| « Powell Implicates SDLP In Own Demise | Co-Ownership Shortfall; On The Other Hand » |
Attacked For Being a Brit?
O'Connell Street, Dublin's main (and "most dangerous") street, was the scene for a vicious attack on St Patrick's night. A 17-year old English lad was confronted by a group of youths at 8pm who asked him where he was from and then attacked him when they didn't like the answer. The attack saw the victim, a pianist, lose a finger which police were unable to recover (until later see comments).
After almost 90 years of independence most folk in the Republic seem to have dropped the old grudges. Some, it seems, still can't get over the xenophobic hatred. So just what is it that fosters this naked hatred among a minority in a country that is developed, prosperous, and supposedly self-confident?
Is the desire to "reclaim" that fourth green field so strong that it warrants an attack on a kid enjoying St Patrick's day, just because he's a Brit? Is the irony that lost on these morons?
42 comments
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
There are morons everywhere. I am sure I could pull out any number of attacks in Britain for race or religion. In fact I wouldn't have to go that far as I could pull out any number here on both sides.
As you well know, which is why this is a little bit intellectually dishonest. I have little doubt this has much to do with the "fourth green field" and more, if anything, to do with a historical grievance handed down. I also suspect the victim might have took a beating regardless of what he said: its not unknown.
As you well know, which is why this is a little bit intellectually dishonest. I have little doubt this has much to do with the "fourth green field" and more, if anything, to do with a historical grievance handed down. I also suspect the victim might have took a beating regardless of what he said: its not unknown.
19 Mar 2008 @ 13:30
Comment from: Chekov [Visitor] · http://threethousandversts.blogspot.com
"I have little doubt this has much to do with the "fourth green field" and more, if anything, to do with a historical grievance handed down."
So the attack has less to do with political conviction and more to do with blind hatred of Britain? That's actually no better than Beano's speculation. In actual fact I would say Beano is being kind to imply that there may have been more to this attack than sheer xenophobia.
So the attack has less to do with political conviction and more to do with blind hatred of Britain? That's actually no better than Beano's speculation. In actual fact I would say Beano is being kind to imply that there may have been more to this attack than sheer xenophobia.
19 Mar 2008 @ 13:52
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
Chekov
So the attack has less to do with political conviction and more to do with blind hatred of Britain? That's actually no better than Beano's speculation. In actual fact I would say Beano is being kind to imply that there may have been more to this attack than sheer xenophobia.
As always, the point is somewhere you aren't. I was saying exactly that - it's no more than mindless bigotry. Which, as I noted, occurs everywhere.
So the attack has less to do with political conviction and more to do with blind hatred of Britain? That's actually no better than Beano's speculation. In actual fact I would say Beano is being kind to imply that there may have been more to this attack than sheer xenophobia.
As always, the point is somewhere you aren't. I was saying exactly that - it's no more than mindless bigotry. Which, as I noted, occurs everywhere.
19 Mar 2008 @ 14:30
Comment from: Reg [Visitor]
"Is the desire to "reclaim" that fourth green field so strong that it warrants an attack on a kid enjoying St Patrick's day, just because he's a Brit?"
Further to Kensei's point, I'd imagine the perpetrators of this awful attack wouldn't know what the fourth green field actually is.
I've witnessed the groups of drunken teenagers that wander round Dublin on Paddy's Day myself. They don't need much of an excuse to act violently.
Security needs to be tighter and off-licences need to be punished more severely.
Further to Kensei's point, I'd imagine the perpetrators of this awful attack wouldn't know what the fourth green field actually is.
I've witnessed the groups of drunken teenagers that wander round Dublin on Paddy's Day myself. They don't need much of an excuse to act violently.
Security needs to be tighter and off-licences need to be punished more severely.
19 Mar 2008 @ 14:54
Comment from: Chekov [Visitor] · http://threethousandversts.blogspot.com
"As always, the point is somewhere you aren't. I was saying exactly that - it's no more than mindless bigotry. Which, as I noted, occurs everywhere."
Bigotry occurs elsewhere and where it does occur the thing to examine is the form it takes. The point I took from Beano's post was that he is asking why in Dublin it takes this particular form. Maybe you don't think it is important to address the problem of bigotry in southern Irish society.
I will take the liberty of posting this bigotry being displayed by a large number of people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5EIWA2VZZs
Bigotry occurs elsewhere and where it does occur the thing to examine is the form it takes. The point I took from Beano's post was that he is asking why in Dublin it takes this particular form. Maybe you don't think it is important to address the problem of bigotry in southern Irish society.
