Loyalist feud

catholicireland

19 year old man shot dead by loyalist gunmen last night.In a separate attack earlier, a man in his 20s was shot several times at Crumlin Road, near Glenbank. Police said he was critically wounded.

It seems there at it again. I think more focus should be put on loyalist gangs so they cant get away with things like this. If the same pressure was put on them as there is on the IRA then maby a few lives could be spared.

jman0

Yes but that's just it, nobody really cares about these lives. They just use things like this to bash the IRA and SF for a partisan political agenda.
So when there's no political hay to be made; then there's no attention given to it.

Nuttzz

Green M&M, Orange M&M, there all the same behind their shells.....

murphaph

Nuttzz wrote:

Green M&M, Orange M&M, there all the same behind their shells.....

Yup, all a bunch of drug dealing criminal scum.

mycroft

catholicireland wrote:

19 year old man shot dead by loyalist gunmen last night.In a separate attack earlier, a man in his 20s was shot several times at Crumlin Road, near Glenbank. Police said he was critically wounded.

It seems there at it again. I think more focus should be put on loyalist gangs so they cant get away with things like this. If the same pressure was put on them as there is on the IRA then maby a few lives could be spared.

This is likely to be a criminal assault by one loyalist gang, aganist another, over drugs or territory, this classic case of "whataboutree...." is just smoke and mirrors, pointing to the mindless violence of one faction to distract from the mindless violence of the other side.

The fact is this violence is being carried out by criminals squabbling over turf or drugs, it's no different to the spate of gangland killings dublin and limerick have endured.

What differentates ,say for example, the murder of Robert Mc Cartney, is the behaviour of people in Sinn Fein, the lies, the inneunedo the protection of the killers, by members of a political party (please don't force me to repeat comments from Adams, Mc Guinness, Maskey, and the SF potential councillor sitting in the bar, again).

What differentates the NI bank robbery from the tit for tat squabbles over turf is that the loyalist terrorists are wearing and driving the spoils of their success, while we don't know how much of SF's funding comes from a dubious source.

Why does the behaviour of SF and it's terrorists bother me more, mmm lets see I don't have an unionist MEP, I instead have a SF MEP who won't condemn the murder of a mother two decades ago as crime.

Truly contemptable, and SF's power and their indifference to the rule of law mean their behaviour and the behaviour of their thugs, matters a great deal to me.

jman0

jman0 wrote:

Yes but that's just it, nobody really cares about these lives.

I doubt too many republican tears are shed at bloodshed from loyalist feuds either.

They just use things like this to bash the IRA and SF for a partisan political agenda.

It's quite simple. SF are inextricably linked to the IRA and they laud their bombers at their party conferences,clapping them at what a good job they did.It's not surprising then that parties here will throw that back at them when they fight elections here.It's a consequence of the fact that most people don't and never did condone PIRA's campaign.
It's unfortunate from your point of view , yes, but a fact none the less.

So when there's no political hay to be made; then there's no attention given to it.

No more than with any other murder.It gets only slightly more attention than an ordinary non political murder.

Sand

Are these Loyalist killers going to take up the position of Education Minister in a restored NI assembly or are they going to sit in the Dail and vote on the laws of our Republic?

No?

Is it dawning on you why its more critical that SFIRA stop being terrorist scum than say, Loyalist drug gangs?

rsynnott

Of course, both groups are undesirable criminals, and anyone should abhor any murders by either of them. That said, tho, for the moment the SF/IRA thingy is more dangerous; as others have said its politicians are all over the place. No-one who supports murder and terror should be allowed hold public office, IMO.

catholicireland

But if Sinn Fein are as evil as you say then why are they the biggest nationalist/republican party in the north? Im not a Sinn Fein voter or will never vote for them, but we have to respect the huge number of people who vote for them. They must be condemned for the undoubtable links they have with the IRA and some of the terrible things the IRA did, but branding SF as evil is going too far, esp since they are not the only ones in this big mess.

rsynnott

catholicireland wrote:

But if Sinn Fein are as evil as you say then why are they the biggest nationalist/republican party in the north? Im not a Sinn Fein voter or will never vote for them, but we have to respect the huge number of people who vote for them.

Do we? The Nazi party got a large minority of the popular vote too, you know. Now, I'm not saying, SF/IRA is as bad as that Nazi party, by a long stretch. They do, however, have a terrorist wing who blows up children. That's evil in my book, I'm afraid. (And no-one has called them evil except you; tho it's a good descriptor).

Also, just to comment on your username and sig; we're not a catholic Ireland, fortunately; I suspect I'd find myself criminalised fairly quickly if we were. And those 88.4%, are they all observant? Do they all support the church in matters like use of contraception? Are they growing, or shrinking year by year?

FTA69

The worrying thing about these feuds is that they will have to end sometime, and when these feuds end Loyalists tend to initiate campaigns as a means of burying the hatchet. These are then directed at vulnerable Catholics or even more vulnerable ethnic minorities, eg Indians and Chinese. Loyalists can kill and intimidate with impunity and not a word will be said but yet all the focus is directed upon Republican guns which have been silent for 8 years.

