Cartoon by Brian Mór
Click to enlarge

The Auld Protocols

Cartoon by Brian Mór
Click to enlarge


  1. Brian,

    no rest for the wicked!!

  2. Brian,

    Would Her Majesty's visit be as objectionable if it was occuring in the context of an United Ireland.

  3. No idea why there would be a fuss about another dignitary visiting after all it is part of their job.
    Pity she is not bringing the family they could have made a weekend of it in Bangor.
    Unsure of the role Monarchies have in the modern world other than being a tourist attraction in that sideshow way. Think I will side with the French considering they seemed to be onto something by kicking out their Royal Family.

    Just for the sake of banter Robert, if a Catholic was to become King or Queen in the near future would the welcome mat be out?

  4. Robert I may be mistaken here a cara but I believe Lizzie Winsdor owns property and fishing rights in Dun na Gall and family and friends own property all over the Republic,I think with her as head of the armed forces even if its only symbolic and given the brutality of those forces in this countrys history the time is not right for any such visit,the cause of Irelands freedom has always been a just cause,and the repression that we the Irish have had to endure to retain that national identity in language and culture,we were even banned from using saffron in the dyeing of our kilts!there has been to much bad blood spilt and memories are long,a united country and an apology for the hurt and damage done would go a long way,in my case as a descendant of Irish nobility I,d want loads of compo,

  5. Marty,

    I take it that means no.

    "..the cause of Irelands freedom has always been a just cause,.."

    Persued by unjust,inhumane means and a little twisted logic. I think Michael Gallagher, of Omagh, nailed this when he said that he could never understand why those who wanted to drive the English out of Ireland did so by killing Irish men.

    Are you sure they were 'kilts' and not 'leinidh'? I take your point - we have the parades commission attacking our customs

  6. Tain Bo,

    Depends who is offering the welcome mat.

  7. Robert I did indeed mean leinidh, different from the kilt more like a dress but I didnt want any funny remarks from you about men in dresses ffs,Honestly I suppose it depends where your allegiance lies, for example the Maquis and indeed Churchills home gaurd or the auxillary units tactics would not have been unlike republican actions,both in style and result,I think the disregaurd for the ballot box shown by Unionists in 1918 and Ed Carsons actions in forming an illegal organisation was a green light for militant republicans,and the rest is history unfortunately.

  8. Btw Robert its not a religious thing with me,a cara I,d gladly tell the pope to fuck of to.

  9. when i first glanced at this picture i thought that santa claus
    had a boot on biffo's head.

    how many IRISH will bow to the head-crown next year,
    queenie in dublin to come out with
    a bold statement,
    those waving union jacks could end up throwing stones at her.

  10. Marty,

    It's the men in tights that worry me!
    Your point regarding the home guard is spectulative given that operation 'Sealion' never materalised. But you provide a perfect analogy for me to expand on my earlier point. Had Britain been faced with a German invasion -how far would the British struggle for freedom been advanced by the planting of bombs in commercial centres that invariably ended with the deaths of locals as opposed to members of the wehrmacht?

  11. Point taken Robert,but what I,m saying and probably very badly is Churchill would have ordered those in charge to do whatever was necessary,like Stalin,the human cost was never a consideration,what was the purpose of bombing Dresden other than to bring the civilian population to its may be a question of does the end justify the means, from historical evidence it sure seems that way.

  12. Why does she want to come here anyway, she must have enough stolen Irish treasures. Must be taking a break for her usual hobbies, like animal torture!

  13. Too tired last night to make a proper comment!

    Why does the Queen want to come to Ireland anyway?
    Tain Bo's comment that, it is part of a dignitaries job, provides some explanation, but in reality she must know she would not be welcome.

    What purpose would it serve, her role is diminishing in her own country, so they are exporting her to anyone fool or desperate enough to take her.

    On the plus side, the deer and the other unfortunate creatures that they rear to torture and kill, will get a break from her odious parasite of a husband for a while.

  14. "If Britain was faced with German invasion would they have bombed commercial targets?" AGHEM, Dresden anyone? What were the night and day raids across the channel targetting exactly? Like the Yanks bombing Heroshim and Nagasaki...military targets? The Brit and Yank always target the family/civilians from as far back as Custer in the 'New World'. Their big fear now is the Muslim has copped on and unlike wee sissy Paddy fighting the good fight, as soon as Muhamed has the wherewithall, the Yanks and the Brits are gunna get some of their own centuries old medicine!! Slap it well up em too.

  15. Larry,

    London,Liverpool,Coventry and Belfast anyone ??

    You should have mentioned the 1943 bombing of Hamburg - there were more casualties than Dresden.

  16. Minor detail, the bombing of Hamburg lasted 10 days and the bombing of Dresden 2, in both give or take a day. Considering the carnage it would be difficult if not impossible to accurately estimate the casualty figures. As always there is the official version which serves the purpose of making it not sound so bad and there is the truth.

  17. Tain Bo,

    "As always there is the official version which serves the purpose of making it not sound so bad and there is the truth."

    As far as I know the Germans themselves revised the figures down from 250,000 to 25,000 fatalities. Little consulation to those killed and injured but as Frederick Taylor put it Dresden was a, " which went horribly right."

