Sinn Fein cancels bomber commemoration

Natterjack from Kerry

McMurphy wrote: »

Something or someone that was part of a problem, was also part of the solution?

No shît Sherlock.

The British Army was not part of the problem. It could have done better and been a more effective part of the solution. But it only had a role in respect of the problem instigated by republican terrorism.

McMurphy

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you someone who doesn't know if they're coming or going.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

The British Army were certainly part of the troubles, .

13 minutes later....

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

The British Army was not part of the problem.

Natterjack from Kerry

McMurphy wrote: »

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you someone who doesn't know if they're coming or going.



13 minutes later....

Most readers will be more than sharp enough however, to understand the difference between the words problem, and troubles, and understand correctly the point I made.

CrazyFather1

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Most readers will be more than sharp enough however, to understand the difference between the words problem, and troubles, and understand correctly the point I made.

Wouldn't worry about it

Some people have no interest in a discussion on these threads, just interested in twisting posts to suit their narrative. Just ignore and move on. I had no issue with the posts and plenty more won't either

McMurphy

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Most readers will be more than sharp enough however, to understand the difference between the words problem, and troubles, and understand correctly the point I made.

The cohort of readers who may agree with you, have already shown themselves to be just as utterly clueless as you are on the subject, with double talk and contradictions, so keeping that in mind , you'll presumably be ok with me giving more credence to my wheaten terriers opinion on the troubles in the north of the island.

"The British army were part of the northern Irish troubles, but not part of the problem."

What in actual fcuk are you blathering about.

CrazyFather1

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Most readers will be more than sharp enough however, to understand the difference between the words problem, and troubles, and understand correctly the point I made.

Just to note, expect posts attacking you. Trying to demean your comment and you personally. It is standard practise around here. Just ignore and move on.

markodaly

Gatling wrote: »

They executed innocent people ,and killed more civilians than the British army ever did .

But hey nothing beat a bit of one sided propaganda

McMurphy wrote: »

I'd say you have deluded yourself into believing that too.

Reread your words slowly again to yourself, and then stop posting absolute scutter about stuff you clearly know nothing about.

Scutter? You mean the truth?
Gattling is 100% correct here.

So let's just kill that one stone dead shall we?



Irish Republicans like the PIRA killed 722 innocent civilians, about 400% MORE than the British Security services.



They also killed more Catholics than British Security services.

This is all from https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/index.html

For someone who posts a lot about this stuff, clearly, you don't know half of what you should know. Getting found out, more like it.

The PIRA and their cousins are not the freedom fighters some make them out to be, they are mostly made up of unrepentant murderers and killers, who dress up their 'blood sacrifice' like Padraig Pearse would go on about, under the cloak of being nominal killers of innocent men, women and children.

The vast majority of people are disgusted by them and their actions, yet decades later we have a new generation, spouting myth, revisionism, lies and fake news under the guise, that it was all the British fault, that violent Irish Republicanism killed 722 innocent civilians.

Fuascailteoir

markodaly wrote: »

Scutter? You mean the truth?
Gattling is 100% correct here.

So let's just kill that one stone dead shall we?



Irish Republicans like the PIRA killed 722 innocent civilians, about 400% MORE than the British Security services.



They also killed more Catholics than British Security services.

This is all from https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/index.html

For someone who posts a lot about this stuff, clearly, you don't know half of what you should know. Getting found out, more like it.

The PIRA and their cousins are not the freedom fighters some make them out to be, they are mostly made up of unrepentant murderers and killers, who dress up their 'blood sacrifice' like Padraig Pearse would go on about, under the cloak of being nominal killers of innocent men, women and children.

The vast majority of people are disgusted by them and their actions, yet decades later we have a new generation, spouting myth, revisionism, lies and fake news under the guise, that it was all the British fault, that violent Irish Republicanism killed 722 innocent civilians.