It's quite simple. SF are inextricably linked to the IRA and they laud their bombers at their party conferences,clapping them at what a good job they did.It's not surprising then that parties here will throw that back at them when they fight elections here.It's a consequence of the fact that most people don't and never did condone PIRA's campaign.

And would you also condemn the British Army's lauding of its killers such as Lee Clegg or those who murdered Peter McBride? Or the fact that the PSNI's social club stubbornly retains the name "RUC social club"? The war is over, let each commemorate his own to be honest, it's peoples' own perogative.

If you resent the presence of Sinn Féin representatives, well, that's just plain tough really considering they represent a third of a million Irish people and they were voted in democratically. When you deride them as thugs and scum you are also deriding their electorate as such.

rsynnott

FTA69 wrote:

Loyalists can kill and intimidate with impunity and not a word will be said but yet all the focus is directed upon Republican guns which have been silent for 8 years.

Really? Robert Mc Cartney would probably not agree, apart from his being dead.

FTA69 wrote:

And would you also condemn the British Army's lauding of its killers such as Lee Clegg or those who murdered Peter McBride?

I really wouldn't call it lauding....

FTA69 wrote:

Or the fact that the PSNI's social club stubbornly retains the name "RUC social club"?

That's certainly their right; if the majority wish to call it that then they should be allowed to do so.

FTA69 wrote:

If you resent the presence of Sinn Féin representatives, well, that's just plain tough really considering they represent a third of a million Irish people and they were voted in democratically. When you deride them as thugs and scum you are also deriding their electorate as such.

No, no more than I think that Finna Fail voters are all untrustable corrupt apathetic persons, or that everyone who voted for Bush wants to torture people. The majority of SF voters DON'T vote for them on the blowing-up-children ticket; they vote for them because they believe in some vague romanticised way in a united Ireland, or because they swallow SF's weird, impractical but nice-sounding fiducary policies.

FTA69

Really? Robert Mc Cartney would probably not agree, apart from his being dead.

Robert McCartney wasn't killed by the IRA as an organisation, this is in marked contrast to Loyalists working cohesively to attack and intimidate people.

That's certainly their right; if the majority wish to call it that then they should be allowed to do so.

So then you acknowledge the right of Republicans to commemorate IRA Volunteers?

The majority of SF voters DON'T vote for them on the blowing-up-children ticket; they vote for them because they believe in some vague romanticised way in a united Ireland, or because they swallow SF's weird, impractical but nice-sounding fiducary policies.

So the people of Darndale, Finglas, Waterford, Cavan etc etc etc are all thick eejits being led astray by besuited terrorists armed with guns and fishy economic policies? What an awkward view of the world you hold a chara. Most people vote for Sinn Féin because they work hard on the ground and address the needs of the people who have been neglected by this state for years. But I suppose that vision of things doesn't suit your black and white view of Irish politics does it?

Hydroquinone

FTA69 wrote:

Robert McCartney wasn't killed by the IRA as an organisation, this is in marked contrast to Loyalists working cohesively to attack and intimidate people.

And I suppose that when the IRA went on record as telling his family they would shoot them men they knew to be responsible, they were going to use silent guns, were they?
How very commendable.
NOT.

rsynnott

FTA69 wrote:

Robert McCartney wasn't killed by the IRA as an organisation, this is in marked contrast to Loyalists working cohesively to attack and intimidate people.

Hmm. SFIRA never works cohesively to attack and intimidate, you know.

FTA69 wrote:

So then you acknowledge the right of Republicans to commemorate IRA Volunteers?

No. Neither side should commemorate their murderers. Why not use the word; murder? No need to hide behind words like "execution" or "collateral damage". Both sides have done wrong. I don't see the British Army celebrating it, though they may have shielded their own murderers more than was deserved.

FTA69 wrote:

So the people of Darndale, Finglas, Waterford, Cavan etc etc etc are all thick eejits being led astray by besuited terrorists armed with guns and fishy economic policies?

No, they're people, being misled by politicians; that is, basically what politicians do, after all. SF, however, have a terrorist wing. They kill people. Sadly, some people ignore this when voting, or just don't care.

FTA69 wrote:

What an awkward view of the world you hold a chara. Most people vote for Sinn Féin because they work hard on the ground and address the needs of the people who have been neglected by this state for years. But I suppose that vision of things doesn't suit your black and white view of Irish politics does it?

Yes, in fairness, they have done some good; their immediate social policies in the Republic are basically decent and reasonable, moreso than those of the ruling parties, and that in turn means that they attract idealists who are willing to turn a blind eye to the terrorism. This in no way justifies murder, however.

murphaph

Hydroquinone wrote:

And I suppose that when the IRA went on reord as telling his family they would shoot them men they knew to be responsible, they were going to use silent guns, were they?
How very commendable.
NOT.