I will take the liberty of posting this bigotry being displayed by a large number of people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5EIWA2VZZs
19 Mar 2008 @ 15:01
Comment from: jakbqwic [Visitor]
I'm sorry for the young lad who is another victim on the hateful streets of dublin, it's crazy here in dublin...yes! infrastructure, planning (LOL), medical, housing (really loop da loop) and high octane narcotics for the children, its a crazy dirty aul town at twice the price. Rip Off Ireland is a souless dog eat dog stress zone. northsiders, southsiders, northeners, culchies, jackeens, polish, english, chinese, africans, e.europeans, women, elderly, ect, we are all potential victims on o'connell street. I say this society is hatefully ignorant towards the needs and aspirations of it"s own citizens, This dubliner does not celebrate st patricks day, boycotts the pub, and enjoys most of the other 27 million reasons to be happy in life. Dublin city? Hard Station-Mean Streets.
19 Mar 2008 @ 15:14
"After almost 90 years of independence most folk in the Republic seem to have dropped the old grudges. Some, it seems, still can't get over the xenophobic hatred. So just what is it that fosters this naked hatred in a country that is developed, prosperous, and supposedly self-confident?"
I wouldn't say this was because of old or current grudges. As the link above points out, crime in O'Connell Street is unfortunately, not uncommon. This was a sick attack, but probably would have happened anyway, had the fella been from Ireland. It was a bunch of drunk thugs itching for a fight.
I wouldn't say this was because of old or current grudges. As the link above points out, crime in O'Connell Street is unfortunately, not uncommon. This was a sick attack, but probably would have happened anyway, had the fella been from Ireland. It was a bunch of drunk thugs itching for a fight.
19 Mar 2008 @ 15:57
"This was a sick attack, but probably would have happened anyway, had the fella been from Ireland. It was a bunch of drunk thugs itching for a fight."
You may be right, but then why ask the chap where he was from at all?
You may be right, but then why ask the chap where he was from at all?
19 Mar 2008 @ 16:06
An excuse to beat. If he had answered England, they would have beat him up. If he had answered Belfast, they would have beat him up. If he had been from Cork, they would have beat him up. If he had been from the other side of the Dublin, they would have beat him up.
19 Mar 2008 @ 16:09
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
Bigotry occurs elsewhere and where it does occur the thing to examine is the form it takes. The point I took from Beano's post was that he is asking why in Dublin it takes this particular form. Maybe you don't think it is important to address the problem of bigotry in southern Irish society.
Except I did address it. It is an easy historical grievance handed down; an easy pretext to use. He might have done similar if it was Southside Dubliner. Or from Cork. Or from Poland.
It is intellectually dishonest to take a single attack line this and try to project it to be "bigotry in Southern Irish society", to say "look at how much them Southerners" hate the Brits. It may be there, though almost everyone on the planet agrees that Irish attitudes to Britain have become much more favourable over the past generation, but this isn't the way to go about demonstrating it or "addressing it".
Dog whistle stuff. Which is why you come running woof.
Except I did address it. It is an easy historical grievance handed down; an easy pretext to use. He might have done similar if it was Southside Dubliner. Or from Cork. Or from Poland.
It is intellectually dishonest to take a single attack line this and try to project it to be "bigotry in Southern Irish society", to say "look at how much them Southerners" hate the Brits. It may be there, though almost everyone on the planet agrees that Irish attitudes to Britain have become much more favourable over the past generation, but this isn't the way to go about demonstrating it or "addressing it".
Dog whistle stuff. Which is why you come running woof.
19 Mar 2008 @ 16:39
Comment from: Chekov [Visitor] · http://threethousandversts.blogspot.com
"Except I did address it. It is an easy historical grievance handed down; an easy pretext to use. He might have done similar if it was Southside Dubliner. Or from Cork. Or from Poland."
You gave a trite explanation and dismissed Beano's blog, basically as not worth posting.
"this isn't the way to go about demonstrating it or "addressing it"."
The post actually explicitly acknowledges that society in Southern Ireland has changed. That doesn't mean it is not valid to highlight an attack which has characteristics suggesting a more regressive attitude lingers on in some quarters.
"Dog whistle stuff. Which is why you come running"
I actually didn't comment on the thread until you instinctively (and atavistically) rubbished the initial post.
You gave a trite explanation and dismissed Beano's blog, basically as not worth posting.
"this isn't the way to go about demonstrating it or "addressing it"."
The post actually explicitly acknowledges that society in Southern Ireland has changed. That doesn't mean it is not valid to highlight an attack which has characteristics suggesting a more regressive attitude lingers on in some quarters.
"Dog whistle stuff. Which is why you come running"
I actually didn't comment on the thread until you instinctively (and atavistically) rubbished the initial post.
19 Mar 2008 @ 17:00
"It is intellectually dishonest to take a single attack line this and try to project it to be "bigotry in Southern Irish society""
Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "most folk in the Republic seem to have dropped the old grudges", I don't know.
That said, I don't accept that it would have been 'just as likely' if he were from Cork. Possibly Polish, yes.
I accept that often bastards like this will develop the hatred first, then seek justification for it after, but I do get the impression that there remains an undercurrent of low-level resentment of "the Brits" among large sections of the population but it's largely limited to taking enjoyment out of their sporting defeats (and let's be honest, we all enjoy that at times).
