nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

Tokyo

Mod:

Continuation of the How long before Irish reunification? thread.

Please note that all mod warnings, actions and threadbans from the previous thread carry across to here.

I have updated the OP of this thread with a list of threadbanned users, I would advise posters to check on this before posting in the thread again or a forum sanction will be imposed for breaching same.

If you want to discuss your threadban feel free to PM the banning mod (or myself if you can't remember who that is and I'll point you in the right direction).

Threadbanned Users:
blanch152
Randy Archer
Natterjack from Kerry
littlevillage

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

FrancieBrady

Not for the first time I'd like to completely dis-associate myself from the comments made by Declan. He's a wind-up merchant.

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

If you are talking about my ancestors. They’ve been here twice as long as your people who put the natives out of Australia. Maybe they should return to their homeland as well

Why would you bother stooping down to that rubbish?

declanflynn

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not for the first time I'd like to completely dis-associate myself from the comments made by Declan. He's a wind-up merchant.

you wanted to say it, someone had to grasp the nettle so I did, the muck he posts on here is is mad

gormdubhgorm

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Very good piece from well-known Slugger contributor, Choyaa:

https://sluggerotoole.com/2020/06/28/if-unionism-is-to-maintain-northern-irelands-membership-of-the-uk-then-it-must-change-and-evolve-otherwise-it-will-become-a-footnote-in-a-forgotten-story/

I'd suggest the likes of DC and GDG have a read.

That was like homework!
A lot echoes what Stacey Dooley found in her 'investigation' of the DUP @24.00 in particular. Considering she is English and half Irish she must have found the whole pantomime and confusion very odd.

I think there is a lot of wishful thinking in the article though. Besides pointing out that there is gap is Unionism. The Alliance Party will surely fill the void in years to come.

Junkyard Tom

Ireland is DC's home as much as anyone else's. In a UI people will have to get used to the fact that a lot of people here will consider themselves politically British.

declanflynn

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Ireland is DC's home as much as anyone else's. In a UI people will have to get used to the fact that a lot of people here will consider themselves politically British.

I agree but those same people will have to get used to the fact that a lot of people here consider themselves Irish!

gormdubhgorm

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Ireland is DC's home as much as anyone else's. In a UI people will have to get used to the fact that a lot of people here will consider themselves politically British.

So what you are telling me is you are accepting of DownCow. And accepting of 'Udders'

in a UI ?

Junkyard Tom

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So what you are telling me is you are accepting of DownCow. And accepting of 'Udders' in a UI ?

Yes. I despise ethno-nationalism and want being Irish to be broad spectrum including unionists if they so choose.

declanflynn

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

So what you are telling me is you are accepting of DownCow. And accepting of 'Udders' in a UI ?

yeah!
But I would have a problem with anyone who spouts rubbish about crimes that the IRA committed while at the same time fails to see any wrongdoing on their own side

gormdubhgorm

I don't think living in NI would suit me to be honest. I would end up igniting the armed struggle again. Cos both sides would be fighting over who gets to shoot me first!
Much safer out of it so I am!

almostover

declanflynn wrote: »

Only thing worse than a brit is a west brit, mate.

What is a west brit? A Welsh person? The term drives me insane. What did the Welsh ever do to tick you off?

declanflynn

almostover wrote: »

What is a west brit? A Welsh person? The term drives me insane. What did the Welsh ever do to tick you off?

yeah a welsh person

almostover

declanflynn wrote: »

yeah a welsh person

Glad we cleared that up. I hate them too, their rugby team keeps beating ours.....a crying shame

declanflynn

almostover wrote: »

Glad we cleared that up. I hate them too, their rugby team keeps beating ours.....a crying shame

Not always
A few share tips, see if I can make friends:
Pires Inv
Nuformix
Wilmington
Wey Education

eire4

almostover wrote: »

Glad we cleared that up. I hate them too, their rugby team keeps beating ours.....a crying shame

More recent trends are good as we have won 4 of the last 5 Rugby meetings with Wales although yes they still hold the overall head to head lead 69-54 with 7 drawn games over our 130 matches:)

declanflynn

eire4 wrote: »

More recent trends are good as we have won 4 of the last 5 Rugby meetings with Wales although yes they still hold the overall head to head lead 69-54 with 7 drawn games over our 130 matches:)

was at Wembley for one of those wins, there was great craic between the Irish and Welsh that day

downcow

declanflynn wrote: »

yeah!
But I would have a problem with anyone who spouts rubbish about crimes that the IRA committed while at the same time fails to see any wrongdoing on their own side

Haha. I’ve just spent the last number of pages listing examples of people from my community who have done terrible things to their catholic neighbours.
You wired up

declanflynn

downcow wrote: »

I am not confusing anything. Republicans will not want their blatant sectarianism exposed for all to see with the facts laid out.

