Martin McGuinness to be named as Sinn Féins candidate for the Presidential Election?

Sunnyisland

If any Irish person was talking to me and were saying they were a republican I would take it they were sinn fein or some group similar, Just saying.

Liam Byrne

realies wrote: »

If any Irish person was talking to me and were saying they were a republican I would take it they were sinn fein or some group similar, Just saying.

Just one last comment on this - that is why the use of the word (minus the quotes) gets to me so much, because it disables my ability to correctly state that I would be a true - genuine - Irish republican - someone who respects all of my countrymen (as long as they're not corrupt ****es who don't deserve it, of course) and yes, I'll admit that I occasionally get a little blinkered by the fact that they are preventing me from using the phrase correctly as its true meaning.

I'm torn as to whether I need to apologise for that fact, because it's not actually me that caused the confusion, and I shouldn't need to apologise for what I am in order to distinguish myself from those who support(ed) violence.

Foghladh

realies wrote: »

If any Irish person was talking to me and were saying they were a republican I would take it they were sinn fein or some group similar, Just saying.

So here's the pickle. If someone isn't a member of Sinn Féin, doesn't particularly care about a 32 county Republic but is resident within the Republic... what are they? Republican lite?

Mr.Micro

realies wrote: »

Was MMG not one of the architects of the GFA ? So without his involvement we wouldn't have it. And is not the president's role non political so no president can promote there political agendas ?

Yes, yes and yes but we are talking SF here, those boys can talk some and more.

crucamim

anymore wrote: »

Presumably he was exercising his democratic right to voice his own opinion. I presume we have gone beyond the stage of having to keep our voices hushed and our opinions to ourselves ?
By the way I was alive in 1969 and can remember it well.

And so can I. Nobody has been brought to trial for the burning of Bombay Street.

Wolfe Tone

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Just one last comment on this - that is why the use of the word (minus the quotes) gets to me so much, because it disables my ability to correctly state that I would be a true - genuine - Irish republican - someone who respects all of my countrymen (as long as they're not corrupt ****es who don't deserve it, of course) and yes, I'll admit that I occasionally get a little blinkered by the fact that they are preventing me from using the phrase correctly as its true meaning.

I'm torn as to whether I need to apologise for that fact, because it's not actually me that caused the confusion, and I shouldn't need to apologise for what I am in order to distinguish myself from those who support(ed) violence.

Sometimes its hard to tell if you are being serious or just simply taking the piss.

I don't particularly care what you call yourself, but I'm proud to say I am an Irish republican.

blahfckingblah

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Point taken, and the American model did spring to mind as another example of how the word has been bastardised.

I did let the use of "genuine" get the better of me earlier, as well as your own questioning of my highlighting that McGuinness has had a different definition of "fundraising" to mine, so if others will stop twisting words, then I'll stop pulling them up on it.

So what you are basically saying is you accepted the explaination of the use of the word genuine earlier but you went away and taught about it and came back to fight the same argument with a different point of view. What word should we use then?

Liam Byrne

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Sometimes its hard to tell if you are being serious or just simply taking the piss.

I don't know why, and that is far too serious an issue to be "taking the piss" with.

It's also in the Politics forum, not AH, which means I am very, very serious.

Liam Byrne

blahfckingblah wrote: »

So what you are basically saying is you accepted the explaination of the use of the word genuine earlier but you went away and taught about it and came back to fight the same argument with a different point of view. What word should we use then?

No idea why you got that impression. I challenged the use of "genuine" earlier because it was used to refer to someone who viewed it as OK to murder Irishmen and women.

crucamim

sparkling sea wrote: »

And couldn't care less where anyone was in 1969 we've left the past in the past (just like "Martin" - the likes of say the Omagh bombings is more likely to spark fury in us.

Why are the Omagh bombings more likely than the pogroms against Catholics to spark fury in you? I do not mind an Eireperson not being interested in Northern Irelandl whem Catholics are being murdered so long as he does not suddenly become interested when Catholics strike back at their oppressors.

steddyeddy

Republican means someone who follows the ideal that any member of the state can attain any position in the state, or something like that.

blahfckingblah

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No idea why you got that impression. I challenged the use of "genuine" earlier because it was used to refer to someone who viewed it as OK to murder Irishmen and women.

