Sinn Fein cancels bomber commemoration

Natterjack from Kerry

James Brown wrote: »

This thread is about a family being bullied for political reasons.

They weren't bullied. They showed their bad judgement in thinking the death of a terrorist should some how be worth commemorating, and felt the disapproval of society, for whom such a concept is abhorrent. So they are anachronisms, and not in line with moral and civil accepted behaviour in Ireland today. Wider Ireland so rightly then condemns them.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Anytime I hear the term "Crown Forces" my bigot antenna goes from off to on.

Remember the time the Real IRA issued a statement when they murdered Lyra McKee? They blamed it on "Crown Forces". Crown Forces being the PSNI! :rolleyes:

Just listen to this Terrorist, whatabout his way through the interview. What is striking is how often the same terms and phrases and the whataboutery is used as talking points on these types of threads.

Says the lad who whatabouted to the Irish Army.

James Brown

James Brown wrote: »

This thread is about a family being bullied for political reasons.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Shelved plan to salute 1996 bomber lays bare Irish fault lines

Sinn Fein councilor for Gorey Fionntán Ó Súilleabháin, a teacher at a local gaelscoil, had been promoting Sinn Féin online commemoration to mark 25 years since the PIRA bomber's death.

The Sinn Fein family?

They'd know all about bullying alright.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Says the lad who whatabouted to the Irish Army.

Are you still upset about the time I brought up the posts which proved that you supported the murder of innocent civilians by the PIRA, including children?

James Brown

ecoli3136 wrote: »

The Sinn Fein family?

They'd know all about bullying alright.

No, the O'Brien family. SF got involved to help promote it, the family did not ask SF.
The family was bullied by chancers who use people, victims and pretend moralising to try score cheap political shots.
The same people abuse the survivors of the mother and baby homes, want a state commemoration for the RIC/Tans, would wear a poppy in commemoration of killers, bullied the family.

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

This thread is about a family being bullied for political reasons.

but its not , is it

its a propaganda stunt that ironically blew up in their faces


again


still nothing from the family just the party spokesman


this really has been covered quite clearly already a few times

James Brown

wicklowstevo wrote: »

but its not , is it

its a propaganda stunt that ironically blew up in their faces


again


still nothing from the family just the party spokesman


this really has been covered quite clearly already a few times

If the story is made up i still see folk are happy to pick the parts they want to believe. Very dishonest.

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

No, the O'Brien family. SF got involved to help promote it, the family did not ask SF.
The family was bullied by chancers who use people, victims and pretend moralising to try score cheap political shots.
The same people abuse the survivors of the mother and baby homes, want a state commemoration for the RIC/Tans, would wear a poppy in commemoration of killers, bullied the family.

once again ?

if anyone is bullying and exploiting the family it seems to be sf

nothing apart from the word for sf party that the family wanted anything to do with this

been asked for a load of times now and only thing produced is the same quotes from the party

James Brown

wicklowstevo wrote: »

once again ?

if anyone is bullying and exploiting the family it seems to be sf

nothing apart from the word for sf party that the family wanted anything to do with this

been asked for a load of times now and only thing produced is the same quotes from the party

You want the family, who stepped away due to online bullying to come out and make a statement?
We know they stepped away from organising a commemoration for their son. Thats a fact.
Why?
If you can speak like it didn't happen that way, maybe you've quotes?

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

If the story is made up i still see folk are happy to pick the parts they want to believe. Very dishonest.

if the story is made up ?

by who ?

the fella giving the interviews ?


surely if that's true its a disgusting exploitation of a family that has already suffered the loss of a son to ira incompetence and exploitation

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

You want the family, who stepped away due to online bullying to come out and make a statement?
We know they stepped away from organising a commemoration for their son. Thats a fact.
Why?

how is it a fact ?
it only came from one wholly untrustworthy source
that's the point loads of posters have made here to endless deflection from the party faithful

I have yet to see any comment from the family ,
in fact a poster here who knows the family says that they want nothing to do with it which sounds a lot more realistic to me and the majority here ?

James Brown

wicklowstevo wrote: »

if the story is made up ?

by who ?

the fella giving the interviews ?


surely if that's true its a disgusting exploitation of a family that has already suffered the loss of a son to ira incompetence and exploitation

I'm not the one claiming its made up.
You people are using the dead son to score points against the shinners. Its disgusting behaviour as done with the Quinn family as done with Lyra McKee. People using families and others to try get political digs. Shameless and completely hypocritical.