A very good point there. The idiots actually stated that publically!

jman0

The title of the thread of course is "Loyalist fued".
But to be sure, the anti-replublican brigade will turn any Northern Ireland thread into bashing SF and the IRA.
Obvioulsy both SF and the IRA have got feck all to do with loyalists murdering other loyalists. But do we even know if the victims are associated with Loyalist paramilitaries? And has anybody bothered to ask the question?
Will we be seeing Unionist politicians making speeches in the House of Commons?

axer

rsynnott wrote:

The Nazi party got a large minority of the popular vote too, you know.

I'm sure if mycroft was reading this thread he would surely jump in to say that godwin's law applies here.

tomMK1

murphaph wrote:

Yup, all a bunch of drug dealing criminal scum.

ahh .. is that statement just to get people to argue? You cant make statements like that which are completely untrue, as every nationalist and unionist isnt a drug dealing criminal scum.

tomMK1

rsynnott wrote:

Hmm. SFIRA never works cohesively to attack and intimidate, you know.

how do Sinn Feinn go about their 'attack's?

No. Neither side should commemorate their murderers. Why not use the word; murder? No need to hide behind words like "execution" or "collateral damage". Both sides have done wrong. I don't see the British Army celebrating it, though they may have shielded their own murderers more than was deserved.

No POppy Day stuff or anything then. No celebrating D Day etc etc etc. What Im saying is that the Brtish Army do celebrate such things. When LEe Cleg shot thoses joy riders, his division in the army camp had a nice big collage of the scene of the crime, glorifying Cleggs actions. They were even interviewed on TV with it in the background.

No, they're people, being misled by politicians; that is, basically what politicians do, after all. SF, however, have a terrorist wing. They kill people. Sadly, some people ignore this when voting, or just don't care.

Unionists have their terror armies - ask trimble with his (i think) 1996 dance with a UVF killer. Ask Paisley with his various anti catholic armies which he's started, got running then disowned once they'd kill someone (but he'd stilla rm them in the first place) - northern irish history is littered with such examples. Some would say the British Government has its own terrorist wing (SAS, MI5/6 etc etc)

Yes, in fairness, they have done some good; their immediate social policies in the Republic are basically decent and reasonable, moreso than those of the ruling parties, and that in turn means that they attract idealists who are willing to turn a blind eye to the terrorism. This in no way justifies murder, however.

I vote sinn fein, but I am not willing to turn a blind eye to murder - I dont know many shinners who would (and to be honest I resent your remark). None of us want to see anyone dying - we want peace but its one hell of an uphill struggle.

rsynnott

tomMK1 wrote:

how do Sinn Feinn go about their 'attack's?

Well, I assume they give their happy friendly terrorist wing a phonecall...

tomMK1 wrote:

I vote sinn fein, but I am not willing to turn a blind eye to murder - I dont know many shinners who would (and to be honest I resent your remark). None of us want to see anyone dying - we want peace but its one hell of an uphill struggle.

As far as I can see, voting Sinn Fein is voting IRA, which is voting for murder.

tomMK1

well that just doesnt cut the mustard for me Im afriad. You views, as described above, arent rational - or youve just not given any viable reason for your points. we can all say things, but if we cant explain why we say them, then whats the point?

tomMK1

vote for tony blair, vote for british army = vote for murder - same with bush, same with anyone

jman0

tomMK1 wrote:

vote for tony blair, vote for british army = vote for murder - same with bush, same with anyone

You shouldn't have ended there tomMK1, you should say that a vote for FF or the PD's is a vote for the US military use of Shannon, which is a vote for the Iraq war, all the destruction and death visited upon the peoples of Iraq, a vote for the torture of (predominately) Arab men and boys. And a vote for it's consequences; which we've seen already in Madrid and London.

murphaph

jman0 wrote:

The title of the thread of course is "Loyalist fued".
But to be sure, the anti-replublican brigade will turn any Northern Ireland thread into bashing SF and the IRA

Bullsh!t. The OP stated this;

It seems there at it again. I think more focus should be put on loyalist gangs so they cant get away with things like this. If the same pressure was put on them as there is on the IRA then maby a few lives could be spared.

So it's part of the thread because the OP brought it into the topic for discussion.

murphaph

jman0 wrote:

You shouldn't have ended there tomMK1, you should say that a vote for FF or the PD's is a vote for the US military use of Shannon, which is a vote for the Iraq war, all the destruction and death visited upon the peoples of Iraq, a vote for the torture of (predominately) Arab men and boys. And a vote for it's consequences; which we've seen already in Madrid and London.

Well, seeing as there hasn't been an election since the FF led government allowed the use of Shannon during the Iraq war, who knows what will happen at the next election.

The fact that Ahern is a slippery toad is one thing-I'd rather have a disagreement with Ahern than Adams et al down a back alley because he wasn't (isn't) a senior member of a terrorist organisation.

mycroft

tomMK1 wrote:

how do Sinn Feinn go about their 'attack's?

I dunno ask the bloke who was marching behind adams at a bloody sunday memorial, later charged with murder over a punishment beating.

No POppy Day stuff or anything then. No celebrating D Day etc etc etc. What Im saying is that the Brtish Army do celebrate such things.

Whats that place called starts with an Ennis mmmm ends with a Killen, or 11. Bad pun I know.

