! Sorry it is so long but I'm sure you can stop if you get bored.

As a currently serving Army medic of many years Service who has seen what level of casualties we are treating, I am in the position of seeing what war does.

Some posters here are clearly anti-military, which is their right, perhaps seeing the services as an imperialist tool of oppression (which they can of course be) whilst hopefully not ignoring the reality that the organisations exist to implement policies decided on by a democratically elected government; re-elected over the period of the Iraq disaster. And yes I know it was a cabinet/Blair decision but you know what I mean.

Anyway, it is disappointing nevertheless to see by their language that the sight of British soldiers offends people so much when my own opinion is that it is the politicians you should be after. It is easy to experience some disquiet over their appearance at Tynie; acknowledging their contribution in any way for some would be tantamount to giving approval for Afghanistan and some cannot forgive the Army for actions carried out by some of those serving and those who are long dead.

I myself have a bit of an issue about people falling over themselves to put soldiers on display ( a rather recent phenomenon) and the only justification I can accept for them being there is that the sight of currently serving soldiers in a remembrance event acts as a link between the present and the past and reminds people that these things are still around. Another 5 killed yesterday I notice.

Moving away from the soldier presence, much of the other unhappiness about what is happening over the event is inevitable. People are being asked to do things as part of a 'captive audience' and that will always get people's backs up.

The Tynie remembrance event is not the only one in the UK so they cannot be blamed for the idea of remembrance at a football ground but it is the stuff particular to Hearts that makes the Tynie one more contentious than others IMO. There is an element of distrust, and a perception that elements of Hearts support and organisation are focusing too much on one group of individuals and not on the wider all-inclusive group that we should be remembering.

I can understand jambo pride about MacCrae's Battalion but find the preponderance of poppies and memorial symbols used on kickback as being a bit obsessive and I distrust some of their possible motives. This is in no way attempting to be critical of those involved in the formal activities of Contalmaison or the clock services who are entirely laudable, but is more to do with the way some appear to partition the deceased of conflict into a 'hearts-related' group and 'others'.

Hearts fans who cannot understand why people might be distrustful of their remembrance focus are probably not part of that partisan group and they need to stand back and see how some of the very visible focus on MacCrae's might be viewed. Many of those festooned with poppies on kickback do not have a good reputation on Hibsnet and so the worst will be assumed regarding their motives. It's then an easy step to tar a large number of jambos with the same brush - unfair, but human nature I'm afraid.

I can say as a soldier that all of the remembrance events I have attended, and that's a lot, remember the innocent victims of conflict as well as the military ones, no one group of victims is more deserving than others, and there is a mistrust that the Tynie focus might be too narrow.

Nevertheless, if you are of a mind to participate in the remembrance activity but distrust Hearts' actions, it might be as well to just accept that the majority of the hearts fans are not using it for one-upmanship but are just doing the same as you are.

I do not expect anyone intends to create a scene even if they disapprove, the embarrassment will probably happen when somebody comes up the steps singing away totally oblivious to the fact that the silence has started. I am sure some will be able to feel suitably sef-righteous and superior if that happens.

Ok, I've gone on a bit here so I apologise. I hope 50% of the soldiers on display enjoy the event and that we get it right up the jambos.

GGTTH

:notworthy:

A nugget of gold in a sea of pish.

Well done sir.

Come on the hearts! :D

[matty_f]

Yes we have, and will again on Saturday.

Think that was wee hibee's point - the recent OTT strip with individual names of dead players on it

I've read this whole thread and in 230-odd posts I haven't seen anyone hinting that they would want to disrupt the silence.

I said the same in another post.:agree:

[--------]

FFS, read the threads! There's not one person that I can see who is talking about disrupting/not observing this silence.

We are largely questioning Heart's cynical appropriation of it and the general appropriateness of the increasing encroachment of this sort of thing at football matches.

One does wish people would get off their knee-jerk tabloid high horses and have a proper debate instead of spoiling for a fight with a non-existent enemy.

Anybody who is daft enough to breach the minutes silence is likely to be some 'pissed-up jakey' or a group of daft young guys showing off to their mates, rather somebody who will argue about it on here.

We now live in an events-orientated culture and I simply have a inherent distrust of those who try to make a spectacle out of this. If people don't think that the Hearts memorial strips, (the 'charity' designation is the most cynical Trojan Horse to make this behaviour acceptable) Stewart's comments about the significance to the club of winning this particular game, the inclusion of servicemen marching etc etc are not an attempt by this sad and sordid club to appropriate this loss and grief for their own cultural branding and marketing purposes, then they are pretty deluded.

This is what I find insulting to the war dead. Yes, I'll observe the silence (and with good grace, as I believe everyone should) but I also reserve the right to criticise the shabby appropriation of the war dead. If that offends some of the 'poppy fascists' on here then I'm absolutely delighted, as you are inherently worth offending.

These are exactly my feelings, Bob. I fully intend to honour all Remembrance observances this weekend and on the 11th itself. I have no aganda against our Armed FORCES - but I do have major reservations about some of the things our present government and its immediate predecessors have asked them (TOLD them, rather) to do.

And like you I will voice my objections and anger when anyone - football club, political party, pressure group, whoever, seeks to appropriate Remembrance for their own ends.

FWIW - it's a olot easier to be a Poppy-Fascist than to support the voluntary bodies who offer effective help to our ex-servicemen, IMO.

Bodies like these.....

http://www.poppyscotland.org.uk/
http://www.royalblind.org/previous/warblinded/
http://www.erskine.org.uk/
http://www.combatstress.org.uk/
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

[Phil D. Rolls]

I don't have time to wade through the whole of the thread. As coach of my son's under 13 football team I have been asked by the opposition coach that we observe a two minute silence before kick off on Sunday (we are playing away from home).

I have no problem with this and expect that the boys will do me proud. If a bunch of 12 year olds can stay quiet for two minutes I see no reason why a bunch of ADULTS cant keep silent for one.

It is done in the name of the millions of service men and women who have given their lives for this country and our freedom and I cant believe this has blown well out of proportion on here. I thought we were meant to be the more sensible fans in this city but some of the guff spouted on this thread makes me think that some of our supporters will be going to Tynecastle on Saturday with the sole reason of disrupting the minutes silence dragging us all down with them.

Our own club have asked that we pay our respects and remember those who have fallen in our name so lets put this to bed and keep quiet about it, especially just before kick off.

Rant over.

Its a shame you haven't read the other posts because not one of them mentions people disrupting the silence being right. The thread is about appropriate ways for people to show their respects.

I hope that doesn't sound like I'm picking you up, it's just that I think it's important that rumours don't start growing about a pre-match protest or anything.

[cwilliamson85]

I cannot believe this thread has gone on for so long. 7 pages about a minuet silence and a bunch of soldiers walking round the pitch at half time.

Remember it could be worse we could get the Hearts version of the Killie cheerleaders

http://www.wiggin.biz/wigginArchive/_wiggin46/_images/cheer.gif

[Hibercelona]

Its a shame you haven't read the other posts because not one of them mentions people disrupting the silence being right. The thread is about appropriate ways for people to show their respects.

I hope that doesn't sound like I'm picking you up, it's just that I think it's important that rumours don't start growing about a pre-match protest or anything.

Exactly... could you imagine the spin the media would try and stick on this right before the derby?

"Hibs fans refuse to respect those lost in the war" :grr:

[heretoday]

The Remembrance ceremonies should be on a Sunday. It's a tradition. What's changed since the fifties and sixties? Do we care MORE about the Fallen now?

I don't think so.

[Arch Stanton]

A nugget of gold in a sea of pish.

Well done sir.

Come on the hearts! :D

To give you your due you are one of the few posters on here who manage to spell that word correctly.

I would though suggest it belies any notion that there will be any kind of coming together in comradely respect on Saturday.

[bighairyfaeleith]

To give you your due you are one of the few posters on here who manage to spell that word correctly.

I would though suggest it belies any notion that there will be any kind of coming together in comradely respect on Saturday.

belies,notion,comraderly!!!!

no yam will understand these words, are you deliberately ridiculing this poor soul :greengrin

[AndyP]

BUT - I question the appropriateness of some of what i see going on, and I am slightly puzzled that Hearts have become so much more enthusiastic about Remembrance since the club passed into the hands of an Eastern European "businessman", when previous Hearts boards managed to pay their respects in ways so much more dignified and (IMO) appropriate. I am convinced that THOSE boards and directors (and fans) understood the scrifices made by our war dead and those whose lives were shattered by their war-service much better than some of the present brood.



It may also have a lot do with the growing interest in the First World war as the survivors numbers dwindled and the anniversarys of major battles/turning points came around. :confused:

[AndyP]

As a currently serving Army medic of many years Service who has seen what level of casualties we are treating, I am in the position of seeing what war does.

By passing out the Brufen and tubigrip, aye right :cool2: (standard Army humerous generalisation for those thinking of getting all precious)



Some posters here are clearly anti-military, which is their right, perhaps seeing the services as an imperialist tool of oppression (which they can of course be) whilst hopefully not ignoring the reality that the organisations exist to implement policies decided on by a democratically elected government; re-elected over the period of the Iraq disaster. And yes I know it was a cabinet/Blair decision but you know what I mean.


Anyway, it is disappointing nevertheless to see by their language that the sight of British soldiers offends people so much when my own opinion is that it is the politicians you should be after. It is easy to experience some disquiet over their appearance at Tynie; acknowledging their contribution in any way for some would be tantamount to giving approval for Afghanistan and some cannot forgive the Army for actions carried out by some of those serving and those who are long dead.


