Would you say that in Russia, it is better to vote for putin in a sham election than spoil your vote.A Vote for Catherine Connolly is a vote for putinism by the back door as she is in favour of giving him everything he wants and dismantling NATO.
An unsuitable President ? And the failure of mainstream politics
- Thread starter cremeegg
- Start date
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
I'd put it down to more a 100yrs or more, since 1916 anyway.
In fact, as I understand it, the IRA killed far more people identifying as Irish than British, starting with the cold-blooded execution of unarmed Constable James O'Brien from Limerick by members of James Connollys Irish Citizen army.
The Irish Labour Party, Sinn Fein, Fianna Fail et al still lionise Connolly to this day, along with child-murderer Thomas Clarke and psycho Pearse.
You can add the child killer Kevin Barry to that list too.
Ironically Connolly was British, as was that other hero of the left Jim Larkin. Two brits who came here and caused no end of trouble.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
Oh, I think it's a little unfair to say that they were the Brits that caused the trouble. I think there is long and deep list of actors, both British and Irish, through the centuries in that sphere.
She has criticised NATO and western countries who supply arms. The worst you can say about he is that she is a militant pacifist, like the Quakers.
Connolly has said that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is "illegal and unacceptable" and that Russia "must immediately end its horrific assault in accordance with international law". She called out Putin as a "dictator with no respect for democracy".
She's still appears to have no issue in effectively giving Putin everything he wants and opposing any concrete measures to defend against or end Russian aggression. Any criticism of Russia has to be dragged out of her kicking and screaming whereas unprompted conspiracy theory rantings comes out of her against the EU for any tentative steps they make to aid Ukraine or boost their own defences.
Whatever tankie both sides drivel she and her ilk here and across Europe and America comes out with is music to the ears of Putin.
She hasn't "called out" that it is unacceptable that there are Russian forces in Ukraine occupying Ukrainian territory. She hasn't called out that Putin's demands upon Ukraine are unacceptable. She hasn't called for Russia forces to leave Ukraine.
Militant pacifism = surrender to tyranny.
What's the point in calling what Russia has done acceptable, and calling for fighting to end, while also criticising attempts to aid Ukraine in its defence of said illegal invasion. What's the point in "calling out" Russia without "calling out" for it to abandon what it has illegally gained from such actions and evacuate all military forces from Ukraine?
It's meaningless contradictory nonsense completely detached from reality.
Militant pacifism.. I suppose that means she opposes the use of force by police\guards to for example stop a rapist or murderer from carrying out a crime or indeed to imprison anyone. Wasn't that one of the questions asked of Quakers in the past to establish if they believed any use of force was justified?
Last edited:
Is that a question?
Moral purism and ruminate for those averse to articulating practical solutions.
We all agree its "illegal and unacceptable", we all think Russia "must immediately end its horrific assault in accordance with international law". Nothing enlightening there. Of course its her whataboutery on the causes ["NATO warmongering"] and her subversion of the solutions ["military industrial complex"] that are the problem.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
What are the solutions and how does she subvert them?
Last edited:
Militant pacifism is not the same thing as absolute pacifism.
It’s perfectly possible to condemn Russian aggression and question the wisdom of escalating an arms race. Connolly’s criticism of NATO or EU militarisation doesn’t make her a Kremlin apologist, it makes her a critic of militarism in all forms. Her approach is moral consistency, not "moral purism".
The country was of a similar view in 2008 when we rejected Lisbon because of worries about an EU army eroding our neutrality.
I wonder how many people here have served in combat or had any experience of a warzone? I haven't but I know several people who have and they are all far closer to Connolly on this than to the military hawks.
It’s perfectly possible to condemn Russian aggression and question the wisdom of escalating an arms race. Connolly’s criticism of NATO or EU militarisation doesn’t make her a Kremlin apologist, it makes her a critic of militarism in all forms. Her approach is moral consistency, not "moral purism".
The country was of a similar view in 2008 when we rejected Lisbon because of worries about an EU army eroding our neutrality.
I wonder how many people here have served in combat or had any experience of a warzone? I haven't but I know several people who have and they are all far closer to Connolly on this than to the military hawks.
I put it in brackets!