You omitted the fact that the British security forces were using loyalist paramilitaries to murder civilians on their behalf

Eric Cartman

markodaly wrote: »

Scutter? You mean the truth?
Gattling is 100% correct here.

So let's just kill that one stone dead shall we?



Irish Republicans like the PIRA killed 722 innocent civilians, about 400% MORE than the British Security services.



They also killed more Catholics than British Security services.

This is all from https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/index.html

For someone who posts a lot about this stuff, clearly, you don't know half of what you should know. Getting found out, more like it.

The PIRA and their cousins are not the freedom fighters some make them out to be, they are mostly made up of unrepentant murderers and killers, who dress up their 'blood sacrifice' like Padraig Pearse would go on about, under the cloak of being nominal killers of innocent men, women and children.

The vast majority of people are disgusted by them and their actions, yet decades later we have a new generation, spouting myth, revisionism, lies and fake news under the guise, that it was all the British fault, that violent Irish Republicanism killed 722 innocent civilians.

Never saw those figures, SFIRA were responsible for almost 2/3rds of all the deaths , if you were irish in the irish security services, civilian or even a provo yourself your biggest risk of death came from the ra.

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

i dont think they should.....them lads died fighting oppression,same as people centuries before them.....

The same lads who planted the Omagh bomb?
The same lads who planted the Warrington bomb?
The same lads who murdered Lyra McKee?

All of them fighting 'oppression'?

Tell us, how oppressed was Gorey, Co. Wexford in 1996? :rolleyes:

CrazyFather1

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Never saw those figures, SFIRA were responsible for almost 2/3rds of all the deaths , if you were irish in the irish security services, civilian or even a provo yourself your biggest risk of death came from the ra.

I posted on another thread, even at the start of the troubles the catholic community didn't support the PIRA. Never did during the troubles.

So much for the great "Freedom Fighters" of the catholics when a huge percentage wanted nothing to do with them

markodaly

Gatling wrote: »

So that excuses the murder , maiming , intimation ,rapes , punishment beating and drug dealing , extortion today in Catholic areas by the ra

When people dress up wonton murder as 'some cause' they can justify anything.
Same as the Nazi's, same as ISIS, the same as any regime who brainwash their people enough to carry out the unspeakable deeds.

What happened in the North, in relation to the PIRA is textbook stuff, about brainwashing. Flags, rebel songs, the folklore of an old bygone generation, a 'cause'.... from a sociological point of view, interesting stuff, apart from when you find out al the hurt and bloodshed it has caused.

What we saw recently with ISIS and the like, are their ability to groom young impressionable down and outs, to carry out unspeakable crimes. They learn many a trick from the likes of the PIRA, who groomed young people to be their lackeys.

What we see now online, is just another fight to win the battle of fake news, that the war was all about 'Civil Rights' not about a United Ireland. Of course its historical rubbish.

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

Scutter? You mean the truth?
Gattling is 100% correct here.

It's no surprise to me that you've jumped in feet first to get a reply in without even realising what you're getting into.

I eve told Gatling to reread his own brainfart SLOWLY to himself, which you should have also taken on board.

They executed innocent people ,and killed more civilians than the British army ever did

Let's think about this for a nanosecond, the IRA killed more civilians than the British Army ever did.

Are you sure this is the hill you want to perish on mark?

markodaly

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

I posted on another thread, even at the start of the troubles the catholic community didn't support the PIRA. Never did during the troubles.

So much for the great "Freedom Fighters" of the catholics when a huge percentage wanted nothing to do with them

They never had the support of the community. They may have some support, but it was tiny and insignificant, as voting trends and records show.

Remember, the Provos didn't even recognise the 'Free State' or the Dail.
They didn't recognise the Gardai as the official police force of the Republic.
They didn't recognise the Irish Defence Forces as the official Army of Ireland, instead, THEY were the army of Ireland!! Can you believe that $hite!! Talk about inflated egos!


