Meanwhile, In Dublin




In Cork…


And at the Élysée in Paris…

More than a million people expected at ‘national unity’ rally in Paris (Irish Times)

Dublin pics via France In Ireland and Vincent Rabault and Cork pic via Cookie & Vaudevilles

47 thoughts on “Meanwhile, In Dublin

  1. Soundings

    Can’t remember such an elegantly dressed gathering of people in Ireland. What’s wrong with the natives that they can’t accessorize or choose styles, fit and colours, not to mention introducing polish to your shoes and boots once in a while. I know that’s all peripheral to the purpose of today’s demonstrations, but it’s an important reason for appreciating the French with whom we are expressing condolences and solidarity.

    1. only when

      you are confusing the French with the Italian, what bargain did end up grabbn’ at the River Island sale in the end?

      1. All the good ones fly south for winter

        Child proofing medication can on rare occasions work against society.

    2. SADDo

      In all fairness their teeth are shit though. And as for showering often….


  2. Ciaran

    glad to see Enda turning up to show his face.
    how long before he’s back in our land of blasphemy laws?

    1. Blueswannabe

      Exactly Ciaran, this empty ‘standing with France’ when in reality we’re too chicken to protect our freedom of speech like they do, afraid to actually support them or stand with them in a meaningful way other than a photo op is yet another example of Conservative Irish hypocrisy.

    2. SADDo

      What difference exactly would removing these laws make? “Oh look, it’s not against the law, so let’s not load up the AKM assault rifles in the back of the Citreon.”

      Give me a break.

      So the mickey mouse law about blaspheming in Ireland outweighs the laws in France about murdering people?

      That’s some first year UCD Arts students’ union right-onism in action.

      How about laws preventing bombing, torture, secret renditions, etc? Make any difference?

      1. Martin

        Well the whole point of the movement is that FREE SPEECH should be allowed and encouraged, so on a matter of principle we should clean our own house and get rid of the stupid blasphemy law. Geddit?

  3. ex pat

    If this was organised by the water protestors they’d be claiming 50,000 turned up.

    Good show for a pretty brass monkeys day.

      1. ex pat

        When the organisers ask for a specific route they generally get it; Murphy and Co asked for Merrion Street versus Kildare St, they got everything they asked for, except the numbers.

          1. Fergus the magic postman

            Lol. Those figures were BS & it was a Wednesday.
            I was there, & there was a massive turnout of protesters from all walks of life, standing together not just against water charges, but against the disgrace of a government in general, the quangos, the bonus culture, the jobs for the boys, Kenny, Bruton, O’ Brien, RTE.

            What happened today was an entirely different affair and should not be used as a vehicle for you to try and belittle the people of our country taking a stand for what’s right.

          2. ex pat

            You are right the march was not about water charges, it was about advancing the electoral fortunes of negative opposition parties such as Sinn Fein who impose austerity in Northern Ireland but see it as a vote winner here; then the privately educated professional socialist Paul Murphy who flew in the Detroit Water campaign in despite no switch offs being on the agenda here.

            It was a Wednesday, that would not have affected the pensioners or the unemployed or those who could have taken a days holiday leave. The reality is the €1,000 a year lies spun in early November swelled public anger and when it was disproven the majority decided it wasn’t worth freezing their nuts off over.

            Today was a magnificent show of solidarity, 2,000 with nothing to gain showing support with a neighbour who has been a very good friend for a long time bar the Sarkozy years.

          1. paul m

            ex pat, whats wrong with a privately educated socialist? Does it make you any less a socialist than one who is self taught or one who came from underprivileged background and funded their way through college? I fail to see where the dig is. both well healed and working class intellectuals have been at the core of socialism for quite some time.

          2. ex pat

            In the case of PaUL MURPHY it is entirely relevant, he is riding a populist horse that is socialist by convenience he has no principles. You are right that some privately educated people have engaged with socialism and the union movements over the years. But I have no doubt Murphy is a simple ego-tripper ramping up the rhetoric to gain power, I’ll see him live in Darndale or Southhill and then come back and lecture the rest of us on driving the market economy from these shores.