Can't disagree with any of that




I myself have a bit of an issue about people falling over themselves to put soldiers on display ( a rather recent phenomenon) and the only justification I can accept for them being there is that the sight of currently serving soldiers in a remembrance event acts as a link between the present and the past and reminds people that these things are still around. Another 5 killed yesterday I notice.


Personally I see the public parading of any military personnel as having 2 aims.

1. The reinforcing of something that the Infantry regiments like to call the Golden Thread which is their recruiting lifeblood.

2. The maintainence and reaffirmation of the Military Covenant. I assume you have in times past and present read some of the Army orientated message boards on the odd occassion. There was much talk, around about the same time that guys were driving around in inappropriate vehicles with inadequate ECM and personal protection, on the boards about the government breaking the covenant. The Bill Oddies walking around the pitch is just a small way of keeping this in the publics conscience.



Moving away from the soldier presence, much of the other unhappiness about what is happening over the event is inevitable. People are being asked to do things as part of a 'captive audience' and that will always get people's backs up.

The Tynie remembrance event is not the only one in the UK so they cannot be blamed for the idea of remembrance at a football ground but it is the stuff particular to Hearts that makes the Tynie one more contentious than others IMO. There is an element of distrust, and a perception that elements of Hearts support and organisation are focusing too much on one group of individuals and not on the wider all-inclusive group that we should be remembering.

I can understand jambo pride about MacCrae's Battalion but find the preponderance of poppies and memorial symbols used on kickback as being a bit obsessive and I distrust some of their possible motives. This is in no way attempting to be critical of those involved in the formal activities of Contalmaison or the clock services who are entirely laudable, but is more to do with the way some appear to partition the deceased of conflict into a 'hearts-related' group and 'others'.

Hearts fans who cannot understand why people might be distrustful of their remembrance focus are probably not part of that partisan group and they need to stand back and see how some of the very visible focus on MacCrae's might be viewed. Many of those festooned with poppies on kickback do not have a good reputation on Hibsnet and so the worst will be assumed regarding their motives. It's then an easy step to tar a large number of jambos with the same brush - unfair, but human nature I'm afraid.

I can say as a soldier that all of the remembrance events I have attended, and that's a lot, remember the innocent victims of conflict as well as the military ones, no one group of victims is more deserving than others, and there is a mistrust that the Tynie focus might be too narrow.

Nevertheless, if you are of a mind to participate in the remembrance activity but distrust Hearts' actions, it might be as well to just accept that the majority of the hearts fans are not using it for one-upmanship but are just doing the same as you are.

I do not expect anyone intends to create a scene even if they disapprove, the embarrassment will probably happen when somebody comes up the steps singing away totally oblivious to the fact that the silence has started. I am sure some will be able to feel suitably sef-righteous and superior if that happens.

Ok, I've gone on a bit here so I apologise. I hope 50% of the soldiers on display enjoy the event and that we get it right up the jambos.

GGTTH

:notworthy:


:agree:

[AndyP]

We'll take the blacks and the chinese, but stuff like this gets kept on the main board.

Rirrum!


I bet that goes over a lot of peoples heads :greengrin I didn't get a Harrumph from that guy :devil:

[Phil D. Rolls]

By passing out the Brufen and tubigrip, aye right :cool2: (standard Army humerous generalisation for those thinking of getting all precious)
:agree:

So that's what Army medics do? I was told that Brufen was standard issue for any complaint from splinters to missing legs in the Navy - maybe it's a government directive.


I bet that goes over a lot of peoples heads :greengrin I didn't get a Harrumph from that guy :devil:

Relax, it's 2009 you can sue them.

I can't help this thread is becoming a wee bit Mel Brooks - it's another Bialystock and Bloom sensation.

[1two]

Some of the jambo comments on the subject...http://boards.footymad.net/forum.php?tno=276&fid=508&sty=2&act=1&mid=2124078200




Hibs had one player who signed up, the rest were on the Germans side, like the rest of their fellow Irishmen, or cowards

Like every other year, Hibs and their vermin cousins from the west, will show their true colours, I'm amazed Hibs aren't pushing for a minutes applause

Tubes!

[lapsedhibee]

Some of the jambo comments on the subject...http://boards.footymad.net/forum.php?tno=276&fid=508&sty=2&act=1&mid=2124078200



Tubes!

Did we really have a player who signed up? Why aren't we naming the new East after him? :confused:

[Antifa Hibs]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1225325/Poppy-power-Now-Premier-clubs-refusing-Sportsmails-campaign-honour-heroes.html?ITO=1490#ixzz0VyWcvKa4
Fair play to Liverpool, Man United and Bolton I say, sticking to their guns and not bowing to the masses.


Now can you imagine the uproar if Celtic refused to wear them?

[Antifa Hibs]

Did we really have a player who signed up? Why aren't we naming the new East after him? :confused:

Maybe their talking about James Connolly? The James Connolly Stand, I like it :not worth:duck:

[Engels74]

Some of the jambo comments on the subject...http://boards.footymad.net/forum.php?tno=276&fid=508&sty=2&act=1&mid=2124078200



Tubes!

:agree: The thing that really gets me is ignorance and lack of knowledge about History.

Ireland was not a Republic yet and whilst there was still conflict between Nationalist and Unionist, irishmen of both political sides fought and died in the British army.

Here is some info from BBC history about the Irish involvement in WW1.

In all, about 210,000 Irishmen served in the British forces during World War One. Since there was no conscription, about 140,000 of these joined during the war as volunteers. Some 35,000 Irish died. Irishmen enlisted for the war effort for a variety of reasons. Some, just like their fellows in other warring states, joined up for the perceived justice of the cause. But in Ireland, which in 1914 was deeply divided between nationalist and unionist political groups, more local considerations played an important part for many individuals.

Nationalists, for whom the establishment of an Irish 'home rule' parliament in Dublin had been the principal political aim for most of the 19th century, were committed to the war effort by their leader, John Redmond, in September 1914.
This was on the grounds that the necessary legislation had been passed (though in fact it was suspended for the duration of the war), and that the 'freedom of small nations' (such as Belgium or Serbia) was that of Ireland as well. The plight of gallant, Catholic little Belgium, invaded by a militaristic aggressor, was disadvantageously compared with Ireland, achieving freedom (so Redmond argued) within the British Empire, rather like Canada or Australia.



My point is that the men that died in all these conflicts,regardless of nationality, have been victims of our societies lack of ability to settle our differences by comunication and listening! We will never learn!

[HFC 0-7]

FFS, read the threads! There's not one person that I can see who is talking about disrupting/not observing this silence.

We are largely questioning Heart's cynical appropriation of it and the general appropriateness of the increasing encroachment of this sort of thing at football matches.

One does wish people would get off their knee-jerk tabloid high horses and have a proper debate instead of spoiling for a fight with a non-existent enemy.

Anybody who is daft enough to breach the minutes silence is likely to be some 'pissed-up jakey' or a group of daft young guys showing off to their mates, rather somebody who will argue about it on here.

We now live in an events-orientated culture and I simply have a inherent distrust of those who try to make a spectacle out of this. If people don't think that the Hearts memorial strips, (the 'charity' designation is the most cynical Trojan Horse to make this behaviour acceptable) Stewart's comments about the significance to the club of winning this particular game, the inclusion of servicemen marching etc etc are not an attempt by this sad and sordid club to appropriate this loss and grief for their own cultural branding and marketing purposes, then they are pretty deluded.

This is what I find insulting to the war dead. Yes, I'll observe the silence (and with good grace, as I believe everyone should) but I also reserve the right to criticise the shabby appropriation of the war dead. If that offends some of the 'poppy fascists' on here then I'm absolutely delighted, as you are inherently worth offending.

Maybe you should read the thread again!!!! I havent said that people are going to disrupt it I am getting to the point that, so what if we are remembering the people from the wars on a day other than the traditional ones. The OP makes the point that he/she doesnt like that the minutes silence is taking place other than Sunday or 11/11. What I am getting at, and you can read my other posts on this thread, is that people are choosing to moan about the timing of the silence, (not a yam thing by the way as it is being observed at other football grounds) and make conspiracies off the back of it. People are saying that, basically, they will have a minutes silence on the other days, but grudge doing it on saturday.

And on this thread there are those who say they will go away for a pie when the minute silence is taking place, sure, they are observing the silence, but not what it was intended for.


Anyway, this thread always had the potential for divide and the sort of posts that are going on. One things for sure though, aside of the minutes silence, every hibby will be agreed on the job at hand of getting it right up those YAM FUDS!

[lapsedhibee]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1225325/Poppy-power-Now-Premier-clubs-refusing-Sportsmails-campaign-honour-heroes.html?ITO=1490#ixzz0VyWcvKa4
Fair play to Liverpool, Man United and Bolton I say, sticking to their guns and not bowing to the masses.


Now can you imagine the uproar if Celtic refused to wear them?

On the general subject of poppy fascism, I noticed yesterday while stuck near the corner of Ferry and Great Junction for 10 minutes that hardly anyone was wearing a poppy. I only spotted two wearers out of about 40 people. Yet on the tellybox nearly everyone is wearing. I asked a (very) senior citizen and she said she wears a poppy on the 11th, as that's the day for it. Media hype and overkill, just like Christmas.