....and I had never even heard of john McKeague. But the IRAs main figurehead protected a paedophile rapist brother and in just one of his pieces of work he masterminded the burning to death of 12 Protestants out for dinner for no reason other that their religion, and says he was never in the ira, and organised the killing of Jean mcconville.
So your main man was a paedo-protecting, sectarian, woman-killer and pathological liar. Who has mysteriously became wealthy.
You see the problem !

Sorry my mistake

jm08

downcow wrote: »

I am not confusing anything. Republicans will not want their blatant sectarianism exposed for all to see with the facts laid out.

....and I had never even heard of john McKeague. But the IRAs main figurehead protected a paedophile rapist brother and in just one of his pieces of work he masterminded the burning to death of 12 Protestants out for dinner for no reason other that their religion, and says he was never in the ira, and organised the killing of Jean mcconville.
So your main man was a paedo-protecting, sectarian, woman-killer and pathological liar. Who has mysteriously became wealthy.
You see the problem !

I presume you are talking about the La Mons Hotel here. Any update on how MI5 were believed to have been involved in that? It has all the fingerprints of their involvement with RUC documents missing! At least the victims had their day in court, unlike the victims of Bloody Sunday, Dublin-Monahan Bombings, Miami Showband etc. etc!

Has Gerry Adams become wealthy?

jm08

downcow wrote: »

Haha. I’ve just spent the last number of pages listing examples of people from my community who have done terrible things to their catholic neighbours.
You wired up

The few that were caught and were not hiding behind their RUC/British Army/MI5 uniforms!

downcow

jm08 wrote: »

I presume you are talking about the La Mons Hotel here. Any update on how MI5 were believed to have been involved in that? It has all the fingerprints of their involvement with RUC documents missing! At least the victims had their day in court, unlike the victims of Bloody Sunday, Dublin-Monahan Bombings, Miami Showband etc. etc!

I always find comments like these very interesting.

I assume you would not doubt for one moment that the IRA planted the bomb. That being the case, are you suggesting collusion between MI5 and the IRA?

jm08

downcow wrote: »

I always find comments like these very interesting.

I assume you would not doubt for one moment that the IRA planted the bomb. That being the case, are you suggesting collusion between MI5 and the IRA?

I find it difficult to understand how anyone can accept that the British State would allow their own citizens to be killed so as to protect their agents. You seem to be more pleased that the British State pulled a fast one on the IRA rather than upset that innocent people were killed.

FrancieBrady

jm08 wrote: »

I find it difficult to understand how anyone can accept that the British State would allow their own citizens to be killed so as to protect their agents. You seem to be more pleased that the British State pulled a fast one on the IRA rather than upset that innocent people were killed.

No more than our partitionists use selective victims when they need to have a dig, I think this is similar. The victims don't matter to downcow, he's still fighting the war.

downcow

jm08 wrote: »

I find it difficult to understand how anyone can accept that the British State would allow their own citizens to be killed so as to protect their agents. You seem to be more pleased that the British State pulled a fast one on the IRA rather than upset that innocent people were killed.

Again you are avoiding the hypocrisy I have drawn attention to.
If what you imply was true, IS THIS COLLUSION??
This is the hypocritical propaganda we continue to listen to from ira sympathisers day in day out.
Loyalists x police = collusion
Republicans x police = agents handled.

You need to take a long look at why you excuse some and accuse others.

Question still stands ARE YOU IMPLYING IRA X MI5 Collusion?

downcow

After hundreds of pages of this it still never ceases to amaze me how republicans refuse to face up to realities and facts and spin every situation.
What I am not clear about is do they actually believe the stuff they spout or do the just see their role as sf/ira pr servants.

