Jayop wrote: » RIP Martin. You'd expect it'll be one of the biggest funerals in the country in recent years. A man who devoted his entire life to his people and will be remembered as such. History will look upon him very fondly.
flutered wrote: » it suits too many agendas to move on, no better place to view this than to take a decco at all major irish parliment debates
Jayop wrote: » Going by your posting here the last few days you certainly haven't. Nice to get another dig in though. Classy.
Wheeliebin30 wrote: » It's funny that Martin stood for peace and reconciliation but all I see from people on this thread and other sites is arguing and bickering about the British and the British also firing back. It's pretty sad actually. I thought we had all moved on.
THE DUP last night said party leader Arlene Foster was still undecided as to whether she would attend Martin McGuinness's funeral. Requiem Mass for the former Stormont deputy first minister will be held tomorrow at St Columba's Church, Long Tower in Derry at 2pm. President Michael D Higgins and Taoiseach Enda Kenny have both confirmed that they will attend the funeral. However as Derry prepares for an influx of political leaders for the funeral, a DUP spokesman said the former first minister - who was in government with Mr McGuinness for a year - had yet to decide if she would attend.
Junkyard Tom wrote: » That didn't work out too well in the past but I'm sure there are plenty of Jim Allister types who'd love nothing more.
Deleted User wrote: » Afair the first time he gave evidence it was such a mess that he wasn't called back. The "some wrong things" included campaigning with a person he knew had raped his own daughter. A man who strolled around without a hair on his head harmed, as kids got kneecapped for anti-social behaviour. That's some wrong alright. None of which is to say that McGuinness knew, of course.. But the point is, it's hard for any supporter of SF to play the child abuse card against another given their very chequered history. Hard to think of another party where a child abuser known to the party leader got to hang out with the main figures in the party.
DrWu wrote: » They certainly did not bring the IRA to their knees through military means. It was defeated through espionage and informers and by the IRA alienating its support in the ROI, the US and elsewhere. Drugs, crime racketeering, all played a part. Foreign suppliers of arms were also dwindling with each successful arms bust. The biggest mistake the Brits made was not having the bottle to finish them off.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Is there a point in that? Adams admitted he did some things wrong in a difficult family situation and gave evidence against his brother.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Hope you are sitting down.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6276416.stm
Deleted User wrote: » You can find a pic of a laughing Liam Adams on the campaign trail with SF leader and brother Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Here's the lovely Norman spreading aspersions about the testimony of the accusers of his mate Jimmy Saville, In fact, try and read the whole article without getting nauseous would be my challenge! :rolleyes:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/15/norman-tebbit-interview
DrWu wrote: » Brits should have finished the provos off when they had the chance. Riddled with crime and informers, the writing was on the wall for them. MMG must have thanked his lucky stars (and John Hume) that the Brits didn't deliver the killing blow. Thoughts are with the families of all the victims that MMG is responsible for, including our own Guards and army members.
Army paper says IRA not defeated Army concedes for first time it did not win the battle against the IRA Army concedes for first time it did not win the battle against the IRA An internal British army document examining 37 years of deployment in Northern Ireland contains the claim by one expert that it failed to defeat the IRA. The admission is contained in a discussion document released by the Ministry of Defence after a request under the Freedom of Information Act. The 100 page document analyses in detail the army's role over 37 years. It focuses on specific operations and gives an overview of its performance. The six-month study, covering the period 1968-2005, was prepared under the direction of the then chief of general staff, General Sir Mike Jackson. The document, obtained by the Pat Finucane Centre, points to a number of mistakes, including internment and highlights what lessons have been learnt. It describes the IRA as "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force", while loyalist paramilitaries and other republican groups are described as "little more than a collection of gangsters". It concedes for the first time that it did not win the battle against the IRA - but claims to have "shown the IRA that it could not achieve its ends through violence". In a statement, the Pat Finucane Centre - a human rights group - said the document "betrays a profoundly colonial mindset towards the conflict here and those involved in it". "Loyalist violence and the links between loyalist paramilitaries and the state has been airbrushed out of this military history," it said. In a statement issued on Friday, an Army spokesman said: "This publication considers the high level general issues that might be applicable to any future counter-terrorist campaign that the British Armed Forces might have to undertake. "It is critically important to consider what was learned by those who served in Northern Ireland."
Jelle1880 wrote: » It seems you've completely missed the point and would rather moan about the evil Brits. Whataboutery must be so easy. The comments from the Daily Mail were about the fact that McGuinness (and Adams) could have given many a family from both sides of the conflict peace of mind by simply saying where the bodies of their relatives were dumped. They refused to do so to this day, THAT is what was meant. The fact you turn it into something totally different isn't my fault or that of tabloids.
Deleted User wrote: » Cry me a river. If you can't see what egregiously predatory and utterly odious creatures tabloid journalists are, then there's nothing I can do. I am so utterly unmoved by this sudden opposition to murdering people from a British tabloid, fresh from quotidian glorifications of the mass murder across the world of the poppy-loving heroes of the British Empire. The natives fight back against British colonial occupation = "terrorism!", screams John Bull. Britannia invades most countries on the planet (you missed 22, I believe), kills the natives and exploits their resources for centuries - "Break out the poppies, old bean; we must commemorate these heroes!"
FTA69 wrote: » That was the Reals. The Provisional IRA are supposed to be fully decommissioned and off the scene, them showing up blasting guns at the funeral of one of the most prominent people in SF might look a bit silly don't you think? It's not going to happen.
Sufa wrote: » Why do people here keep doing this? Whenever something happens, so often the first reaction of a great number of Irish people seems to be "quick, quick, what are the British going to be saying about this??!" And when it quickly turns out that right leaning publications have a viewpoint that was always going to be at odds with theirs, they become a seething, smoldering ball of indignation. It's always the posters with a very obvious dislike for the Brits who go hunting for articles to fume about which is all the more strange. Life is too short for it lads. They don't care one iota what we think here, maybe there are a few here who should follow that lead and lose the insecurities: let's focus on what we think, what our reactions to events are.
tomwaterford wrote: » January 2017http://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/watch-shots-fired-over-exprovo-notarantonios-coffin-ahead-of-belfast-funeral-35412122.html
FTA69 wrote: » Are ye mad? There hasn't been volleys of shots done for years, never mind for someone who was no longer a member of the IRA and was a senior Sinn Fein figure. Sure that was generally limited to people who died on active service anyway.
Deleted User wrote: » Will the IRA give him a volley of shots? If only to have John Bruton rush into Dáil Éireann in tears, waving a copy of the newspaper with said picture, it would be worth it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I have been at quite a few and both rounds have been used. It's symbolic, they are not trying to hit anyone. Calm the ham as they say.
bubblypop wrote: » Have you been to many republican funerals were volleys were fired? I've been at a few, and they didn't use blanks. Martin McGuiness can have a very dignified republican funeral without the need for shots over the coffin.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5c1c06444977305a5e99f4ce35119320.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)