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

jm08

Truthvader wrote: »

Yep, now you have it.

It is not OK to murder random people in pursuit of any anything or to break the legs of children, steal, extort etc etc. 25% of the population don't seem to know that or are happy to live with it on the promise of free housing or a united Ireland - or whatever Mary Lou promises them from time to time. Not OK. Sick and lost.

Are Sinn Fein murdering random people?
Do you see any difference between Sinn Fein and Dissident Republicans. Just answer Yes or No.

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

"What about". You just cant stop yourself can you.

Not going into all this again but for starters the British Army was actually sent here to protect the Catholic community from their Protestant neigbours. There were some disgraceful acts committed by the British Army but unlike Sinn Fein IRA they were not full time dedicated to murder and thuggery

OF COURSE you don't want to go into it. Of course!

SafeSurfer

jm08 wrote: »

Can you answer my question of whether you are able to distinguish between PIRA, New IRA etc.

When you have answered that, I'll ask you another.

For the record (any of the links I clinked on post GFA were all dissident republican activities). The criticism of Sinn Fein seems to be that the PIRA had legitimised this kind of activity during the Troubles.

Did you watch the Fr. Denis Faul interview from1984?

Get back to me when you have.

Good lad.

FrancieBrady

jm08 wrote: »

You are wrong in the case of the PIRA. The nationalist community turned to the PIRA for defence when attacked by the RUC/BA/loyalist paramilitaries. Internment and the hunger strikes won them all the community support they needed.

The abiding tragedy that the moralising partitionists and those who ignored the constitutional imperative to protect were a party too.
They, (and some of them knowingly) allowed a vacuum to develop into which somebody was always going to step.

Truthvader

jm08 wrote: »

Are Sinn Fein murdering random people?
Do you see any difference between Sinn Fein and Dissident Republicans. Just answer Yes or No.

markodaly

jm08 wrote: »

You are wrong in the case of the PIRA. The nationalist community turned to the PIRA for defence when attacked by the RUC/BA/loyalist paramilitaries. Internment and the hunger strikes won them all the community support they needed.

Then why did the SDLP outpoll them at every election until 2001?

The vast majority of nationalists rejected SF and their provo brothers, until the PIRA stopped killing.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Then why did the SDLP outpoll them at every election until 2001?

The vast majority of nationalists rejected SF and their provo brothers, until the PIRA stopped killing.

Again, like the Adams fantasy allegations that don't equate to anything that happens in real life, this theory that the 'electorate' suddenly trusted SF is a nonsense.

It's 25 yrs since the GFA and the southern electorate (the partitionist element) are still going on about distrust but SDLP voters 'suddenly' switched over.

The reality is, the SF election machine didn't really get going until the 90's and they grew their support all the way through despite, censorship, intimidation, a fairly spectacular anti SF bias in the media and the not trivial fact that members of SF were shot dead.

Bonniedog

SF MEP McManus abstained on a vote criticising China for Hong Kong repression.

jm08

markodaly wrote: »

Then why did the SDLP outpoll them at every election until 2001?

The vast majority of nationalists rejected SF and their provo brothers, until the PIRA stopped killing.

Were they running candidates. Didn't Gerry Adams take Gerry Fitt's seat in West Belfast in the early 80s?

By the way, that link to Kevin Lunney's beatings and attempted murder - it says that the Continuity IRA were believed to behind it, not the PIRA as you seem to be claiming.

Superfoods

jm08 wrote: »

Were they running candidates. Didn't Gerry Adams take Gerry Fitt's seat in West Belfast in the early 80s?

By the way, that link to Kevin Lunney's beatings and attempted murder - it says that the Continuity IRA were believed to behind it, not the PIRA as you seem to be claiming.

The Real IRA, the Continuity IRA, the Makeuppy IRA

It's all the one group. Anything that happens now it is "dissident Republicans" but check into their history and surprise surprise they are part of the PIRA. THey suddenly jumped ship

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again, like the Adams fantasy allegations that don't equate to anything that happens in real life, this theory that the 'electorate' suddenly trusted SF is a nonsense.

It's 25 yrs since the GFA and the southern electorate (the partitionist element) are still going on about distrust but SDLP voters 'suddenly' switched over.

The reality is, the SF election machine didn't really get going until the 90's and they grew their support all the way through despite, censorship, intimidation, a fairly spectacular anti SF bias in the media and the not trivial fact that members of SF were shot dead.

Calls into question the fact that SDLP outpolled SF at every election until 2001.
Then, admits its in the next paragraph.

But sure, you never voted SF in your life until recently, am I right? :P

markodaly

jm08 wrote: »

Were they running candidates. Didn't Gerry Adams take Gerry Fitt's seat in West Belfast in the early 80s?

Not as many as they should have. They were too busy trying to murder and bomb their way to a United Ireland. But I guess they didn't have as much support as they thought they had.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Calls into question the fact that SDLP outpolled SF at every election until 2001.

Another lie mark. I didn't question the fact that they outpolled them. Look again without the blinkers on.

You are getting desperate, lying several times today now.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Another lie mark. I didn't question the fact that they outpolled them.

So nationalists gave the SDLP a bigger mandate than SF up to 2001.

As I have said all along, SF/PIRA had no majority support from nationalists for their acts of terror and murder. I am glad we can agree on that.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

So nationalists gave the SDLP a bigger mandate than SF up to 2001.
As I have said all along, SF/PIRA had no majority support from nationalists for their acts of terror and murder. I am glad we can agree on that.

When have I ever claimed that?

The simple FACT (those things you detest) is that SF were not equal to the SDLP as an electoral machine for reasons already outlined. Had they been then they would have eclipsed the SDLP long before they did.
I can't be bothered going to the trouble AGAIN to show you the data on this as you will doubtless try to claim something else was said.