I could list endless stuff where once the hypocrisy appears they deflect or opt out of the discussion.
Just some very recent ones:
Q. Name a few ira activist that who it would be offensive to remember publicly?
A. ......
Q. You say MI5 teamed up with the IRA on La Mon massacre, are you suggesting collusion?
A. .........
Q. You say ‘no stone unturned’ clearly demonstrates collusion, Give me just a few very tiny examples of this evidence from the film?
A. ..........
Q. You say the ITA are not sectarian. Tell me why 97% of their attacks in my majority catholic town were directed at Protestants?
A. .........
Q. You say the targets were economic. Why did the IRA always risk leaving a safe catholic areas and drive miles to plant bombs in Protestant areas if they were not blatantly sectarian.
A. ......
Oh I could go on and on. I hope the decent people living in ROI can see right through the denial and bigotry

jm08

downcow wrote: »

Again you are avoiding the hypocrisy I have drawn attention to.
If what you imply was true, IS THIS COLLUSION??

This is the hypocritical propaganda we continue to listen to from ira sympathisers day in day out.
Loyalists x police = collusion
Republicans x police = agents handled.

You need to take a long look at why you excuse some and accuse others.

Question still stands ARE YOU IMPLYING IRA X MI5 Collusion?

The British State was not trying to undermine Unionism. Its fight was with the Republican movement. It wasn't trying to achieve the aims of the Provos by killing innocent people in the Le Mons bombing. The British State was trying to discredit republicans, not unionists and it had no problem killing protestants/unionists to achieve that.

The IRA apologised for the Le Mons bombing - said that they tried to give a longer warning so that people could get out. It wasn't in the interests of the IRA to kill innocent protestants out for a meal - its what the British Army would call unfortunate collateral damage.

By the way, loyalists were used by the British as well. They were only pawns by the likes of Paisley and co.

jm08

downcow wrote: »

After hundreds of pages of this it still never ceases to amaze me how republicans refuse to face up to realities and facts and spin every situation.
What I am not clear about is do they actually believe the stuff they spout or do the just see their role as sf/ira pr servants.

I could list endless stuff where once the hypocrisy appears they deflect or opt out of the discussion.
Just some very recent ones:
Q. Name a few ira activist that who it would be offensive to remember publicly?
A. ......

I'd prefer if no one was commemorated.

Q. You say MI5 teamed up with the IRA on La Mon massacre, are you suggesting collusion?

A. .........

No. The British State was not trying to help republicans. They were trying to undermine them.

Q. You say ‘no stone unturned’ clearly demonstrates collusion, Give me just a few very tiny examples of this evidence from the film?

A. ..........

Q. You say the ITA are not sectarian. Tell me why 97% of their attacks in my majority catholic town were directed at Protestants?
A. .........

I don't know what you are asking here.

Q. You say the targets were economic. Why did the IRA always risk leaving a safe catholic areas and drive miles to plant bombs in Protestant areas if they were not blatantly sectarian.
A. ......

They were economic targets owned by the unionist establishment. Would unionists care if republican's targetted nationalist owned business? Did unionists care when loyalists blew up the centre of Dublin and Monaghan?

Oh I could go on and on. I hope the decent people living in ROI can see right through the denial and bigotry

But none of your claims have any logic to them. Its easy to see you the one in denial. You try and project the way you think onto us down here, when in fact we think the exact opposite (for instance, our attitude to memorials and monuments). I've said I'd have them all banned.

BloodyBill

We seen Ian Marshall got shafted by the new government. It is some stinker of a start for Micheal Martin. How could you leave the one Unionist in the Seanad out?

munsterlegend

BloodyBill wrote: »

We seen Ian Marshall got shafted by the new government. It is some stinker of a start for Micheal Martin. How could you leave the one Unionist in the Seanad out?

Unionism has so many diverse strands of opinion I think one is pointless anyway and only a token gesture. Much more can be achieved through cross border bodies.

FrancieBrady

munsterlegend wrote: »

Unionism has so many diverse strands of opinion I think one is pointless anyway and only a token gesture. Much more can be achieved through cross border bodies.

Seemed a bit niggardly of Martin and the coalition not to renew the role.

Maybe it wasn't fully embraced by the holder...he didn't make much of an impact in fairness.

But even saying that...there are quite a few in that house that make little impact.