A discussion on SF,the IRA,and some views on opinions about their relationship

Villain

mycroft wrote:

Then why raise it, and why constently defend SF and SF's actions? Again you cannot try to pretend to play devils adovcate your political bias is too obvious, drop the pretence.

Where have I defended Sinn Fein's actions on this matter?? All I have done is offer my opinion as to why people don't want to go to the PSNI

mycroft wrote:

You've mentioned "other" murders in the north commited by others, who are these others we're not talking about? You keep your position so intentially murky we have to draw inference to what you're getting it. It's convient for you.

I mentioned other murders committed by all people including the IRA, and the only reason I mentioned them was in relation to Cork's comments and all I said was they don't get as much media attention. It's not murky your just spinning it.

mycroft wrote:

And you sidestepped the Mc Guinness warning them not to get into politics but dragging them up at the Ard Feis.

They weren't dragged to the Ard Fheis they were invited and they attended are you critising the McCartney sisters for attending??

mycroft wrote:

Again diluting your position down, you may not have used the word "but" but theres always a subclause, a qualifier "What about other murders/what about their politics etc etc etc......

Read my posts MyCroft there is no but's and once again the only time I mentioned otehr murders were in relation to Cork's post and media coverage.

mycroft wrote:

You don't slate the IRA, you offer mild meek criticism with one hand and then toe SF party line with the other. You offer platitutes of support but theres always a but Its disingenious.

To call the mild mannered calls for justice while blaming everyone else for the lack of arrests, suggesting that the SF councillor in the bar really didn't see anything, why hasn't devine made a statement, and of course you understand why people don't come forward, and then suggest your primary interest in this matter is Mc Cartney justice, is comical.

You just can't seperate my views from Sinn Fein's and other supporters, I support Sinn Fein that doesn't mean I support them on everything and as I have said hundreds of times here, I don't support the IRA in any shape or form.

mycroft wrote:

While at the same time you understand how people don't go to the PSNI
:rolleyes:

Yes I do I understand why, do I support the people who won't go to the PSNI?NO

Anyone that knows anything about the Nationalist community in the North would understand why, understanding and supporting are 2 very different thing mycroft.

mycroft wrote:

So just out of curiousity how many of SF's positions are you going to "understand" but "not support", till you finally stop supporting them?

I don't know, as long as I believe they can bring an end to the IRA violence and offer the nationalists peace through truly democratic means while striving to unite the island I will continue to support them.

Sand

Oh now that's a little doubly loaded. Whatever your opinions on the connections between SF and the RA or your views on the effective fusion of the two at higher levels, SFIRA aren't a registered political party (and personally I'm rather glad of that as I prefer my terrorists to wander about out of fatigues and wearing a shiny pair of shoes). Sinn Fein are though, so that might be a better question, especially given that the quoted post referenced "Sinn Fein".

Sinn Fein are the IRA. Im just calling a spade a spade.

If people want to play games and pretend you can put Sinn Fein into one bucket, and put the IRA into the other thats their own perogative - I wont indulge them.

One interesting weakness in that viewpoint is that the killers of McCartney loudly proclaimed it was IRA business, the IRA offered to shoot the IRA men....and Adams suspended them from the SF party as they are SF "election" workers - i.e. their local community enforcers. The same goes for Snot boys SF "electoral" workers who were also an IRA punishment gang and spying unit. What bucket would you put those men into again, the SF one or the IRA one? SFIRA is the most fitting description for the provo scum.

I hope Irish1 wont ignore the question though, does he vote for them?

Villain

Sand I have voted for Sinn Fein in the past along with other parties and I may do the same in the future. Can you prove Sinn Fein are the IRA or is that accusation just your opinion.

Sand

Sand I have voted for Sinn Fein in the past along with other parties and I may do the same in the future

So then you do support them and their actions - in the most meaningful fashion, you vote for them to get into government as you approve their outlook and actions. End of.

Villain

Sand wrote:

So then you do support them and their actions - in the most meaningful fashion, you vote for them to get into government as you approve their outlook and actions. End of.

Going by that logic I also support FG, FF and Labour and their actions as I have voted for them in the past!!!