I just think that in some cases it runs that little bit deeper. Somehow it's seen as acceptable to hate the British and/or English. People, on the whole, are rightly ashamed to admit to racist sentiment or feelings, but for some reason when it's directed at the English or British it's just "a bit o' craic" or, occasionally, downright patriotic. This clearly isn't a healthy thing and I think that kind of prevailing, if low-level, attitude allows for the development of a hatred for what becomes a dehumanised, semi-anonymous group; a hatred fed by the sorts of people who insist on exaggerating and dramatising (occasionally romanticising) perceived historical injustices (I'm thinking "the famine was [genocide/holocaust]" here).
Do you really not think that that kind of mentality may possibly have contributed to this attack?
Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "most folk in the Republic seem to have dropped the old grudges", I don't know.
That said, I don't accept that it would have been 'just as likely' if he were from Cork. Possibly Polish, yes.
I accept that often bastards like this will develop the hatred first, then seek justification for it after, but I do get the impression that there remains an undercurrent of low-level resentment of "the Brits" among large sections of the population but it's largely limited to taking enjoyment out of their sporting defeats (and let's be honest, we all enjoy that at times).
I just think that in some cases it runs that little bit deeper. Somehow it's seen as acceptable to hate the British and/or English. People, on the whole, are rightly ashamed to admit to racist sentiment or feelings, but for some reason when it's directed at the English or British it's just "a bit o' craic" or, occasionally, downright patriotic. This clearly isn't a healthy thing and I think that kind of prevailing, if low-level, attitude allows for the development of a hatred for what becomes a dehumanised, semi-anonymous group; a hatred fed by the sorts of people who insist on exaggerating and dramatising (occasionally romanticising) perceived historical injustices (I'm thinking "the famine was [genocide/holocaust]" here).
Do you really not think that that kind of mentality may possibly have contributed to this attack?
19 Mar 2008 @ 17:06
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
Chekov
You gave a trite explanation and dismissed Beano's blog, basically as not worth posting.
It basically isn't, in this way at least.
The post actually explicitly acknowledges that society in Southern Ireland has changed. That doesn't mean it is not valid to highlight an attack which has characteristics suggesting a more regressive attitude lingers on in some quarters.
It acknowledges but...
No attempt is made to to penetrate below a superficial level; neither the attackers nor the victims have said nothing particularly interesting or startling; it isn't linked to a wider spate of attacks; nor is it seemingly linked to any particular group. It's just a random act of hatred and violence; replicated all over the world daily. Deplorable, by I imagine beano could have found many more on the streets of Belfats if taht is his thing.
So why blog it? Because it is a little way of saying "Look at themmums" without actually saying it.
I actually didn't comment on the thread until you instinctively (and atavistically) rubbished the initial post.
My instincts are right. What lies under this post is ugly, and intellectually dishonest.
You gave a trite explanation and dismissed Beano's blog, basically as not worth posting.
It basically isn't, in this way at least.
The post actually explicitly acknowledges that society in Southern Ireland has changed. That doesn't mean it is not valid to highlight an attack which has characteristics suggesting a more regressive attitude lingers on in some quarters.
It acknowledges but...
No attempt is made to to penetrate below a superficial level; neither the attackers nor the victims have said nothing particularly interesting or startling; it isn't linked to a wider spate of attacks; nor is it seemingly linked to any particular group. It's just a random act of hatred and violence; replicated all over the world daily. Deplorable, by I imagine beano could have found many more on the streets of Belfats if taht is his thing.
So why blog it? Because it is a little way of saying "Look at themmums" without actually saying it.
I actually didn't comment on the thread until you instinctively (and atavistically) rubbished the initial post.
My instincts are right. What lies under this post is ugly, and intellectually dishonest.
19 Mar 2008 @ 17:39
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
beano
Do you really not think that that kind of mentality may possibly have contributed to this attack?
Not in any serious sense, because I believe that if it wasn't there another hatred would be used as a pretext. With that kind of attack, I doubt it would have mattered much what he said (the correct answer if the person looks ready to attack you, by the by, is "Do I know you?". It requires a short thinking time that allows you to either run or get your retaliation in first).
Some of that attitude still remains but only in a very, very few places in the South do I think it is likely to result in violence. I don't particularly believe there is much harm in celebrating England getting tanked, or being angered by British Government policy past or present, or disliking monarchy. I would be more concerned with visitors being made to feel uncomfortable or responsible for it, and in the right places that would not unknown. Even in the North I'd say Northern Protestants are more likely to face violence in Republican areas than English people. Unless they happen to be present or former military. Not that is a good thing, just my impression from my experience.
Do you really not think that that kind of mentality may possibly have contributed to this attack?