When LEe Cleg shot thoses joy riders, his division in the army camp had a nice big collage of the scene of the crime, glorifying Cleggs actions. They were even interviewed on TV with it in the background.

Almost but completely incorrect. Neil Kinnock was having christmas dinner with the regiment, when an eagle eyed cameraman spotted the poster in the background.

Unionists have their terror armies - ask trimble with his (i think) 1996 dance with a UVF killer.

Nope that'd be his dance with paisley, post drumcree in 98/99.

Ask Paisley with his various anti catholic armies which he's started, got running then disowned once they'd kill someone (but he'd stilla rm them in the first place) - northern irish history is littered with such examples. Some would say the British Government has its own terrorist wing (SAS, MI5/6 etc etc)

And again a fine piece of whataboutrey.

I vote sinn fein, but I am not willing to turn a blind eye to murder - I dont know many shinners who would (and to be honest I resent your remark). None of us want to see anyone dying - we want peace but its one hell of an uphill struggle.

I'm not sure what you mean by "not willing to turn a blind eye to murder"? So you admit SF has a terrorist wing who commit murder, and you don't have a problem with that, or you deny SF's terrorist wing commits murder. And yes peace is a hell of a uphill struggle be a dear and tell the IRA to disband, that'd be the first step.

The title of the thread of course is "Loyalist fued".
But to be sure, the anti-replublican brigade will turn any Northern Ireland thread into bashing SF and the IRA.

jamn0) wrote:

Obvioulsy both SF and the IRA have got feck all to do with loyalists murdering other loyalists. But do we even know if the victims are associated with Loyalist paramilitaries? And has anybody bothered to ask the question?
Will we be seeing Unionist politicians making speeches in the House of Commons?

Yup we don't know, and the ideal of this thread is to distract us over to look at another killing to avoid some of the less salubrious activities of an organisation who claim they're fighting for us.

tomMK1

jman0 wrote:

You shouldn't have ended there tomMK1, you should say that a vote for FF or the PD's is a vote for the US military use of Shannon, which is a vote for the Iraq war, all the destruction and death visited upon the peoples of Iraq, a vote for the torture of (predominately) Arab men and boys. And a vote for it's consequences; which we've seen already in Madrid and London.

thats precisely the point I was trying to make - once you start the blame game - and if you treat everything with the same set of principles, - where do you stop? what makes the IRA killing someone much much worse than a 'legal' (though how you define legal I dont know) army? ANd if it isnt any worse, since death is death, then how can people defend state actions and critise IRA actions?

That dual idea of what is wrong and what isnt really confuses me. To me all killing is wrong and we need to make a place where killing no longer exists, and we cant do that by sitting on the sidelines shouting down and constantly blaming the opposition

tomMK1

mycroft wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean by "not willing to turn a blind eye to murder"? So you admit SF has a terrorist wing who commit murder, and you don't have a problem with that, or you deny SF's terrorist wing commits murder.

First off, what the hell do you think I mean? I 'admit' SF and the IRA are part of republicanism, as the british government has its army which is part of the british state, as the unionist comminities are linked to their 'terrorist wing' through trimble, paisley and the orange order - so I was admitting EVERYONE has a terrorist wing.

SO, you dont have a problem with everyone elses terrorist wings, so do you deny the british army etc etc commit murder? Thats a wile high horse you got there.

Murder is murder no matter. Go on, aplly that to wars and tell me just where you stand. they're all murderers really - blair, bush, the IRA, the UDA, UVF, the british army. like, what is your point exactly, since you obviously support murder if I do?

And yes peace is a hell of a uphill struggle be a dear and tell the IRA to disband, that'd be the first step.

thats really not funny. are you enjoying taking the piss of a process many have worked very hard at? Or were you being funny and smart, because Im not laughing with you .. laughing at you maybe. In case you havent noticed, admas has already asked them that.

mycroft

tomMK1 wrote:

thats precisely the point I was trying to make - once you start the blame game - and if you treat everything with the same set of principles, - where do you stop? what makes the IRA killing someone much much worse than a 'legal' (though how you define legal I dont know) army? ANd if it isnt any worse, since death is death, then how can people defend state actions and critise IRA actions?

I don't know, how about that theres some level of accountablility in state actions, a degree of responsibility in elected officals, and people can be held and called to account for their actions.

How is the court of appeal of IRA justice working out?

That dual idea of what is wrong and what isnt really confuses me. To me all killing is wrong and we need to make a place where killing no longer exists, and we cant do that by sitting on the sidelines shouting down and constantly blaming the opposition

What makes this oh so hilarious is you're admiting you vote for a party that has it's own ex judicary, unaccountable terrorist army that refuses to hand over their guns.

First off, what the hell do you think I mean? I 'admit' SF and the IRA are part of republicanism, as the british government has its army which is part of the british state, as the unionist comminities are linked to their 'terrorist wing' through trimble, paisley and the orange order - so I was admitting EVERYONE has a terrorist wing.

So let me get this straight, you admit that the party you vote for has a paramilitary army that commits murder, but you think killing is wrong.