A Dub in Glasgo

Sand wrote:

Sinn Fein are the IRA. Im just calling a spade a spade.

If people want to play games and pretend you can put Sinn Fein into one bucket, and put the IRA into the other thats their own perogative - I wont indulge them.

One interesting weakness in that viewpoint is that the killers of McCartney loudly proclaimed it was IRA business, the IRA offered to shoot the IRA men....and Adams suspended them from the SF party as they are SF "election" workers - i.e. their local community enforcers. The same goes for Snot boys SF "electoral" workers who were also an IRA punishment gang and spying unit. What bucket would you put those men into again, the SF one or the IRA one? SFIRA is the most fitting description for the provo scum.

I hope Irish1 wont ignore the question though, does he vote for them?

This is unreal

You are actually calling the spade a shovel. Many confuse them as the same thing but they are in fact 2 different things.

Then your almost juvenile name calling of Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Then your name calling of anyone in SF (or supporter of SF) as scum

Who do you vote for?

county

well sinn fein are scum,and i my opinon any one who supports sinn fein agrees with terrorisim.and why are the british and american goverments so soft with sinn fein/ira compared to al queda,terrorists are terrorists

A Dub in Glasgo

Murder is murder is murder... remember that one?

Villain

county wrote:

well sinn fein are scum,and i my opinon any one who supports sinn fein agrees with terrorisim.and why are the british and american goverments so soft with sinn fein/ira compared to al queda,terrorists are terrorists

So in your opinion the majority of nationalists support terrorism??

Thats nearly as bad as MT trying to tell us the majority of nationalists are deluded!

bonkey

irish1 wrote:

Thats nearly as bad as MT trying to tell us the majority of nationalists are deluded!

He did nothing of teh sort. He tried to tell you that Sinn Fein supporters were deluded and then, as now, you misrepresented Sinn Fein supporters as making up "the majority of nationalists"

And yet here you go again, saying "nationalists" when weve already clarified that you were more talking about sonme sub-group like nationalists who live in the North of Ireland and know whats really going on.

I mean...seriously...if you're going to take people like Sand to task over what you perceive as consistent inaccuracy in his terminology....don't you owe it to yourself to not do the same thing?

jc

Villain

Sorry bonkey that was a typo I should have said he said the majority of Northern Nationalists are deluded. Which IMO is just a crazy statement.

Rock Climber

irish1 wrote:

Sorry bonkey that was a typo I should have said he said the majority of Northern Nationalists are deluded. Which IMO is just a crazy statement.

It's nice to know some people learn from boards because when you used the term "majority of nationalists" back on page 5, it wasnt a typo and now it is so ergo you have learned which is good

On the central point it's impossible to know what the intentions of every voter who votáils Sinn Féin is in NI.
Some are voting because the rep is very good.
Some are voting because of the IRA and some are voting tactically because its the green rep that has the best chance of winning in a tight constituency.

Villain

Rock Climber wrote:

It's nice to know some people learn from boards because when you used the term "majority of nationalists" back on page 5, it wasnt a typo and now it is so ergo you have learned which is good

On the central point it's impossible to know what the intentions of every voter who votáils Sinn Féin is in NI.
Some are voting because the rep is very good.
Some are voting because of the IRA and some are voting tactically because its the green rep that has the best chance of winning in a tight constituency.

Well in my mind when I said the majority of nationalists I meant up north, I just didn't claify it.

I agree with you rock climber like any party SF get votes from different people for different reasons. I think MT's statement that people who vote for SF are deluded is total nonsense. Just because you don't like what people choose doesn't make them deluded, I mean given the chance I would never vote for the DUP, do I believe that the people who do vote for them are deluded? Not at all, they have beliefs and I respect them I just don't share them.

bonkey

irish1 wrote:

I think MT's statement that people who vote for SF are deluded is total nonsense.

As is your perogative.

Just because you don't like what people choose doesn't make them deluded,

No, but its not a question of not liking it.

Its a question of looking at what issues people are putting as priorities.
I guarantee that very very few people will say that supporting killers is a reason they vote for Sinn Fein. In fact, I'd say an awful lot of Sinn Fein voters would take offence at the suggestion that this is what they're doing.