Not in any serious sense, because I believe that if it wasn't there another hatred would be used as a pretext. With that kind of attack, I doubt it would have mattered much what he said (the correct answer if the person looks ready to attack you, by the by, is "Do I know you?". It requires a short thinking time that allows you to either run or get your retaliation in first).
Some of that attitude still remains but only in a very, very few places in the South do I think it is likely to result in violence. I don't particularly believe there is much harm in celebrating England getting tanked, or being angered by British Government policy past or present, or disliking monarchy. I would be more concerned with visitors being made to feel uncomfortable or responsible for it, and in the right places that would not unknown. Even in the North I'd say Northern Protestants are more likely to face violence in Republican areas than English people. Unless they happen to be present or former military. Not that is a good thing, just my impression from my experience.
19 Mar 2008 @ 17:50
Comment from: Chekov [Visitor] · http://threethousandversts.blogspot.com
"No attempt is made to to penetrate below a superficial level; neither the attackers nor the victims have said nothing [sic] particularly interesting or startling; it isn't linked to a wider spate of attacks; nor is it seemingly linked to any particular group. It's just a random act of hatred and violence; replicated all over the world daily. Deplorable, by I imagine beano could have found many more on the streets of Belfats if taht is his thing."
He may well find similar incidents on the streets of Belfast and he may well post about them. This blog seems quite often to highlight criminal acts that are not necessarily linked to any group. And it is not quite a random act of violence if the perpetrators tried to establish the nationality of their victim before attacking him. Even if this provided a pretext to attack him, there was still something at work impelling those attackers to seek a rationale.
"So why blog it? Because it is a little way of saying "Look at themmums" without actually saying it."
Why blog anything? Because it is a reported incident and Beano is attempting to make some sense of it and provoke a discussion.
"My instincts are right. What lies under this post is ugly, and intellectually dishonest."
I do not think you are correct. I think Beano is quite entitled to attempt to explore what the rationale of those attackers may have been. You have acknowledged that a sense of historical grievance lies behind it. It is that sense of historical grievance that Beano is interested in exploring as far as I can detect.
He may well find similar incidents on the streets of Belfast and he may well post about them. This blog seems quite often to highlight criminal acts that are not necessarily linked to any group. And it is not quite a random act of violence if the perpetrators tried to establish the nationality of their victim before attacking him. Even if this provided a pretext to attack him, there was still something at work impelling those attackers to seek a rationale.
"So why blog it? Because it is a little way of saying "Look at themmums" without actually saying it."
Why blog anything? Because it is a reported incident and Beano is attempting to make some sense of it and provoke a discussion.
"My instincts are right. What lies under this post is ugly, and intellectually dishonest."
I do not think you are correct. I think Beano is quite entitled to attempt to explore what the rationale of those attackers may have been. You have acknowledged that a sense of historical grievance lies behind it. It is that sense of historical grievance that Beano is interested in exploring as far as I can detect.
19 Mar 2008 @ 17:55
Comment from: dantheman [Visitor]
A sickening attack, but attempts to link it to the reasoning that all Brits get the shit knocked out of them in Dublin is pathetic. There are hundreds if not thousands of "Brits" in Dublin ever weekend and attacks are extremely rare.
Chekov
"I will take the liberty of posting this bigotry being displayed by a large number of people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5EIWA2VZZs"
Again!!! Get your own house in order...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3FaJ2Ijp6Dc
Chekov
"I will take the liberty of posting this bigotry being displayed by a large number of people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5EIWA2VZZs"
Again!!! Get your own house in order...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3FaJ2Ijp6Dc
19 Mar 2008 @ 19:12
Comment from: Mike [Visitor] · http://www.independent.ie/national-news/riot-police-arrest-12-in-city-suburb-after-chaotic-scenes-13
A somewhat dangerous street ? -certainly
A very dangerous street ? -arguably
Dublin's MOST dangerous street ? -er you dont know Dublin that well -do you ?
A very dangerous street ? -arguably
Dublin's MOST dangerous street ? -er you dont know Dublin that well -do you ?
19 Mar 2008 @ 22:55
Mike, I don't know Dublin at all mate. But that is a direct quote from the BBC article on a report by the National Crime Council. I'll add quotation marks to make that clear.
19 Mar 2008 @ 22:59
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
Chekov
I do not think you are correct. I think Beano is quite entitled to attempt to explore what the rationale of those attackers may have been. You have acknowledged that a sense of historical grievance lies behind it. It is that sense of historical grievance that Beano is interested in exploring as far as I can detect.
No, I said a historical grievance is being used a pretext - not at all the same thing. And what beano is interested in, solely, is current political reality. Look at themmmums! They hate us! My world view is totally reinforced!
I do not think you are correct. I think Beano is quite entitled to attempt to explore what the rationale of those attackers may have been. You have acknowledged that a sense of historical grievance lies behind it. It is that sense of historical grievance that Beano is interested in exploring as far as I can detect.