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

I'm not the one claiming its made up.
You people are using the dead son to score points against the shinners. Its disgusting behaviour as done with the Quinn family as done with Lyra McKee. People using families and others to try get political digs. Shameless and completely hypocritical.

why did you bring it up then james ?

which people are you people ? can you clarify ? I certainly don't need sf points

victims of terrorism have family's , does that surprise you ?

im sure the quinn and mckee family's have stronger views than me , just like Robert McCarthy , all those disappeared folks warrington victims familys .

maybe the o brien family in gorey feel the same ? they certinally aren't coming out in support of sf , could be they just want to be left alone

James Brown

wicklowstevo wrote: »

why did you bring it up then james ?

which people are you people ? can you clarify ? I certainly don't need sf points

victims of terrorism have family's , does that surprise you ?

im sure the quinn and mckee family's have stronger views than me , just like Robert McCarthy , all those disappeared folks warrington victims familys .

maybe the o brien family in gorey feel the same ? they certinally aren't coming out in support of sf , could be they just want to be left alone

I didn't. I responded to claims it was made up. Claims like you are suggesting also.
'You people' are those who believe its made up because it suits. If its made up why deicide the parts you like aren't? Same story after all.
Yes, that's my impression. I'm speaking on the family being bullied. Couldn't care less about SF getting hassle, its par for the course.
Wouldn't the O'Brien family be victims too? Why bully a family lost their son?
The family were bullied by hypocritical people who use families and abuse families of the dead.

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

I didn't. I responded to claims it was made up. Claims like you are suggesting also.
'You people' are those who believe its made up because it suits. If its made up why deicide the parts you like aren't? Same story after all.
Yes, that's my impression. I'm speaking on the family being bullied. Couldn't care less about SF getting hassle, its par for the course.
Wouldn't the O'Brien family be victims too? Why bully a family lost their son?
The family were bullied by hypocritical people who use families and abuse families of the dead.

aw now james your wilfully ignoring any point that is made and rehashing it the way you would want to be

no point in discussing anything like that

your just propagating what people say about a certain political party and its online army and only bear ignoring

end of the road

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

I'm not sure thats quite accurate. But shamed, or saw the light that memorials for terrorists are not acceptable to the vast majority of people. Its as it should be. Such scum should rightly be forgotten. It would seem this episode has made some people aware of how unacceptable such a mindset is today.

no they were bullied.
bullied by what was quite likely a politically motivated campaign.
they had nothing to be ashamed of or see the light on, they were simply wanting to commemorate their dead son.
it must be horrific for parents to lose a child especially in the circumstances in which this family lost theirs.
absolutely disgraceful how they were treated and there is no defending it, shame on those who bullied them and shame on those who defend their bullying.
lowest of the low.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

They aren't terrorists though.
The IRA and its apologists are free to warp reality to their disturbed view. But they cannot redefine words. I can see how it would suit the bending of arguments that make no sense to normal people speaking the Queen's English, to be able to do so. But once you do that, the argument itself collapses rather.

incorrect, terrorism is or at least was at the very heart of the existance of the BA.

markodaly wrote: »

Are you still upset about the time I brought up the posts which proved that you supported the murder of innocent civilians by the PIRA, including children?

you didn't bring up any such posts, you brought up random posts and then claimed he supported the killing of civilians and that the posts supported that claim when they didn't.
there were no such posts by him condoning the killing of civilians.

maccored

markodaly wrote: »

Anytime I hear the term "Crown Forces" my bigot antenna goes from off to on.

Remember the time the Real IRA issued a statement when they murdered Lyra McKee? They blamed it on "Crown Forces". Crown Forces being the PSNI! :rolleyes:

Just listen to this Terrorist, whatabout his way through the interview. What is striking is how often the same terms and phrases and the whataboutery is used as talking points on these types of threads.

worst voiceover ever. why are they using a voiceover?

maccored

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

They aren't terrorists though.
The IRA and its apologists are free to warp reality to their disturbed view. But they cannot redefine words. I can see how it would suit the bending of arguments that make no sense to normal people speaking the Queen's English, to be able to do so. But once you do that, the argument itself collapses rather.

course they are - they terrorised people in the north. The British Army and its apologists are free to warp reality to their disturbed view

Natterjack from Kerry

maccored wrote: »

course they are - they terrorised people in the north. The British Army and its apologists are free to warp reality to their disturbed view

To be taken seriously, you must use the English language in its widely accepted way. Redefining words is an admission that you cannot support you argument. I could say the Irish flag is green, black and orange. Which it is, if when I say the word black to mean the colour that reflects all visible wavelengths and is the lightest colour. But the rest of the worls will regard someone saying the Irish flag has the colours green black and orange as a nutter.
I appreciate such language twisting is part and parcel of SF/IRA speak, but unfortunately for them, it only works among themselves as similarly deluded people. The rest of the world laughs.

