Taoiseach shocked and dismayed at Sinn Fein TDs tweet on IRA attacks

doublejobbing 2

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I suppose you'd say the same about the Americans celebrating the killing of Bin Laden vs people celebrating 9/11 then?

The attempts at moral relativism when it comes to Northern Ireland are f*cking ridiculous. One side was fighting to maintain its dominance over the other side. They are automatically the scumbags in that equation. No other factors are relevant - fighting to maintain your coercive power over the other side makes you the bad guys, in any context or conflict. It's as simple as that.


The entire loyalist/British "cause" came about because one side didn't want to give the other equal democratic rights. How anyone can talk as if there's any equivalence is utterly beyond me. Any attacks against the British Army were fully justified in the context of an entire demographic being systematically oppressed by that army and those who backed them.

Christ, it's such a ludicrous situation. What the IRA did to civilians was atrocious and celebrating that is atrocious. Attacks against Crown forces of any kind are an entirely different kettle of fish and it's ridiculous to conflate the two. They were fair game up until the signing of the GFA, and rightly so. They were committing acts contrary to all conventions of human decency through their activities in Northern Ireland - not even because of the actions themselves, but because of the regime of oppression they sought to maintain.

It's just f*cking stupid. Would you equate pro and anti apartheid militants in the same breath as if their actions carried the same moral consequences? How about the pro and anti slavery factions in the American Civil War?

It's a painfully stupid debate. Loyalism is rooted in hatred and supremacy. F*ck 'em. You cannot equate that with people who fought to free themselves and their people from the same aforesaid hatred and supremacy.

Ah here.

Let me break it down for those in the cheap seats.

Making cracks about Arlene Fosters personal appearance = great craic

Doing same about Mary Lou= old boys club misogyny

A FG or FF TD to ever drop the N bomb = a hanging offence

Gerry Adams actually doing this = Gerry is basically an honorary black person via his civil rights work

Golf.Society Dinner with 100 people = out of touch **** putting the nation at risk

The core of the SF SF Dublin Brigade travelling North to attend the biggest funeral these islands have seen since Princess Di's= a small socially distanced gathering of family and close friends that SF had nothing to do with regarding attendance

And dont even start on their endorsement of the BLM protests.

SF are a banter party with the most emotionally sensitive members of the big 3.

Harry Palmr

When did the Warrenpoint attack get rebranded?

Hamsterchops

Harry Palmr wrote: »

When did the Warrenpoint attack get rebranded?

Is it Narrowpoint, or something? Anyway I remember the day very well, shock and horror here in Dublin, great sadness & disgust with total and utter contempt for those responsible for all the loss of life on that day.

Ash.J.Williams

An Claidheamh wrote: »

No it wasn’t

It was stating a fact

The two ambushes were similar

That tweet was nothing out of the ordinary, no different to any second DUP tweet

British MPs regularly remember their “heroic soldiers” and say, not very nice things about the foreigners they were “civilising”


In fact, shortly after that tweet you had the
Dee Ewe Pay whinging about government commemorations of Kilmichael,
any statement from FF, the Republican Party on that?

MM and the Irish media will do anything to avoid questions about his spineless lack of action regarding Finucane’s murder

let the british be dicks, we should aim higher

Normal One

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Is it Narrowpoint, or something? Anyway I remember the day very well, shock and horror here in Dublin, great sadness & disgust with total and utter contempt for those responsible for all the loss of life on that day.

I wonder did your part of Dublin feel the same when Kilmichael happened too? Do you wear your poppy with pride?

Hamsterchops

Normal One wrote: »

I wonder did your part of Dublin feel the same when Kilmichael happened too? Do you wear your poppy with pride?

OK then, at least I know whom I'm engaging with.
I am talking exclusively about the horrors of that day in 1979 when the Provisional IRA killed so many, hence Stanley's Tweet was rightly attacked from all sides. Dublin Central, South side + every where was appalled at the murders in 79.

I guess you are possibly coming from a bomber-friendly Provo perspective? (Please clarify). With regard to your poppy jibe, well I make no apologies for my families history in WWI & WWII.

gourcuff

are people condemning Kilmichael now? wow, hyper revisionism ..

weldoninhio

He's apologised. Game over. It's not as if he leaked confidential documents to a friend. Apologies cover everything now don't they??