We all know about Republican Sinn Fein, the idiot splinter group that still doesn't recognise either the Dail or Stormont? Well, that was Sinn Fein, prior to 1986!

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

Let's think about this for a nanosecond, the IRA killed more civilians than the British Army ever did.

Are you sure this is the hill you want to perish on mark?

Oh, you mean you want to widen the scope to include the BA circa all of its history, circa 300-400 years?

Yeap, the usual dancing on a pinhead stuff from you, alright. Whatabout away about something insignificant.

We all know the context here is what happened in the North, but sure whatabout away about India, or Kenya, or some other conflict to make yourself look and feel a bit better.

At the end of the day, the facts are that Irish Republicans killed far far more innocent civilians in the Troubles than the British Security forces ever did.
That IS a fact.
Either own it or whatabout away.

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

Oh, you mean you want to widen the scope to include the BA circa all of its history, circa 300-400 years?

Yeap, the usual dancing on a pinhead stuff from you, alright. Whatabout away about something insignificant.

We all know the context here is what happened in the North, but sure whatabout away about India, or Kenya, or some other conflict to make yourself look and feel a bit better.

At the end of the day, the facts are that Irish Republicans killed far far more innocent civilians in the Troubles than the British Security forces ever did.
That IS a fact.
Either own it or whatabout away.

I repeat, I told Gatling to slowly reread his complete and utter scutter - he posted under his Username back slowly to himself, and you jumped blindly in.

Am I to take the above we some kind of concession that the British Army have killed countless more civilians than the Provos ever did?

That'll do me. Don't post scutter, and it won't be called out, don't jump in blindly to defend the scutter and you won't come across as defending scutter.


British army. Great bunch of lads.

CrazyFather1

markodaly wrote: »

They never had the support of the community. They may have some support, but it was tiny and insignificant, as voting trends and records show.

Remember, the Provos didn't even recognise the 'Free State' or the Dail.
They didn't recognise the Gardai as the official police force of the Republic.
They didn't recognise the Irish Defence Forces as the official Army of Ireland, instead, THEY were the army of Ireland!! Can you believe that $hite!! Talk about inflated egos!


We all know about Republican Sinn Fein, the idiot splinter group that still doesn't recognise either the Dail or Stormont? Well, that was Sinn Fein, prior to 1986!

It was interesting at the very start of the troubles you would expect the catholics wanted the PIRA, especially if you listen to the people on here who said the PIRA was only started because it was necessary. But the catholics in Northern Ireland didn't want them at all.

Normally you would have a freedom fighting army who have a majority of the population supporting them, not in this case. If Sinn Fein and the PIRA actually listened to the people they would have shut down straight away, not continue to blow up women/men/children, innocent women/men/children for years afterwards.

The shocking part was 71% of those killed where not police/army etc. Just random people. Not a very good "army" the PIRA turned out to be

Scratchly

McMurphy wrote: »

That'll do me. Don't post scutter, and it won't be called out,

Speaking of posting scutter. Maybe yourself and your backwards RA head pals could take your own advice and stop bending over backwards and tying yourself in knots defending terrorist scumbags who murdered innocent people?

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

Am I to take the above we some kind of concession that the British Army have killed countless more civilians than the Provos ever did?

In the Toubles? No, the facts speak for themselves.

Do you acknowledge the fact that Irish Republicans killed way more innocent civilians than the British Security forces, or are you going to slide off and talk about something else, maybe Maria Cahill for example, your go-to copy and paste tanget.

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

In the Toubles? No, the facts speak for themselves.

Do you acknowledge the fact that Irish Republicans killed way more innocent civilians than the British Security forces, or are you going to slide off and talk about something else, maybe Maria Cahill for example, your go-to copy and paste tanget.

Mark, listen.

You jumped in blindly to defend a brainfart post. That's your own (and Gatlings) issue and not mine.

