Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

RIP Martin McGuinness

Options
1…457910…38

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    Thomas__
    Closed Accounts Posts: 618 ✭✭✭Thomas__


    PhuckHugh wrote: »
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Why?
    The state was formed because men like McGuinness and women went to 'war' with the British.

    Charlie Flanagan this morning was funny, like some here, in his compartmentalising.
    He was making the trite point that McGuinness stopped being a 'militant republican' and became a politician like him', of course ignoring the blatant fact that Charlie was able to become a non militant politician precisely because his forebears did the 'militant' work.

    The hypocrisy and craw thumping today is actually hilarious.

    That's a important point that those throwing the stones usually miss - Martin was no different to the 'heroes' that founded the state that we celebrate - In many ways, FF/FG have far more blood on their hands when you think of the civil war and the murder of Irish citizens carried out by both sides - Men, women and children

    There was neither FF nor FG at that time. They were established afterwards. SF was split down in the middle upon the Treaty and if it falls back, it all falls back at SF in the first place, the anti-treaty side of SF to be precise. The forerunner of FG was pro-treaty and worked on the consolidation of the Irish Free State. De Valera founded FF in 1926. Three years after the end of the Civil War.


  • Options
    #183
    PhuckHugh
    Registered Users Posts: 683 ✭✭✭PhuckHugh


    JayZeus wrote: »
    It's sometimes sad when someone dies. Sometimes it's sad because of the character of the person, the circumstances of their passing or the loss their family will feel.

    Martin McGuinness' death may be some of those things to some people but to me the greatest sadness comes from seeing so many Irish people praise his efforts for peace and attempts to portray him as some kind of folk hero. He should be remembered for what he was, a paramilitary commander who committed murder in the name of the nationalist movement. A man with the cold and cruel ability to blow up pubs, hotels and market squares no matter who may be there at the time.

    Martin McGuinness ran out of time leading and directing a violent, bloody, murderous campaign using normal everyday people as pawns, blowing them to pieces, maiming and mentally scarring the survivors and their families in the cold and calculating process.

    He had no choice to make. Peace was on the cards, with or without him. He was the man in the seat at the time but it wasn't his decision, when the community he supposedly represented wanted something his guns and bombs couldn't deliver. He went to his grave knowing more than he told about the victims of his violence and that's unforgivable. The years he spent in politics do not wash the blood from his hands.

    Never forget that.

    He wasn't a good man, let alone a hero.

    That's your view.

    Plenty others, including myself, will regard him as a hero. Nelson Mandela was full of praise for Martin and Gerry .. Gerry acting as a guard of honour for Mandela's funeral -- that's the esteem these men are held in. If we had politicians with half his character in the south we'd be a fine country.


  • Options
    #184
    Noveight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,813 ✭✭✭Noveight


    As a man who was never really far from the news here in Ireland I find it strange to think he's dead. RIP.


  • Options
    #185
    citytillidie
    Registered Users Posts: 22,020 ✭✭✭✭citytillidie


    Bad few days for the city of Derry

    ******



  • Options
    #186
    Thomas__
    Closed Accounts Posts: 618 ✭✭✭Thomas__


    PhuckHugh wrote: »
    Thomas__ wrote: »
    What means did the previous governments of the Republic of Ireland had to help in the first place?

    Btw, I am neither for FF, FG, SF or Labour. I judge the People by their characters and achievements, and I even hold some respect for Charles J. Haughey, in spite the fact that there are many Irish People who look at him as and call him a crook. My political leaning is centre-left and superfically saying, I consider myself to have more in common with the in 2015 founded Social Democrats than any other political Party in the Republic of Ireland.

    In the end of the day, it counts more to me what every single politician has done for the good of the Republic of Ireland in the first place, cos that was their Domain to give their best efforts. Just that there are hardly any Irish People I have come across so far who always find one or another Irish politician to project their animosity on and loath about, doesn´t influences me at all. Every Taoiseach, since the Irish Free State was established, contributed to the future of this country. One never held that office and is still at the top of all the great Irishmen in this islands history and that is Michael Collins. Close behind Comes Arthur Griffith, Sean Lemass, then Jack Lynch and to some extend C. J. Haughey. I also have some respect for Reynolds (though a tad too weak imo), Berty Ahern (not convicted for any wrong doing). I pity Cowen (he had to pick up the pieces after Ahern resigned), but I don´t find Kenny that worse like others see him (had to bring Ireland through the financial crisis with the hardships that came along, but which other countries also had to endure).