[HFC 0-7]

On the general subject of poppy fascism, I noticed yesterday while stuck near the corner of Ferry and Great Junction for 10 minutes that hardly anyone was wearing a poppy. I only spotted two wearers out of about 40 people. Yet on the tellybox nearly everyone is wearing. I asked a (very) senior citizen and she said she wears a poppy on the 11th, as that's the day for it. Media hype and overkill, just like Christmas.

Media highlights the poppy and publicly supports it. I would imagine a lot of people would forget about wearing a poppy on the 11th if the media did show it so much. Overkill? Possibly, but I can think of a lot of worse things the media overkills on.

[marinello59]

Poppy fascists? Is this going to be the catch all term to dismiss one side of the argument then?
Perhaps we could file it with the PC Brigade, The Happy Clappers and the Morally Outraged for future reference.:greengrin

[lapsedhibee]

Poppy fascists? Is this going to be the catch all term to dismiss one side of the argument then?
Perhaps we could file it with the PC Brigade, The Happy Clappers and the Morally Outraged for future reference.:greengrin

It's from Jon Snow (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6134906.stm)

[Antifa Hibs]

On the general subject of poppy fascism, I noticed yesterday while stuck near the corner of Ferry and Great Junction for 10 minutes that hardly anyone was wearing a poppy. I only spotted two wearers out of about 40 people. Yet on the tellybox nearly everyone is wearing. I asked a (very) senior citizen and she said she wears a poppy on the 11th, as that's the day for it. Media hype and overkill, just like Christmas.

I've read in The Star this week that the BBC recieved complaints as the Strictly Come Dancing contestants never wore one last week, Gordon Brown was getting slated for not wearing about a fortnight ago and Westlife were getting slated for not wearing one on a TV performance despite it being about 10 days before rememberence sunday and them actually being effectively a foreign band. Mental :crazy:

[Betty Boop]

On the general subject of poppy fascism, I noticed yesterday while stuck near the corner of Ferry and Great Junction for 10 minutes that hardly anyone was wearing a poppy. I only spotted two wearers out of about 40 people. Yet on the tellybox nearly everyone is wearing. I asked a (very) senior citizen and she said she wears a poppy on the 11th, as that's the day for it. Media hype and overkill, just like Christmas.

:agree:

It's Poppy Week, which means if you don't wear a poppy all week you're a filthy, dirty, low-life, ****my traitor. Yesterday, there was outrage in newspapers because a library in Derbyshire would not sell poppies, and a headline in the sports section of the Daily Mail complained: "Why are only 12 Premier League clubs wearing their poppies?"


Everyone on television has to wear a giant, beaming poppy, so there could be a documentary about the tribes of Africa and someone would complain that none of the Masai warriors were wearing poppies. The popular press will demand an apology from the swimming federation because none of the finalists in the 200m butterfly on Eurosport were wearing poppies on the backs of their trunks (with instructions to swim with their ***** just above the water so as to keep their poppies visible and thereby pay suitable respects to our war heroes).

And letters in The Daily Telegraph will begin "Sir: while watching Night Nurse Knocking on the Adult Channel on the evening of 7 November, I was shocked to see that none of the nurses in question were adorned with poppies, as might be deemed appropriate in this week of solemn remembrance. My father fought at El Alamein, and one can only be grateful that he is no longer around to bear this fearsome insult."

Because the poppy means you care. So a Conservative defence spokesman will declare that he is so patriotic he wears TWO poppies, Peter Mandelson will announce that he is having a poppy tattooed on his face, and Nick Clegg will convert his house into a giant poppy with an opium den in the loft.

Yet the institutions that scream the most that we must respect our fallen soldiers through poppies and Remembrance Day are the same ones that are most keen to have a new bunch of wars to create a new generation of dead soldiers to remember. This must be the plan; to remind us about the dead of previous wars by keeping a flow of dead coming in from new wars.

Maybe that's why the First World War happened in the first place – the Kaiser, Lloyd George and the Tsar of Russia met in 1914 and said, "We could sort this out peacefully, but then we'd have no way of remembering the dead, which would be deeply insulting to those who would have died, so off we go."

So the poppy wasn't chosen as a symbol of the horror and pointlessness of that war, but as a celebration. The poem on which it was founded was supposed to be a cry from a dead soldier in Belgium that went, "Take up our quarrel with the foe/ We shall not sleep though poppies grow."

The Royal British Legion that sells the poppies often has a slogan at its stalls that reads "1914: The Glorious War". It is possible they are being ironic, but in that case they are too subtle, and might be better with "1914: oh very glorious, with hardly any casualties and only the tiniest hint of shell-shock, and fought to end all wars which worked a treat I suppose".

The sense of war and glory may derive from the founder of the poppy tradition, Earl Haig, the General in charge of British troops in northern Europe, 350,000 of which were wiped out at Passchendaele. Haig was derided as an idiot by almost all observers at the time, including most servicemen, but said: "I know quite well I am a tool of divine power."

I suppose if God hadn't been guiding him there would have been 350,001 casualties. He then had a furious row with Lloyd George because he wanted to be in the front coach at the victory parade, and the surviving soldiers must have wished he'd displayed a similar eagerness to be at the front while he was in the Somme.

So Haig was as responsible as almost anyone for the slaughter, then set up the foundation to remember those who were killed during it. You might as well have let Harold Shipman set up a foundation to remember old women who died after seeing a doctor.

Most people who sell or buy poppies are probably not doing so in honour of Earl Haig, but are remembering the casualties in their own way and contributing to the charity for injured soldiers. But that raises the question of why these soldiers are dependent on charity in the first place.

It seems the Government that has devised a series of tricks for reducing compensation payments then makes the poor sods beg with a poppy. The next move will be to make returning wounded servicemen dance for pennies in libraries.

But maybe this is why the Government is so keen on the current war – it is convenient to have another one in a place full of poppies, as we have already got the remembrance stuff ready without having to change the flower.

[email protected]

More from Mark Steel

[RIP]

Is this thread about holding or observing a minutes silence - Absolutely not!!
Is this thread about slagging off soldiers who died in wars - Definitely not!
Is this thread about Soldiers parading on the pitch at a football match - Yes
Is this thread suggesting some Hearts fans are trying to steal the moral high ground in connection with Remembrance Day - Probably!

[jakedance]

Article in the Guardian today about poppys and fitba and all that business that people get in a right old rage about.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2009/nov/05/poppy-appeal-premier-league

[McIntosh]

Like many on this forum, I have lost friends and loved one through war and violence -War and violence are horrible and wicked beyond belief. I very rarely wear a poppy, not out of disrespect but because I think of loss every day - sadly, my eyes have seen.

The tragedy of the First World War is not consigned to its tremendous loss of life on all sides but to its consequences and its continued consequences. Rememberance should be left to every individual and should not be reduced to banal tokenism that in my own opinion is the ultimate disrespect to the dead as it reduces their lives to mere platitudes. I leave you with the last three sentences of John Keegan masterpiece The First World War I hope it puts the debate into context:

Men whom the trenches cast into intimacy entered into bonds of mutual dependancy and sacrifice of self stronger than any of the friendships made in peace and better times. That is the ultimate mystery of the First World War. If we could understand its loves, as well as its hates, we could be nearer understanding the mystery of human life.

[JT Fae The Toon]

If you're interested (please ignore, if not), here's the official HMFC web site article about the matchday programme:

The front cover, for the first time, features the shirt to be worn by both teams, as a mark of respect to the many Hearts AND Hibs supporters who have fought in past and modern conflicts.

The 64-page all-colour Programme includes detailed extremely history of Hearts relationship with McCrae's Battalion and features on the Hibs supporters who signed up for the Great War effort along with Eddie Turnbull's war time memories from World War II.

http://www.heartsfc.premiumtv.co.uk/javaImages/47/67/0,,10289~7563079,00.jpg

[1two]

Poppy fascists? Is this going to be the catch all term to dismiss one side of the argument then?
Perhaps we could file it with the PC Brigade, The Happy Clappers and the Morally Outraged for future reference.:greengrin

If your not in the 'Poppy Fascists Clique', your not welcome in my newly formed 'I hate Cliques Clique'!

[lapsedhibee]

If you're interested (please ignore, if not), here's the official HMFC web site article about the matchday programme:

The front cover, for the first time, features the shirt to be worn by both teams, as a mark of respect to the many Hearts AND Hibs supporters who have fought in past and modern conflicts.

The 64-page all-colour Programme includes detailed extremely history of Hearts relationship with McCrae's Battalion and features on the Hibs supporters who signed up for the Great War effort along with Eddie Turnbull's war time memories from World War II.


I really, really hope that Hibs don't produce anything remotely resembling this if we have a home game on the second Saturday of November 2010.

[Antifa Hibs]

What's a peace poppy? I have a poppy, but not a peace-poppy - are they green or pink or something?

White

[Hibs On Tour]

I really, really hope that Hibs don't produce anything remotely resembling this if we have a home game on the second Saturday of November 2010.

If they do, just change the channel as the saying goes...

[marinello59]

It's from Jon Snow (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6134906.stm)

I know where it came from.:greengrin

[New Corrie]

If you're interested (please ignore, if not), here's the official HMFC web site article about the matchday programme:

The front cover, for the first time, features the shirt to be worn by both teams, as a mark of respect to the many Hearts AND Hibs supporters who have fought in past and modern conflicts.