No, I said a historical grievance is being used a pretext - not at all the same thing. And what beano is interested in, solely, is current political reality. Look at themmmums! They hate us! My world view is totally reinforced!
20 Mar 2008 @ 09:31
Comment from: dantheman [Visitor]
"Mike, I don't know Dublin at all mate. "
Beano, if you knew Dublin at all, you wouldn't have written this spurious article.
Beano, if you knew Dublin at all, you wouldn't have written this spurious article.
20 Mar 2008 @ 14:30
Nothing spurious about it Dan. While not certain, I believe that the balance of probability is that he was attacked because of where he was from.
I find it interesting that on the one hand I'm accused of highlighting this to support my own world view while others choose to believe that I am wrong because it doesn't fit theirs.
I find it interesting that on the one hand I'm accused of highlighting this to support my own world view while others choose to believe that I am wrong because it doesn't fit theirs.
20 Mar 2008 @ 15:25
Comment from: kensei [Visitor]
beano
I find it interesting that on the one hand I'm accused of highlighting this to support my own world view while others choose to believe that I am wrong because it doesn't fit theirs.
Actually beano, it fits mine perfectly. I have already conceded I think that anti-British sentiment is just about possible, but highly unlikely. I simply think it is vastly outweighed by the fact that there are dickheads out there that are simply looking for an excuse.
I find it interesting that on the one hand I'm accused of highlighting this to support my own world view while others choose to believe that I am wrong because it doesn't fit theirs.
Actually beano, it fits mine perfectly. I have already conceded I think that anti-British sentiment is just about possible, but highly unlikely. I simply think it is vastly outweighed by the fact that there are dickheads out there that are simply looking for an excuse.
20 Mar 2008 @ 16:07
Comment from: Mike [Visitor]
TBH either is very possible.
Reminds me of an incident a late one night few years ago involving three friends of mine outside City Hall in Belfast. This wee spide walks up to one of the guys and asks him where hes from.
When my friend replies "Turkey" the guy calls him an "orange bastard" and tries to hit him oblivious to the fact that attempting a random unprovoked attack against three guys who are bigger than you when youre on your own may not seem such a good idea when youve sobered up.
Reminds me of an incident a late one night few years ago involving three friends of mine outside City Hall in Belfast. This wee spide walks up to one of the guys and asks him where hes from.
When my friend replies "Turkey" the guy calls him an "orange bastard" and tries to hit him oblivious to the fact that attempting a random unprovoked attack against three guys who are bigger than you when youre on your own may not seem such a good idea when youve sobered up.
20 Mar 2008 @ 23:15
Comment from: Da [Visitor]
As far as I can see all of the foregoing just says to me that some people think that there is sectarian bigotry in Dublin and others don't. The fact is that everyone is falling back into their own "trench".
Of course there is sectarianism/bigotry - call it what you will - in Dublin as in most other cities. My own opinion is that a lot of people don't like to concede that it might exist in the fair city.
Of course there is sectarianism/bigotry - call it what you will - in Dublin as in most other cities. My own opinion is that a lot of people don't like to concede that it might exist in the fair city.
21 Mar 2008 @ 22:41
Comment from: dantheman [Visitor]
Beano, I know you wouldn't dream of gracing the fair city's papist riddled streets with your wise presence, but may i suggest you buy today's sunday independent, owned by the unionist loving tony o'reilly and read the article about the trouble on dublin's streets?
might put you're "brit-hating" version of life in dublin into perspective. cheers. alternatively, visit the city yourself and make an informed and mature judgement. cheers
might put you're "brit-hating" version of life in dublin into perspective. cheers. alternatively, visit the city yourself and make an informed and mature judgement. cheers
23 Mar 2008 @ 18:40
Comment from: Da [Visitor]
Dantheman
Try wearing some small token of Britishness (a union jack tee-shirt might be a bit OTT but what the hey!) the next time you go for a meander along the streets of the fair city and see what the reaction is. You seem very confident in the lack of anti-British sentiment - put it to the test.
Open your eyes to the bigotry that still exists (and I'm not just singling out Dublin - most cities and towns in Ireland, North and South, "orange or green", still suffer from this to some extent).
It can't be remedied if everyone pretends its not there.
Try wearing some small token of Britishness (a union jack tee-shirt might be a bit OTT but what the hey!) the next time you go for a meander along the streets of the fair city and see what the reaction is. You seem very confident in the lack of anti-British sentiment - put it to the test.
Open your eyes to the bigotry that still exists (and I'm not just singling out Dublin - most cities and towns in Ireland, North and South, "orange or green", still suffer from this to some extent).
It can't be remedied if everyone pretends its not there.
24 Mar 2008 @ 15:47
Comment from: Reg [Visitor]
"Try wearing some small token of Britishness (a union jack tee-shirt might be a bit OTT but what the hey!) the next time you go for a meander along the streets of the fair city and see what the reaction is."