SO, you dont have a problem with everyone elses terrorist wings, so do you deny the british army etc etc commit murder? Thats a wile high horse you got there.

Oh phluzze, you're new to the site, and I could enjoy doing this dance with someone else again, but my joints aching,

Assuming someone disagrees with the republicanism/SF does not make them a unionist or a supporter or the British army,

Nor does it mean that we deny that the British army have commited horrible acts. However does the actions of another side justify or allow you to commit murder and terrorist acts. Quit holding up a mirror to the other sides actions, or Sands or I are going to produce a really nifty report which should that the IRA killed more people in the troubles than anyone else.

Murder is murder no matter. Go on, aplly that to wars and tell me just where you stand. they're all murderers really - blair, bush, the IRA, the UDA, UVF, the british army. like, what is your point exactly, since you obviously support murder if I do?

Yup they're all murderers, and you appear to have picked your gang.

tomMK1

mycroft wrote:

I dunno ask the bloke who was marching behind adams at a bloody sunday memorial, later charged with murder over a punishment beating.QUOTE]

im sorry, but you'll really have to spell this out for me. What has a marcher at a bloody sunday memorial, later charged with murder over a punishment beating have to do with Sinn Fein organising attacks? Because he was there, does that mean it was all organised by Sinn Fein? Why do people seem to answer questions with silly statements rather than answering the questions?

Who was this person btw?

tomMK1

mycroft wrote:

I don't know, how about that theres some level of accountablility in state actions, a degree of responsibility in elected officals, and people can be held and called to account for their actions.

How is the court of appeal of IRA justice working out?



What makes this oh so hilarious is you're admiting you vote for a party that has it's own ex judicary, unaccountable terrorist army that refuses to hand over their guns.

so basically youve ignored everything I said? level of accountability - so thats why you support state sponsored terror?..hang on, did you say accountibility? You and me are obviously talking about different parts of the world here.

and hilarious is it? your second statement basically tries to bring things back to before my post on the governments terrorists, the unionists terrorists etc. You vote for the irish government, which played its part in the killing of iraqi citizens by letting planes refuel here (or alternatively the british government, who have their own track recrod for murder.) so you vote for murderers too, wouldnt that be correct (using your logic)?

mycroft

tomMK1 wrote:

mycroft wrote:

I dunno ask the bloke who was marching behind adams at a bloody sunday memorial, later charged with murder over a punishment beating.QUOTE]

im sorry, but you'll really have to spell this out for me. What has a marcher at a bloody sunday memorial, later charged with murder over a punishment beating have to do with Sinn Fein organising attacks? Because he was there, does that mean it was all organised by Sinn Fein? Why do people seem to answer questions with silly statements rather than answering the questions?

Who was this person btw?

Because at the time he was under investigation and facing charges and Adams had no problem letting him act as an offical steward.

Lets try and clear a few things up. Do you believe SF and the IRA are seperate organisations? Do you believe that members of IRA are in SF, do you believe that SF should be held accountable for the behaviour of it's members when they're engaged in "republican" activities.

so basically youve ignored everything I said? level of accountability - so thats why you support state sponsored terror?..hang on, did you say accountibility? You and me are obviously talking about different parts of the world here.

Where did I say I supported it, I merely pointed out the difference between IRA murder and murder commited by the state. At least the british are investigating bloody sunday, the IRA won't admit the murder of jean mc conville was a crime.

and hilarious is it? your second statement basically tries to bring things back to before my post on the governments terrorists, the unionists terrorists etc. You vote for the irish government, which played its part in the killing of iraqi citizens by letting planes refuel here. so you vote for murders too, wouldnt that be correct (using your logic)?

A logic flawed by the fact that I've never voted FF or PD in my life.

tomMK1

mycroft wrote:

I don't know, how about that theres some level of accountablility in state actions, a degree of responsibility in elected officals, and people can be held and called to account for their actions.

How is the court of appeal of IRA justice working out?



What makes this oh so hilarious is you're admiting you vote for a party that has it's own ex judicary, unaccountable terrorist army that refuses to hand over their guns.



So let me get this straight, you admit that the party you vote for has a paramilitary army that commits murder, but you think killing is wrong.



Oh phluzze, you're new to the site, and I could enjoy doing this dance with someone else again, but my joints aching,

Assuming someone disagrees with the republicanism/SF does not make them a unionist or a supporter or the British army,

Nor does it mean that we deny that the British army have commited horrible acts. However does the actions of another side justify or allow you to commit murder and terrorist acts. Quit holding up a mirror to the other sides actions, or Sands or I are going to produce a really nifty report which should that the IRA killed more people in the troubles than anyone else.



Yup they're all murderers, and you appear to have picked your gang.

I wont even bother seperating the quotes. ther is nothing in your reply whatsoever of any use.

you're new to the site

- cop on man. Dont go by registration dates
It must be quite annoying when people ask you questions and you reply with things like "Assuming someone disagrees with the republicanism/SF does not make them a unionist or a supporter or the British army, " - I never said anyone did .. thats your swing on it not mine. stop trying to speak for me, just so you can twist it around in a counter argument

Aklso, you're little nifty report would be quite wrong as most statisticans have pointed out that the unionist community is reponsible for most deaths.