The solution is adherence to and application of the UN Charter by all signatories. Her particular strategy (she is not in government to be fair - though part of the legislature now!) is to undermine the efforts of government and partners to create the conditions for peace. Whether its sanctions on Russia (she opposes that because of the harm to civilians), European states defending themselves in response to threats (then its militarism) or increasing their industrial base (that's the military industrial complex), it's one connivence after the other, by "the establishment" of course.
Her rhetoric is grounded in dog whistles, appeal to emotion and equivocation. Her arguments infer that her opponents are bad faith actors, of low moral standards and lack humanity. God forbid some people would genuinely feel fearful for their society in face of naked and overwhelming aggression or that the geopolitical landscape has changed.
A Galweigen Gandi? Militant pacifism implies some sort of threat or consequence in use of non-violence in the pursuit of peace. She's more privileged pacifism. Easy to be a pacifist in the west of Ireland, not so easy when apartment blocks in your constituency are being obliterated.
It's perfectly possible of course, but only by for theorist. She knows of course that her proposition is fundamentally unserious, its ruminant for her supporters principally, not a practical political strategy for oppressed peoples to pursue, not least Ukrainians.
What's a military hawk? I would strongly urge you to interrogate those views further. While they may share the her ideals, particularly Irish soldiers given our military history, I would be extremely doubtful these peoples views align to her "peace at all costs", "NATO warmongering" or "EU militarism" views or if they do, are widely representative of military people.
This talk always resonated with me, as a good reflection of a soldiers outlook.
Connolly would call him a warmonger.
What a jaw-droppingly asinine and pig-ignorant comment.
The right to participate in the democratic process includes the right to spoil one's vote, should that be one's preference. It is fully participating in the process and treating the offerings with the contempt that they deserve.
There's not much point in clambering up the rickety stairs into your plywood pulpit if that infantile argument is the best that you can muster up.
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
I think if you really think about that, you will find that Connolly's concerns and the concern of many others is how the the solution above is applied selectively, and not to all.
The obvious and immediate contradiction is the sanctioning of Russia for its illegal invasion and the political cover, financing and weapons provision for Israels illegal occupation and genocide in Gaza.
There is no UN Charter any more, it is exists in paper form only. It has been repeatedly jack-booted by the fascist military powerful over the decades and lies in shreds. US regime change campaigns and illegal invasion of Iraq, Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, Israels genocide, sanctions on ICC members, indiscriminate attacks on vessels of the coast of Venezuela by US, blocking democratically elected MEPs from visiting Gaza, etc, etc,
The world is moving to, or has moved to, a military order led by the US, and chased by China and Russia, and now the EU is now joining the fray at the behest of US and NATO.
From the Treaty of Rome, to Irelands membership of EEC, it was always assured from the government benches that the EEC was an economic arrangement and not a political or military one. Having reaped benefits economically, fears were put aside, trust was built with European partners and the political establishments were founded and endorsed by the people of Ireland. Still, military alignment was no-go, with assurances from government benches.
And now here we are, a European military alliance being forged by the back-door virtue of European NATO membership and no doubt the pressure for Ireland to align will ramp up.
Ireland is doing everything it can to support the NATO alliance short of providing offensive weapons. Technology used for NATO weapons is manufactured here, US warplanes routinely land and re-fuel without cargo inspection, economic sanctions are applied in line with NATO interests. Medical and humanitarian aid is provided to one-side of the Ukraine/Russia war.
All the ducks are in order for the governing class for Ireland to be a fully fledged member of NATO and European defence alliance with the prospect of lucrative military contracts in weapons manufacturing and technology. Boomtime economically for Ireland, boomtime for death and destruction against some of poorest people and regions in the world.
All that stands in the way of the fascist military industry is that pesky stone in the shoe - the right of the people to decide through democratic ballot.
God Bless Connolly, she provides a voice of reason and I wish her well during her tenure.
Any of them living or serving in Ukraine fighting off this Russian invasion?
Any of them ever lived under Russian or Soviet occupation?
We can see the reactions of places like Poland, Sweden, Finland, Baltic States. Peoples who live with the reality of Russian threats hanging over them.
