Obama is apparantly 'heartbroken' at the death of Edward Kennedy. Gordon Brown said 'Kennedy would be mourned in 'every continent'. Tony Blair, who worked closely with Senator Kennedy during the Northern Ireland peace talks, said he was 'a figure who inspired admiration, respect and devotion not just in America, but around the world'.
And so the schmaltzy tributes roll in like a syrup tsunami. There are some who will not have any shred of regret at the passing of this 'supposedly' great man; the relatives of those killed by the IRA in Northern Ireland during his days of supporting the nationalist cause for instance.
Now before any terrorist sympathising Americans get hot under the collar about this just remember this: Northern Ireland was not part of a British Empire and British troops were not an occupying army. Northern Ireland was and is just as much part of the United Kingdom as England, Wales and Scotland. Yes, the originally Scottish protestants occupied Northen Ireland - or the six provinces - some hundreds of years ago, land they presumably took from the native Irish just as the American settlers took land from the Native Americans.
As I said, the majority population were protestants, who under 'normal' democratic circumstances would have the right to retain their way of life and not become a minority in an alien Catholic Ireland. If you still don't get it think of Kosovo or say a US state with a minority Muslim population starting a terror Jihad against the majority in order join the worldwide calipate. Got it now?
They say you shouldn't speak ill of the dead but the Daily Mail thinks otherwise:
Sometimes it is right to speak ill of the dead. The truth matters, even when it is deeply unsavoury. The truth about Ted Kennedy is certainly unsavoury.
Not that you'd know it from yesterday's tributes, dominated by sycophantic humbug.
Gordon Brown was 'proud to have counted him as a friend and proud that the United Kingdom recognised his service earlier this year with the award of an honorary knighthood'.
Proud? He should be ashamed. Kennedy was a formidable and Machiavellian political operator in the U.S., but he was no friend of Britain. In fact, he was one of our most committed and unrelenting enemies on Capitol Hill.
In his anti-British sentiments, he took after his father, Joseph P. Kennedy, who was unable to hide his bigoted views during a shameful spell as U.S. ambassador to Great Britain.
Ted did his father proud. As a politician dependent on Irish-American votes, this master of empty rhetoric had no scruples about spreading the bitter message of Irish republicanism, especially if there was an election at stake.
Gordon Brown would not be ashamed he would be proud because he and his Marxist cronies are busy dismantling our society in preparation for the Islamic takeover and so an enemy of Britain is a friend of Gordon's seemingly. Why else would he make sleazy Edward Kennedy an honourary knight? Must be another reason for abolishing the honours system.
Talking about sleazy the Daily Mail really put the boot in:
He reeked of drink by nine in the morning and could be relied on to be bawling drunk at four in the afternoon. In Washington's top La Brasserie restaurant, he once threw a waitress over a table in a private room and tried to have sex with her. Read more.
So as I said, not a shred of regret from Yours Truly, the Daily Mail, and many more people. Oh, and just in case someone wants to remind me; yes, he did have 'some' involvement in the peace talks but that does not counterbalance his unbridled support for the republican cause earlier.
7 comments:
I live in Massachusetts, Ray, and holy cow you should see it around here. You'd think it was the Second Going. The only ones not lionizing him from every direction are keeping their mouths shut out of "respect". They need to get back ASAP to reminding everyone about what this old reprobate helped bring upon the U.S. with his endorsement of Barack Hussein Obama.
RIP Ted. Come back when you can't stay so long.
Ray,
I have a friend who was personally involved in the struggles in Belfast. He and his family were Protestants, and you are right on this. Absolutely right.
I have never understood why the world sided with the IRA.
But then, I have never understood why the world sides with the PLO or Hamas either.
The IRA had two main sources for arms: The United States and Libya.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_IRA_arms_importation
If that doesn't raise eyebrows, it should.
I have had two Irish friends tell me that the IRA commonly flew Palestinian flags in the windows of their homes.
Conversely, the UDL people (the Protestants) flew Israeli flags.
That might tell you something too.
Good to know you're onside on this pasto.
I was on the other side, like most Americans, until I met my friend from Belfast and he explained the situation to me.
By the way, though my friends family was involved in the troubles themselves (bad things went down), my friend became a Christian when he was a young man, and he converted his father to Christianity also, and they both managed to get out without being killed. They were lucky to be personal friends with people in high places, so they were given a break.
The reason I am noting this is because it needs to be known that just because the Protestants are in the right does not mean that the people who fought for the Protestant side were right in their methods.
It could be argued that their methods were necessary. But, it was gang violence. It was not government-supported police work.
That's what happens when the government does not represent the people.
And, of course, that is the problem you guys are having over there in the UK with regard to Muslims.
And, of course, the U.S. government is increasingly not representing the will of the American people.
Here's another thing to note. The Protestants are Protestant in name only. They are not believing Christians, for the most part. Likewise, with the Catholics.
This is more a battle over a cultural/ethnic thing.
That's the way my friend explains it to me.
Do you agree?
Post a Comment