    The many of them being from FF, it´s not my fault that they were cos, see it as it was, they always got their votes from the Irish electorate.

    The very only Irish politician I can´t stand is De Valera (too cosy with the Catholic Church and imo partly too stubborn on the Republic when there was no way to achieve it and he knew that perfectly well himself, and partly to weak to prevail against the other die-hards on the anti-treaty side like Brugha). He also was the one Holding Ireland backwards for decades. Lemass brought Ireland into modernity, Haughey set the seeds to bring Ireland to the 21st Century and Ahern reaped what was coming out of it and there hadn´t been the period of the "Celtic Tiger" without the work of his predecessors. Well, I am not saying that every man hadn´t his faults, but what Counts in the end is what they achieved.

    Mrs McGuinness never had the means to do likewise, cos he grew up and lived in a different country, but he achieved, together with others, peace in NI and if there is any legacy on his part, this is the very thing on his side which he´ll always be remembered as being part of. But also his way of conduct regarding his IRA past, on which - I think - he wasn´t quite that frank and admitting. That part was the very reason for why he lost to Higgins in the last presidential election.

    I really find it curious to notice how many people are jumping to defend McGuinness when it comes to his life and doings, the so called "failure" of the Republic to stand up for the Irish people in NI but on the other hand, reading posts from people who are uttery opposed to any chance of re-unification with NI. Well, I know, the political Standing is always leading the way of argumentation, one is either pro or contra. There is rarely something inbetween with a balance upon which one can build a better future. That´s a pity.

    Pure WUM.
    Certainly not from my side, but there you go, your perception is yours, and yours alone. In contrast to that, I mean what I wrote.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Many of the well worn points being made here were put to Martin in the following excellent interview. Well worth watching.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmxKXiF2xZI



    To me Martin McGuinness was simply an Irish resistance fighter and arguably a much needed one.

    RIP.


  • Options
    #188
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    It seems to be a common tactic.

    Mention the atrocities that were done under his command and you're bound to get a response about the Brits. Because that somehow makes it ok I guess ?

    I think Hitchens summed it up perfectly about Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams, and it probably works for McGuinness too:

    The same Hitchens that called for a united Ireland and famously said "partition of Ireland was the cause of sectarian violence".

    I'm not defending the bombing campaign. My family members in the SDLP tried the peaceful method. The British government created a situation where many people seen violence as necessary. The following probably didn't help
      Torturing and interning innocent Catholics Shooting unarmed protesters Colluding with loyalist terror groups to plant bombs 85% of loyalist terror groups information on targets came from the security forces. Most were innocent Catholics.

    Now I'm not saying that bombing was OK because of the above but some form of violence was always going to happen.


  • Options
    #189
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    PhuckHugh wrote: »
    Pure WUM.

    Contribute better than accusations of trolling or don't post at all please.


  • Options
    #190
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I think SF as they are involved in ROI politics are a shabby and dangerous organisation but I have huge admiration for what McGuinness achieved in the North in the GFA and especially in his distinguished political career since.

    I wasn't a NI Catholic in his time, but I'm pretty sure that it's a lens we should try and adopt when judging the man in his aims and methods. You can't handwave away the activities he directed and you can't handwave away the activities of loyalist paramilitaries, British army collusion, the way that Catholics were treated by the state apparatus, etc.

    Trying to bring the govt of ROI into it is pure whataboutery. NI was and is a separate country, any pretence otherwise is fantasy. Whether or not I'd agree with McGuinness on that or not, he worked effectively and intelligently to bring about, establish and safeguard the current peace and political mechanisms, and the starting point was far from an ideal utopia.

    RIP


  • Options
    #191
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    RIP

    He was did a lot to bring about peace on this island.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    castletownman
    Registered Users Posts: 11,089 ✭✭✭✭castletownman


    RIP.

    Done more for the stability of this country than most other politicians can lay claim to. Something admirable in his honesty, and his strive for peace. That handshake with the Queen will be forever a symbol of the "new" Ireland.

    While I would never condone the IRA and their actions, one has to remember that back then, Martin was fighting for the rights of second-class citizens (in terms of how Catholics were treated).

    There is literally no difference between his early "military" career, and that of Nelson Mandela. But sure, Mandela was fighting for the poor Africans- a more important (and mainstream) cause than any plight on our island.


  • Options
    #193
    swimming in a sea
    Registered Users Posts: 937 ✭✭✭swimming in a sea


    PhuckHugh wrote: »
    That's your view.