  18. Indeed Robert the Nazi propaganda over estimated the tally… I should have been clearer on the point.
    I also failed to mention that the American daytime bombers (in Operation Gomorrah ) stopped after 2 or 3 days due to smoke from the bombings.

  19. Don't think a Royal visit to the free state would do too much harm in this modern era. Might help people get over themselves. As for the WW2 there were ex servicemen who survived Dunkirk, D-Day and the tail end of the war only to have to do vigilante in their old age to try and prevent 'British' people burning their houses down in Armagh.
    Not interested in the 'wataboutery' headcounts in WW2 air raids. Though i notice the 2 nukes went unmentioned. New weapon directed immediately at? civilians! Says it all. Bottom line is civilian/family massacres are a historical feature of Brit/yank war. As for WW2 it was a German V Russian conflict. The Allies only entered belatedly to prevent a communist Europe.

  20. I suppose one could argue that Lizzie Windsor,whos real name is Wettin should be entitled to visit especially the west coast, the place is full of Germans probably all relations,!!

  21. Up here in the black north, we have orangemen celebrating a wee gay Dutch man, now they are getting excited by the possibility of a visit by a wee German who is married to a weird Greek bloke who likes to wear Scottish kilts,whose ex daughter in law was almost married to an Arab, while a large section of citizens from the unfree state will pay loadsamoney to get to England/Scotland to see the ex nazi give them two fingers,bet none of them will leave their kids in the care of dicky dodgers or priests!!!!

  22. Larry,

    I think your up the left on the chronology of events during WWII.

    "As for WW2 it was a German V Russian conflict. The Allies only entered belatedly to prevent a communist Europe."

    The United Kingdom declared war on Germany 3rd September, 1939. The conflict between the Russians and Germans commenced on the 22nd June, 1941 following the German invasion of Russia aka 'Operation Barbarossa'.

  23. Larry,

    Stalin certainly argued that the US and Britain (he did not like Churchill) were delaying the continental war in order to let the Russians do the worst of the fighting. But there were serious logistical problems in mounting D Day as early as Stalin wanted. The US, Brits and the rest who invaded through Normandy suffered bad casualties. Some of the fighting equalled anything on the Eastern Front. I think the most self serving act amongst the allies was Stalin's decision to abandon the Poles, allowing them to be slaughtered in Warsaw. That was to ensure a communist Europe. Yet at the Russian side during the storming of Berlin was a Polish Army.

  24. Good point Robert with the pesky reds knocking on the door.
    Oddly enough the Americans were feeding the Bear?
    The Lend Lease Program introduced by Winston certainly is a twist on stopping the red invasion.


    The world of dignitaries being polite and orderly set the standard for us underlings we ironically end up fighting the wars they always begin.
    Give her a break with all the worries she has minding her dysfunctional kids and trying to keep up with bills dogs shitting all over the house a wee break in the emerald Isle will do wonders for her.
    As for us non royals we are just left to wonder what the craic is with “worshiping” these foreign idols.

    There certainly would be a lot of Red Hand of Ulster flags minus the wee crown if a Kaflik became King or Queen?

  25. Tain Bo,

    There are historical and, in my opinion, perfectly rational reasons for the provisions contained in the Bill Of Rights 1688, the Act Of Settlement 1700,the Act Of Unions and reinforced by the Coranation Oath Act 1680 and the Accession Declaration Act 1910.
    Each time a Roman Catholic has ascended the throne it has resulted in the persecution of those who opposed Catholic beliefs and practises. Historically this has involved burning people at the stake for crimes such as the denial of papal infallibility.
    In the case of the last Roman Catholic monarch, King James II, much of the provisions were enacted to prevent a repeat of his proroguing of parliament in 1685.

  26. Instead of arguing over whether we should have a protestant, king/queen or a catholic king/queen,with the disgusting behavour of both types over the centuries,why not in this time of recession and belt tightening, dump the monarachy and the rest of the free loading b###ards.

  27. Robert

    “I [here insert the name of the Sovereign] do solemnly and sincerely in the presence of God profess, testify, and declare that I am a faithful Protestant, and that I will, according to the true intent of the enactments which secure the Protestant succession to the Throne of my Realm, uphold and maintain the said enactments to the best of my powers according to law.”

    I will ask if “Accession Declaration Act 1910 (c.29)” was amended to solemnly swear allegiance to a Catholic monarch under British Law would you sign it?
    In fairness I would not sign it as I prefer the separation of Church and State and my opinion on monarchies is clear they are of little purpose in the modern world.

    Reading that law I would think the non believers have a case for not putting on the welcome mat for a Monarch and a Law that excludes them?

  28. What was it the 'limeys' said about the Yanks as they all pertied until 1944 in London, oh aye, OVER SEXED OVER PAID AND OVER HERE.

  29. The royals and the pope just doing what they always did, enjoying themselves and having a good laugh at how generation after generation of desperate eegits can be hoodwinked regardless of the evidence before their eyes.
    Really, why does anyone care??