Unfortuntely, Sinn Fein remains the political wing/arm/sister of the IRA. The two are currently intextricably linked. You cannot show support for one without showing support for the other. You mightn't intend to, but thats the effect, and deciding that effect doesn't exist is just as arguably a delusion as the notion that the two organisations are, in fact, completely seperate.

It wouldn't be much different to expressing support for the Plu Plux Party in the US (were it to exist) and insist that this in no way indicates any sort of support for their sister organisation...even though they'd be inextricably linked as well.

Tactical voting - as you put it - is all well and good. We all have to make choices in who we vote for, deciding how acceptable/unacceptable each aspect of the candidate is and coming to a concludion as to who is the best match.

Voting for Sinn Fein either involves deciding either that they are not linked to the IRA, that their links to the IRA don't really mean anything, or that the actions of the IRA aren't really that objectionable a thing to be linked to. Or it could involve just ignoring the issue entirely.

I'm open to other options, but I can't see which of those four couldn't be delusional from certain perspectives.

Which leads nicely into...

they have beliefs and I respect them I just don't share them

MT has expressed a belief that most Sinn Fein supporters are delusional.

So apparently calling a belief ridiculous or total nonsense counts as respect.
Tell me...what would be disrespectful on that scale?

jc

Villain

bonkey wrote:

MT has expressed a belief that most Sinn Fein supporters are delusional.

So apparently calling a belief ridiculous or total nonsense counts as respect.
Tell me...what would be disrespectful on that scale?

jc

i meant I don't share the beliefs of people who vote for the DUP but i respect their decision, I don't respect MT's statement that anyone who votes for SF are delusional.

bonkey

Ah. So only smoe beliefs and decisions deserve respect....

...which immediately offers a validation of MTs position, as he no doubt feels that the decision to support SF is not one worthy of respect, just as you feel his delusional belief is not one worthy of respect.

No?

jc

Villain

bonkey wrote:

Ah. So only smoe beliefs and decisions deserve respect....

...which immediately offers a validation of MTs position, as he no doubt feels that the decision to support SF is not one worthy of respect, just as you feel his delusional belief is not one worthy of respect.

No?

jc

Bonkey, I will never respect a statment where someone is insulted because of the party they support no matter what party that is. If that means I respect some of of his beliefs and not others fine.

As I said I respect his decision not to vote for Sinn Fein but I don't accept his sweeping insult of SF voters.

bonkey

OK, so when you talked about respecting beliefs, its not beliefs you meant, but rather decisions on who to vote for.

I just want to be clear, because this type of difference in the way we both seem to use the English language seems to be at the root of an awful lot of the disagreements that we're having.

jc

Villain

Well I respect a lot of his opinions just not this one, so it's not a simple case of respecting only who he votes for.

I mean I respect your opinions but if you turned around and said anyone who votes for FF is deluded I would have to say I don't respect that statement and I find it insulting towards people who have decided to vote for FF. I will respect anyones opinion but i won't respect sweeping insults made against large numbers of people just because of who they vote for.

bonkey

I will respect anyones opinion but i won't respect sweeping insults made against large numbers of people just because of who they vote for.

So what you mean is that you'll respect anyone's opinion as long as you don't find it insulting or sufficiently disagreeable that you won't respect it? Seems to me thats still exactly the stance that MT is taking regarding support for Sinn Fein. He just has - as we all do - different opinions to you or I as to what is and is not sufficiently insulting/disagreeable.

Me....I respect peoples' right to hold an opinion. Whether or not I respect the opinion itself is a non-issue in that respect. So I find MT entitled to believe Sinn Fein supporters are deluded, and Sinn Fein supporters are entitled to support Sinn Fein. Whether or not I agree with them has nothing to do with it.

jc

mycroft

irish1 wrote:

Where have I defended Sinn Fein's actions on this matter?? All I have done is offer my opinion as to why people don't want to go to the PSNI



I mentioned other murders committed by all people including the IRA, and the only reason I mentioned them was in relation to Cork's comments and all I said was they don't get as much media attention. It's not murky your just spinning it.