Whatisthisnow

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

To be taken seriously, you must use the English language in its widely accepted way. Redefining words is an admission that you cannot support you argument. I could say the Irish flag is green, black and orange. Which it is, if when I say the word black to mean the colour that reflects all visible wavelengths and is the lightest colour. But the rest of the worls will regard someone saying the Irish flag has the colours green black and orange as a nutter.
I appreciate such language twisting is part and parcel of SF/IRA speak, but unfortunately for them, it only works among themselves as similarly deluded people. The rest of the world laughs.

I did say these threads would get busy now the Shinners are joint top of the Red C polls

Natterjack from Kerry

Whatisthisnow wrote: »

I did say these threads would get busy now the Shinners are joint top of the Red C polls

Well done. If you can provide your original quote, I think you get a prize. The rest of boards are in awe of you.

blanch152

wicklowstevo wrote: »

aw now james your wilfully ignoring any point that is made and rehashing it the way you would want to be

no point in discussing anything like that

your just propagating what people say about a certain political party and its online army and only bear ignoring

There is no point debating.

The facts are clear.

SF said the family organised it, yet there is no evidence to support this. In fact, everything that is on record from the family is to reject SF and their toxic ideology.

maccored

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

To be taken seriously, you must use the English language in its widely accepted way. Redefining words is an admission that you cannot support you argument. I could say the Irish flag is green, black and orange. Which it is, if when I say the word black to mean the colour that reflects all visible wavelengths and is the lightest colour. But the rest of the worls will regard someone saying the Irish flag has the colours green black and orange as a nutter.
I appreciate such language twisting is part and parcel of SF/IRA speak, but unfortunately for them, it only works among themselves as similarly deluded people. The rest of the world laughs.

All of that is relevant to the conversation how? Waffle sir, that is waffle.

James Brown

wicklowstevo wrote: »

aw now james your wilfully ignoring any point that is made and rehashing it the way you would want to be

no point in discussing anything like that

your just propagating what people say about a certain political party and its online army and only bear ignoring

I answered you quite clearly. You seem to want to play games.
Family should be left commemorate their son. They were attacked on this thread and elsewhere not just shinners.
As I said people pretending to be outraged attacking the family were the same ones claiming to have all the feels for the Quinns.
Not sure whats confusing you. Don't really care

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

There is no point debating.

The facts are clear.

SF said the family organised it, yet there is no evidence to support this. In fact, everything that is on record from the family is to reject SF and their toxic ideology.

You cite facts then engage in conspired fantasy.
If you don't believe the story why engage at all? Seems its not believable but good enough to pick the bits you can criticise

end of the road

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

To be taken seriously, you must use the English language in its widely accepted way. Redefining words is an admission that you cannot support you argument. I could say the Irish flag is green, black and orange. Which it is, if when I say the word black to mean the colour that reflects all visible wavelengths and is the lightest colour. But the rest of the worls will regard someone saying the Irish flag has the colours green black and orange as a nutter.
I appreciate such language twisting is part and parcel of SF/IRA speak, but unfortunately for them, it only works among themselves as similarly deluded people. The rest of the world laughs.

this is only the case in wishful thinking and not in reality, where you are completely incorrect on all points.

wicklowstevo

James Brown wrote: »

I answered you quite clearly. You seem to want to play games.
Family should be left commemorate their son. They were attacked on this thread and elsewhere not just shinners.
As I said people pretending to be outraged attacking the family were the same ones claiming to have all the feels for the Quinns.
Not sure whats confusing you. Don't really care

so still nothing from the family just the local sf propagandist blowing his own foot off

ok that's cleared it up.

hardly needed such a long thread to drag that of ye now did it

Natterjack from Kerry

maccored wrote: »

All of that is relevant to the conversation how? Waffle sir, that is waffle.

It explains how the IRA are terrorists, and armed forces of the British government are not terrorists. Denying either divorces one from rational conversation as it requires creating a new version of the English language - exposing the flaw in the denial. I am sure it is readily fully understood but all those not with minds undistorted into IRA/SF speak. Guessing you would be an SF supporter ?

markodaly

https://twitter.com/OnThisDayPIRA/status/1365967558336208898

Reading electrical meters makes one an accomplice to the Crown Forces?

Bubbaclaus

markodaly wrote: »

https://twitter.com/OnThisDayPIRA/status/1365967558336208898

Reading electrical meters makes one an accomplice to the Crown Forces?

I don't see the relevance to this thread.