          3. Eliot Rosewater

            That’s great, Ex Pat, but this Broadsheet post is about something completely different from the water charges. You get that, right? You understand that just because there were two marches, the marches didn’t actually have anything to do with each other?

          4. ex pat

            The estimate for this march is put at 2,000, it stretched from Kildare Street to Grafton Street, which if anything makes the estimate look conservative; in contrast another group that had a march in December had 32,040 people attend their rally according to the Irish Times but various elements sought to inflate this by a factor of 3:1.

            The comment was merely a congratulation to those who did march today and an implied comment on their dignity of their feet doing the talking; not a spin in sight.

  4. PPads

    It’s great to see such numbers turning out in solidarity with France but a question keeps popping up in my head about these fanatics. It may seem silly but I’m sure many are asking it. What is it they want? I mean, they are quite happy to murder innocents but what is their objective?

    1. ex pat

      IS are the richest terrorist organisation in history and became rich in the space of 12-18 months; the organisation is worth in the region of $2bn and was until the recent crash in crude oil prices netting between $2m-$4m a day depending on which estimates you believe.

      IS want the ability to liquidate the oil fields of Kurdistan which are some of the richest in the World; religion appears to be the hook to get a free army of very committed radicalised non-nationals to do their fighting and the payback is no restraint on their raping and pillaging the areas they conquer.

        1. ex pat

          Radicalised means normal decent muslim youth who fall under the influence of firebrand preachers who convince them to shed western and moderate eastern values to wage holy war.

      1. f_lawless

        thanks for the info there pat but what’s that got to do with the Charlie Hebdo attacks? IS never claimed responsibility for it rather some more obscure “Al Qaeda” faction from Yemen. Whether they actually orchestrated it or are just claiming responsibility in order to try and stay relevant we can’t say at this point.

    2. Milo

      They all have different pet issues (a bit like the “water” protesters) such as Israel or Iraq etc but fundamentally they object to our way of life. Have no doubt if Israel was abolished tomorrow and the U.S. Pulled out of the MIddle East they would find some reason – I mean, some of them actually state they want Spain back as it was once under the Moorish Caliph. So whatever reason of the day they give, until you convert to their extreme version of Islam you are a “fair” target.

      1. Formerly known as

        The bit of our way of life that many object to, is sending large armies to the Muslim countries, to kill many people.

        1. shitferbrains

          Right. And the Kuwaitis ,Northern Alliance, Libyans, Kurds,Yazidis and originally the Syrian opposition who asked for military aid. They’re not Muslims ?

      1. Eliot Rosewater

        To determine their objectives, you could look at how the groups originated and what their goals were in different geopolitical times. Pre Iraq I, most jihadists were content to focus their rage on superpowers like the Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan. When America turned their attention to Iraq, their interest was alerted, but it was really having foreign armies in Saudi Arabia that seemed to be the spark that set off the fire. Of course, it’s ‘evolved’ since then, but the radicalisation (the particularly nasty radicalisation that we have seen with these attacks and other similar ones in recent years) are, I would argue, related to Afghanistan and Iraq II. You also have similar radicalisation in Iran and their proxy wars in the middle east, but these are primarily geared towards fighting a power struggle with Saudi Arabia, but also, of course, the US, which is on their own list of enemies since interfering in Iranian affairs since the time of the installation of the Shah. Not being a dick in the region (so, you know, not invading countries whenever there is a made up ‘threat’) isn’t going to stop this radicalisation (cos it’s already happened) but it would help to dampen it over the next decade or so. Understanding the goals of organisations like this is somewhat pointless due to their nature. ISIS, and Al-Qaeda aren’t terrorist organisations as we understand them, with the strict hierarchy that we are used to. So, you will have some wanting to reclaim Al-Andalus and others wanting an Arabian Caliphate, and others wanting complete world domination. But stopping the radicalisation should be the first step, and to do that means letting the Middle East decide their own political development, as uncomfortable as that may be.

Comments are closed.