Lets look at your comments on this thread.....

your first two meal mouthed down with this sort of thing

comment 3

"Well I don't hold much respect if any for the IRA either but I think most people accept in this case that the IRA had nothing to with the Murder other than that members (now ex-members) of the group were involved."

So you don't have much respect for the IRA you just vote for their political wing?

"IMO thats just an unfounded accusation."
Comment 18

Is defence of the IRA providing a handy shield in the form of it's structure

Comment 21
"I never said that the IRA hadn't intimidated people I just said that IMO MyCroft's statement was just an unfounded accusation as he didn't back his claim up.

I'm quite sure there is members within the IRA who would intimidate witnesses."

Is a piece of backpeddling by you, now you're saying that you're sure that there are members just my accusation is an unfounded one.

Comment 28
"Show me where I said I was pretty sure the IRA are intimadating???"

Now you're back peddling on your back peddling

And in the same comment

"There is a difference between saying the IRA as an organisation would intimate people and saying members of the group would."

Now it's IRA members but not the IRA as a group.

Comment 37
"You raised the accusation I said it was unfounded because you didn't provide any proof. I said imo I believe members would intimate I never said I had proof they did or are currently intimadating"

Now it's you believe they could you don't know if they are, but it's possible but unfounded

Comment 58
"o if a person tells a lie once then everything he says after that has to be as suspicious???"

is a defence of Adams and IRA membership

Comment 70
"I see Congressman Peter King has upset the government by saying that the murder of Mr Mccartney was the sort of "pub dispute that could have happened in any city in the US"

Again why raise this, unless you feel the killing the aftermath didn't have wider politcal ramifications

Comment 92
"Sinn Fein asked people to go to what authority they felt comfortable with, if you knew anything about the nationalists community in the north you would know they don't trust the PSNI. I don't expect you to understand that but I would have thought you might at least accept it. As for the Sinn Fein Candiidate she said she didn't see anything how can you be sure she did?? "

Again a defence of SFs actions and the SF councillor.

same comment

"Sinn Fein wanted to ammend the motion that is why they voted against it."

Defence of SF action.

and

"Any evidence at all here or you just making this up??"

In reference to the IRA's habit of making witnesses disappear in the 80s/90s., thats a Defence

"Has the PSNI not questioned Mr Devine can he not give some evidence that could be used to charge someone?

Shifting the blame to the victim

And comment 107
"Thats one isolated incident Cork, a truly tragic one but many many murders have occured up North and got very little media attention down South."

Thats the classic now I'm not defending this but......

Seriously Irish1 this is a fecking joke by now.

They weren't dragged to the Ard Fheis they were invited and they attended are you critising the McCartney sisters for attending??

You were the one assuring us that Mc Guinness was warning them to stay out of party politics, but then sf invite them to their rally, it's an odd warning if that was it's direction and then they invited them to the rally, unless the warning was for something else. Like be careful of whose party politics you avoid/snub

Read my posts MyCroft there is no but's and once again the only time I mentioned otehr murders were in relation to Cork's post and media coverage.

I have read all your posts and have drawn my conclusion from that opinion. You keep demanding people read your posts. and then drawing these conclusions telling us to re read them is insulting our intelligence.

You just can't seperate my views from Sinn Fein's and other supporters, I support Sinn Fein that doesn't mean I support them on everything and as I have said hundreds of times here, I don't support the IRA in any shape or form.



Anyone that knows anything about the Nationalist community in the North would understand why, understanding and supporting are 2 very different thing mycroft.

Reall from where I stand you're doing both.

I don't know, as long as I believe they can bring an end to the IRA violence and offer the nationalists peace through truly democratic means while striving to unite the island I will continue to support them.

So basically despite all the evidence to the contray?

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Going by that logic I also support FG, FF and Labour and their actions as I have voted for them in the past!!!

I think the nubb of some peoples issue with SF here is that the other 3 parties don't give credence and/or support for the IRA's past campaign.
They don't invite afaik convicted murderers to their árdfheiseanna and laud them as heroes.
They don't like it when accusations of criminal funding aren't investigated and put at least somewhat to bed.Theres been no comment or suit for damages or investigation by SF afaik into the w/end SW allegations for instance, whereas with the other parties such things are dealt with relatively quickly either via sackings law suits or tribunals etc.
Voting for parties with such baggage is at the root of what some posters here find objectionable and that quite frankly is understandable.
At the end of the day one could laud Sinn Féin for getting the IRA to stop bombing and shooting but you would be lauding them for getting people to stop doing what most people saw as wrong...yet at the same time praising them for what they did.

Thats a very unacceptable main tennet for a political party in the eyes of most people.


Now most of the last couple of pages in the Mccartney primetime thread were very off topic, so I've split all of that off into this new one.
Please leave all the McCartney murder discussion in the primetime thread.
This one's title is fairly broad but keep your opinion pieces within the posting guidelines.

ressem

irish1 wrote:

Well I respect a lot of his opinions just not this one, so it's not a simple case of respecting only who he votes for.

I mean I respect your opinions but if you turned around and said anyone who votes for FF is deluded I would have to say I don't respect that statement and I find it insulting towards people who have decided to vote for FF. I will respect anyones opinion but i won't respect sweeping insults made against large numbers of people just because of who they vote for.

You've altered your viewpoint from last year?

irish1 wrote:

Well they get what they vote for, in this case it's a monkey. The majority of Americans don't care about health or employment they care about been the strongest Country with the Strongest Army and they see Bush as someone one who has the same ideals.

Never mind, consistency is overrated.

Villain

Nice of you to add the debate, btw did I insult the people who voted for Bush???

Nope I insulted Bush himself, thanks for doing all that searching though, pitty it didn't prove your point

Sand

Going by that logic I also support FG, FF and Labour and their actions as I have voted for them in the past!!!

Grand - but theyre not under discussion. Youve busily defended SFIRA point by point in the McCartney murder, and then go "Oh but I dont support them, I just vote for them" When you vote for them, it tends to be interpreted as support for them and their actions. Its very hard to take seriously someone who insists the positions they defend vehemently arent actually their own.

I mean, do you hear of hardline stalinists voting for McCreevy?

You are actually calling the spade a shovel. Many confuse them as the same thing but they are in fact 2 different things.

Whilst theres all sorts of scope here for wrestling with the analogies raised, lets not and pretend we did.

Then your almost juvenile name calling of Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Well I prefer to refer to him as that terrorist scum filth that stains the dignity of Irish democracy - but Im trying to lighten the tone, and Snot boy is shorthand for the contempt with which I hold him, his terrorist organisation and his supporters. We could spend a while where you praise Snotty as a true Irish patriot putting us West Brit Free Staters to shame, and where I highlight his contemptible criminality and hypocisy - but lets not, and pretend we did.

Then your name calling of anyone in SF (or supporter of SF) as scum

I call paedophiles scum as well. People who torture animals for fun. People who beat and torment lone pensioners in their homes. Rapists arent exactly high on my list of respectable types. I dont think anyone would disagree with me, in referring to those sort of thugs as scum.

Do you think that people who cheer and clap and holler as they welcome like rock stars men who threw nail bombs into London resteraunts are somehow worthy of more respect? Men who were so brave in killing innocent people for their sectarian cause but sh1tted themselves when they faced the prospect of fighting actual soldiers. Perhaps you do. Thats your perogative. Personally I prefer to call a spade a spade. And again we could get caught up in that analogy, but lets not and pretend we did.

Who do you vote for?

Not really a point of issue. We could go into a massive discussion on the pros and cons and dig up some somewhat dodgy dealings or some less than progressive policy and go back and forth on whether that means theyre morally the same as the sort of scum who plant no warning bombs in shopping streets, but lets not and pretend we did.

Either way Im quite certain that my vote isnt giving a mandate to a party to beat 15 year old kids almost to death, rob banks and murder men in cold blood. Can supporters of SFIRA say the same?

Fenian

"Do you think that people who cheer and clap and holler as they welcome like rock stars men who threw nail bombs into London resteraunts are somehow worthy of more respect? Men who were so brave in killing innocent people for their sectarian cause but sh1tted themselves when they faced the prospect of fighting actual soldiers. Perhaps you do. Thats your perogative. Personally I prefer to call a spade a spade. And again we could get caught up in that analogy, but lets not and pretend we did."