    Plenty others, including myself, will regard him as a hero. Nelson Mandela was full of praise for Martin and Gerry .. Gerry acting as a guard of honour for Mandela's funeral -- that's the esteem these men are held in. If we had politicians with half his character in the south we'd be a fine country.

    We have politicians like this in the south, your Gerry is a Louth TD. So we must be on the way to that fine country.


  • Options
    #194
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Alf Stewart. wrote: »
    The weren't policemen, they were SAS members, part of an elite military unit, who have done, and continue to do similar, and worse acts of atrocities as the Provos ever have, to this very day.

    They died in active service, caught carrying out a covert operation.

    Get it straight please.

    telling someone to get it straight, usually involves you being correct.

    They were not SAS, they were Royal Corp of Signals


  • Options
    #195
    barrier86
    Registered Users Posts: 254 ✭✭barrier86


    Did a lot of good in later life.

    RIP


  • Options
    #196
    Lady Spangles
    Registered Users Posts: 434 ✭✭Lady Spangles


    Very sad news, actually. The IRA ceasefire would never have held without all his hard work and, we all know, SF were sorely tested at times. He took huge risks for peace and took some steps that must have been extremely difficult (meeting Queen Elizabeth to name but one).

    I don't care if I'm totally out of step with the rest of my home nation (England) on this (seeing as that's already been brought up here). They only saw one side of the conflict which was bombs going off on their streets. They didn't see the peace process transform Northern Ireland the way I did. McGuinness made a huge contribution to that.

    RIP to the man and condolences to his family. Very sad news.


  • Options
    #197
    Zebra3
    Registered Users Posts: 13,858 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Following the death of Martin McGuinness, I'd like to hear from the white supremacists of the British Establishment.

    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #198
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Following the death of Martin McGuinness, I'd like to hear from the white supremacists of the British Establishment.

    :rolleyes:

    Who exactly are they ?


  • Options
    #199
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Following the death of Martin McGuinness, I'd like to hear from the white supremacists of the British Establishment.

    :rolleyes:

    say what?


  • Options
    #200
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    In 1973, he was convicted by the Republic of Ireland's Special Criminal Court, after being arrested near a car containing 250 pounds (110 kg) of explosives and nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition. He refused to recognise the court, and was sentenced to six months imprisonment. In court, he declared his membership of the Provisional IRA without equivocation: "We have fought against the killing of our people... I am a member of Óglaigh na hÉireann and very, very proud of it".

    There's enormously admirable integrity right there. I'd trust somebody with such conviction, courage and honesty.


  • Options
    #201
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Following the death of Martin McGuinness, I'd like to hear from the white supremacists of the British Establishment.

    :rolleyes:

    Very few unionists have come out with a statement.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    Alf Stewart.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,789 ✭✭✭Alf Stewart.


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    telling someone to get it straight, usually involves you being correct.

    They were not SAS, they were Royal Corp of Signals

    The British Army denied that they were SAS.

    That said, the official line trotted out didn't make them any less legitimate targets to the provos regardless.

    Undercover British soldiers, armed at a provisional IRA funeral?

    They just happened to accidentally stray into the funeral?

    Yeah right.


  • Options
    #203
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Very few unionists have come out with a statement.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-northern-ireland-39184255


  • Options
    #204
    nelly17
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭nelly17


    John Major was Just on BBC news - a very interesting take on him prior to his Road to Damascus transition - but that said he could not have accomplished all that he did without having first gained respect within Armed Republiicinisim.


  • Options
    #205
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Norman Tebitt was on Twitter whinging about him. I imagine you'll have a few in the British gutter Press as well up to the same.

    What do you expect? The IRA nearly killed his wife in the Brighton bombing and left her permanently paralysed. He was badly injured too and was dug out from the rubble in full view of the TV cameras. It's ghoulish to expect of him that he harbour any kind thoughts towards the IRA or its senior commanders.

    He's entitled to his feelings.

    Mind you, so are the many people in working class communities, especially mining communities, who were devastated by the policies of the Thatcher government of which he was the most unapologetic member of cabinet. Very much a "dry" rather than a "wet" Tory.

    When he goes there will be more than a bit of "good riddance to the bastard" being voiced. And most of it will be in English accents. Indeed it was from (several) English people that I heard the joke sequence:
    "What do you call a Welshman with a seagull on his head?
    Cliff
    What do you call an Englishman with a hotel on his head?
    Norman Tebbitt"


  • Options
    #206
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Alf Stewart. wrote: »
    The British Army denied that they were SAS.