The 64-page all-colour Programme includes detailed extremely history of Hearts relationship with McCrae's Battalion and features on the Hibs supporters who signed up for the Great War effort along with Eddie Turnbull's war time memories from World War II.

http://www.heartsfc.premiumtv.co.uk/javaImages/47/67/0,,10289~7563079,00.jpg


I am interested, and I am going to the game, and I will be buying the Programme. It's a nice touch along with the silence and parading of our brave service personnel. I will also take my Uncle's cigarette case from WW11, he was a Gorgie man and was badly injured during the conflict. I hope lots of respect and appreciation is on display.

[lapsedhibee]

If they do, just change the channel as the saying goes...

What, support a different team? Mm, ok. I'll probably go for the huns as they're in the champs league. :agree:

[lapsedhibee]

I know where it came from.:greengrin

I wasn't sure whether Ch4 tellybox reached that far north.

[Speedway]

Ultimately I think, that if you buy a poppy, the war veterans charities will have more money donated to them, than they would if you didn't.

[lapsedhibee]

Ultimately I think, that if you buy a poppy, the war veterans charities will have more money donated to them, than they would if you didn't.

Ultimately I think that if you donate the same amount of money and don't take the poppy, the war veterans' charities will be better off than they would if you did.

[Peevemor]

Ultimately I think that if you donate the same amount of money and don't take the poppy, the war veterans' charities will be better off than they would if you did.

Ultimately, if everyone did this, the veterans employed to make the poppies would be out of a job.

[lapsedhibee]

Ultimately, if everyone did this, the veterans employed to make the poppies would be out of a job.

Ultimately, the government should be looking after war veterans in the first place and they shouldn't have to rely on charitable donations.

[BravestHibs]

Ultimately, if everyone did this, the veterans employed to make the poppies would be out of a job.

What!! They get paid to make the poppies???

So these greedy veterans are basically taking food from the mouth of other veterans? Has the Daily Mail been informed? I'm outraged.

[Phil D. Rolls]

If they do, just change the channel as the saying goes...

Or, even better just pretend there is nothing in life worth caring about.

[Hibs On Tour]

What, support a different team? Mm, ok. I'll probably go for the huns as they're in the champs league. :agree:

No what I meant and ye know it!

FWIW I kinda like our strip with the poppy on it.

[Hibs On Tour]

Or, even better just pretend there is nothing in life worth caring about.

??? What are you on about ??? :greengrin

[Hibs On Tour]

Ultimately, the government should be looking after war veterans in the first place and they shouldn't have to rely on charitable donations.

I'll second that 100%. Same goes for all the other charities that have to rely on handouts from joe public to provide services that the government we apparently put in power to do just that don't bother with.

[Dashing Bob S]

Maybe you should read the thread again!!!! I havent said that people are going to disrupt it I am getting to the point that, so what if we are remembering the people from the wars on a day other than the traditional ones. The OP makes the point that he/she doesnt like that the minutes silence is taking place other than Sunday or 11/11. What I am getting at, and you can read my other posts on this thread, is that people are choosing to moan about the timing of the silence, (not a yam thing by the way as it is being observed at other football grounds) and make conspiracies off the back of it. People are saying that, basically, they will have a minutes silence on the other days, but grudge doing it on saturday.

And on this thread there are those who say they will go away for a pie when the minute silence is taking place, sure, they are observing the silence, but not what it was intended for.


Anyway, this thread always had the potential for divide and the sort of posts that are going on. One things for sure though, aside of the minutes silence, every hibby will be agreed on the job at hand of getting it right up those YAM FUDS!

Yes, apos if I've misrepresented you. It might seem a storm in a teacup but I think it's important that we debate the imposition of these things. Let's agree to differ on this, but not, as you say, on the last point of your post.

[Speedway]

Ultimately, if everyone did this, the veterans employed to make the poppies would be out of a job.

Ultimately I think, that those who wish to purchase and wear their poppies will be easily identifiable on Saturday as they won't not be wearing one.

[Phil D. Rolls]

??? What are you on about ??? :greengrin

I can't find the remote, that's all. :greengrin

[Dashing Bob S]

I won't be wearing a poppy, but purely on aesthetic grounds. It would constitute an unpardonable lapse of style, and quite frankly, compromise the highly individual look I'll be striving to achieve on Saturday.

Yes, like practically everyone else on this thread I have relatives/antecedents who fought and were injured/died in WW1 and WW2 and to be quite frank, I don't think any of them would give a flying **** as to whether I, or anyone else, wore a poppy on their lapel.

They might just be a little bit more concerned if we engaged as active citizens in a healthy democracy to ensure this type of carnage doesn't happen again.

[Minder]

Betty Boop;2231353]:agree:

It's Poppy Week, which means if you don't wear a poppy all week you're a filthy, dirty, low-life, ****my traitor. Yesterday, there was outrage in newspapers because a library in Derbyshire would not sell poppies, and a headline in the sports section of the Daily Mail complained: "Why are only 12 Premier League clubs wearing their poppies?"


Everyone on television has to wear a giant, beaming poppy, so there could be a documentary about the tribes of Africa and someone would complain that none of the Masai warriors were wearing poppies. The popular press will demand an apology from the swimming federation because none of the finalists in the 200m butterfly on Eurosport were wearing poppies on the backs of their trunks (with instructions to swim with their ***** just above the water so as to keep their poppies visible and thereby pay suitable respects to our war heroes).

And letters in The Daily Telegraph will begin "Sir: while watching Night Nurse Knocking on the Adult Channel on the evening of 7 November, I was shocked to see that none of the nurses in question were adorned with poppies, as might be deemed appropriate in this week of solemn remembrance. My father fought at El Alamein, and one can only be grateful that he is no longer around to bear this fearsome insult."

Because the poppy means you care. So a Conservative defence spokesman will declare that he is so patriotic he wears TWO poppies, Peter Mandelson will announce that he is having a poppy tattooed on his face, and Nick Clegg will convert his house into a giant poppy with an opium den in the loft.

Yet the institutions that scream the most that we must respect our fallen soldiers through poppies and Remembrance Day are the same ones that are most keen to have a new bunch of wars to create a new generation of dead soldiers to remember. This must be the plan; to remind us about the dead of previous wars by keeping a flow of dead coming in from new wars.

Maybe that's why the First World War happened in the first place – the Kaiser, Lloyd George and the Tsar of Russia met in 1914 and said, "We could sort this out peacefully, but then we'd have no way of remembering the dead, which would be deeply insulting to those who would have died, so off we go."

So the poppy wasn't chosen as a symbol of the horror and pointlessness of that war, but as a celebration. The poem on which it was founded was supposed to be a cry from a dead soldier in Belgium that went, "Take up our quarrel with the foe/ We shall not sleep though poppies grow."

The Royal British Legion that sells the poppies often has a slogan at its stalls that reads "1914: The Glorious War". It is possible they are being ironic, but in that case they are too subtle, and might be better with "1914: oh very glorious, with hardly any casualties and only the tiniest hint of shell-shock, and fought to end all wars which worked a treat I suppose".

The sense of war and glory may derive from the founder of the poppy tradition, Earl Haig, the General in charge of British troops in northern Europe, 350,000 of which were wiped out at Passchendaele. Haig was derided as an idiot by almost all observers at the time, including most servicemen, but said: "I know quite well I am a tool of divine power."

I suppose if God hadn't been guiding him there would have been 350,001 casualties. He then had a furious row with Lloyd George because he wanted to be in the front coach at the victory parade, and the surviving soldiers must have wished he'd displayed a similar eagerness to be at the front while he was in the Somme.

So Haig was as responsible as almost anyone for the slaughter, then set up the foundation to remember those who were killed during it. You might as well have let Harold Shipman set up a foundation to remember old women who died after seeing a doctor.

Most people who sell or buy poppies are probably not doing so in honour of Earl Haig, but are remembering the casualties in their own way and contributing to the charity for injured soldiers. But that raises the question of why these soldiers are dependent on charity in the first place.

It seems the Government that has devised a series of tricks for reducing compensation payments then makes the poor sods beg with a poppy. The next move will be to make returning wounded servicemen dance for pennies in libraries.

But maybe this is why the Government is so keen on the current war – it is convenient to have another one in a place full of poppies, as we have already got the remembrance stuff ready without having to change the flower.

[email protected]

More from Mark Steel





Betty Boop, just curious why you display a picture of a child being sheltered by their father - photographed seconds before the child was shot dead by the IDF.......presumably you are paying homage to the memory:dunno: An act of remembrance?

[One Day Soon]

That's such a Godawful peice of 'journalism' that Mark Steel seems to me to be right at home in The Independent. The only place that may be better suited to him would be that other sheltering ground for chic and outsider former public schoolboys - Dispatches on Channel 4. If there's one thing I cannot tolerate among all other open debate its being lectured at by the media establishment - from either of its wings - about how we should live or on what constitutes right and wrong. Usually at its most revolting when some well insulated from real life, upper middle class twat takes his right-on public conscience out and starts machine gunning everyone with his glib answers to the intractable challenges of human differences.


:agree:

It's Poppy Week, which means if you don't wear a poppy all week you're a filthy, dirty, low-life, ****my traitor. Yesterday, there was outrage in newspapers because a library in Derbyshire would not sell poppies, and a headline in the sports section of the Daily Mail complained: "Why are only 12 Premier League clubs wearing their poppies?"