With that sentiment, the pilots of WW2 are even WORSE than IRA volunteers. Those pilots dropped thousands (if not millions) of tonnes of explosives on German and Japanese cities, yet when they came home they got rousing welcomes from the citizens.

Would you put men who fought in WW2 in the same catagory as rapists and paedophiles? Or just Irish men who fought in WW2?

hawkmoon269

Fenian wrote:

Would you put men who fought in WW2 in the same catagory as rapists and paedophiles? Or just Irish men who fought in WW2?

The typical moral equivalence of the Provo apologist! :rolleyes:

DeVore

The life expectancy of a WW2 fighter pilot was 30 days. The war lasted for over 4 years. Do the maths and dont pretend the IRA are war veterans, I never asked them to fight for me.

DeV.

Villain

Sand wrote:

Grand - but theyre not under discussion. Youve busily defended SFIRA point by point in the McCartney murder, and then go "Oh but I dont support them, I just vote for them" When you vote for them, it tends to be interpreted as support for them and their actions. Its very hard to take seriously someone who insists the positions they defend vehemently arent actually their own.

I mean, do you hear of hardline stalinists voting for McCreevy?

I do support Sinn Fein, but that doesn't mean I support all their actions, I don't think any person could say they support every action of the party they vote for. I have voted for Sinn Fein and may do so again, I happen know a bit about the party and I enjoy discussing politics so thats why I come on here and post. Now in the McCartney incident I have posted several explanations why SF done this or that, that doesn't mean I support those positions.

Sand wrote:

Whilst theres all sorts of scope here for wrestling with the analogies raised, lets not and pretend we did.

I know you were responding to dub in glasgo for the rest, and I'm quite sure he will reply but I thought I'd post a few quick replies too.

Sinn Fein and the IRA are not the one unit, you can try and convince yourself they are, but in reality there not.

Sand wrote:

Well I prefer to refer to him as that terrorist scum filth that stains the dignity of Irish democracy - but Im trying to lighten the tone, and Snot boy is shorthand for the contempt with which I hold him, his terrorist organisation and his supporters. We could spend a while where you praise Snotty as a true Irish patriot putting us West Brit Free Staters to shame, and where I highlight his contemptible criminality and hypocisy - but lets not, and pretend we did.

Well I'm not his biggest either tbh, but I think your gone a little OTT there.

Sand wrote:

I call paedophiles scum as well. People who torture animals for fun. People who beat and torment lone pensioners in their homes. Rapists arent exactly high on my list of respectable types. I dont think anyone would disagree with me, in referring to those sort of thugs as scum.

Do you think that people who cheer and clap and holler as they welcome like rock stars men who threw nail bombs into London resteraunts are somehow worthy of more respect? Men who were so brave in killing innocent people for their sectarian cause but sh1tted themselves when they faced the prospect of fighting actual soldiers. Perhaps you do. Thats your perogative. Personally I prefer to call a spade a spade. And again we could get caught up in that analogy, but lets not and pretend we did.

So basically your calling the majortity of nationalists up north "scum"! I think that says a lot about your beliefs.

Sand wrote:

Not really a point of issue. We could go into a massive discussion on the pros and cons and dig up some somewhat dodgy dealings or some less than progressive policy and go back and forth on whether that means theyre morally the same as the sort of scum who plant no warning bombs in shopping streets, but lets not and pretend we did.

Either way Im quite certain that my vote isnt giving a mandate to a party to beat 15 year old kids almost to death, rob banks and murder men in cold blood. Can supporters of SFIRA say the same?

It's your right to refuse to state who you vote for, but in a politics forum it might help the debate if you did reveal who you support.

A Dub in Glasgo

Sand wrote:

]Whilst theres all sorts of scope here for wrestling with the analogies raised, lets not and pretend we did.

Yep, the analogy you raised and now you want to go into pretendy mode

Well I prefer to refer to him as that terrorist scum filth that stains the dignity of Irish democracy - but Im trying to lighten the tone, and Snot boy is shorthand for the contempt with which I hold him, his terrorist organisation and his supporters. We could spend a while where you praise Snotty as a true Irish patriot putting us West Brit Free Staters to shame, and where I highlight his contemptible criminality and hypocisy - but lets not, and pretend we did.