    That said, the official line trotted out didn't make them any less legitimate targets to the provos regardless.

    Undercover British soldiers, armed at a provisional IRA funeral?

    They just happened to accidentally stray into the funeral?

    Yeah right.

    no, they didn't need to deny they were SAS, that was a story made up by the men that stripped, tortured, beat, shot and stabbed them.

    They were not in uniform (because it was kind of unsafe driving around in an army uniform) and were armed because they were soldiers. They weren't even supposed to be there, they had only recently arrived in the north and got lost. They were told to avoid the area.


  • Options
    #207
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    There's enormously admirable integrity right there. I'd trust somebody with such conviction, courage and honesty.

    You should go down to the special criminal court, there's people in there every day if the week stating stuff like this.


  • Options
    #208
    Alf Stewart.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,789 ✭✭✭Alf Stewart.


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    no, they didn't need to deny they were SAS, that was a story made up by the men that stripped, tortured, beat, shot and stabbed them.

    They were not in uniform (because it was kind of unsafe driving around in an army uniform) and were armed because they were soldiers. They weren't even supposed to be there, they had only recently arrived in the north and got lost. They were told to avoid the area.

    SAS/Regular British Army, makes not a not to the legitimacy of their killings (in the eyes of the Provos)

    You're saying it was incompetence led to their killings?


  • Options
    #209
    jackhammer
    Registered Users Posts: 91 ✭✭jackhammer


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    no, they didn't need to deny they were SAS, that was a story made up by the men that stripped, tortured, beat, shot and stabbed them.

    They were not in uniform (because it was kind of unsafe driving around in an army uniform) and were armed because they were soldiers. They weren't even supposed to be there, they had only recently arrived in the north and got lost. They were told to avoid the area.

    Not condoning in any way that horrible event, but I think it quite likely that both those men were members of FRU or "the Det", both units having an even more chequered history in the north than the SAS.

    In short, I can only make a guess as to what they were, as can you. But I would never, unquestionably, believe any side's version of any event in Northern Ireland.


  • Options
    #210
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,112 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I see the deflectors are hard at work.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    bubblypop wrote: »
    I don't think it matters really does it?
    The video of this attack remains one of the most horrific i have ever seen. I don't believe anyone could watch it without being seriously emotionally disturbed.

    It was horrendous. And brutal. But you have to remember the context. The day (or two) before, a republican funeral had been attacked by a Loyalist named Michael Stone who fired shots and threw grenades at mourners in a graveyard, killing a few of them.

    Unsurprisingly, people were somewhat on edge at the next set of Republican funerals. Then they come across a car parked with two strange men sitting inside as the cortege approaches. Stewards demand to know what is going on.

    The car tries to extricate itself from the situation. It gets blocked in by taxis. People approach it. The passenger pulls out a gun. Everybody scatters. Then the braver among them rush the car again. One guy, clearly identifiable by his red hair as one "Cleeky" Clarke jumps on to the roof and starts bashing the window with a tyre iron. The men are dragged out of the car, taken away, identified as soldiers, stripped and shot dead.

    Horrendous.

    They were probably NOT SAS however. As they were signallers, the informed speculation is that they were there to attempt to bug the crowd to pick up conversations for intelligence purposes. There was a helicopter overhead (as always in Northern Ireland during the Troubles) but the technology of the time would not enable sound recording from such a distance. So it appears likely the two guys were sent in undercover with sophisticated equipment to bug the mourners.

    The notion that two guys on RnR were driving through West Belfast in the vicinity of the Falls Road on that weekend of all times is just farcical. Not even the Brits are that stupid.

    Incidentally, the same Cleeky Clarke who was filmed bashing in the windows and was later convicted for his role in the killings had previously during the Michael Stone incident in Milltown cemetry risked considerable injury by rescuing a journalist who had come under suspicion of being involved in the shootings by the hysterical crowd. The journalist had been running away to find a payphone (mere local reporters didn't have mobile phones in those days) to file a report and the crowd thought he was one of the attackers. They jumped on him and were in the process of trying to kick him to death when Clarke, who recognised him, dived in on top of him and shielded him while screaming at the crowd to leave him alone.

    There's footage of it somewhere.

    Oh and I am no Sinn Fein supporter. Nor was I ever. But remember the context of the times.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement