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

Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Pkiernan

I haven't seen or heard anything from Mary Lou, Slab Murphy and other good Republicans in ages.

What's going on?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Truthvader

Deleted User wrote: »

Ya....these are real bastions of peace with no killings alright :pac:

Didnt the yanks,end up negociating with the taliban after a protracted civil war.....

If with all resources yanks can throw at a war,they couldnt defeat an guerilla campaign.....what makes people think the brits were on brink of outright victory in the 6 counties??

The vast majority even in those places way more abnormal than NI did not resort to murder. Some did as in NI. Its not OK

Truthvader

Adam9213 wrote: »

Like what countries are you referring to? just curious.

Of course the vast majority of people don't commit murder what is your point? Obviously the majority of people in any war in any country don't commit murder why are you just stating the obvious?

Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo. You choose one

Adam9213

Truthvader wrote: »

Nope, not good enough. People the world over suffer injustices abnormal societies and disappointments. The vast majority do not choose murder

Like what countries are you referring to? just curious.

Of course the vast majority of people don't commit murder what is your point? Obviously the majority of people in any war in any country don't commit murder why are you just stating the obvious?

Truthvader

Adam9213 wrote: »

You can only expect normal standards of behaviour from normal societies and normal situations.

Expecting normal behaviour in the most militarized zone on the planet in a politically unstable state that is disputed territory claimed by two governments is bizarre.

That's where I think you can't understand because you're comparing it to a normal society which it wasn't at all.

Nope, not good enough. People the world over suffer injustices abnormal societies and disappointments. The vast majority do not choose murder

Adam9213

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, it seems that some people believe killing retired part-time members of the reserves was a vital necessity to achieve "Irish freedom", whatever that means in a multi-cultural, multi-denominational, movable modern world.

It seems most people would believe that as the Old IRA done the exact same thing

In May, 1921, the I.R.A killed a 70 year old ex-soldiers called Mick Sullivan near Rathmore, Co. Kerry and used his body to lure Crown Forces into the area.

DMP constable Michael McCarthy was shot in Cork on April 22nd. He died on April 24th at Cork military hospital. McCarthy was off duty and at home on leave working in a field when two men approached him. They produced guns. Shot him and ran off.

RIC sergeant was shot Patrick Carroll was shot dead while leaving church after Mass at Kilmilhill, County Clare.

There's no such this as an off duty soldier.

Adam9213

Truthvader wrote: »

Just read the last few pages. Its like an endless train ride through Gerry Adams' twisted booby trapped mind; full of dead ends, double meanings, lies, denials, equivocations, justifications, whataboutery, falsehoods, unspoken understandings and spiritual bankruptcy. As they are called out on each lie three more new ones spring into its place.

Give up. These people are not amenable to normal discourse because at their very core they are absolutely convinced that killing another person to get what you want is OK.

All that can be done is for decent people to ensure that they are excluded from power forever and to steadfastly point out the backsliding and lies as and when they crop up. There will never be any contrition, realisation or concession to any normal standards of behaviour

You can only expect normal standards of behaviour from normal societies and normal situations.

Expecting normal behaviour in the most militarized zone on the planet in a politically unstable state that is disputed territory claimed by two governments is bizarre.

That's where I think you can't understand because you're comparing it to a normal society which it wasn't at all.

blanch152

Truthvader wrote: »

Just read the last few pages. Its like an endless train ride through Gerry Adams' twisted booby trapped mind; full of dead ends, double meanings, lies, denials, equivocations, justifications, whataboutery, falsehoods, unspoken understandings and spiritual bankruptcy. As they are called out on each lie three more new ones spring into its place.

Give up. These people are not amenable to normal discourse because at their very core they are absolutely convinced that killing another person to get what you want is OK.

All that can be done is for decent people to ensure that they are excluded from power forever and to steadfastly point out the backsliding and lies as and when they crop up. There will never be any contrition, realisation or concession to any normal standards of behaviour

Yes, it seems that some people believe killing retired part-time members of the reserves was a vital necessity to achieve "Irish freedom", whatever that means in a multi-cultural, multi-denominational, movable modern world.

Truthvader

Just read the last few pages. Its like an endless train ride through Gerry Adams' twisted booby trapped mind; full of dead ends, double meanings, lies, denials, equivocations, justifications, whataboutery, falsehoods, unspoken understandings and spiritual bankruptcy. As they are called out on each lie three more new ones spring into its place.

Give up. These people are not amenable to normal discourse because at their very core they are absolutely convinced that killing another person to get what you want is OK.

All that can be done is for decent people to ensure that they are excluded from power forever and to steadfastly point out the backsliding and lies as and when they crop up. There will never be any contrition, realisation or concession to any normal standards of behaviour

RandomViewer

Deleted User wrote: »

Its almost as if the government is in crisis and needs a distraction??

Expecting paul quinn(who ffg excluded getting justice for,from.the programme for government) to be wheeled out about 5 or 6pm :rolleyes:

Paul Williams heading up with the Indo cheque book?

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

And literally the next post, trying to justify the murder of two boys.

You asked a question...I gave you the answer.

I didn't plant the bomb, I am not responsible for the boys death. I GAVE you the thinking of the IRA at the time. Take it or leave it.

If you just said something in the following that the murder of two young boys in Warrington did nothing to defend Nationalists in the North then we would agree, but you again appear to defend murder and violence because some sociopaths in the IRA had a particular point of view.

See, I am not asking why you think the PIRA did it, I am asking YOU the question and seeing that you continuously fail to stop justifying the murder, then I am of the opinion that you agree with it, as part of the overall war effort.

I have said it WAS ALL WRONG. What the hell more do you need to know, to work out whether I justify it or not?

This is exactly why selective exploitation of victims will get nobody anywhere.

Adam9213

Pkiernan wrote: »

If SF aren't still pro IRA, why won't the SF TDs tell what they know about the pedo rapists in the IRA?

Shinnbots never answer that question.

Well the IRA is gone and they have always claimed they supported it so I don't know what your point is?

[Deleted User]

Pkiernan wrote: »

If SF aren't still pro IRA, why won't the SF TDs tell what they know about the pedo rapists in the IRA?

Shinnbots never answer that question.

How can there be pedo rapists still in the ira....it deosnt exist :pac:

Pkiernan

If SF aren't still pro IRA, why won't the SF TDs tell what they know about the pedo rapists in the IRA?

Shinnbots never answer that question.

jm08

markodaly wrote: »

And literally the next post, trying to justify the murder of two boys.

If you just said something in the following that the murder of two young boys in Warrington did nothing to defend Nationalists in the North then we would agree, but you again appear to defend murder and violence because some sociopaths in the IRA had a particular point of view.

See, I am not asking why you think the PIRA did it, I am asking YOU the question and seeing that you continuously fail to stop justifying the murder, then I am of the opinion that you agree with it, as part of the overall war effort.

You are right it didn't do any good for NI nationalists and the Provos and they were used extensively by the British State/media in a propaganda war, just like you are using them now.

No one has even tried to justified their deaths, so why do you keep asking people here to do so?

Adam9213

markodaly wrote: »

And literally the next post, trying to justify the murder of two boys.

If you just said something in the following that the murder of two young boys in Warrington did nothing to defend Nationalists in the North then we would agree, but you again appear to defend murder and violence because some sociopaths in the IRA had a particular point of view.

See, I am not asking why you think the PIRA did it, I am asking YOU the question and seeing that you continuously fail to stop justifying the murder, then I am of the opinion that you agree with it, as part of the overall war effort.

Nobody justifies Warrington, IRA supported don't, IRA sympathisers don't, IRA members don't, I don't know where you get the idea they do?

Do you ask supporters of the US army, UK army or any other supporters of guerilla armies throughout history do they justify a couple of innocent people killed by them?

[Deleted User]

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

The IRA card hasn't been used in a while. Ever since the FFG merger and the shambles since day 1 of the Govt, the IRA card is well and truely back

Its almost as if the government is in crisis and needs a distraction??

Expecting paul quinn(who ffg excluded getting justice for,from.the programme for government) to be wheeled out about 5 or 6pm :rolleyes:

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

NOBODY deserved to die and NONE of it was justified.

And literally the next post, trying to justify the murder of two boys.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because they believed that turning defence into attack represented the best way forward in an intractable conflict/war were the main player - Britain had still not accepted what it could quite easily have done in 1968/69.

If you just said something in the following that the murder of two young boys in Warrington did nothing to defend Nationalists in the North then we would agree, but you again appear to defend murder and violence because some sociopaths in the IRA had a particular point of view.

See, I am not asking why you think the PIRA did it, I am asking YOU the question and seeing that you continuously fail to stop justifying the murder, then I am of the opinion that you agree with it, as part of the overall war effort.

Adam9213

blanch152 wrote: »

And where have I defended the actions of the glennane gang?

Were the members of the security forces killed by the PIRA directly involved in feeding information to loyalists? If not, why did they deserve to be killed, as you and several other posters are making clear?

You should just leave this thread, you just showed from that statement you have no clue what you're talking about.

Adam9213

blanch152 wrote: »

And where have I defended the actions of the glennane gang?

Were the members of the security forces killed by the PIRA directly involved in feeding information to loyalists? If not, why did they deserve to be killed, as you and several other posters are making clear?

I don't think you have a clue what the war was about, The IRAs whole war was against the British state so obviously anyone who supported the IRA would support the killings of members of the security forces.

I can tell by that idiotic statement you just made you don't have any idea what you're talking about, is that what you believe? The IRAs goal was to fight loyalists? They probably spent less than one percent of their time and resources on worrying about loyalists.

dundalkfc10

The IRA card hasn't been used in a while. Ever since the FFG merger and the shambles since day 1 of the Govt, the IRA card is well and truely back

blanch152

Deleted User wrote: »

These being same security forces who colluded and fed info to loyalists to kill innocent nationlists??

Iirc it was 150 out of 151 killed by glennane gang,(joint sec force and uvf team) were 100% innocent and had no connection to republican activities??

And where have I defended the actions of the glennane gang?

Were the members of the security forces killed by the PIRA directly involved in feeding information to loyalists? If not, why did they deserve to be killed, as you and several other posters are making clear?

Adam9213

blanch152 wrote: »

So you are saying that the 1,000 members of the security forces killed by the PIRA deserved that fate and helped the nationalist cause? Really?

Yes, heavily armed men and women walking around in disputed territory in (at the time the 6 counties were claimed by both British and Irish governments) so they were whatever way you think about literally occupying Ireland yes they deserved their fate or even if they were off duty they still deserved their fate.

There's no such thing as an off duty IRA man why should the Brits get a free pass when they clock off for the day.

Yeah_Right

maccored wrote: »

as an alternative to the GFA? Might have worked had the brits kept their side of the bargain and transferred all powers to Stormont - but they didnt (one of the reasons why its failing)

Though as you're telling people to think about the fact the GFA isnt working - what would your solution have been? Any better ideas?

Apologies, I didn't make it clear I was mocking the post that said the GFA was a failure and that all it achieved was stopping the killing.

I don't have a different solution to the GFA because I think it was a success. It stopped the killing (mostly) and I think that is what the vast majority of people wanted. I would be quite happy for the status quo to continue. My only hope is that the few remaining dissident republicans (whatever name the RA are going by these days) would stop trying to start the violence again.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

So, how did the murder of two young boys defend the nationalist community?

Because they believed that turning defence into attack represented the best way forward in an intractable conflict/war were the main player - Britain had still not accepted what it could quite easily have done in 1968/69.

Adam9213

markodaly wrote: »

You mean, you cannot answer it.
That is fine. Your silence on the matter is more of an answer for the rest of us.

So, how did the murder of two young boys defend the nationalist community?

Your question is ridiculous and doesn't make any sense you said how did the murder of two young boys defend the nationalist community?

How did the killing of A 4 year old boy named Fitzpatrick by the old IRA who was walking by his mothers side further Irish independence? Or the killing of the pregnant wife of a district inspector further Irish independence?

These questions your making are ridiculous and you could make them about any side in any conflict around the world in all of history.

[Deleted User]

blanch152 wrote: »

So you are saying that the 1,000 members of the security forces killed by the PIRA deserved that fate and helped the nationalist cause? Really?

These being same security forces who colluded and fed info to loyalists to kill innocent nationlists??

Iirc it was 150 out of 151 killed by glennane gang,(joint sec force and uvf team) were 100% innocent and had no connection to republican activities??

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

But this is the thing, not every act of violence occurs in the same circumstances. The level of justification or explanation for each individual act will depend on the circumstances. The concept of justifiable homicide is a real one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide

For example, a woman killing her rapist in self-defence could be justifiable homicide. Similarly, a democratically elected government fighting a totalitarian regime, maintaining security within its borders, fighting unelected insurgents etc. can engage in justifiable homicide. Sometimes these acts cannot.

In most of the cases that you have raised as whataboutery, there is some level of arguable justification under widely accepted notions of justifiable homicide. In the case of the actions of the PIRA, there are none.

You call it "the selective blame approach", to the rest of us, it is the "justifiable homicide" approach. So, to go back to the question I asked another poster earlier.....

Of all the people killed, maimed, injured, abused and terrified by the PIRA, which, if any of them, deserved it and which of them furthered the aims of the PIRA?

How would you not know my answer to that?

NOBODY deserved to die and NONE of it was justified.

ALL of the players were wrong.

Can we accept that to begin with?

You either begin there or you are biased from the get go.

RandomViewer

blanch152 wrote: »

But this is the thing, not every act of violence occurs in the same circumstances. The level of justification or explanation for each individual act will depend on the circumstances. The concept of justifiable homicide is a real one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide

For example, a woman killing her rapist in self-defence could be justifiable homicide. Similarly, a democratically elected government fighting a totalitarian regime, maintaining security within its borders, fighting unelected insurgents etc. can engage in justifiable homicide. Sometimes these acts cannot.

In most of the cases that you have raised as whataboutery, there is some level of arguable justification under widely accepted notions of justifiable homicide. In the case of the actions of the PIRA, there are none.

You call it "the selective blame approach", to the rest of us, it is the "justifiable homicide" approach. So, to go back to the question I asked another poster earlier.....

Of all the people killed, maimed, injured, abused and terrified by the PIRA, which, if any of them, deserved it and which of them furthered the aims of the PIRA?

Lenny Murphy definately deserved it, his own set him up, RUC stayed back

RandomViewer

blanch152 wrote: »

So you are saying that the 1,000 members of the security forces killed by the PIRA deserved that fate and helped the nationalist cause? Really?

NI security forces coluded in the murders of hundreds of people, just terrorists in uniform.

blanch152

Adam9213 wrote: »

Of the at least 1,009 (about 59%) were members or former members of the British security forces, while at least 508 (about 29%) were civilians.

The at least 1,000 members of the security forces and out of the 500 civilian figure only the politicians, informers etc.

So you are saying that the 1,000 members of the security forces killed by the PIRA deserved that fate and helped the nationalist cause? Really?