"So let me get this straight, you admit that the party you vote for has a paramilitary army that commits murder, but you think killing is wrong. " - as I said numerous times, you more than likely have voted for murderers yet you reckon your innocent. explain that one to me (unless youve never voted beflre)

"I could enjoy doing this dance with someone else again, but my joints aching,
"
- oh Id be glad to watch your little dance my friend. I would ask though you reply to questions instead of dancing around them.

Maybe thats too tall an order though.

tomMK1

Because at the time he was under investigation and facing charges and Adams had no problem letting him act as an offical steward.

who and do you have proof he was a steward (just following the old 'bcak it up or retract' line)

Lets try and clear a few things up. Do you believe SF and the IRA are seperate organisations? Do you believe that members of IRA are in SF,

Yes I do believe they are seperate organisations. I have never been to a SF meetin yet where there were gangs of IRA men hanging around. They are linked through republanism though.

do you believe that SF should be held accountable for the behaviour of it's members when they're engaged in "republican" activities.

No i dont. If I murdered someone and was in the PDs would the PDs be responsible? I doubt youd think they were, so if someone in sinn fein joins the ira and murders someone, why would it be any different.

I suppose though, if you do think SF and the IRA are then same then you wont have to use half as many brain cells in understanding whats actually goin gon.

tomMK1

obviously my spelling has gone to hell .... :rolleyes:

mycroft

tomMK1 wrote:

I wont even bother seperating the quotes. ther is nothing in your reply whatsoever of any use.

So basically ignore what is undigestable.

- cop on man. Dont go by registration dates

So you're an old friend re registering.

It must be quite annoying when people ask you questions and you reply with things like "Assuming someone disagrees with the republicanism/SF does not make them a unionist or a supporter or the British army, " - I never said anyone did .. thats your swing on it not mine. stop trying to speak for me, just so you can twist it around in a counter argument

For starts yes you f*cking did

so thats why you support state sponsored terror?..

Your quote directed at me, so you did say it.

Aklso, you're little nifty report would be quite wrong as most statisticans have pointed out that the unionist community is reponsible for most deaths.

Oh dear.

Table 4 Organisations Responsible for Deaths
Organisation Responsible Frequency Valid Percent
Republican Paramilitaries 2001 55.7
Loyalist Paramilitaries 983 27.4
British Army 318 8.9
UDR 11 0.3
RUC 53 1.5
Civilian 11 0.3
Other 216 6.0
Total 3593 100

I've attached the file.

"So let me get this straight, you admit that the party you vote for has a paramilitary army that commits murder, but you think killing is wrong. " - as I said numerous times, you more than likely have voted for murderers yet you reckon your innocent. explain that one to me (unless youve never voted beflre)

- oh Id be glad to watch your little dance my friend. I would ask though you reply to questions instead of dancing around them.

Maybe thats too tall an order though.

I've answered you points, you've dismissed them, and ignored them. In a rather contemptable manner.

who and do you have proof he was a steward (just following the old 'bcak it up or retract' line)

I'll have to dig it up, it was mentioned in a recent prime time, I'll be back later with that.

Yes I do believe they are seperate organisations. I have never been to a SF meetin yet where there were gangs of IRA men hanging around. They are linked through republanism though.

Because they had the giant IRA Man stickers on their forehead.

How about this quote from respected journalist henry mc donald

So, for example, motions from radical branches in the Republic calling on the party to support abortion rights for women will be voted down with a collective show of hands from delegates under IRA army instruction.

from here

tomMK1

mycroft wrote:

So basically ignore what is undigestable.

As you can see, I actually did answer as many of your points as I could

For starts yes you f*cking did


Your quote directed at me, so you did say it.

I'll have to find the piece of this thread where i said that anyone who disagrees with the republican side of things is obviously a unionist or british. I assume you vote - that was the only assumption I was making. It was you who added the part about anyone who disagrees with the republican side of things is obviously a unionist or british, not me.
Before I do, you sure you dont wish to retract this?

Oh dear.

Table 4 Organisations Responsible for Deaths
Organisation Responsible Frequency Valid Percent
Republican Paramilitaries 2001 55.7
Loyalist Paramilitaries 983 27.4
British Army 318 8.9
UDR 11 0.3
RUC 53 1.5
Civilian 11 0.3
Other 216 6.0
Total 3593 100

I've attached the file.

the file looks lovely - Ive always wanted one. IN return I shall have to dig out the info in various well informed books I have read that would dispute that. theres another on the web which staes republicans are responsible for 49%, which also differs from yours.

The question is not if you can back it up with a PDF file - but if the file itself is actually accurate.

I've answered you points, you've dismissed them, and ignored them. In a rather contemptable manner.

You obviously didnt bother reading my post then. Which did I dismiss and ignore? there were some alright, but I'll have to check

I'll have to dig it up, it was mentioned in a recent prime time, I'll be back later with that.

oh yeah - the 'it was on telly so its true' line

Because they had the giant IRA Man stickers on their forehead.

what kind of answer is that? if you cant prove they are linked, you just assume they are. very good.