Cluedo Monopoly

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Is it Narrowpoint, or something? Anyway I remember the day very well, shock and horror here in Dublin, great sadness & disgust with total and utter contempt for those responsible for all the loss of life on that day.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/soldier-who-lived-through-narrow-water-attack-still-haunted-by-what-he-saw-38435197.html

Mr Caughey said it was a scene of "total carnage". He added: "Everything was on fire. My legs were on fire. But this didn't register with me. I just looked around.

"There were bits of bodies everywhere, the only way I can describe it as being like something out of an abattoir. I couldn't see anyone alive.

"The majority of the guys were in parts, rather than whole people.

Everything was on fire. The smell of burning flesh still haunts me to this day.

"Suddenly the reality hit me that my legs were burning and I couldn't move.

He was 18 at the time. 1 of 2 survivors.

The IRA committed their atrocity at Mullaghmore on the same day. Those heroes killed 2 80 year olds and 2 children.

James Brown

Hamsterchops wrote: »

OK then, at least I know whom I'm engaging with.
I am talking exclusively about the horrors of that day in 1979 when the Provisional IRA killed so many, hence Stanley's Tweet was rightly attacked from all sides. Dublin Central, South side + every where was appalled at the murders in 79.

I guess you are possibly coming from a bomber-friendly Provo perspective? (Please clarify). With regard to your poppy jibe, well I make no apologies for my families history in WWI & WWII.

You keep talking about Dublin like you represent it's views. You don't.
His tweet wasn't attacked by all sides. Not the kind of thing I tweet but I'd no issue with it.

We might be neighbours actually.

tipptom

Hamsterchops wrote: »

OK then, at least I know whom I'm engaging with.
I am talking exclusively about the horrors of that day in 1979 when the Provisional IRA killed so many, hence Stanley's Tweet was rightly attacked from all sides. Dublin Central, South side + every where was appalled at the murders in 79.

I guess you are possibly coming from a bomber-friendly Provo perspective? (Please clarify). With regard to your poppy jibe, well I make no apologies for my families history in WWI & WWII.

If your family has a history of terrorism in the British army bullying small nations then you certainly should make apologies and hang your head in shame.

Hamsterchops

Bowie wrote: »

You keep talking about Dublin like you represent it's views. You don't.
His tweet wasn't attacked by all sides. Not the kind of thing I tweet but I'd no issue with it.

I worked and lived in Dublin at the time as I still do, so I witnessed the mood from work, while on the bus, from family, from the media, so although I don't represent all views (probably some RA-heads thrilled on the day) I was here and I witnessed the vibe. Most normal Irish people were horrified.

Bowie wrote: »

We might be neighbours actually.

God I hope not.

tipptom

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I worked and lived in Dublin at the time as I still do, so I witnessed the mood from work, while on the bus, from family, from the media, so although I don't represent all views (probably some RA-heads thrilled on the day) I was here and I witnessed the vibe. Most normal Irish people were horrified.



God I hope not

Perfectly sums up the west Brits living in Ireland

Normal One

That reminds me, I was in Tucson Arizona back in 2003/4 in a taxi. The driver said he was from Kashmir and when he realised I was Irish, refused to take any fare because we "took care of Mountbatten".

Hamsterchops

tipptom wrote: »

Perfectly sums up the west Brits living in Ireland

Why are you saying that tipptom?

So I was against the murders and you supported them, what can I say?

James Brown

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I worked and lived in Dublin at the time as I still do, so I witnessed the mood from work, while on the bus, from family, from the media, so although I don't represent all views (probably some RA-heads thrilled on the day) I was here and I witnessed the vibe. Most normal Irish people were horrified.

That's very black and white. Quite likely there were people didn't celebrate it but saw it as an inevitability of conflict.
If you recall the hunger strikes you'd have witnessed a wide variety of takes on the situation up north.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

God I hope not.

Don't worry I feel I'd know if we lived close.

tipptom

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Why are you saying that tipptom?

So I was against the murders and you supported them, what can I say?

You say your family has been in the British army for over a hundred years so you are more intimate with supporting murderers than i am

hatrickpatrick

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

Ah here.