Everyone on television has to wear a giant, beaming poppy, so there could be a documentary about the tribes of Africa and someone would complain that none of the Masai warriors were wearing poppies. The popular press will demand an apology from the swimming federation because none of the finalists in the 200m butterfly on Eurosport were wearing poppies on the backs of their trunks (with instructions to swim with their ***** just above the water so as to keep their poppies visible and thereby pay suitable respects to our war heroes).

And letters in The Daily Telegraph will begin "Sir: while watching Night Nurse Knocking on the Adult Channel on the evening of 7 November, I was shocked to see that none of the nurses in question were adorned with poppies, as might be deemed appropriate in this week of solemn remembrance. My father fought at El Alamein, and one can only be grateful that he is no longer around to bear this fearsome insult."

Because the poppy means you care. So a Conservative defence spokesman will declare that he is so patriotic he wears TWO poppies, Peter Mandelson will announce that he is having a poppy tattooed on his face, and Nick Clegg will convert his house into a giant poppy with an opium den in the loft.

Yet the institutions that scream the most that we must respect our fallen soldiers through poppies and Remembrance Day are the same ones that are most keen to have a new bunch of wars to create a new generation of dead soldiers to remember. This must be the plan; to remind us about the dead of previous wars by keeping a flow of dead coming in from new wars.

Maybe that's why the First World War happened in the first place – the Kaiser, Lloyd George and the Tsar of Russia met in 1914 and said, "We could sort this out peacefully, but then we'd have no way of remembering the dead, which would be deeply insulting to those who would have died, so off we go."

So the poppy wasn't chosen as a symbol of the horror and pointlessness of that war, but as a celebration. The poem on which it was founded was supposed to be a cry from a dead soldier in Belgium that went, "Take up our quarrel with the foe/ We shall not sleep though poppies grow."

The Royal British Legion that sells the poppies often has a slogan at its stalls that reads "1914: The Glorious War". It is possible they are being ironic, but in that case they are too subtle, and might be better with "1914: oh very glorious, with hardly any casualties and only the tiniest hint of shell-shock, and fought to end all wars which worked a treat I suppose".

The sense of war and glory may derive from the founder of the poppy tradition, Earl Haig, the General in charge of British troops in northern Europe, 350,000 of which were wiped out at Passchendaele. Haig was derided as an idiot by almost all observers at the time, including most servicemen, but said: "I know quite well I am a tool of divine power."

I suppose if God hadn't been guiding him there would have been 350,001 casualties. He then had a furious row with Lloyd George because he wanted to be in the front coach at the victory parade, and the surviving soldiers must have wished he'd displayed a similar eagerness to be at the front while he was in the Somme.

So Haig was as responsible as almost anyone for the slaughter, then set up the foundation to remember those who were killed during it. You might as well have let Harold Shipman set up a foundation to remember old women who died after seeing a doctor.

Most people who sell or buy poppies are probably not doing so in honour of Earl Haig, but are remembering the casualties in their own way and contributing to the charity for injured soldiers. But that raises the question of why these soldiers are dependent on charity in the first place.

It seems the Government that has devised a series of tricks for reducing compensation payments then makes the poor sods beg with a poppy. The next move will be to make returning wounded servicemen dance for pennies in libraries.

But maybe this is why the Government is so keen on the current war – it is convenient to have another one in a place full of poppies, as we have already got the remembrance stuff ready without having to change the flower.

[email protected]

More from Mark Steel

[chorley_fm]

Not that many years ago public Rememberance services were held at war memorials and churchs and the minutes silence held on the 11th hour of the 11th day.

Not that many years ago minutes silences at fitba grounds were confined to ex players and staff. I went to games throughout the 70s and 80s hardly coming across a minutes silence.

Now the Rememberance commemorations have been brought into fitba grounds , which afaik is a very recent development.

I will be wearing a poppy and will be attending a Rememberance service. However it is my choice to do both. The compulsory nature of an imposed paying of respects in an entertainment venue is something im uncomfortable with.

Id like us to go back to the situation we had a few short years ago where the paying of Rememberance respects was held at war memorials or in churchs , places where people had specifically gathered for the sole purpose of paying their respects. . Id also like to see minutes silences at fitba confined to deceased players or former staff ..... with some thought given to the opposition fans views on that particular day :wink:


^^this

[khib70]

That's such a Godawful peice of 'journalism' that Mark Steel seems to me to be right at home in The Independent. The only place that may be better suited to him would be that other sheltering ground for chic and outsider former public schoolboys - Dispatches on Channel 4. If there's one thing I cannot tolerate among all other open debate its being lectured at by the media establishment - from either of its wings - about how we should live or on what constitutes right and wrong. Usually at its most revolting when some well insulated from real life, upper middle class twat takes his right-on public conscience out and starts machine gunning everyone with his glib answers to the intractable challenges of human differences.
:top marks Exactly what you'd expect from this chattering-class rag.

And "poppy fascism"?? What a lowlife turn of phrase. The poppy acknowledges those who fought and died against fascism. If you don't approve, don't wear one, but don't besmirch the memory of brave men and women by inventing or perpetuating this kind of keech.

[BravestHibs]

:top marks Exactly what you'd expect from this chattering-class rag.

And "poppy fascism"?? What a lowlife turn of phrase. The poppy acknowledges those who fought and died against fascism. If you don't approve, don't wear one, but don't besmirch the memory of brave men and women by inventing or perpetuating this kind of keech.

How exactly is not agreeing with someone who is alive 'besmirching' the memory of the war dead? You are getting hysterical.

[Tinyclothes]

:top marks Exactly what you'd expect from this chattering-class rag.

And "poppy fascism"?? What a lowlife turn of phrase. The poppy acknowledges those who fought and died against fascism. If you don't approve, don't wear one, but don't besmirch the memory of brave men and women by inventing or perpetuating this kind of keech.

I personally thought it was a good article and a welcome respite from the self-righteous, rememberance day tub thumping that is going on at the moment.

[LiverpoolHibs]

That's such a Godawful peice of 'journalism' that Mark Steel seems to me to be right at home in The Independent. The only place that may be better suited to him would be that other sheltering ground for chic and outsider former public schoolboys - Dispatches on Channel 4. If there's one thing I cannot tolerate among all other open debate its being lectured at by the media establishment - from either of its wings - about how we should live or on what constitutes right and wrong. Usually at its most revolting when some well insulated from real life, upper middle class twat takes his right-on public conscience out and starts machine gunning everyone with his glib answers to the intractable challenges of human differences.

As an attempted precis of Steel, that really couldn't be more wrong.

[hibbybrian]

Good to see that everyone agrees that there should be no disruption of the remembrance. :thumbsup:

Having got that out the way, the only disagreement left is the "Hearts WW1 winning" conspiracy :greengrin

As the minute silence is country wide, it's obviously not been a deliberate set-up to show the Hibs support in a bad light as some suggest, however to be fair to those doing the suggesting, some section of the Hearts support do appear to be trying to take a moral highground which isn't really there.

JJFTT is spot on with his post, however the highlighted part seems to point to the moral highground dilemma


Players & fans from both clubs fought and died side by side in both world wars - it's not too much too ask that we honour their memory without petty point scoring is it?

Referring to something like this maybe

5177

They formed less than 2% of the Company, and a better explanation than "whilst 'other clubs' sheltered their players behind their contracts and reserved occupations" may be that of the the 2 teams at the time, Hibs had only 1 player under 22 (10 of the players were married men) whilst Hearts had only 2 players over 22, and initially single men were the recruitment target. BTW Reserved occupations consisted of those whose work was deemed to be 'equivalent to the armed forces', and they were simply not allowed to even volunteer

Incidentally Hibs had a player in the Territorial Army before MacRae's recruitment drive started.

Items like this on a Hearts website are part of the perceived "WW1 winners" tag and they are really not appropriate in my opinion. It only serves to undermine the work of Hearts supporters who have given their time and efforts in organising remembrance activities.


If you're interested (please ignore, if not), here's the official HMFC web site article about the matchday programme:

The front cover, for the first time, features the shirt to be worn by both teams, as a mark of respect to the many Hearts AND Hibs supporters who have fought in past and modern conflicts.

The 64-page all-colour Programme includes detailed extremely history of Hearts relationship with McCrae's Battalion and features on the Hibs supporters who signed up for the Great War effort along with Eddie Turnbull's war time memories from World War II.

http://www.heartsfc.premiumtv.co.uk/javaImages/47/67/0,,10289~7563079,00.jpg

:top marks - it would be appropriate if they included reference to:

http://www.forrestdale.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GretnaList.html

due to the scale of the tragedy and as it's probably relevant to both Hibs and Hearts supporters

[One Day Soon]

How exactly is not agreeing with someone who is alive 'besmirching' the memory of the war dead? You are getting hysterical.

The extraordinarily stupid and glib use of the term 'fascism' in relation to poppies simply could not be more inappropriate. While it is clearly a useful shorthand for anyone who wishes to make a point about the strength of received orthodoxy on whether and when poppies are worn it is actually just crass and inaccurate to apply that term to this debate.

Fascism involved the literal murder, torture and displacement of millions of people in Europe and beyond. All freedom of speech was destroyed, the right to oppose or organise was suppressed, histroy was rewritten, books were burned, genocide took place, countries were wiped off the map, civilians were slaughtered and ultimately it was followed by 50 years of cold war.

