Edgware wrote: » Ha ha. Thats a laugh. We all know who was compromised by M15. Scapaticci, Donaldson and the other higher echelons of SF in Belfast who were on the payroll of the British.
FrancieBrady wrote: » How would you know anything when you are buying into a version of the history written by the SDLP? Hume and Mallon are not of the same stature. You demean Hume's vision and bravery by lumping Mallon in with him.
Edgware wrote: » Stop deflecting. How many of SF/IRA were on the British payroll. How many innocents were plugged by the Nutting squad to cover up the informer network at the top of S.F. I.R.A. Mallon is detested by SF because he stood up to them throughout years of murder and mayhem. Cowards hate that.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Should your questions not be directed at the British here? Personally I could care less if the IRA where being run from Westminster itself. I care that they are gone and that the GFA has been achieved for the people of this island. Mallon is not detested by SF or anybody IMO. He was of service but he had feet of clay in comparison to Hume. I think some may have felt sorry for him when he bitterly made his final pleas for recognition. Were it not for Hume we would be talking about the memory of the SDLP as a political party. The people knew who delivered and they voted accordingly, some still find that very hard to get over. But there you have it.
Edgware wrote: » If Mallon is not detested by S.F. why did the S.F. members of Drogheda Council vote against giving him the fairly insignificant honour of Freeman of Drogheda? It wasnt the Nobel Prize. Orders from H.Q. probably told them to vote against.
Throughout the Troubles Mallon was subjected to as much abuse and threats from the Provo supporters as he was from the Loyalist side. He highlighted the activities of the British backed murder gangs
as well as the Provo murder gangs and made it his business to attend the funeral of every person murdered in his constituency regardless of the victims background. He saw the absolute futility of political violence as a means of unifying a country
Bonniedog wrote: » Shinners were run by the Brits when the important negotiations were going on. Scap made sure that the boys toed the line. Donaldson and others told them everything they needed to know about internal dealings. One of those who left claimed he was at crucial meeting before an Army Convention where he reckoned in hindsight that he was probably the only one not working for Brits or Special Branch in the room! Must rank as one of MI5's most successful operations. Ended centuries of Irish resistance by catching a few of the main boys with kiddie porn, riding the family and stealing money to gamble. You can say whatever you like about Mallon - and wouldnt have been great admirer back in the day - but he wasn't a criminal degenerate like those he despised.
Bonniedog wrote: » As I said before, if the Provies couldnt beat the Brits then three men and a dog from Finglas or Ballymurphy are not going to beat the Brits. Armed struggle was defeated and a secret conspiracy will always be open to being taken over as the last one was. Just an awful waste of life for nothing. Unless you think that coalition with the DUP and Mary Lou becoming Tánaiste or something was worth all the senseless waste of life. Had the ceasefires been followed by republican politics, to convince northern unionists of the benefits of unity for everyone, instead of waiting to have more babies than them - unlikely now that shinners are in support of abortion on demand - things might have been different.
Bonniedog wrote: » Same to Francie who knows as much about what happened as Monaghan do about winning All Irelands.
bonniedog wrote: The "unionist veto" is the right to consent to change constitutional status of NI. It's still there.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Hold up.....unionists went on a killing spree after ceasefires Likes of greysteel/leighlinisland virtually all lvf killings only occured as they known the ira wouldnt push back
Edgware wrote: » You let yourself down all the time. Facts are what matter not what you and Francie make up.
Poor_old_gill wrote: » From the irony in your posts- I can’t decide whether you are just not very bright or you are the wittiest person on here. But answering a post where the constant whataboutery of SF supporters is being called out- with more whataboutery- gave me a little chuckle this morning. Thank you
blanch152 wrote: » Amazing how this thread has managed to deflect itself away from discussing Sinn Fein's abysmal failure to take any steps to form a government and the humiliation of Mary-Lou in the Dail yesterday. Maybe Paddy Houlihan can save some blushes by getting elected to a position of importance on South Dublin County Council.
Bowie wrote: » Nobody defended Holohan. It's hard to take hypocrites seriously who pretend to be outraged by him while O'Leary who openly admires the Blueshirts gets a pass is all.
Bowie wrote: » So a hypocrite. Will get all outraged for an ejit being an ejit but cool with O'Leary who openly admires the Blueshirts.
maccored wrote: » right so basically - going by what you are saying - the brits were in fact fighting the brits. Sere how stupid the idea is?
joeguevara wrote: » Can anyone explain to me why so many Sinn Fein and People Before Profit supporters are organising a march to demonstrate against the newly formed government because they are not the change they voted for. How can reasonable people think it’s in any way acceptable to go against at the end of the day the will of the people and essentiall revolt against a democratically formed government
joeguevara wrote: » Can anyone explain to me why so many Sinn Fein and People Before Profit supporters are organising a march to demonstrate against the newly formed government because they are not the change they voted for. How can reasonable people think it’s in any way acceptable to go against at the end of the day the will of the people and essentiall revolt against a democratically formed government because they still hold the view that their perceived outcome trumps the actual one. Also, while you are there, what is the constant posting of Michael Martin photo with Not My Taoiseach sprawled across it. Is it a case of throwing the toys out of the pram because they didn’t get the toy they wanted off Santy. It’s like they are oblivious to the fact that every Majority opposition that ever was would be disappointed that their leader wasn’t Taoiseach but understood the fact that if you don’t get enough votes you won’t be sitting on the other side. For the sake of openness, i think what’s on the other side are equally as ineffectual, but my god voters need to grow up.
zoobizoo wrote: » The outrage on the Friends Who Support Sinn Fein Facebook page makes for great reading...... "Yes we want another election we did not vot foer ye power grabing ***** But it all about the money in the endSold ye vote just liks judis done Enjoy while ye can yer days are numbered And ye will be history get up on you bike and toddle on Ye wount have a gaverment if the people dont support ye Not my goverment"
aido79 wrote: » Are all of these #notmygovernment and #notmytaoiseach people emigrating? Sinn Fein might really struggle in the next election if they don't return home to vote.
joeguevara wrote: » Can anyone explain to me why so many Sinn Fein and People Before Profit supporters are organising a march to demonstrate against the newly formed government because they are not the change they voted for. How can reasonable people think it’s in any way acceptable to go against at the end of the day the will of the people and essentiall revolt against a democratically formed government because they still hold the view that their perceived outcome trumps the actual one.
Also, while you are there, what is the constant posting of Michael Martin photo with Not My Taoiseach sprawled across it. Is it a case of throwing the toys out of the pram because they didn’t get the toy they wanted off Santy. It’s like they are oblivious to the fact that every Majority opposition that ever was would be disappointed that their leader wasn’t Taoiseach but understood the fact that if you don’t get enough votes you won’t be sitting on the other side. For the sake of openness, i think what’s on the other side are equally as ineffectual, but my god voters need to grow up.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Are you saying people cannot protest? It's hardly a coup now, hold on to the old hat there. Protests against governments are normal and legal. The difference here is that it is so early in the term. It is probably meant to trigger just that reaction.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » Not really though
joeguevara wrote: » Never said no right to protest but protesting against a democratically elected government and disregarding the will of the majority of voters smacks of either lack of knowledge of how proportional representation and subsequent forming of a government works or bully boy tactics.
As regards the not my Taoiseach i don’t think it’s as sophisticated as you say. It’s more of a petulant child who didn’t win the 100m sprint in a school sports day but still want the gold medal. I’m certainly not triggered by it as I dislike them all, but at least have a bit of cop on and work towards the next time.