I've seen girls wearing t-shirts with union flags on them in Dublin.
I've seen girls wearing t-shirts with union flags on them in Dublin.
25 Mar 2008 @ 16:36
Comment from: dantheman [Visitor]
Da,
Have you not been to Dublin either? Perhaps you should ask one of the ten thousand or so England fans that grace the city on six nations day either!!
This thread should be renamed "How much people from Dublin hate the Brits (although I never go there...)"
Have you not been to Dublin either? Perhaps you should ask one of the ten thousand or so England fans that grace the city on six nations day either!!
This thread should be renamed "How much people from Dublin hate the Brits (although I never go there...)"
25 Mar 2008 @ 19:49
Comment from: Adam [Visitor] · http://adammaguire.com
As has been said here already - the guy wasn't really attacked because he was British, he was attacked because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Given that there were countless British in Dublin for St. Patrick's Day, in addition to those permanently here making up Ireland's biggest minority, I think it's clear enough that this attack had nothing to do with nationality.
It's clear to me anyway that those who went at him were just looking for an excuse for a fight.
And as it turns out, the loss of ahis finger was pretty much self-inflicted (http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0326/wallaceg.html) although in fairness to Guy he did so while trying to get away from the scum who attacked him in the first place.
That said, and while the attackers are scum regardless, his story of having his finger viciously severed by a bunch of drunken Irish louts has turned out to be pure fantasy and by all accounts the attack he suffered was minor (although clearly a traumatic experience all the same). It's a shame that he decided to make such a dramatic embellishment for whatever reason; he has only done himself more damage.
Given that there were countless British in Dublin for St. Patrick's Day, in addition to those permanently here making up Ireland's biggest minority, I think it's clear enough that this attack had nothing to do with nationality.
It's clear to me anyway that those who went at him were just looking for an excuse for a fight.
And as it turns out, the loss of ahis finger was pretty much self-inflicted (http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0326/wallaceg.html) although in fairness to Guy he did so while trying to get away from the scum who attacked him in the first place.
That said, and while the attackers are scum regardless, his story of having his finger viciously severed by a bunch of drunken Irish louts has turned out to be pure fantasy and by all accounts the attack he suffered was minor (although clearly a traumatic experience all the same). It's a shame that he decided to make such a dramatic embellishment for whatever reason; he has only done himself more damage.
26 Mar 2008 @ 16:52
Comment from: Reg [Visitor]
Adam,
I'd heard there was something not right about this case but didn't want to comment on it - I'd heard that Gardai were "surprised" by the version of events that Mr Wallace gave to the media. It's clear that he was completely hammered and didn't know what he was doing.
Nevertheless, he wouldn't have lost his finger if it weren't for the scumbags who attacked him in the first place.
I'd heard there was something not right about this case but didn't want to comment on it - I'd heard that Gardai were "surprised" by the version of events that Mr Wallace gave to the media. It's clear that he was completely hammered and didn't know what he was doing.
Nevertheless, he wouldn't have lost his finger if it weren't for the scumbags who attacked him in the first place.
26 Mar 2008 @ 17:18
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7315250.stm
There we go, all cleared up now. A drunken eejit gets into a fight, does a runner, fucks himself up on a fence, and then claims he was the victim of a xenophobic beating. Makes you think if anything he told the Guards was true, like the whole being beat up for being English.
There we go, all cleared up now. A drunken eejit gets into a fight, does a runner, fucks himself up on a fence, and then claims he was the victim of a xenophobic beating. Makes you think if anything he told the Guards was true, like the whole being beat up for being English.
26 Mar 2008 @ 21:57
Comment from: dantheman [Visitor]
Well senor Beano, what do you think of that???
26 Mar 2008 @ 22:35
Comment from: Adam [Visitor] · http://adammaguire.com
I'd heard there was something not right about this case but didn't want to comment on it - I'd heard that Gardai were "surprised" by the version of events that Mr Wallace gave to the media. It's clear that he was completely hammered and didn't know what he was doing.
Yeah, there was clearly something dodgy about it from day 1. He didn't tell the Gardaí about the missing finger when he made his statement (in hospital I think) and then he turned up in the media making the claim.
I'm sure you could say he was so out of it/traumatised in hospital that he wasn't thinking straight, but that doesn't excuse going to the media first once his head was clear.
Nevertheless, he wouldn't have lost his finger if it weren't for the scumbags who attacked him in the first place.>
Absolutely no doubt - although I would wonder if they actually chased him or if he was so disorientated that he ran for no reason (not that it should be a let off for the scumbags - I'm just thinking of it could legally be argued that they forced him into a corner where he had to choose between jumping the fence and getting a hiding... I'd venture they didn't follow him because scum like that probably would have laid into him once he fell off the fence, missing finger or not).
