RIP Martin McGuinness

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.

Is there a point in that?
Adams admitted he did some things wrong in a difficult family situation and gave evidence against his brother.

Tebbitt tried to undermine the evidence of those abused by his friend.

Hardly similar situations.
How did you get on with the rest of what Norman had to say, do you agree with him?

DrWu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Hope you are sitting down.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6276416.stm

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.

[Deleted User]

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.

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.

Shame you have no sources for the above equivalent to the BA themselves.

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.

I agree it was totally the wrong thing to do and the wrong way to handle it. I said before I thought he should have resigned at that point.
This has all been discussed on the relevant threads btw.

I offered the article about Tebbitt to give an overview of the 'unrepentant' nature of the man and the as an indication of his warped world view. That he was so prominent in comments on McGuinness was the relevancy.

dinorebel

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.

And a few republicans who'd equally be happy to be fair.

Isn't there an element of irony about the people who literally come into a thread like this to say "what about his Ira past and their victims" being the people who then stomp their feet crying whataboutery.

Self awareness is in short supply.

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.

Going by your posting here the last few days you certainly haven't. Nice to get another dig in though. Classy.

Way to go DUP.
http://www.irishnews.com/news/2017/03/22/news/foster-still-undecided-about-attendance-at-requiem-mass-972620/

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.

flutered

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.

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, plus your own posts of course, perhaps you as martin did, are after having a road to damascus decision

Jayop wrote: »

Going by your posting here the last few days you certainly haven't. Nice to get another dig in though. Classy.

Are you talking to me??

I haven't commented at all on this thread only to say RIP?

Would you take back what you said please.

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

Maybe yeah. But even the British coming out with stuff.

Just seems like the old days.

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.

Just remember one thing. The people of Derry might turn out in their "hundreds" to weep at the cortege of Martin McGuinness (in a city of 90,000) but they wouldn't vote for him.

He never ran in a Westminster election in Derry (when the city votes as a single constituency) because he knew he would lose. And not because there is a natural Unionist majority from which he would never get any swing votes anyway. On the contrary, Foyle (Derry) is an overwhelmingly nationalist/republican constituency and Sinn Fein has NEVER been able to win it. Not even with an icon like McGuinness hailing from there.

He always went to Mid Ulster for votes, he knew he would have his arse handed to him in Derry so he left it to others in the party to take the fall. It sticks in Sinn Fein's craw that they can't win there, even after local hero John Hume retired. The people of Derry just didn't want McGuinness that badly.

Any more than the people of Ireland as a whole wanted him as president.

Some perspective please people.

If you think McGuinness will get a good send off from Derry wait until John Hume goes (he's 80 now).

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Are you talking to me??

I haven't commented at all on this thread only to say RIP?

Would you take back what you said please.

And that post having a dig, but I'm referring mainly to your posting in other threads.

steddyeddy

Snickers Man wrote: »

Just remember one thing. The people of Derry might turn out in their "hundreds" to weep at the cortege of Martin McGuinness (in a city of 90,000) but they wouldn't vote for him.

He never ran in a Westminster election in Derry (when the city votes as a single constituency) because he knew he would lose. And not because there is a natural Unionist majority from which he would never get any swing votes anyway. On the contrary, Foyle (Derry) is an overwhelmingly nationalist/republican constituency and Sinn Fein has NEVER been able to win it. Not even with an icon like McGuinness hailing from there.

He always went to Mid Ulster for votes, he knew he would have his arse handed to him in Derry so he left it to others in the party to take the fall. It sticks in Sinn Fein's craw that they can't win there, even after local hero John Hume retired. The people of Derry just didn't want McGuinness that badly.

Any more than the people of Ireland as a whole wanted him as president.

Some perspective please people.

If you think McGuinness will get a good send off from Derry wait until John Hume goes (he's 80 now).

That post is mostly conjecture to be fair.

steddyeddy wrote: »

That post is mostly conjecture to be fair.

And complete bull****ting.

steddyeddy wrote: »

That post is mostly conjecture to be fair.

The last sentence is conjecture. The rest is all verifiable fact. Look up the records.

Jayop wrote: »

And that post having a dig, but I'm referring mainly to your posting in other threads.

OK firstly I wasn't having a dig. I said both sides including the British having pops at each other is pretty sad.

Secondly what I post on other threads has nothing to do with this one. I never said anything bad about mmg.

You are so quick to jump down people's throat about things.

Am I not allowed have an opinion about how I think people are behaving over his death?

So once again I ask you to take back your accusations I was having a dig and my posts here the last few days.

steddyeddy wrote: »

That post is mostly conjecture to be fair.

Waiting for Hume to die to stick it to SF. Classy poster.

Jelle1880

Jayop wrote: »

Isn't there an element of irony about the people who literally come into a thread like this to say "what about his Ira past and their victims" being the people who then stomp their feet crying whataboutery.

Self awareness is in short supply.

It's not 'whataboutery' to talk about someone's past.

Just because you don't kill people anymore means people should simply gloss over the fact that you once did.

Jayop wrote: »

And complete bull****ting.

I await your penetrating analysis for why such a "proud Derryman" never chose to stand for that constituency in a Wesminster election.

Bull**** detector at the ready.

Jelle1880 wrote: »

It's not 'whataboutery' to talk about someone's past.

Just because you don't kill people anymore means people should simply gloss over the fact that you once did.

Lol OK. So when you literally make a "what about his past" post its not whataboutery, but when my others say "what about what caused that" it is.

Like I said completely lacking in self awareness.

Snickers Man wrote: »

I await your penetrating analysis for why such a "proud Derryman" never chose to stand for that constituency in a Wesminster election.

Bull**** detector at the ready.

Because his political analysis indicated he wouldn't win?

Politician makes a political move shocker!

Jelle1880

Jayop wrote: »

Lol OK. So when you literally make a "what about his past" post its not whataboutery, but when my others say "what about what caused that" it is.

Like I said completely lacking in self awareness.

Has anyone in here actually said that people should stop talking about the events that caused him to do what he did ?
Not to my knowledge. I think you're seeing things that aren't there to be fair.

Snickers Man wrote: »

I await your penetrating analysis for why such a "proud Derryman" never chose to stand for that constituency in a Wesminster election.

Bull**** detector at the ready.

Why would he? Why would he choose to stand for a seat that they'll never sit in when he had more important work to do in the assembly. You're assuming because he choose not to that he wouldn't get elected. Maybe your right but it's conjecture because you don't know that

I have no doubt that Humes funeral will be bigger. He's the greatest Irishman in the last hundred years by my money so I'm not about to get into a pissing contest over that, but If you think only a few hundreds will be at this funeral then you haven't seen the vigils held last night all around the country and further afield.

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Has anyone in here actually said that people should stop talking about the events that caused him to do what he did ?
Not to my knowledge. I think you're seeing things that aren't there to be fair.

When you accuse people of whataboutery for doing just that you are, yeah.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because his political analysis indicated he wouldn't win?

Politician makes a political move shocker!

That's basically what I said.

Jelle1880

Jayop wrote: »

When you accuse people of whataboutery for doing just that you are, yeah.

But nobody is doing that, you're making stuff up.

The only time it was used is when for example someone like Norman Tebbit comes out with his views on McGuinness and then people talk about the ****ing Belgrano or his views on Saville :rolleyes:

THAT is whataboutery. But what you're talking about simply didn't happen.