Yes even though I didn't use it to OK anything, which I then made clear to you twice and eventually you accepted it, do you want me to quote it to you?

Einhard

crucamim wrote: »

I do not mind an Eireperson not being interested in Northern Irelandl whem Catholics are being murdered so long as he does not suddenly become interested when Catholics strike back at their oppressors.

A what now?

Fighting against oppression is one thing; leaving bombs in pubs and on streets is another thing entirely.

Probably getting a tad off topic on this though.

Wolfe Tone

So what Liam is saying is that Marty is not a "genuine republican", but a genuine republican is someone who lives, works etc in the south and doesn't want unification and never thought it was "OK" to kill an Irishman or woman.

Lets take this to its logical conclusion. Pearse, Connolly and co are not republicans. Tom Barry was not a republican. Wolfe Tone was not a republican. Michael Collins was never a republican.

No, the only real republicans are people like Liam.

When someone makes arguments like that it is indeed hard to tell if they are serious or taking the piss.

Liam Byrne

blahfckingblah wrote: »

Yes even though I didn't use it to OK anything, which I then made clear to you twice and eventually you accepted it, do you want me to quote it to you?

You clarified that, and I accepted it.

However I still disagree with your assertion that someone who condoned and assisted in murdering fellow Irishmen could be a genuine republican - in the true meaning of the word.

I'm going to bow out, though, because between having to add quotes in order to allude to the alternative SF/IRA definitions and wanting to speak clearly, my head is addled and I could well confuse others and myself.

Bottom line is that I don't view him as a genuine republican (for reasons stated), I cannot accept his past actions in relation to innocent people - fellow Irishmen - and I don't want him as president of this state because he doesn't even call the state by its proper name.

Liam Byrne

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So what Liam is saying is that Marty is not a "genuine republican", but a genuine republican is someone who lives, works etc in the south and doesn't want unification and never thought it was "OK" to kill an Irishman or woman.

Lets take this to its logical conclusion. Pearse, Connolly and co are not republicans. Tom Barry was not a republican. Wolfe Tone was not a republican. Michael Collins was never a republican.

No, the only real republicans are people like Liam.

When someone makes arguments like that it is indeed hard to tell if they are serious or taking the piss.

You left out the word "innocent" in all of that biased waffle.

I can be a realist and accept violence targetted at an opposition.

But by deliberately leaving out the word innocent you put a complete spin on what you know well I stand for.

That is dirty debating and completely unacceptable.

And as a result, you can go back on ignore.

Wolfe Tone

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You left out the word "innocent" in all of that biased waffle.

I can be a realist and accept violence targetted at an opposition.

But by deliberately leaving out the word innocent you put a complete spin on what you know well I stand for.

That is dirty debating and completely unacceptable.

And as a result, you can go back on ignore.

So the actions of the men I listed never brought about the death of civilians? Civilians die in war don't they? Michael Collins ordered the deaths of civil servants and civilians didn't he for one?


You started this Liam, take it to the logical conclusion. Were those men republicans or not?


Oh and Liam, I didn't leave "innocent" out. You never used it.

goat2

lugha wrote: »

I'd agree. I think Michelle Gildernew is a much better bet. Plus McGuinness, like any candidate, will have his past thoroughly scrutinised. And there is a thing or three there that will put many off!

i know she is a bit young for the park. but i was hoping triosa ferris would have been put forward, she would have been a brill candidate. Mcginess is also a good candidate, triosa would have been my favourite,

blahfckingblah

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You clarified that, and I accepted it.

However I still disagree with your assertion that someone who condoned and assisted in murdering fellow Irishmen could be a genuine republican - in the true meaning of the word.

I'm going to bow out, though, because between having to add quotes in order to allude to the alternative SF/IRA definitions and wanting to speak clearly, my head is addled and I could well confuse others and myself.

Bottom line is that I don't view him as a genuine republican (for reasons stated), I cannot accept his past actions in relation to innocent people - fellow Irishmen - and I don't want him as president of this state because he doesn't even call the state by its proper name.