Let me break it down for those in the cheap seats.

I'mma do the same and respond individually.

Making cracks about Arlene Fosters personal appearance = great craic

Doing same about Mary Lou= old boys club misogyny

Doing either as a form of public debate is moronic and uncivil.

A FG or FF TD to ever drop the N bomb = a hanging offence

Gerry Adams actually doing this = Gerry is basically an honorary black person via his civil rights work

I'd argue that it's scummy in either case. Again, just me.

Golf.Society Dinner with 100 people = out of touch **** putting the nation at risk

The core of the SF SF Dublin Brigade travelling North to attend the biggest funeral these islands have seen since Princess Di's= a small socially distanced gathering of family and close friends that SF had nothing to do with regarding attendance

I have repeatedly condemned this idiocy on these very threads.

And dont even start on their endorsement of the BLM protests.

I'd endorse those protests while agreeing that they should have waited until they were legal in the context of COVID restrictions. Holding them when they were held, the way they were held, was wrong.

SF are a banter party with the most emotionally sensitive members of the big 3.

What has literally any of this got to do with equating IRA violence with British Army violence? Were you responding perhaps to a different poster and clicked the wrong reply button? O_o

hatrickpatrick

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

let the british be dicks, we should aim higher

Ah now come on, we really shouldn't be shooting them at all anymore in the GFA-era :pac:

In all seriousness, commemorating our side in The Troubles should not be considered "being a dick". The oppressed minority had (and always has, in my view) every right to react violently when suppressed with violence.

The only thing that matters as far as right and wrong in Northern Ireland is that the Troubles began when the RUC ambushed a peaceful civil rights march and beat the absolute sh!t out of peaceful protesters to deter further protests against state-backed, systematic discrimination and oppression.

They and the rest of the Crown Forces were fair game from that moment onwards until the signing of the GFA. They started what was in essence a mini civil war and they were 100% the aggressors of the entire conflict. The aggressor is fair game for being retaliated against, by pretty much any standard of human morality apart from "turn the other cheek" Catholic doctrine which unfortunately has never worked in the history of this island.

facehugger99

I always love when the mask slips from the Shinners.

A party of scumbags.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ah now come on, we really shouldn't be shooting them at all anymore in the GFA-era :pac:

In all seriousness, commemorating our side in The Troubles should not be considered "being a dick". The oppressed minority had (and always has, in my view) every right to react violently when suppressed with violence.

The only thing that matters as far as right and wrong in Northern Ireland is that the Troubles began when the RUC ambushed a peaceful civil rights march and beat the absolute sh!t out of peaceful protesters to deter further protests against state-backed, systematic discrimination and oppression.

They and the rest of the Crown Forces were fair game from that moment onwards until the signing of the GFA. They started what was in essence a mini civil war and they were 100% the aggressors of the entire conflict. The aggressor is fair game for being retaliated against, by pretty much any standard of human morality apart from "turn the other cheek" Catholic doctrine which unfortunately has never worked in the history of this island.

You are right, commemorating our side in The Troubles should not be considered "being a dick", it is far worse than that.

Firstly, we didn't have a side in the Troubles. The IRA never spoke or killed or bombed or sexually abuse or kneecapped in my name.

Secondly, respect needs to be shown to the people who are still alive maimed and crippled by IRA actions, not to mention the people permanently scarred by the loss of their loved ones in many hideous and horrible actions by the IRA.

So commemorating anything from the Troubles is just wrong.

hatrickpatrick

blanch152 wrote: »

You are right, commemorating our side in The Troubles should not be considered "being a dick", it is far worse than that.

Firstly, we didn't have a side in the Troubles. The IRA never spoke or killed or bombed or sexually abuse or kneecapped in my name.

Secondly, respect needs to be shown to the people who are still alive maimed and crippled by IRA actions, not to mention the people permanently scarred by the loss of their loved ones in many hideous and horrible actions by the IRA.

So commemorating anything from the Troubles is just wrong.

Many of the IRA's actions were absolutely atrocious and I have never shied away from that as you well know.

Doesn't change the fact that there were two macro sides in the conflict - oppressor and oppressed. Putting the two on equal moral footing is bullsh!t and always will be.