Any of these people serve in the Irish armed forces? Do they oppose increased funding on equipment? Because there's zero signs Connolly thinks the defence forces need more money for such things., actual equipment such as ships, weapons to their job. Just things like uniforms and pensions etc.
So I doubt these people are as close to Connolly as you imagine. I imagine they have been duped by her double speak.
The EU building up military in the face of Russian aggression is so far removed from 'military hawk' it bears no relation to the words.
Military hawks? Nope. Just Irish people still in Skibbereen Eagle never land.
Escalating an 'arms race'? What 'arms race'? The EU militaries were disarming and eg France, Britain, Germany, Belgium a shadow of their Cold War strength and Russia took advantage of that. To present steps to remedy that as "escalating an arms race" is completely detached from reality.
Connolly is a Kremlin apologist and not just Kremlin. She was the same when she was being led around the nose in Syria by butchers and when she came back reserved as much criticism for the West as the actuals in Syria committing the war crimes, implicitly downplaying their culpability for war crimes in doing so. Also lying that she funded it when she did not.
She had actual war criminals in front of her and she couldn't ever see it. Preferring her fantasies.
Always making excuses for and 'both siding' illegal aggression and dictators with conspiracy theories about NATO and some mythical EU military industrial complex.
Her "militant pacifism" (an oxymoron is ever there was) is nothing more than a philosophy which ultimately demands surrender to dictators and create circumstances in which they can do what they want unopposed. If anyone in the EU is a warmonger, it is her. She encourages aggression by opposing steps to resist it. At least Chamberlain in appeasing Hitler was also increasing British military strength. With Connolly we just get the appeasement.
Last edited:
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
*wrong forum
Last edited:
I can see you can't actually defend Connolly's actions in Syria and this is obvious whataboutery. Wasn't she supposed to be about speaking truth to power? Apparently you are putting her on the same level as a British minister. Unless you're a supporter of said British government, by your own standards, you have criticised and discredited her with such a comparison.
I can see Connolly is the useful idiot of dictators. She didn't speak truth to power in Syria, she was led around the nose on a propaganda tour by butchers and said nothing critical there. When she came back, she said what they wanted her to say. To blame the West and call for sanctions to be lifted. An apologist for invaders and dictators and war criminals.
Last edited:
Sister Sara
Registered User
- Messages
- 270
Connollys 'actions' in Syria were utterly inconsequential, certainly no greater than Assad's 'actions' in Buckingham Palace.
The moral outcry against Connolly for her visit to Syria is pure fake. The media and political reaction of the time of the visit in 2018 was benign at best. Only now, in 2025 for a Presidential race, does the moral outrage manifest.
But you are correct, we can do the whataboutery thing* as the list of hypocrisy and contradiction is endless regardless of which perspective you take. Not least the delayed fake outrage in 2025 over Connolly visit to Syria in 2018.
*So I deleted the post.
As far as defending Connollys 'actions'. I absolutely stand behind any of our democratically elected representatives meeting whoever they want in the pursuit of understanding a complex matter and if the purpose is to garner support for a peaceful resolution.
I wish there were more like Connolly and Daly, from every hue of the Dáil. Instead, we have governing partners cowering to the mantra of the US/NATO narrative at every turn.
Israel, a foreign country, has blocked a democratically elected MEP, Lynn Boylan, the chair of the EU Parliament Delegation for Relations with Palestine from entering Palestine, a country that Israel illegally occupies and is committing genocide in.
Please don't tell me it will take 7 years for the media and political establishment to raise a fuss about this?
Last edited:
Your defence of Connolly being led around by butchers on a propaganda tour is that it was 'utterly inconsequential'. Assad and his stooges, including the butcher who was her tour guide, who was conducting widespread atrocities against their own civilians at the time.
This is the best her defenders can do, dumping misleading photos trying to create false equivalences, it speaks volumes.
As for false cries about 'delayed fake outrage'? Doesn't invalidate a single point made and you know it when you have to engage in such tactics.
Yes, dictators see her as utterly inconsequential. She will never oppose them in any way they care about just college debating utterly inconsequential delusions about 'speaking truth to power'. And they welcome her opposition to attempts by democracies to stand against dictators.
A dictator's useful idiot.