How about this quote from respected journalist henry mc donald


from here

how about it? whats its saying that any other person who thinks ira/sf bad, everyone else good doesnt say?

I would argue that in fact its been a great year for SF. They managed to move the peace process much further than their detractors have, plus theyve made massive electorial gains, as well as advising the IRA to disband.

murphaph

tomMK1 wrote:

The question is not if you can back it up with a PDF file - but if the file itself is actually accurate.

and...

tomMK1 wrote:

oh yeah - the 'it was on telly so its true' line

Common theme here? Disbelieve what is presented to you in reputable reports and the media and just toe the SFIRA line.

At some point you'll have to accept that the 'struggle' is over and was a waste of 3000 lives who could be alive today if the SDLP had been allowed to get on with their PEACEFUL campaign for civil rights which WAS having an effect!

tomMK1

Common theme here? Disbelieve what is presented to you in reputable reports and the media and just toe the SFIRA line.

whats the SFIRA line that Im meant to be towing? plus, what are you talking about? Just because its on a PDF on the web doesnt make it accurate, and just because its mentioned on a TV show doesnt mean its accurate. thats just common sense, not anyones 'line'. get around that cop out anti republicans round here seem to use about SFIRA lines etc etc. Ive been at a lot of SF meetings and never once has anyone ever told me what the SF line is on anything.

At some point you'll have to accept that the 'struggle' is over and was a waste of 3000 lives who could be alive today if the SDLP had been allowed to get on with their PEACEFUL campaign for civil rights which WAS having an effect!

all i can say is what country were you living in? cus it wasnt ireland obviously if you think the SDLP could have done much.

Are you telling me that the loyalists and RUC officers who attached the first civil rights march wanted peace? theres just soo soo much you;ve ignored in that statement about peaceful marches that really, theres no point in me going on, except to say that you statement once again is a tad simplistic.

tomMK1

oh and by the way. Would you think SF asking the IRA to disarm shows that republicans think the armed part of the struggle is over? cus you obviously dont think so .. or are your opinions in need of updating?

murphaph

tomMK1 wrote:

oh and by the way. Would you think SF asking the IRA to disarm shows that republicans think the armed part of the struggle is over? cus you obviously dont think so .. or are your opinions in need of updating?

SF=IRA=SF. No need to ask themselves to do something. Tell Robert McCartney the armed struggle is over, oh wait-you can't republicans killed him.

mycroft

tomMK1 wrote:

As you can see, I actually did answer as many of your points as I could



I'll have to find the piece of this thread where i said that anyone who disagrees with the republican side of things is obviously a unionist or british. I assume you vote - that was the only assumption I was making. It was you who added the part about anyone who disagrees with the republican side of things is obviously a unionist or british, not me.
Before I do, you sure you dont wish to retract this?

Oh jesus, you said you never called anyone you disagrees with republicans a support of state terrorism. I found a quote by you whcih you accuse me of supporting state terror, you get in huff. No I'm not going to retract it.

the file looks lovely - Ive always wanted one. IN return I shall have to dig out the info in various well informed books I have read that would dispute that. theres another on the web which staes republicans are responsible for 49%, which also differs from yours.

The question is not if you can back it up with a PDF file - but if the file itself is actually accurate.

Fine refute it, or get different statistics to rubbish it. Just some inneneudo isn't accurate.

You obviously didnt bother reading my post then. Which did I dismiss and ignore? there were some alright, but I'll have to check

The massive chunk you derided before answering????

oh yeah - the 'it was on telly so its true' line

There are photos, I like your Adams says it so it must be true defense.

what kind of answer is that? if you cant prove they are linked, you just assume they are. very good.

No you've claimed you've never seen IRA men at a SF meeting I was asking how you'd know?

how about it? whats its saying that any other person who thinks ira/sf bad, everyone else good doesnt say?

I've a link from a respected journalist, from the Markets in Belfast and his claim, you've got sweet fa.

I would argue that in fact its been a great year for SF. They managed to move the peace process much further than their detractors have, plus theyve made massive electorial gains, as well as advising the IRA to disband.

Actually I'll think you'll find the flaw is that the northern politics is balkanised, SF now face an intransient, obtuse opponent. who have greater support

tomMK1

Oh jesus, you said you never called anyone you disagrees with republicans a support of state terrorism. I found a quote by you whcih you accuse me of supporting state terror, you get in huff. No I'm not going to retract it.

ahh man, serious stop playing with words. I never stated (as you claimed I did) that anyone who disagrees with republicanisn is obviously a loyalist/other supporter.

Fine refute it, or get different statistics to rubbish it. Just some inneneudo isn't accurate.

It'd be a hard job to refute it as though I have defintely read otherwise, it'd be awkward putting my hand to the actual book and page. I wasnt making an inneneudo - just trying to point out that just because its in a linked PDF doesnt make it true.

The massive chunk you derided before answering????