You also have to wonder where the story of it being forcibly removed came from - did he make the claim or did he tell the tabloids "I got attacked by some fellas, I can't quite remember what happened but when I regained consciousness my finger was missing" and they decided to jump to the conclusion all by themselves? I think the latter is entirely plausible.
Yeah, there was clearly something dodgy about it from day 1. He didn't tell the Gardaí about the missing finger when he made his statement (in hospital I think) and then he turned up in the media making the claim.
I'm sure you could say he was so out of it/traumatised in hospital that he wasn't thinking straight, but that doesn't excuse going to the media first once his head was clear.
Nevertheless, he wouldn't have lost his finger if it weren't for the scumbags who attacked him in the first place.>
Absolutely no doubt - although I would wonder if they actually chased him or if he was so disorientated that he ran for no reason (not that it should be a let off for the scumbags - I'm just thinking of it could legally be argued that they forced him into a corner where he had to choose between jumping the fence and getting a hiding... I'd venture they didn't follow him because scum like that probably would have laid into him once he fell off the fence, missing finger or not).
You also have to wonder where the story of it being forcibly removed came from - did he make the claim or did he tell the tabloids "I got attacked by some fellas, I can't quite remember what happened but when I regained consciousness my finger was missing" and they decided to jump to the conclusion all by themselves? I think the latter is entirely plausible.
26 Mar 2008 @ 23:07
Comment from: A N Other [Visitor]
After listening to Beano's anti-Southern, xenophobic & bigoted remarks on slugger for the last two years, it's nice to see him finally with egg on his face.
As a southerner whose lived in Belfast for two years, I'll you the same thing I tell my Catholic & Prostestant colleagues:-
90% OF SOUTHERNERS DON'T GIVE TWO FUCKS ABOUT THE NORTH.
[Edited. Beano]
Phew, nice to get that off my chest. For the umpteenth time since New Year's...
If you spent less time spouting bigotted comments about the South - somewhere you clearly don't understand - and more time realising that people in the South have more important things to worry about then trying to rail-road 1m people into a re-untied state that they don't want (at a mere STG£10billion pa & rising), then maybe we might finally have positive steps towards peace on this isle.
...& to think, it took a Drumcondra gangster like Bertie for the Unionists to come to agreement with the Shinners...
...A very Irish way of doing things!!
27 Mar 2008 @ 23:26
"After listening to Beano's anti-Southern, xenophobic & bigoted remarks on slugger"
Ballocks. And as for egg on my face, the only thing I've had to change in the original post is that the police have now found his finger. I also mentioned in my first comment that it was possible that they were just thugs looking for a fight, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good bitch now, will you?
27 Mar 2008 @ 23:37
The problem Beano is that the original post is still very misleading. It basically still states that an element of Dublin society, found a kid who, asked him where he was from, and then gave him a kicking because he was English.
He was a drunken eejit, and like most other fights caused involving drunken eejits, it was probably in no way racist of xenophobic. You also make it still seam like he got his finger cut off in the fight with the quote "The attack saw the victim, a pianist, lose a finger which police were unable to recover". He lost his finger climbing a fence, not during the fight. Even if you added question marks like "Attacked for being a Brit?" would make the post more acceptable. By leaving it in it's current state it makes it seem like you have made your mind up about this being a blatant xenophobic attack on this fella.
He was a drunken eejit, and like most other fights caused involving drunken eejits, it was probably in no way racist of xenophobic. You also make it still seam like he got his finger cut off in the fight with the quote "The attack saw the victim, a pianist, lose a finger which police were unable to recover". He lost his finger climbing a fence, not during the fight. Even if you added question marks like "Attacked for being a Brit?" would make the post more acceptable. By leaving it in it's current state it makes it seem like you have made your mind up about this being a blatant xenophobic attack on this fella.
28 Mar 2008 @ 00:05
Re: the finger - the loss of the digit was still caused by the attack.
Fair enough on the title though. I hadn't really given the titlemuch any thought following the updates - just tried to keep the story accurate. One question mark coming up.
Fair enough on the title though. I hadn't really given the title
28 Mar 2008 @ 00:08
Comment from: oneill [Visitor]
Beano,
There's a republican troll doing the rounds at the minute, I wouldn't worry too much about AN Other. And considering the amount of bigotted, sectarian and racist shite that passes for comment on Slugger these day his comment tells us a lot more about him than you.
But yeah, the question-mark probably's a good idea now
Enjoy the rest!
There's a republican troll doing the rounds at the minute, I wouldn't worry too much about AN Other. And considering the amount of bigotted, sectarian and racist shite that passes for comment on Slugger these day his comment tells us a lot more about him than you.
But yeah, the question-mark probably's a good idea now
Enjoy the rest!
28 Mar 2008 @ 14:51
Comment from: A N Other [Visitor]
O'Neill,
Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough above...Very
few consider themselves "Republicans" in the South - myself included.
Ergo, I'm not a Republican - moreover, I'd rather iron my
sack for two months than vote for SF & their ilk.