There would have been no Troubles if the Unionist/Protestant side hadn't decided they were better than everyone else and deserved more votes, disproportionate representation and disproportionate allocation of national resources. There would have been no Troubles if the armed Crown forced who backed that side hadn't responded to peaceful civil rights marches with extreme violence.

Everything which came after is, in my view, irrelevant to apportioning morality in this conflict. The conflict began because one demographic refused to relinquish its power over the other. Any demographic which does that, for any reason, at any point in history, is "the bad guy". The oppressed demographic is not.

It's extremely black and white as far as I and many, many other people are concerned.

Does that justify any atrocity or crime committed by the IRA? No.

Does it mean that any atrocity or crime committed by the IRA is orders of magnitude less immoral than any action committed by the loyalist side or its state-backed supporters? Absolutely yes. No ifs. No buts. No nuance. One side fought to maintain dominance over the other and doing that is fundamentally evil in any and all contexts, regardless of any other factors.

Hamsterchops

tipptom wrote: »

You say your family has been in the British army for over a hundred years so you are more intimate with supporting murderers than i am

No, what I said was that like many Irish people I too had family in WWI and WWII. Navy & RAF.

bpmurray

I shouldn't be, but I am always surprised at how quickly the electorate forgets the rabid bigotry of both sides in NI. SF showed their true colours in the form of Stanley's tweet, and from the other side another tweet implying that anyone providing legal advice to republicans should meet the same fate as Pat Finucane. The BBC has just published a report that there are still 12500 card-carrying members of the UDA and UVF - I imagine the number of republican paramilitaries is similar.

Let's be perfectly clear about this: SF are part of the extra-judicial republican movement involved in extortion, punishment beatings, kneecappings, etc. They are the perfect example of, as facehugger called them, scumbags. They are not fit for government.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Many of the IRA's actions were absolutely atrocious and I have never shied away from that as you well know.

Doesn't change the fact that there were two macro sides in the conflict - oppressor and oppressed. Putting the two on equal moral footing is bullsh!t and always will be.

There would have been no Troubles if the Unionist/Protestant side hadn't decided they were better than everyone else and deserved more votes, disproportionate representation and disproportionate allocation of national resources. There would have been no Troubles if the armed Crown forced who backed that side hadn't responded to peaceful civil rights marches with extreme violence.

Everything which came after is, in my view, irrelevant to apportioning morality in this conflict. The conflict began because one demographic refused to relinquish its power over the other. Any demographic which does that, for any reason, at any point in history, is "the bad guy". The oppressed demographic is not.

It's extremely black and white as far as I and many, many other people are concerned.

Does that justify any atrocity or crime committed by the IRA? No.

Does it mean that any atrocity or crime committed by the IRA is orders of magnitude less immoral than any action committed by the loyalist side or its state-backed supporters? Absolutely yes. No ifs. No buts. No nuance. One side fought to maintain dominance over the other and doing that is fundamentally evil in any and all contexts, regardless of any other factors.

The IRA never spoke or acted for me, a southern nationalist.

Your warped history of the times is shocking, for someone like me who actually lived through the 1970s and 1980s.

buried

blanch152 wrote: »

The IRA never spoke or acted for me, a southern nationalist.

Your warped history of the times is shocking, for someone like me who actually lived through the 1970s and 1980s.

How is it warped history? Everything he said here is true

There would have been no Troubles if the Unionist/Protestant side hadn't decided they were better than everyone else and deserved more votes, disproportionate representation and disproportionate allocation of national resources. There would have been no Troubles if the armed Crown forced who backed that side hadn't responded to peaceful civil rights marches with extreme violence.

Its your view of history that is warped blanch, a view that's akin to something like believing that the IRA grew out of the ground all by itself like some make of Satanic plant.

hatrickpatrick

blanch152 wrote: »

The IRA never spoke or acted for me, a southern nationalist.

I never suggested that they did. I am suggesting that anyone who supported the nationalist side in any way is orders of magnitude less of a scumbag than anyone who supported the unionist side in any way.

I am not defending IRA atrocities. I am attacking those who put them on equal moral footing with Crown Force atrocities. That's all. One was worse than the other for no reason other than the cause that side was fighting for.

