Noel F. Jones
Member
"Senan at no point has questioned whether placards were placed around the Lusitania memorial."
Well that's news to me Inger. Get this:
"I'm sorry, but this is a wild, nonsensical and
untrue claim."
And:
"It is absurd. It is preposterous. It is untrue."
When I am assailed in such manner what to you expect me to do? Capitulate? Sorry Inger, I'm not of that kidney.
"The issues you differ on are whether these constitute a 'desecration', and whether these were targeted specifically at the Lusitania because of a perceived Englishness."
I couldn't disagree more. Mr Moloney was clearly seeking to deny that the primary desecration, (the hedging about of the memorial with substantial IRA propaganda placards over a period of time) ever took place, never that the rationale you now put forward obtained. Go back and read the posts.
And if you want deconstruction and prolixity, Mr Moloney put to me the following:
"........Your contention is that the Cob Town Council and the townspeople of Cobh engaged in prolonged xenophobia.
The council were either pusillanimous or tacitly supported the hijacking over "months and years" of their central monument. That charge is bad enough.
The police, of course, stood idly for the same period by during this strange vigil by malcontents."
Exactly. Those were PRECISELY the consequent allegations made in the British press at the time. As to whether the inaction of the municipality and/or the police stemmed from "xenophobia" or intimidation, you must enquire locally. The consensus favoured the latter.
On a detail: the plinth of Nelson's column has provided a convenient podium for issues contentious and otherwise ever since it was built. That does not categorise as a desecration (the structure is rather large for that in any case!).
As the record will show (if anyone should care to go back and actually read it), all I originally did was provide some contextual countervailing information without any political 'side' to it. This being Ireland, I knew there was a risk that some would rise, as to a bait, and seek to politicise it but I did not expect to encounter such irrational vehemence. Or indeed – and regrettably – from a quarter that I hitherto regarded as accruing some gravitas.
All-in-all I consider I have shown commendable restraint in responding to an unprovoked attack upon my veracity and integrity. As the matter clearly remains unresolved I'm minded to spend the money (you'll have to go back and look that one up an'all).
For the time being I look forward to receiving Mr Moloney's meet apology in due course.
Noel
Well that's news to me Inger. Get this:
"I'm sorry, but this is a wild, nonsensical and
untrue claim."
And:
"It is absurd. It is preposterous. It is untrue."
When I am assailed in such manner what to you expect me to do? Capitulate? Sorry Inger, I'm not of that kidney.
"The issues you differ on are whether these constitute a 'desecration', and whether these were targeted specifically at the Lusitania because of a perceived Englishness."
I couldn't disagree more. Mr Moloney was clearly seeking to deny that the primary desecration, (the hedging about of the memorial with substantial IRA propaganda placards over a period of time) ever took place, never that the rationale you now put forward obtained. Go back and read the posts.
And if you want deconstruction and prolixity, Mr Moloney put to me the following:
"........Your contention is that the Cob Town Council and the townspeople of Cobh engaged in prolonged xenophobia.
The council were either pusillanimous or tacitly supported the hijacking over "months and years" of their central monument. That charge is bad enough.
The police, of course, stood idly for the same period by during this strange vigil by malcontents."
Exactly. Those were PRECISELY the consequent allegations made in the British press at the time. As to whether the inaction of the municipality and/or the police stemmed from "xenophobia" or intimidation, you must enquire locally. The consensus favoured the latter.
On a detail: the plinth of Nelson's column has provided a convenient podium for issues contentious and otherwise ever since it was built. That does not categorise as a desecration (the structure is rather large for that in any case!).
As the record will show (if anyone should care to go back and actually read it), all I originally did was provide some contextual countervailing information without any political 'side' to it. This being Ireland, I knew there was a risk that some would rise, as to a bait, and seek to politicise it but I did not expect to encounter such irrational vehemence. Or indeed – and regrettably – from a quarter that I hitherto regarded as accruing some gravitas.
All-in-all I consider I have shown commendable restraint in responding to an unprovoked attack upon my veracity and integrity. As the matter clearly remains unresolved I'm minded to spend the money (you'll have to go back and look that one up an'all).
For the time being I look forward to receiving Mr Moloney's meet apology in due course.
Noel