He is a genuine republican why not? all your talk of bias and your post begins with "I still disagree with your assertion that someone who condoned and assisted in murdering fellow Irishmen could be a genuine republican" what would you have said if I praised him for kickstarting a new beginning for NI etc.????
He is a genuine republican who not only supports a republic but wants to be the president of it. Can't really get more republican (by your definition) than that.

Wolfe Tone

goat2 wrote: »

i know she is a bit young for the park. but i was hoping triosa ferris would have been put forward, she would have been a brill candidate. Mcginess is also a good candidate, triosa would have been my favourite,

She is too young to run for president isnt she?


I hope Gildernew takes over as deputy first minister.

steddyeddy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You left out the word "innocent" in all of that biased waffle.

I can be a realist and accept violence targetted at an opposition.

But by deliberately leaving out the word innocent you put a complete spin on what you know well I stand for.

That is dirty debating and completely unacceptable.

And as a result, you can go back on ignore.

A lot of it was against innocent victims which I cant accpet but a lot was against the ruc and sectarian louts who were far from innocent.

Liam Byrne

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Oh and Liam, I didn't leave "innocent" out. You never used it.

Please don't resort to out-and-out lies.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Why is he a "genuine" republican ? Because he's been involved in the violence and bombing ?

Anyone who is OK with orchestrating the murder of innocent Irishmen is not a "republican".

anymore

crucamim wrote: »

And so can I. Nobody has been brought to trial for the burning of Bombay Street.

Nor have some bodies been located for proper burial.

paky

i fail to see what the argument is here. martin mcguinness did what any other right thinking individual would of done if their community was underthreat by an apartheid state.
mcguinness is a hero because of hios past actions. they may not of been democratic but were legitimate due to the fact that it was a state of war

blahfckingblah

Liam now you're changing the definition you gave out to people for bastardising make your mind up

Wolfe Tone

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Please don't resort to out-and-out lies.

Apologies I missed that. However my other points still stand, care to respond?

Sunnyisland

Anyone who is OK with orchestrating the murder of innocent Irishmen is not a "republican".Liam byrne

Would that not rule out the founding figures of fianna fail and fianna gael as republicans,Yet they be well up there in the year 2016 commemorating men who in there fight for Irish freedom innocent civilians did get murdered.

steddyeddy

paky wrote: »

i fail to see what the argument is here. martin mcguinness did what any other right thinking individual would of done if their community was underthreat by an apartheid state.
mcguinness is a hero because of hios past actions. they may not of been democratic but were legitimate due to the fact that it was a state of war

Agreed

RandomName2

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So what Liam is saying is that Marty is not a "genuine republican", but a genuine republican is someone who lives, works etc in the south and doesn't want unification and never thought it was "OK" to kill an Irishman or woman.

Lets take this to its logical conclusion. Pearse, Connolly and co are not republicans. Tom Barry was not a republican. Wolfe Tone was not a republican. Michael Collins was never a republican.

No, the only real republicans are people like Liam.

When someone makes arguments like that it is indeed hard to tell if they are serious or taking the piss.

Correct me if I am wrong Liam but what I understood from what he said was that planting bombs is not a part of being a true republican is.

This is debatable in the Irish context however as planting bombs is (by now) synonymous with 'Irish republicanism' - and, of course, 'Marty' is a part of that tradition. However, Pearse, Connolly, Tom Barry and Wolfe Tone didn't plant bombs; but using their names in some sort of sweeping generalisation of two hundred years of political ideas concerning Irish self-determination and justifiable means of achieving it is going to produce some... inconsistencies.

sparkling sea

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Sometimes its hard to tell if you are being serious or just simply taking the piss.

I don't particularly care what you call yourself, but I'm proud to say I am an Irish republican.

Have to admit I feel the same when you are talking about the Republic of Ireland - the country that I love.

Do you seriouly think that most Irish people would actually want to change it - just take a look at the votes SF gets in the Republic as an indicator - people have enoungh to worry about without some outdated historical dead project being rehashed over and over,

And why would any Northern Irish person in their right mind want to come near us - we are virtually peasants again - these people have their own cultural heartache and pain and you expect them to want to take on ours as well. Seriously you need to get real here - there is nothing to suggest that the majority in either country wants or even cares about land anymore