The glorious 12th

FrancieBrady wrote: »

..and amazingly, the 'question' asked remains unanswered. Marvelous.

I'll re-ask as it is spot on...Downcow, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer?

Yes. My preference is that there would be no more £200m enquiries, no more investigations and no more prosecutions. The troubles ended 20 years ago and we can’t go on forever picking over the scab.
Now I dont enjoy seeing torturers, mass killers and bombers getting off but it is pragmatic.

firemansam4 wrote: »

But I said soldier f, not the paras as a whole, I just can't see how anyone could defend him after the things he has stated. Its sickening.

Are you equally sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours or are you less sqeemish when it was the other sort they murdered.?
You are trying to be simplistic and it’s not simple

maccored

downcow wrote: »

Are you equally sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours or are you less sqeemish when it was the other sort they murdered.?
You are trying to be simplistic and it’s not simple

justified one by giving out about the other?

[Deleted User]

downcow wrote: »

Yes. My preference is that there would be no more £200m enquiries, no more investigations and no more prosecutions. The troubles ended 20 years ago and we can’t go on forever picking over the scab.
Now I dont enjoy seeing torturers, mass killers and bombers getting off but it is pragmatic.

So by that thinking you dont think they should of been hunting down nazis 40-50 years after the war?

janfebmar

There should be no hunting down of soldiers while paramilitary murderers walk free.

lawred2

janfebmar wrote: »

There should be no hunting down of soldiers while paramilitary murderers walk free.

you believe soldiers should be held to lesser standards than members of proscribed organisations?

janfebmar

lawred2 wrote: »

you believe soldiers should be held to lesser standards than members of proscribed organisations?

Murderers in proscribed organisations were set free. 200 Republicans got amnesty letters or whatever you want to call them too.

lawred2

janfebmar wrote: »

Murderers in proscribed organisations were set free. 200 Republicans got amnesty letters or whatever you want to call them too.

They weren't state operatives.

How can you not see the simply chasmic difference?

The equivalents of the IRA are not British Paras but members of terrorist organisations like the UVF and the UDA. Until that registers with your poisoned well of a mind this 'discussion' will simply circle the drain for years to come.

downcow wrote: »

Yes. My preference is that there would be no more £200m enquiries, no more investigations and no more prosecutions. The troubles ended 20 years ago and we can’t go on forever picking over the scab.
Now I dont enjoy seeing torturers, mass killers and bombers getting off but it is pragmatic.

The only route is a fully transparent and comprehensive (involving all those who were players in the conflict/war) truth commission.

That is the only process that serves all the victims and might restore the moral integrity and authority of those who should not have been players in the first place - the government and army of Great Britain.

But it will take many years before they get that integrity back as they are using Ireland as a pawn again at the moment..

maccored wrote: »

justified one by giving out about the other?

I was quite categoric. It is you who refuses to answer the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

downcow wrote: »

I was quite categoric. It is you who refuses to answer the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

British soldiers shot and killed british citizens.

That’s a matter of fact.

Trying to hide and Protect those soldiers from justice is beyond appalling.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The only route is a fully transparent and comprehensive (involving all those who were players in the conflict/war) truth commission.

The big problem here is that the ira code does not allow it.
....and do you know how that rings so hollow when Gerry Adams still states quite categorically that he was never in the ira.

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

British soldiers shot and killed british citizens.

That’s a matter of fact.

Trying to hide and Protect those soldiers from justice is beyond appalling.

What about addressing the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours? Could it even be beyond appalling??

downcow wrote: »

What about addressing the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours? Could it even be beyond appalling??

Always with the refusal to answer and address the problem
I’m not aware of anyone that killed people running for election.
Oh wait...there was that one uvf guy what was his name

downcow wrote: »

The big problem here is that the ira code does not allow it.
....and do you know how that rings so hollow when Gerry Adams still states quite categorically that he was never in the ira.

The IRA and SF want a Truth Commission, it is being blocked by the British and some Unionists.

“The Sinn Féin leadership helped to facilitate this engagement because we sincerely believe there is a responsibility to assist families bereaved in the conflict if and when we can, though this may not be possible in all cases.

Republicans are very conscious of the hurt and suffering which has been caused through conflict in our country.