What makes anyone think therefore that it is appropriate to use the term 'poppy fascism'? It is a casual degradation of a term which describes something far more fundamentally damaging than a debate on poppies and remembrance ceremonies. But of course these are precisely the sort of things that these effete, cosseted darlings and lovies in the media feed on like parasites. Just how much suffering is Jon Snow being subjected to by this 'poppy fascism'?

What a complete voyeur he and his type are. Disgusting.

[lapsedhibee]

The extraordinarily stupid and glib use of the term 'fascism' in relation to poppies simply could not be more inappropriate. While it is clearly a useful shorthand for anyone who wishes to make a point about the strength of received orthodoxy on whether and when poppies are worn it is actually just crass and inaccurate to apply that term to this debate.

Fascism involved the literal murder, torture and displacement of millions of people in Europe and beyond. All freedom of speech was destroyed, the right to oppose or organise was suppressed, histroy was rewritten, books were burned, genocide took place, countries were wiped off the map, civilians were slaughtered and ultimately it was followed by 50 years of cold war.

What makes anyone think therefore that it is appropriate to use the term 'poppy fascism'? It is a casual degradation of a term which describes something far more fundamentally damaging than a debate on poppies and remembrance ceremonies. But of course these are precisely the sort of things that these effete, cosseted darlings and lovies in the media feed on like parasites. Just how much suffering is Jon Snow being subjected to by this 'poppy fascism'?

What a complete voyeur he and his type are. Disgusting.

Are you familiar at all with the notion that language changes over time? For example, "disgusting" did not used to mean "I disagree with someone else's opinion".

[BravestHibs]

The extraordinarily stupid and glib use of the term 'fascism' in relation to poppies simply could not be more inappropriate. While it is clearly a useful shorthand for anyone who wishes to make a point about the strength of received orthodoxy on whether and when poppies are worn it is actually just crass and inaccurate to apply that term to this debate.

Fascism involved the literal murder, torture and displacement of millions of people in Europe and beyond. All freedom of speech was destroyed, the right to oppose or organise was suppressed, histroy was rewritten, books were burned, genocide took place, countries were wiped off the map, civilians were slaughtered and ultimately it was followed by 50 years of cold war.

What makes anyone think therefore that it is appropriate to use the term 'poppy fascism'? It is a casual degradation of a term which describes something far more fundamentally damaging than a debate on poppies and remembrance ceremonies. But of course these are precisely the sort of things that these effete, cosseted darlings and lovies in the media feed on like parasites. Just how much suffering is Jon Snow being subjected to by this 'poppy fascism'?

What a complete voyeur he and his type are. Disgusting.

The emboldened bit in your post almost made me weep with irony. Just an observation.

And read this. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2009/nov/05/poppy-appeal-premier-league

Also how can a person be disgusting just because they choose not to wear a poppy. You seem to be over reacting.

[Aubenas]

Fascism involved the literal murder, torture and displacement of millions of people in Europe and beyond

What you list are incontrovertibly the results of fascism - but that is not what the word fascist means. Fascist indicates an attitude where people's right to hold their own views is taken away and other views are imposed on them. Invariably it is used in connection with Mussolini, Hitler and Franco as they were high impact adherents of this approach - but its meaning is wider than that.

My understanding is that Jon Snow is referring to broadcasting organisations' insistence that all presenters wear a poppy, regardless of their own view of the matter. This directive is a fascist disregard for the right to disagree - a right that those who are remembered on Armistice Day died to defend.

If you read Snow's autobiography it is clear that he has, quite literally, waded through the skulls and bones in African graveyards formed by the results of fascism; he has on numerous occasions come under fire in war zones, and he comes from a long line of military people. His Grandfather, General Thomas Snow, fought in every major battle of the Great War. Some might say that gives him the right to an opinion and choice of language to describe that opinion. Whatever it suggests, it's hard to describe him as a voyeur.

The saddest thing about this thread is people arguing over whether it's permissible to disagree. I always thought permission to disagree without rancour being returned was a basic human right - the kind that thousands of young men die for - on all sides, in all wars, for all countries and often at the behest of poor military or political leadership.

60 seconds considering that tomorrow wouldn't do any harm, would it??????

I fear that the foundation of this thread is the messageboard equivalent of the sad characters who appear at Tynecastle each Derby shouting, swearing and gesticulating at whole stands of Hearts supporters - as if that somehow means they are the best of Hibs fans; basically the type of no brain, drunk, immature and macho behaviour that leads to our A and E's filling up with senseless morons every weekend.

I'm not denigrating most of the thoughtful posts, but rather suggesting that there is a rather sad suggestion that we have to ape the Old Firm and seek hidden agendae in every iniative by our rivals. Most Hibees have Hearts suporting mates and, as I've often posted, we have much more in commion with them than we do with folk who don't support football. I think it's clear that in Edinburgh terms, Hearts are the establishment club, and Hibs are the 'outsiders'. I have no problem with that, I think it makes us quite romantic as a club. It also means it's not surprising that Hearts should feel a close affiliation with Remembrance, especially considering the McRae's battalion history. Hibs, perhaps, have a more disparate history (Ireland, Southside, Leith, St Pat's) but that doesn't mean we have to be at each other's throats, other than in a footballing sense. Good grief, if Gordon Smith can move from Hibs to Hearts, who are we to belittle them?

Wouldn't it be great if HIbs and Hearts supporters could show a wee bit of genuine class, sensitivity and maturity tomorrow?????

Or are there people hell bent on proving they are just as morally bankrupt as the lower end of the Bigot Brothers support?

[jakedance]

The extraordinarily stupid and glib use of the term 'fascism' in relation to poppies simply could not be more inappropriate. While it is clearly a useful shorthand for anyone who wishes to make a point about the strength of received orthodoxy on whether and when poppies are worn it is actually just crass and inaccurate to apply that term to this debate.

Fascism involved the literal murder, torture and displacement of millions of people in Europe and beyond. All freedom of speech was destroyed, the right to oppose or organise was suppressed, histroy was rewritten, books were burned, genocide took place, countries were wiped off the map, civilians were slaughtered and ultimately it was followed by 50 years of cold war.

What makes anyone think therefore that it is appropriate to use the term 'poppy fascism'? It is a casual degradation of a term which describes something far more fundamentally damaging than a debate on poppies and remembrance ceremonies. But of course these are precisely the sort of things that these effete, cosseted darlings and lovies in the media feed on like parasites. Just how much suffering is Jon Snow being subjected to by this 'poppy fascism'?

What a complete voyeur he and his type are. Disgusting.

That's not an appropriate use of the word voyeur. I'm not disgusted by that though because I understand that sometimes people use words out of context to make a point.:wink:

[PeeKay]

Just to set the record straight. Jon Snow wears a poppy every year - he just refuses to be bullied into wearing it on-screen.

[One Day Soon]

Are you familiar at all with the notion that language changes over time? For example, "disgusting" did not used to mean "I disagree with someone else's opinion".

Language does indeed change over time both in terms of lnaguage used and in terms of how it is used. I do not agree however that using the term fascist in this context is appropriate. There is no reason why he could not have used a term such as 'poppy intolerance', poppy obsessives', 'poppy dictators', 'poppy authoritarians' or indeed any other number of descriptive terms. Using the term 'fascist' in this context is ludicrous over statement and subverts the real meaning and history of that word - which given its connotations is completely inappropriate.

I am sure you are right that "disgusting" did not used to mean "I disagree with someone else's opinion" - I am equally sure that it does not mean that now either. I certainly didn't use it in that sense.

[One Day Soon]

The emboldened bit in your post almost made me weep with irony. Just an observation.

And read this. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2009/nov/05/poppy-appeal-premier-league

Also how can a person be disgusting just because they choose not to wear a poppy. You seem to be over reacting.

Really? You actually wept real tears of irony? No one here is being told they cannot express an opinion or oppose a viewpoint are they? Quite apart from anything else even they were I find it hard to equate being harassed into wearing a poppy on screen (not an approach or policy that I agree with by the way) with the intrinsic values and actual effects of fascism.

The poor dears, they might be forced to wear a poppy, on their....I can hardly bear to think it, let alone write it....on their ......their...lapels! The inhumanity.

I have read the Guardian piece. Its garbage. But then it is the Guardian so what are we to expect other than the usual trendy middle class Lentillista nonsense. Do you think that they on the mad left and the Daily Mail on the raving right eventually meet somewhere at the ar5e end of beyond in policy terms? It wouldn't surprise me.

I don't find a person disgusting because they choose not to wear a poppy. I find it disgusting that the term 'fascist' was misappropriated in this way and cheapened by being used in such a luvvies tif over this incredibly marginal and contrived debate with all the associated indignation.

[lapsedhibee]

Language does indeed change over time both in terms of lnaguage used and in terms of how it is used. I do not agree however that using the term fascist in this context is appropriate. There is no reason why he could not have used a term such as 'poppy intolerance', poppy obsessives', 'poppy dictators', 'poppy authoritarians' or indeed any other number of descriptive terms. Using the term 'fascist' in this context is ludicrous over statement and subverts the real meaning and history of that word - which given its connotations is completely inappropriate.

I am sure you are right that "disgusting" did not used to mean "I disagree with someone else's opinion" - I am equally sure that it does not mean that now either. I certainly didn't use it in that sense.

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'

:wink:

[Phil D. Rolls]

The extraordinarily stupid and glib use of the term 'fascism' in relation to poppies simply could not be more inappropriate. While it is clearly a useful shorthand for anyone who wishes to make a point about the strength of received orthodoxy on whether and when poppies are worn it is actually just crass and inaccurate to apply that term to this debate.