I hope that clarifies matters O'Neill...
However, I still stand over the comments I made above re: Beano's original post i.e.
The 17yo boy himself now admits the story was horse-shit.
The guards who interviewed him themselves expected as much
from day 1 (brother-in-law is involved inthe station in question, not willing to sya any more than that).
So, Beano - who admittedly, knows very little about the South - uses the false story of an attack on a UK teenager
to launch a tirade against a country he knows little of....
So O'Neill, you're telling me that comments (admittedly, het-of-the-moment stuff) such as "bigotted" & "sectarian" don't seem apt???
I'll have a dozen large bottles of whatever medication you're on, pal...
Just one final point - I'm not having a go at Beano because of his political belifs; and I say that as a Free-Stater who;s
quite happy to see the border in place.
I just felt that I had to mark his card for what was an idiotic, short-sighted, "let's kick the South" post.
Regards,
ANO
Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough above...Very
few consider themselves "Republicans" in the South - myself included.
Ergo, I'm not a Republican - moreover, I'd rather iron my
sack for two months than vote for SF & their ilk.
I hope that clarifies matters O'Neill...
However, I still stand over the comments I made above re: Beano's original post i.e.
The 17yo boy himself now admits the story was horse-shit.
The guards who interviewed him themselves expected as much
from day 1 (brother-in-law is involved inthe station in question, not willing to sya any more than that).
So, Beano - who admittedly, knows very little about the South - uses the false story of an attack on a UK teenager
to launch a tirade against a country he knows little of....
So O'Neill, you're telling me that comments (admittedly, het-of-the-moment stuff) such as "bigotted" & "sectarian" don't seem apt???
I'll have a dozen large bottles of whatever medication you're on, pal...
Just one final point - I'm not having a go at Beano because of his political belifs; and I say that as a Free-Stater who;s
quite happy to see the border in place.
I just felt that I had to mark his card for what was an idiotic, short-sighted, "let's kick the South" post.
Regards,
ANO
29 Mar 2008 @ 12:25
Comment from: oneill [Visitor]
OK AN Other, I’ll take your word that you’re not a republican troll; it was this earlier remark you made that led me to that conclusion:
After listening to Beano's anti-Southern, xenophobic & bigoted remarks on slugger for the last two years, it's nice to see him finally with egg on his face
Anyone who reads Slugger regularly knows that to be patently untrue and
I see that you’ve provided no further evidence on that to back up your claim, do you withdraw it?
So, Beano - who admittedly, knows very little about the South - uses the false story of an attack on a UK teenager to launch a tirade against a country he knows little of....
The UK teenager was attacked, so it wasn’t a “false story”.
So O'Neill, you're telling me that comments (admittedly, het-of-the-moment stuff) such as "bigotted" & "sectarian" don't seem apt???
Always a mistake to post heat of the moment.
After listening to Beano's anti-Southern, xenophobic & bigoted remarks on slugger for the last two years, it's nice to see him finally with egg on his face
Anyone who reads Slugger regularly knows that to be patently untrue and
I see that you’ve provided no further evidence on that to back up your claim, do you withdraw it?
So, Beano - who admittedly, knows very little about the South - uses the false story of an attack on a UK teenager to launch a tirade against a country he knows little of....
The UK teenager was attacked, so it wasn’t a “false story”.
So O'Neill, you're telling me that comments (admittedly, het-of-the-moment stuff) such as "bigotted" & "sectarian" don't seem apt???
Always a mistake to post heat of the moment.
29 Mar 2008 @ 13:05
Comment from: fionn [Visitor]
So an Englishman gets beaten up in Ireland, claims it was a racist attack (backed up loudly by his Tory father), and is proven a fantasist.
On the same day day, in England an Irishman was beaten to death for being Irish, and not a word?
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/police-probe-irishmans-death-after-paddy-row-1332855.html
What's the REAL story here people?
On the same day day, in England an Irishman was beaten to death for being Irish, and not a word?
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/police-probe-irishmans-death-after-paddy-row-1332855.html
What's the REAL story here people?
02 Apr 2008 @ 05:48
Comment from: United Irelander [Visitor] · http://unitedirelander.blogspot.com
LOL beano.
I have to laugh at this anti-Irish guff. This is the guy I read about in the Evening Herald who got pissed, caught himself on a fence and decided to blame it all on anti-British yobs.
God you must be feeling very embarrassed about sticking up for this wally.
Least you gave me a good laugh though. Cheers for that.
PS you're welcome down in Dublin any time, mate.
I have to laugh at this anti-Irish guff. This is the guy I read about in the Evening Herald who got pissed, caught himself on a fence and decided to blame it all on anti-British yobs.
God you must be feeling very embarrassed about sticking up for this wally.
Least you gave me a good laugh though. Cheers for that.
PS you're welcome down in Dublin any time, mate.
04 Apr 2008 @ 16:43
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
Recent Comments