Sinn Féin believes that there needs to be an effective process for dealing with all legacy issues. Weston Park only dealt with six cases. But there are many more families who seek truth and closure.

Therefore, the British and Irish governments should invite a reputable and independent international body to establish an Independent International Truth Commission.

Adams, nor anybody else is not going to begin a 'one sided truth commission', PLEASE do not go down that ridiculous rabbit hole.

I wouldn't expect any side to do that, they would start an internal war in their own side.

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Always with the refusal to answer and address the problem
I’m not aware of anyone that killed people running for election.
Oh wait...there was that one uvf guy what was his name

Try answering the question. It’s very simple a succinct
You are ducking and diving

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The IRA and SF want a Truth Commission, it is being blocked by the British and some Unionists.

Adams, nor anybody else is not going to begin a 'one sided truth commission', PLEASE do not go down that ridiculous rabbit hole.

I wouldn't expect any side to do that, they would start an internal war in their own side.

Well many seem to want security forces to tell all they know. What was Bloody Sunday enquiry about if it was asking for the truth on one atrocity

downcow wrote: »

Well many seem to want security forces to tell all they know. What was Bloody Sunday enquiry about if it was asking for the truth on one atrocity

And it took 40 years to drag the truth out. This is from the GOVERNMENT.
As yet 47 years later nobody has stood in a court of law to answer for what happened and it is only one token soldier. Nobody from the apparatus of government will stand trial for it either, or for the long and sophisticated cover up and whitewash (if what we have now is the 'TRUTH' many many people, from judges to soldiers, lied and covered it up).

downcow wrote: »

Try answering the question. It’s very simple a succinct
You are ducking and diving

Which ‘killer’ are you referring to and where are they running for election?

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Which ‘killer’ are you referring to and where are they running for election?

It really shouldn’t matter. It is a general principal. I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

downcow wrote: »

It really shouldn’t matter. It is a general principal. I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

That’s some serious waffling non answer there’s DC
You asked a question.
I asked you who were you referring to
You waffle on with a non answer.
And repeat the question you just refused to elaborate on

You’re some skit I’ll give you that

downcow wrote: »

It really shouldn’t matter. It is a general principal. I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

I will answer that. If people involved in a conflict/war have stood down from that, decommission their weapons then as a democrat I cannot object to them taking part in the political process. On either side.
And I don't have a problem with people voting for them either.

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

That’s some serious waffling non answer there’s DC
You asked a question.
I asked you who were you referring to
You waffle on with a non answer.
And repeat the question you just refused to elaborate on

You’re some skit I’ll give you that

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

lawred2

downcow wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

which murderers stood for public office?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I will answer that. If people involved in a conflict/war have stood down from that, decommission their weapons then as a democrat I cannot object to them taking part in the political process. On either side.
And I don't have a problem with people voting for them either.

Thanks francie. So can you see why I would just like soldier f left alone and am happy people call for him to be left alone.

I wouldn’t go quite as far as you in that I would be a wee bit troubled if he stood for election and my community Elected him in massive numbers. But I appreciate how you think that would be fine and honourable

downcow wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

Well i don't really see the point of the question. 'Peace' was always going to present this scenario, people with a vested interest in the future of the state getting involved in the negotiated agreement and the democratic process.

You seem to be only annoyed by those YOUR side call murderers getting involved, while the nationalist/republican side have to deal with the British (who also killed/murdered them) and Loyalists.

Cuts both ways this one. Soldiers returned from conflict/war all through history and led normal democratic lives.

downcow wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

Which paramilitary orginastion are the DUP linked to again?

You vote for them right?

What’s your point exactly?
Pa I’ve never had to make this call at a polling station in my life. As far as I know none of the parties down this way run around killing people or drug running

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Which paramilitary orginastion are the DUP linked to again?

You vote for them right?

What’s your point exactly?
Pa I’ve never had to make this call at a polling station in my life. As far as I know none of the parties down this way run around killing people or drug running

Do the shinners not stand in your area?

downcow wrote: »

Do the shinners not stand in your area?

They do. Mary Lou is actually td for my area.
I’m not aware of her killing anyone though?
If you know something we don’t you should probably call the police.