Fascism involved the literal murder, torture and displacement of millions of people in Europe and beyond. All freedom of speech was destroyed, the right to oppose or organise was suppressed, histroy was rewritten, books were burned, genocide took place, countries were wiped off the map, civilians were slaughtered and ultimately it was followed by 50 years of cold war.

What makes anyone think therefore that it is appropriate to use the term 'poppy fascism'? It is a casual degradation of a term which describes something far more fundamentally damaging than a debate on poppies and remembrance ceremonies. But of course these are precisely the sort of things that these effete, cosseted darlings and lovies in the media feed on like parasites. Just how much suffering is Jon Snow being subjected to by this 'poppy fascism'?

What a complete voyeur he and his type are. Disgusting.

And your point is?

Have to say some of the stuff on here would be an interesting case study for the inverted snobbery thread in The Holy Ground. When arguments move away from the facts or opinions and instead try to rubbish the source of those opimions due to their background, or education then it is not a nice thing.

I know it might sound trivial, but we all have our own thoughts on how the world should be. When someone else imposes their beliefs on us then it is not a comfortable feeling. I doubt if Jon Snow loses sleep over this, but at the same time he is protesting that his right to live as an individual is being compromised.

I hate to compare what is going on with the Poppy debate with fascism, but the insidious removal of individual freedoms can only take us down an Orwellian road, where eventually even thoughts can be a crime. It's for people in the media, with their ability to reach large numbers of people to try and inform the debate.

[BravestHibs]

Really? You actually wept real tears of irony? No one here is being told they cannot express an opinion or oppose a viewpoint are they? Quite apart from anything else even they were I find it hard to equate being harassed into wearing a poppy on screen (not an approach or policy that I agree with by the way) with the intrinsic values and actual effects of fascism.

The poor dears, they might be forced to wear a poppy, on their....I can hardly bear to think it, let alone write it....on their ......their...lapels! The inhumanity.

I have read the Guardian piece. Its garbage. But then it is the Guardian so what are we to expect other than the usual trendy middle class Lentillista nonsense. Do you think that they on the mad left and the Daily Mail on the raving right eventually meet somewhere at the ar5e end of beyond in policy terms? It wouldn't surprise me.

I don't find a person disgusting because they choose not to wear a poppy. I find it disgusting that the term 'fascist' was misappropriated in this way and cheapened by being used in such a luvvies tif over this incredibly marginal and contrived debate with all the associated indignation.

Perhaps not but they are being told that they are disgusting for making an informed decision of their own which is pretty much the same thing.

[One Day Soon]

What you list are incontrovertibly the results of fascism - but that is not what the word fascist means. Fascist indicates an attitude where people's right to hold their own views is taken away and other views are imposed on them. Invariably it is used in connection with Mussolini, Hitler and Franco as they were high impact adherents of this approach - but its meaning is wider than that.

I have to disagree here. You cannot read the 'teachings' of fascist thinkers and practitioners without taking as at least implicit and often explict the activities which I detailed.

My understanding is that Jon Snow is referring to broadcasting organisations' insistence that all presenters wear a poppy, regardless of their own view of the matter. This directive is a fascist disregard for the right to disagree - a right that those who are remembered on Armistice Day died to defend.

He may well be referring to such an instruction. His use of the term fascism is nonetheless excessive, inappropriate and in my view disrespectful of those who suffered the very extreme consequences of the practice of real fascism. I don't disagree with his right to disagree, as it were, I do disagree with his misuse of this term.

If you read Snow's autobiography it is clear that he has, quite literally, waded through the skulls and bones in African graveyards formed by the results of fascism; he has on numerous occasions come under fire in war zones, and he comes from a long line of military people. His Grandfather, General Thomas Snow, fought in every major battle of the Great War. Some might say that gives him the right to an opinion and choice of language to describe that opinion. Whatever it suggests, it's hard to describe him as a voyeur.

Journalists are by their very nature voyeurs. It is pretty much the essence of their purpose. There are of course those who report and hope to change the world by doing so, but there are also those who don't simply report the 'news', they want to actually make and shape the news. Like a referee who wants to be the centre of attention rather than trying to anonymously police the game. The fact that someone who he isn't, but who he is related to, fought in the Great War does not somehow bestow upon him the right to any more valid an opinion on this subject than anyone else. Its pretty easy to describe him as a voyeur. He isn't doing the fighting and he isn't doing the being killed - he's writing or talking about it.

The saddest thing about this thread is people arguing over whether it's permissible to disagree. I always thought permission to disagree without rancour being returned was a basic human right - the kind that thousands of young men die for - on all sides, in all wars, for all countries and often at the behest of poor military or political leadership.

Agreed

60 seconds considering that tomorrow wouldn't do any harm, would it??????

Agreed

I fear that the foundation of this thread is the messageboard equivalent of the sad characters who appear at Tynecastle each Derby shouting, swearing and gesticulating at whole stands of Hearts supporters - as if that somehow means they are the best of Hibs fans; basically the type of no brain, drunk, immature and macho behaviour that leads to our A and E's filling up with senseless morons every weekend.

Largely Agreed

I'm not denigrating most of the thoughtful posts, but rather suggesting that there is a rather sad suggestion that we have to ape the Old Firm and seek hidden agendae in every iniative by our rivals. Most Hibees have Hearts suporting mates and, as I've often posted, we have much more in commion with them than we do with folk who don't support football. I think it's clear that in Edinburgh terms, Hearts are the establishment club, and Hibs are the 'outsiders'. I have no problem with that, I think it makes us quite romantic as a club. It also means it's not surprising that Hearts should feel a close affiliation with Remembrance, especially considering the McRae's battalion history. Hibs, perhaps, have a more disparate history (Ireland, Southside, Leith, St Pat's) but that doesn't mean we have to be at each other's throats, other than in a footballing sense. Good grief, if Gordon Smith can move from Hibs to Hearts, who are we to belittle them?

Mostly agreed, though as other posters have demonstrated the grasp of history here often seems quite myopic when it comes accepting the actual involvement of Hibernian related people.

Wouldn't it be great if HIbs and Hearts supporters could show a wee bit of genuine class, sensitivity and maturity tomorrow?????

Unquestionably

Or are there people hell bent on proving they are just as morally bankrupt as the lower end of the Bigot Brothers support?

Probably - on both sides of the debate

[One Day Soon]

Yes but that's when YOU use a word, not when you misinterpret how I use a word.


`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'

:wink:

[lapsedhibee]

Yes but that's when YOU use a word, not when you misinterpret how I use a word.

The point is that the meaning of a word is not up to you as an individual to decide. If Jon Snow's use of the word fascism is acceptable to everyone but you, you can rant all you want if it makes you happy - it won't change the meaning of the word.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Originally Posted by Aubenas

I fear that the foundation of this thread is the messageboard equivalent of the sad characters who appear at Tynecastle each Derby shouting, swearing and gesticulating at whole stands of Hearts supporters - as if that somehow means they are the best of Hibs fans; basically the type of no brain, drunk, immature and macho behaviour that leads to our A and E's filling up with senseless morons every weekend.


I think this is a bit strong. Doctors and nurses may not be the worlds brightest but morons is a bit off. :greengrin

[One Day Soon]

Hmm


And your point is?
Why did you only highlight part of the fascist record? It makes it look like you only wanted to select that part which suits your argument?
My point is that while the poppy wearing debate is no doubt very distasteful to Jon Snow and others, it is nonetheless crazy to compare it to fascism. If he had said it was like being told what to do at school he might have been hitting a more appropriate level.

Have to say some of the stuff on here would be an interesting case study for the inverted snobbery thread in The Holy Ground. When arguments move away from the facts or opinions and instead try to rubbish the source of those opimions due to their background, or education then it is not a nice thing.

You can only take so much hypocrisy and do as I say not as I do instruction from the Monbiot's of this world before you choke on it. I am happy to rubbish an opinion I disagree with on its own demerits AND to talk about the hypocrisy of the author of that opinion when I feel it is relevant to the argument.

I know it might sound trivial, but we all have our own thoughts on how the world should be. When someone else imposes their beliefs on us then it is not a comfortable feeling. I doubt if Jon Snow loses sleep over this, but at the same time he is protesting that his right to live as an individual is being compromised.

I understand that and I respect it. I disagree with his misuse of the term 'fascism'.

I hate to compare what is going on with the Poppy debate with fascism, but the insidious removal of individual freedoms can only take us down an Orwellian road, where eventually even thoughts can be a crime. It's for people in the media, with their ability to reach large numbers of people to try and inform the debate.

"It's for people in the media, with their ability to reach large numbers of people to try and inform the debate." Are you mad? These are the last people we should be relying upon. Do not forget that it is just such an august body of people in the media who are advancing the case for effectively compulsory poppy wearing - ie the Daily Mail. This isn't a real argument about freedom of expression - its a clash of media ego and vanity between the nutty right and the wet left as to who gets to lord it over the rest of us where moral authority is concerned.

And if he wears a poppy all the rest of the time why doesn't he just carry on and do what HE thinks is right (ie wearing his poppy) all the time? I think its because if he did that he wouldn't be the centre of attention. He could just wear the poppy and say 'I am wearing it, not because you are trying to tell me to, but becuase I think its right to do so and what I feel comfortable doing'.

[Aubenas]

I think this is a bit strong. Doctors and nurses may not be the worlds brightest but morons is a bit off.