The IRA did not, under any circumstances "kill more civilians than the British army ever did". That's a blatant lie, it's not true, it's a fallacy etc etc.

I haven't done the research, but I'd be fairly certain if we were to drill down into things, they've (British army) killed countless more civilians on the island of Ireland than the Provos ever did too.

Is that the road you'd like to travel next?

markodaly

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

It was interesting at the very start of the troubles you would expect the catholics wanted the PIRA, especially if you listen to the people on here who said the PIRA was only started because it was necessary. But the catholics in Northern Ireland didn't want them at all.

Normally you would have a freedom fighting army who have a majority of the population supporting them, not in this case. If Sinn Fein and the PIRA actually listened to the people they would have shut down straight away, not continue to blow up women/men/children, innocent women/men/children for years afterwards.

The shocking part was 71% of those killed where not police/army etc. Just random people. Not a very good "army" the PIRA turned out to be

Again, the historical revisionism is strong in many Irish Republican quarters.

The Nationalist community, Catholics and even the IRA themselves welcomes, yes WELCOMED, the deployment of the British Army to the streets of Northern Ireland.

However, the egos of the Old IRA heads were embarrassed by this, that the BA had to step in and protect nationalists when they failed to do so.

So..... what to be done? Yes, start taking potshots at the BA and call for an armed struggle for a UI, to finish off the work the rising started!

Again, the PIRA campaign had nothing, zero, nada to do with human/civil rights. It was all a war for a UI. End of story.

This is all fact in the public record from any IRA interviews from the early 70s.

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

Mark, listen.

You jumped in blindly to defend a brainfart post. That's your own (and Gatlings) issue and not mine.

The IRA did not, under any circumstances kill more civilians than the British army ever did. That's a blatant lie, it's not true, it's s fallacy.

I haven't done the research, but I'd be fairly certain if we were to drill down into things, they've (British army) killed countless more civilians on the island of Ireland than the Provos did too.

Is that the road you'd like to travel next?

Ah, I see you want to go down the road of a tangent and widen the scope of the argument so it suits you best, but we all know the scope of the debate, that is the troubles.

The fact you can't even admit that Irish Republicans killed more civilians than the British Security forces in the context of the Troubles, says.... a lot!

But, sure let's talk about Kenya, or 1798, or the Norman Invasion of Ireland or any of that craic, to try and slide away from that one salient fact..... because you are fooling no one but yourself.

Bobeagleburger

McMurphy wrote: »

Mark, listen.

You jumped in blindly to defend a brainfart post. That's your own (and Gatlings) issue and not mine.

The IRA did not, under any circumstances "kill more civilians than the British army ever did". That's a blatant lie, it's not true, it's a fallacy etc etc.

I haven't done the research, but I'd be fairly certain if we were to drill down into things, they've (British army) killed countless more civilians on the island of Ireland than the Provos ever did too.

Is that the road you'd like to travel next?

Whats the breakdown of deaths? Interested to see it?

Always had provos down as causing 60% of deaths. Can't remember where I read that but will check

hatrickpatrick

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Nice post, but can you tell me what exactly in the SF manifesto for the election or everything they have said since would make you believe they know how to resolve the issue? I haven't seen anything that would suggest they have a clue. A lot of Huff&puff but nothing else.

• Public housing on public land, wherein price is determined by a calculation with regard to ability to pay and quality of life, and profit simply doesn't factor in to the equation.
  
• Ending the privatisation of housing on public land which reduces the state's ability to undercut market rents. No more "regenerations" which require councils to sell 50% of the new development at market rates or rents, which are already unacceptably high.
  
• Meaningful rent controls which aren't rife with loopholes like the current ones and operate to reverse recent rent hyoerinflation, not merely halt it at already unacceptable levels.
  
• Blocking the purchase of housing stock by foreign investment funds who care about nothing but milking people dry.
  
• Banning co-living developments, which I realise the current government has now done, but was refusing to at the time of the election.