Your warped history of the times is shocking, for someone like me who actually lived through the 1970s and 1980s.

Explain how my view of history is shocking?

Am I wrong in suggesting that pre-GFA, Northern Catholics were systematically discriminated against through rigged electoral systems and apartheid-esque state-backed bigotry?

Am I wrong in suggesting that the Troubles began in the late 1960s when several civil rights marches were ambushed by members of the RUC who beat the sh!t out of peaceful protesters? Am I wrong in suggesting that the footage of these incidents was broadcast all over the world at the time?

Am I wrong in suggesting that when the British Army entered the conflict, it fundamentally took the side of the aforementioned aggressors?

Which of these three facts is, in your view, incorrect?

Wibbs

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Which of these three facts is, in your view, incorrect?

None of them. I agree with you 100%. The Troubles and all the tragedy and death that came of it didn't magic themselves into reality. It was a centuries long simmering antagonism, born of plantation by a foreign colonising force that came to the fore in what was most certainly an apartheid state on this island.

My sole issue with the tweet is akin to Blazers on the first page of the thread. That is it's not exactly helpful or appropriate for a TD to come out with that stuff. We need to build a bridge and get over it, or that crazy crap could well kick off again. We've had peace on this island for decades. At times an uneasy peace to be sure and that's the danger. Especially in the wake of who the fcuk knows will happen post Brexit in the long term and how it will affect the North and ultimately us.

hatrickpatrick

Wibbs wrote: »

None of them. I agree with you 100%. The Troubles and all the tragedy and death that came of it didn't magic themselves into reality. It was a centuries long simmering antagonism, born of plantation by a foreign colonising force that came to the fore in what was most certainly an apartheid state on this island.

My sole issue with the tweet is akin to Blazers on the first page of the thread. That is it's not exactly helpful or appropriate for a TD to come out with that stuff. We need to build a bridge and get over it, or that crazy crap could well kick off again. We've had peace on this island for decades. At times an uneasy peace to be sure and that's the danger. Especially in the wake of who the fcuk knows will happen post Brexit in the long term and how it will affect the North and ultimately us.

I agree with all of this. The tweet was moronic. The reason I waded in was because people were comparing pro-Republican sentiment with pro-Loyalist sentiment, and I object to that on the simple basis that fundamentally, what one side fought for was morally wrong and what the other side fought for was morally right. The ways in which both sides fought for those things isn't relevant in my view to the fact that conflating one with the other is utter stupidity.

It's no different to the US civil war in my view - commemorating or celebrating one side in that conflict is rightly viewed as tacit support for racism and slavery. Similarly, commemorating or celebrating the Loyalist side in The Troubles is tacit support for discrimination. That's why there is, in my view, absolutely no comparison between the two and those coming out with "how can anyone be ok with this and not ok with pro-Crown Forces sentiment?" sh!te are being intentionally disingenuous. They are pretending the two sides in the conflict are morally equivalent when anyone with any notion of right and wrong knows that they are not.

EDIT: In simple terms, it's like comparing someone who murders for sexual gratification with someone who kills a home intruder who is about to attack their family. Obviously one can argue that killing is wrong and that neither should be celebrated for their actions, but for anyone to claim that cheering a homeowner for killing a burglar is on equal moral fotting with cheering a pervert who murders for pleasure, is batsh!t insane. And those posters know that when they try to stir the pot in this way.

tdf7187

timmyntc wrote: »

Point scoring. Polls recently indicated SF on highest support ever(?) so naturally MM will have to use whatever he can to attack them.

Warrenpoint & Kilmichael were no different really.




We glorify murder all the time when we commemorate the Rising and various other skirmishes around Civil war era.
How is Warrenpoint (or Brian Stanleys tweet mentioning same) any different?

There is certainly a gaping hypocrisy in the view of recent Irish history presented by the Zanu FF/FG establishment.

Anyone fighting against forces of occupation pre 1922 - freedom fighter, nationalist, founder of the state, officially designated national hero
Anyone fighting against forces of occupation post 1922- terrorist, murderer, reprobate

At least the likes of Ruth Dudley-Earnest and Eoghan Harris are not hypocrites. They hate all types of Irish nationalism, and love all types of Brit imperialism.