I may go and check that out as I thought that in that same post i actually answered your questions stated in the block of text I'd quoted. My initial thought was feck that, but then I decided to do it anyway

There are photos, I like your Adams says it so it must be true defense.

fair enough if you can find the info proving he was guilty and the photos proving he was at a march - but it still doesnt prove anything either though. You cant use that and say Sinn Fein goes around terrorising people - which is what the original claim was (not by you i may add)

I've a link from a respected journalist, from the Markets in Belfast and his claim, you've got sweet fa.

honestly, i dont give a toss. its only his opinion. we've all got one of them.

Actually I'll think you'll find the flaw is that the northern politics is balkanised, SF now face an intransient, obtuse opponent. who have greater support

Id say the DUP getting in was one of the best things to happen in northern politics. the DUP will stick to their guns and have an opinion that doesnt change with the wind - unlike the UUP and trimble who changed his mind everytime someone looked sideways at him.

tomMK1

murphaph wrote:

SF=IRA=SF. No need to ask themselves to do something. Tell Robert McCartney the armed struggle is over, oh wait-you can't republicans killed him.

gosh I am chuckling at that show of amazing wit. Once again you avoid the question by posting really hilarious puns.

I suppose you know fior a fact mr mcCartney was murdered during an IRA operation acting under orders from the army council. then again I suppose you've also got the elusive proof that the IRA raided that bank 8 months ago almost.

In other words, you cant say he was murdered in an IRA operation, so therefore it isnt linked to any armed struggle.

The people who murdered mr mcCartney didnt do that in the name of republicanism and I dont think you'll find a republican who isnt sickened by his death.

mycroft

tomMK1 wrote:

ahh man, serious stop playing with words. I never stated (as you claimed I did) that anyone who disagrees with republicanisn is obviously a loyalist/other supporter.

Oh ffs you child, you claimed I supported state sponsored terrorism, and are now spluttering about how you never said such a thing.

It'd be a hard job to refute it as though I have defintely read otherwise, it'd be awkward putting my hand to the actual book and page. I wasnt making an inneneudo - just trying to point out that just because its in a linked PDF doesnt make it true.

So basically the ostrich na na na na na I don't believe it it can't be true defence. Brilliant and ingenious.

I may go and check that out as I thought that in that same post i actually answered your questions stated in the block of text I'd quoted. My initial thought was feck that, but then I decided to do it anyway

Seriously what? No really what on earth on your on about it.

fair enough if you can find the info proving he was guilty and the photos proving he was at a march - but it still doesnt prove anything either though. You cant use that and say Sinn Fein goes around terrorising people - which is what the original claim was (not by you i may add)

So basically it's okay for SF to put in position of authority a man being charged with a republican related murder.

honestly, i dont give a toss. its only his opinion. we've all got one of them.

Nifty the "I don't give a toss" rebuttal. Ingenious. I must try that one.

Id say the DUP getting in was one of the best things to happen in northern politics. the DUP will stick to their guns and have an opinion that doesnt change with the wind - unlike the UUP and trimble who changed his mind everytime someone looked sideways at him.

Okay, so let me get this straight you've got an dogmatic opponent who's pledged to scupper the good friday agreement, and not to engage in power sharing how's this a good thing again? For peace I mean, you're all for peace, after all

murphaph

tomMK1 wrote:

gosh I am chuckling at that show of amazing wit. Once again you avoid the question by posting really hilarious puns.

It asn't a pun and I'm saddened that a post about the murder of Robert McCartney made you laugh.

tomMK1 wrote:

I suppose you know fior a fact mr mcCartney was murdered during an IRA operation acting under orders from the army council. then again I suppose you've also got the elusive proof that the IRA raided that bank 8 months ago almost.

He was murdered by SFIRA members who clearly believe they are above the law. The bank robbery was also commited by SFIRA members. If Hugh Orde says so, I'll take the word of a respected senior police officer over people who have convictions for terrorism.

tomMK1 wrote:

In other words, you cant say he was murdered in an IRA operation, so therefore it isnt linked to any armed struggle.

The people who murdered mr mcCartney didnt do that in the name of republicanism and I dont think you'll find a republican who isnt sickened by his death.

They did it because they believe they are above the law and the attitudes towards the police on this board lead me to believe that the people need to cop on and stop giving these SFIRA twats the ego boosts that make them think they are above the law and treat them like the murdering scum they are.

catholicireland

As far as I can see, voting Sinn Fein is voting IRA, which is voting for murder.

That is taking it way too far, and is only your wierd opinion. If you were right then SF would be an illegal party.

the ideal of this thread is to distract us over to look at another killing to avoid some of the less salubrious activities of an organisation who claim they're fighting for us.

Your an idiot!

murphaph

catholicireland wrote:

Your an idiot!

There's a grown up argument, not.

bus77

murphaph wrote:

SF=IRA=SF. No need to ask themselves to do something. Tell Robert McCartney the armed struggle is over, oh wait-you can't republicans killed him.

He was a SF supporter himself.

gandalf

catholicireland wrote:

Your an idiot!

And you are banned for a week.