These are the radical policies young people want. It's not just about fiddling wit the current system, it's about radically overthrowing it and replacing it with an entirely different, socialist model of housing.

I'm going to paraphrase something in which was posted on Reddit regarding rent increases in an Canada city recently, which sums up exactly how young people feel about FF and FG's housing policies. Simply put, young people do not want to live in a world of Rentier capitalism anymore, and out of the big three parties, SF is the only one ideologically opposed to this model of society.

The problem is you’re thinking of a house as a place where people live and build families.

This is wrong. A house is simply an investment vehicle to be flipped frequently in search of ever inflating gains, so that you can build enough equity to retire with some degree of dignity. If you’re lucky you die before exhausting all of that stored value.

You’re thinking of a community as a place where individuals and families grow together over time, and because they all have a long term stake in that place, they pull together to advocate for their best interests, like a healthy local ecosystem for example.

This is wrong. Communities are simply containers for investments, temporary stops on a never ending road to continuous gains. Social bonds are unnecessary since you will have shiny new neighbours within 4-6 years anyhow. And everyone has their own snowblower, so what’s the point in talking to people.

You’re thinking of commuting as way to get to work. This is wrong. Commuting is the key to making this charade work by slowly acclimatising workers to longer and longer commutes because no one lives where they work anymore, and furthermore it’s ridiculous for anyone to expect to be able to.

These notions are all wrong. As soon as everyone has an all electric, self-driving pod that they’re financing against their mortgage, so they can video chat with their kids over breakfast, all the above concerns will collapse. In addition, if you find yourself on the wrong end of the housing market at something point, you can live in the pod.

Rent out the trunk for a little bit extra every month.

Gatling

Must have touched an uncomfortable nerve with the plastic brigade ,

Natterjack from Kerry

markodaly wrote: »

In the Toubles? No, the facts speak for themselves.

Do you acknowledge the fact that Irish Republicans killed way more innocent civilians than the British Security forces,

One doesnt acknowledge facts, as such. They simply are, by definition. The statement you make, is beyond refutation. Being without interpretation, gradation, and being independent of viewpoint, it needs no acknowledgement.

99nsr125

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 PIRA member died when the bomb he was carrying on a London bus, blew up prematurely (as IRA bombs were known to do) thankfully killing him, but unfortunately wounding several civilians, one of whom later died from complications.

Note that the planned commemoration was to do with the bomber, not the civilian (who was a Dubliner) who died.

Since controversy has arisen about the planned commemoration, it has now been silently cancelled. However the incident has raised questions about Sinn Fein's position in relation to past terrorism.

Can you not see the equivalency between you celebrating the man's death in your post and they're proposed celebration.

McMurphy

Gatling wrote: »

Must have touched an uncomfortable nerve with the plastic brigade ,

Na - you just posted scutter and were shown up for talking through your hoop that's about the long and short of it chief.

Tokyo

Mod: McMurphy, you seem completely unable to post without making it a personal dig at those around you. Don't post in the thread again.

James Brown

Gatling wrote: »

By British and the Ra just as bad in cases worse because it's still going on to this day .

But ,but ,but yes we know what the Brits did we also know what the Ra did and are still doing .

So what's the current excuse ?

If you've been reading this thread, the IRA, the 'bad' IRA. Not the one that carried out murders and atrocities, the one that carried out atrocities and murders. Excuse for what you say? FF/FG housing policy, Varadkar leaking to a pal, the mother and baby homes....the IRA is the response.
A shinner pointed out and the ERSI and public accounts Committee agree, that the new affordable housing scheme will drive up pricing.
A shinner asked MM why he won't move forward with victims of the troubles/conflict getting their due as signed up to. In each case, if you've been following the thread, the excuse is the IRA.
This thread was about SF Commemorating a bomber. Turned out it was his family so now both the shinners and his family are being attacked. Quality.