You do like your melodrama
Terrorist scum filth? What convictions or charges has he been done for then?

Stains the dignity of Irish democracy? Unlike some other guys who are still drawing their pension from the taxpayer and who became millionaires by defrauding the Irish people. Good company then eh?

West Brit Free Staters? Your words not mine so I'll take your word for it

I call paedophiles scum as well. People who torture animals for fun. People who beat and torment lone pensioners in their homes. Rapists arent exactly high on my list of respectable types. I dont think anyone would disagree with me, in referring to those sort of thugs as scum.

Do you think that people who cheer and clap and holler as they welcome like rock stars men who threw nail bombs into London resteraunts are somehow worthy of more respect? Men who were so brave in killing innocent people for their sectarian cause but sh1tted themselves when they faced the prospect of fighting actual soldiers. Perhaps you do. Thats your perogative. Personally I prefer to call a spade a spade. And again we could get caught up in that analogy, but lets not and pretend we did.

You mean you are still calling the spade a shovel but hey you want to live in the pretendy world

Not really a point of issue. We could go into a massive discussion on the pros and cons and dig up some somewhat dodgy dealings or some less than progressive policy and go back and forth on whether that means theyre morally the same as the sort of scum who plant no warning bombs in shopping streets, but lets not and pretend we did.

Either way Im quite certain that my vote isnt giving a mandate to a party to beat 15 year old kids almost to death, rob banks and murder men in cold blood. Can supporters of SFIRA say the same?

If you are asking someone who they vote for and are using a certain way they answer as a means to somehow show up their credibility... then it is an issue IMO.

If you do not care who people vote for and are not asking them to come clean... then it is not an issue IMO

What was it you were asking anyway or was it a pretendy question?

Sand

Now in the McCartney incident I have posted several explanations why SF done this or that, that doesn't mean I support those positions.

So if you dont view protecting murderers and attempting to sabotage a police investigation as reason to withold your vote, then what is serious enough in your eyes? What would be unacceptable activity for a political party that would ensure you couldnt vote for them in good conscience, regardless of their stated positions? Theres nothing suitable objectionable in their attitude to the McCartney murder. SFIRA taking the oath and sitting in the House of Commons? Would that be enough for you to remove your vote?

At the end of the day, you vote for them. You give them a mandate to carry out *all* their activities, including the ones you claim not to support. Youd best be sure that the activities that you claim you dont support are ones that you can live with.

So basically your calling the majortity of nationalists up north "scum"! I think that says a lot about your beliefs

A)SFIRA are not the majority of nationalists. They represent barely 1 in 10. Theres a reason for that.
B)That people vote for SFIRA says more about their beliefs than anyone elses.

It's your right to refuse to state who you vote for, but in a politics forum it might help the debate if you did reveal who you support.

If you are asking someone who they vote for and are using a certain way they answer as a means to somehow show up their credibility... then it is an issue IMO.

Its not an issue, its only a distraction you boys want to use to drag the thread hopelessly off topic, in time honoured fashion. I'm not going to help you with that. There is quite simply no other political party in the Dail that has a terrorist army and a permissive attitude to criminal activity. None. Hence any attempt to make any other party morally equivalent to SFIRA is doomed to failure and will be tiresome to wade through. Read the topic. If you cant post within the boundaries of the topic, then dont post.

Villain

Sand wrote:

So if you dont view protecting murderers and attempting to sabotage a police investigation as reason to withold your vote, then what is serious enough in your eyes? What would be unacceptable activity for a political party that would ensure you couldnt vote for them in good conscience, regardless of their stated positions? Theres nothing suitable objectionable in their attitude to the McCartney murder. SFIRA taking the oath and sitting in the House of Commons? Would that be enough for you to remove your vote?

At the end of the day, you vote for them. You give them a mandate to carry out *all* their activities, including the ones you claim not to support. Youd best be sure that the activities that you claim you dont support are ones that you can live with.