:tee hee::hilarious:hahaha::faf:

[One Day Soon]

Oh right, I see. So Jon Snow took a poll, found that he had majority backing for his use of the term and away we go.

I haven't said anywhere that its up to me to decide the meaning of a word. I have said that I find his use of the term 'fascism' inappropriate and a misuse. People are free - because we do not live in a fascist dictatorship - to agree or disagree with me.

Was I ranting? I thought I was just robustly expressing my opinion. Perhaps the Thought Police will ask me to moderate the level of my disagreement with Lentillista Tendency?


The point is that the meaning of a word is not up to you as an individual to decide. If Jon Snow's use of the word fascism is acceptable to everyone but you, you can rant all you want if it makes you happy - it won't change the meaning of the word.

[One Day Soon]

I think this is a bit strong. Doctors and nurses may not be the worlds brightest but morons is a bit off. :greengrin


THAT is funny.

[One Day Soon]

Perhaps not but they are being told that they are disgusting for making an informed decision of their own which is pretty much the same thing.

No they aren't. See above.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Hmm
I thought it was ironic that you were rounding on Jon Snow for using the word facism that's all. Facism, as you say, is not keen on free speech. Jon Snow was standing up for the right of the individual to choose.

You can only take so much hypocrisy and do as I say not as I do instruction from the Monbiot's of this world before you choke on it. I am happy to rubbish an opinion I disagree with on its own demerits AND to talk about the hypocrisy of the author of that opinion when I feel it is relevant to the argument.

I didn't actually think you were guilty of inverted snobbery, but there is an undercurrent in the thread of people objecting to dissentors because they see them as "media luvvies" or "intellectual idealists" (I am paraphrasing).

I appreciate your belief that there is an element of hypocrisy from some.

I think the media should inform, and where necessary declare a personal interest. I agree that, on the whole they don't, and I believe that a dumbed down media is one of the reasons that the State has managed to regain so
much control over the people.

I can see how you might think it is personal vanity by Snow not to wear his poppy all the time. I don't know the man, and you could be right. I reckon that most people that stand up for their beliefs may be narcissistic, ie "this is what I think and it is important". It doesn't necessarily make their beliefs any less valid though. Tam Dalyell said it was the arrogance instilled in by Eton that made him so determined to have HIS questions on the Belgrano answered.

ps I probably am mad, but that's another story.:greengrin

[lapsedhibee]

Oh right, I see. So Jon Snow took a poll, found that he had majority backing for his use of the term and away we go.
Yep, that's more or less how language changes over time.


I haven't said anywhere that its up to me to decide the meaning of a word. I have said that I find his use of the term 'fascism' inappropriate and a misuse. People are free - because we do not live in a fascist dictatorship - to agree or disagree with me.
And on this thread they've disagreed with you.


Was I ranting?

Well you're now on about Thought Police, so what do you think? :dunno:

[One Day Soon]

Ok, lets draw that discussion to a gentlemanly close then shall we?


I thought it was ironic that you were rounding on Jon Snow for using the word facism that's all. Facism, as you say, is not keen on free speech. Jon Snow was standing up for the right of the individual to choose.

You can only take so much hypocrisy and do as I say not as I do instruction from the Monbiot's of this world before you choke on it. I am happy to rubbish an opinion I disagree with on its own demerits AND to talk about the hypocrisy of the author of that opinion when I feel it is relevant to the argument.

I didn't actually think you were guilty of inverted snobbery, but there is an undercurrent in the thread of people objecting to dissentors because they see them as "media luvvies" or "intellectual idealists" (I am paraphrasing).

I appreciate your belief that there is an element of hypocrisy from some.

I think the media should inform, and where necessary declare a personal interest. I agree that, on the whole they don't, and I believe that a dumbed down media is one of the reasons that the State has managed to regain so
much control over the people.

I can see how you might think it is personal vanity by Snow not to wear his poppy all the time. I don't know the man, and you could be right. I reckon that most people that stand up for their beliefs may be narcissistic, ie "this is what I think and it is important". It doesn't necessarily make their beliefs any less valid though. Tam Dalyell said it was the arrogance instilled in by Eton that made him so determined to have HIS questions on the Belgrano answered.

ps I probably am mad, but that's another story.:greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

Ok, lets draw that discussion to a gentlemanly close then shall we?

OK. :thumbsup:

[bighairyfaeleith]

Is there a game on tomorrow :confused:

[One Day Soon]

Below


Yep, that's more or less how language changes over time.
You think Snow took a poll and that this is how language changes over time?



And on this thread they've disagreed with you.
I think perhaps five or so people have disagreed with me, let's see whether others later in the day have a different view.




Well you're now on about Thought Police, so what do you think? :dunno:
Truthfully? I think you quite like a wee wind up and that you have so far misinterpreted what I have said twice. You used the term 'ranting' to describe an opinion different from yours - so, to answer your question, what I think is that you would like to be the Thought Police on this issue. I would be happy to stand corrected though.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Is there a game on tomorrow :confused:

Not unless our lads can whack Johnny Taliban in time for tea!

[One Day Soon]

That's also very funny.

I think there's supposed to some kind of 90 minute event that's being organised around the Remembrance tomorrow.

I know a lot of people don't like being subjected to football at these things. After all the authorities have plenty of other opportunities to observe football - every Saturday at 3pm, the recording of the occasion which is broadcast on Saturday evenings and Sunday mornings and the various serious reflection opportunities afforded by the likes of Off the Ball, Grandstand and Soccer AM. I think everyone should have the right to observe 90 minutes of football at a a time of their own choosing rather than having it rammed down their throats by this Government conspiracy to further legitimise football at home and abroad. Did these SPL people decide to organise this football match by themselves or were they told to do it by the government. I understand that similar games are being organised around the other Remembrances taking place tomorrow. And now I'm hearing that they're going to have footballers on the pitch tomorrow as well.

Is this just another example of Hearts trying to pretend to have some kind of superiority in this area? Its not as though their club has been the only one that sent players and fans to serve in some of the most appalling theatres of football atrocity. I mean surely they recognise that Hibs fans too suffered and gave service in the 1978 World Cup expedition.


I do hope that, once we are able to get over ourselves, everyone has a good day tomorrow. A 0-7 kind of a day that is.



Is there a game on tomorrow :confused:

[Gmack7]

you dont buy poppys:grr:you make a donation

[JT Fae The Toon]

What you list are incontrovertibly the results of fascism - but that is not what the word fascist means. Fascist indicates an attitude where people's right to hold their own views is taken away and other views are imposed on them. Invariably it is used in connection with Mussolini, Hitler and Franco as they were high impact adherents of this approach - but its meaning is wider than that.

My understanding is that Jon Snow is referring to broadcasting organisations' insistence that all presenters wear a poppy, regardless of their own view of the matter. This directive is a fascist disregard for the right to disagree - a right that those who are remembered on Armistice Day died to defend.

If you read Snow's autobiography it is clear that he has, quite literally, waded through the skulls and bones in African graveyards formed by the results of fascism; he has on numerous occasions come under fire in war zones, and he comes from a long line of military people. His Grandfather, General Thomas Snow, fought in every major battle of the Great War. Some might say that gives him the right to an opinion and choice of language to describe that opinion. Whatever it suggests, it's hard to describe him as a voyeur.

The saddest thing about this thread is people arguing over whether it's permissible to disagree. I always thought permission to disagree without rancour being returned was a basic human right - the kind that thousands of young men die for - on all sides, in all wars, for all countries and often at the behest of poor military or political leadership.

60 seconds considering that tomorrow wouldn't do any harm, would it??????

I fear that the foundation of this thread is the messageboard equivalent of the sad characters who appear at Tynecastle each Derby shouting, swearing and gesticulating at whole stands of Hearts supporters - as if that somehow means they are the best of Hibs fans; basically the type of no brain, drunk, immature and macho behaviour that leads to our A and E's filling up with senseless morons every weekend.

I'm not denigrating most of the thoughtful posts, but rather suggesting that there is a rather sad suggestion that we have to ape the Old Firm and seek hidden agendae in every iniative by our rivals. Most Hibees have Hearts suporting mates and, as I've often posted, we have much more in commion with them than we do with folk who don't support football. I think it's clear that in Edinburgh terms, Hearts are the establishment club, and Hibs are the 'outsiders'. I have no problem with that, I think it makes us quite romantic as a club. It also means it's not surprising that Hearts should feel a close affiliation with Remembrance, especially considering the McRae's battalion history. Hibs, perhaps, have a more disparate history (Ireland, Southside, Leith, St Pat's) but that doesn't mean we have to be at each other's throats, other than in a footballing sense. Good grief, if Gordon Smith can move from Hibs to Hearts, who are we to belittle them?

Wouldn't it be great if HIbs and Hearts supporters could show a wee bit of genuine class, sensitivity and maturity tomorrow?????

Or are there people hell bent on proving they are just as morally bankrupt as the lower end of the Bigot Brothers support?
Great post and I wholeheartedly agree with the bit in bold. Some of my best mates are *cough* Hibbies!

This is taken from the web site of the Hearts Great War Memorial organisation (an unofficial site):

Dunfermline, Falkirk, Hibernian and Raith
supporters - this is your memorial too!

If you would like to become involved in the memorial project, providing direct assistance or raising money for the appeal, or if you simply want to donate, please contact us. No offers of help will be declined, and no-one will be turned away.