  30. Tain Bo,

    I would have to refer to the 'Auld Protocols' of many here and declare that I would sign nothing!
    The Act has no relevance to the Republic.

  31. Marty,

    "Instead of arguing over whether we should have a protestant, king/queen or a catholic king/queen,with the disgusting behavour of both types over the centuries,why not in this time of recession and belt tightening, dump the monarachy and the rest of the free loading b###ards"

    If you look at the figures Marty, the case, economically at least, for retaining the monarchy far outways the arguments for it's abolishment.

  32. Robert a cara Charlie is on about £18 mill a year or around £300k a week ffs for doing what sniffing flowers or acting as a tampax, that family is more dysfunctional than the Simpsons,the myth that the royals pay for themselves through tourism is bunkum a cara there isnt any record of how many tourists come to England just to see the royals, the security bill for their protection is over £100 mill a year,their financial affairs are shrouded in secrecy and exempt from the freedom of information act, why should you or your children have to call someone sir or lord/lady, and again why should you or any member of your family be exempt from the top post in the land because of your birth,i.e, if the head of state was a president would that not be a more democratic state,plus and finally Robert didnt Tony Robertson of Time Team fame carry out reshearch and discovered that the true monarch of England is a bloke living in Australia,drives a forklift I think, anyway when asked about coming back and making a claim for the job ,he said he was happy where he was, time to turn Lissie and the clan out into the paddock Robert,their days are past go on mate let them run free.

  33. Tony Robinson of Time Team I apoligise,

  34. Yes Mackers, the Polish were treated savagely. Any I have met have been really decent people too. Difficult to know if they carry and harbour resentment the way the Irish have always done. If they do they certainly have massive reason to. It hasn't been detectable from where I stand.

  35. Robert
    The “auld protocols” good enough I get your drift nothing wrong with borrowing a leaf.
    As for the Free State I have my misgivings about that place…was referring to our side of the imaginary line and its non-believers.

  36. Larry,

    I have met many Polish in the course of my employment. On the whole very decent and ordinary folk attempting to eke out a living, like the rest of us. I have always found them to possess a healthy skepticism of politicians and in alot of cases outright contempt. Solidarity!!!

  37. Marty,

    "..that family is more dysfunctional than the Simpsons.."

    Having locked the kids and mrs in the coal-shed for the night I reflected on this and came to a conclusion. They are no more dysfunctional than any of the rest of us. The total cost of the Queen's Civil List - which pays for the running of the Royal Household including staff salaries - was £13.9 million in 2008. This equates to 69p per person in the UK. Social security benefits for the same period were £152 billion.

    "..acting as a tampax.."

    It's a dirty job Marty but somebodys got to do it!

  38. Robert a cara,just goes to show what a snob and how you lot have been better treated, a coal shed did you ever, we keep ours in the bath,you mention the civil list and quote £13.9 mill what you fail to mention a cara is the increasing protection bill for the royals which is currently increasing year on year and all the other expenses which amount to over £1oo mill a hell of a difference a cara,plus as I have already stated their financial affairs are shrouded in secrecy and exempt from the freedom of information act,WHY? and why should you be classified as a subject and not a citizen this is 2010 Robert not 1010

  39. Robert, your figures are well out in relation to her majesty.
    Latest BBC survey, reckons the royals cost us around 150 million a year, I would say you were quite wrong as was the 2008 study you quoted from.

    Kinda of glad, because you really made it sound as though we should be happy to pay her our 62p or whatever the figure was.
    Actually, watched a show hosted by Nicki Campbell several weeks ago, were the whole issue of what they cost the tax-payer was debated.
    Two British government ministers, argued, that a special office should be set up to audit the royals spending, because of the size of their over spend.
    They wanted Lizzie's spending overseen by a government department as opposed to her own accountants. (sounds dodgy)

    We pay for their mega-rich lifestyles, their homes, fine foods, wines,staff, holidays abroad,clothes, security, animal torture and whatever other freebies she can get her tight little fist on, Lillibet on the other hand pays for duck all, not even 1p in tax.

    They (The Brit Royals)actually cost up to ten times more than any other heads of state in Europe.
    Not really what you initially made out Robert.
    You sold it well though, I was nearly going to petition for two Royal families as they sounded such a bargain.

  40. Nuala, I don't even think the Royal Family play the secular religion function they used to years ago. I think in time it will probably fade out.

  41. Mackers, almost lamenting their passing already, true they never made any serious contribution to humankind in either a religious or secular sense, but there is no denying they were always good for a laugh.

  42. Nuala, they could not cope well with ridicule and lots of it were heaped on them as they were stripped of the 'sacred.'

  43. Marty,

    "Robert a cara,just goes to show what a snob and how you lot have been better treated, a coal shed did you ever, we keep ours in the bath.."

    A Bath no less!! You'll perhaps understand my annoyance at this startling revelation that `croppies' are in position of such mod cons. Recalling my chidhood, amongst the elite and privledged, we did'nt 'have one about the place'. No! bathtime for us was a slosh about in granny's belfast sink, affectionately referred to as the 'Jaw-Box'. "A Protestant parliament for a Protestant people" - indeed where did it all go wrong?