Well you see SF and the IRA as the same group, I don't and I believe Sinn Fein can bring an end to the IRA and peace to this Island so that is why I have voted for them

Sand wrote:

A)SFIRA are not the majority of nationalists. They represent barely 1 in 10. Theres a reason for that.
B)That people vote for SFIRA says more about their beliefs than anyone elses.

You said that anyone who supports SF is scum, now you said anyone who votes for SF is supporting them so going by the election results the majority of Nationalists in Northern Ireland support SF so you think the majority of nationalists in the north are scum

Sand wrote:

Its not an issue, its only a distraction you boys want to use to drag the thread hopelessly off topic, in time honoured fashion. I'm not going to help you with that. There is quite simply no other political party in the Dail that has a terrorist army and a permissive attitude to criminal activity. None. Hence any attempt to make any other party morally equivalent to SFIRA is doomed to failure and will be tiresome to wade through. Read the topic. If you cant post within the boundaries of the topic, then dont post.

Oh right so you can call me scum because of the party I have voted for but when asked what party you support you refuse to answer, fair enough.

A Dub in Glasgo

Sand wrote:

Its not an issue, its only a distraction you boys want to use to drag the thread hopelessly off topic, in time honoured fashion. I'm not going to help you with that. There is quite simply no other political party in the Dail that has a terrorist army and a permissive attitude to criminal activity. None. Hence any attempt to make any other party morally equivalent to SFIRA is doomed to failure and will be tiresome to wade through. Read the topic. If you cant post within the boundaries of the topic, then dont post.

So you deem your demand for other posters to answer your question of 'Who do you vote for?' to be more important than if someone else was to ask you the same question?

It is either totally irrelevant or everyone puts their cards on the table but you seem to want the a la carte system of questions.

oscarBravo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

It is either totally irrelevant or everyone puts their cards on the table but you seem to want the a la carte system of questions.

I think it's pretty obvious that Sand doesn't vote for Sinn Féin. A question about any other party is off-topic.

bonkey

irish1 wrote:

when asked what party you support you refuse to answer, fair enough.

No...when asked, he points out that its off-topic.

Its a tactic you should be well familiar with.

You could ask him to answer it and have it split off to another topic, I suppose, although other than "What party do you support", it doesn't really merit a topic...and besides...you already took the mods to task about splitting off topics in the Discussion topic....

Actually, screw it. I agree with Sand. Its got nothing to do with this discussion, other than being a distractionary tactic.

axer

murphaph wrote:

I only vote because with our (in my opinion stupid) PR system I like to run through all the other candidates and make sure I don't give any preference for SF. I hate them. I hate sleaze-bag Gerry Armani and Martin-sit-ee-ation-McGuinness. I'd respect them more if they'd just admit what they are (members or at least former members of the IRA at the highest level). People have voted for them because they offer a (perceived) departure from the bland mix that goes for political parties here. They do more 'work' on the ground than anyone else. Up north they're well known as the folks to ask about which benefits you're 'entitled' to. A pack of wasters the lot of 'em. I hate Ahern and FF in general, but could anyone seriously imagine the economic 'management' we'd see under a SF government? You think it's a banana republic now??? Haha, just wait!

Good for you, as can be seen by the rise of Sinn Fein in northern Ireland and the freestate not everybody shares your views. I think the more that Sinn Fein are bashed by politicians and the media in the republic of Ireland the bigger they will get.

murphaph

axer wrote:

Good for you, as can be seen by the rise of Sinn Fein in northern Ireland and the freestate not everybody shares your views. I think the more that Sinn Fein are bashed by politicians and the media in the republic of Ireland the bigger they will get.

If it wasn't for PR I doubt SF would get any seats in Dail Eireann. SF are a one trick pony and their entire 'agenda' would be thrown out the window should they actually get into government and had a chat with the senior civil servants as to what and what would not bankrupt the state (ie reunification would help sink the republic under the weight of the social welfare drain in NI). As the years go by more and more people will wise up to the charade that SF are. I generally dislike all politicians, but Adams & Co. are much worse.

As for people not sharing my views, thankfully we at least have a democracy. If SF ran the show then dissenters would all probably go the way of Robert McCartney.