I can't stand posters who lie about what other posters said and when challenged slink and slither away into silence.
You told a lie about me today and the Kevin Lunney incident and refused to back it up. You know you did it and I hope you are proud of that. At least one other poster knows you did too. You ruled yourself out of being taken as a credible debater.

McMurphy

Superfoods wrote: »

The Real IRA, the Continuity IRA, the Makeuppy IRA

It's all the one group. Anything that happens now it is "dissident Republicans" but check into their history and surprise surprise they are part of the PIRA. THey suddenly jumped ship

Ok, going by this logic - same IRA Michael Collins and Fine Gael evolved from so?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When have I ever claimed that?

The simple FACT (those things you detest) is that SF were not equal to the SDLP as an electoral machine for reasons already outlined. Had they been then they would have eclipsed the SDLP long before they did.

If my Auntie had balls she would be a thoroughbred horse.

:D

The only fact we know, not some made up 'What if', or "could have" bollix that you like to lean on is that the SDLP up to 2001 was the party most nationalists supported.

The rest is mere conjecture and bull****, done to peddle a myth that most nationalists supported a ragtag bunch of murderers, rapists, bombers and child killers.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

If my Auntie had balls she would be a thoroughbred horse. :D

The only fact we know, not some made up 'What if', or "could have" bollix that you like to lean on is that the SDLP up to 2001 was the party most nationalists supported.

The rest is mere conjecture and bull****, done to peddle a myth that most nationalists supported a ragtag bunch of murderers, rapists, bombers and child killers.

The myth peddled is that the switch from the SDLP was sudden...it wasn't anything like that and actually follows the pattern you would expect of a party gradually building their electoral base and performance.

The bizarre idea that people switched en masse to vote for a party in the volatile post GFA period when the IRA had still not de-comissioned, police reform had not been achieved is 'actual' mythmaking because as we know in the south, that is not the way REAL life works.

So you cling to that level of analysis if you wish...who cares what you think. You are not interested in informed analysis.

Bishop of hope

McMurphy wrote: »

Ok, going by this logic - same IRA Michael Collins and Fine Gael evolved from so?

Not sure how you jumped to that conclusion.
The provos departed from the IRA who then became known as the official IRA.
Their stance on who and what should be targeted was the reason for the split as far as I know.
The provos only formed themselves at the beginnings of the troubles, so they are relatively new.
Again the continuity IRA formed from that because they didn't support the GFA as they reckoned that was a surrender.
The provos were prepared to kill civilian targets and bomb civilian businesses, in short they were considered ruthless and psychopathic by others at the time.
Of course this was true.

Superfoods

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The myth peddled is that the switch from the SDLP was sudden...it wasn't anything like that and actually follows the pattern you would expect of a party gradually building their electoral base and performance.

The bizarre idea that people switched en masse to vote for a party in the volatile post GFA period when the IRA had still not de-comissioned, police reform had not been achieved is 'actual' mythmaking because as we know in the south, that is not the way REAL life works.

So you cling to that level of analysis if you wish...who cares what you think. You are not interested in informed analysis.

It seems you have one memory of history, your entitled to your view of course

Don't expect the rest of the World to believe that rubbish

Superfoods

McMurphy wrote: »

Ok, going by this logic - same IRA Michael Collins and Fine Gael evolved from so?

FrancieBrady

Superfoods wrote: »

It seems you have one memory of history, your entitled to your view of course

Don't expect the rest of the World to believe that rubbish

If you can show a sudden switch to the SDLP (here is the bizarre claim >) when a still armed group reached an agreement then show us that in the data. It's all out there on google and on this thread as I posted it before.

Don't listen to the spin of partitionists whose only goal is to big up the SDLP not to mention whinge about their demise. (the most ridiculous whinging I have ever heard...if you do not gain the respect of the voter then you deserve whatever you get at the polls)
If you properly review the period you will see how SF built their electoral performance 'with the armalite in one hand and the ballot box in the other' and gradually took the SDLP vote...not suddenly took it.
They in effect built an electoral machine that was envied by others - fact again.

You don't HAVE to be a shinner or a RA head to accept the facts of history. History is nuanced, it is rarely, if ever, black and white.

Superfoods

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You don't HAVE to be a shinner or a RA head to accept the facts of history. History is nuanced, it is rarely, if ever, black and white.

It looks like we have two versions of history. What actually happened and then the Francie version. So far in your version

PIRA casued no fear in NI
Everyone had no issues during the troubles
Sinn Fein really had the backing of the people, they just never voted for them
Everything was perfect
PIRA didn't kill or maim anyone in the North
Punishment beatings? what the hell are they?
Monaghan seemed to have a lot of US tourist
At the end of the day it was the journalist fault
Oh and the british army.....

Did I forget anything?

Im not a RA head, or a Shinner, I dont support any political organization. FF/FG or any of them. They are all fairly incompedent in my eyes. But if this is what Sinn Fein and supporters plan to do going forward then it is time to put a stop to it. If they are voted in, is the plan for everyone to go and burn all history books so nobody can remember the troubles? remember exactly what Sinn Fein and the PIRA did?

McMurphy

Superfoods wrote: »

No

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Not sure how you jumped to that conclusion.

Quite easily.

Superfoods wrote:

but check into their history and surprise surprise they are part of the PIRA.

[Quote=Bishop of hope [/quote]The provos departed from the IRA who then became known as the official IRA.
Their stance on who and what should be targeted was the reason for the split as far as I know.[/Quote]

It seems the dissidents evolved from the PIRA for much the same reason as the PIRA evolved from the OIRA.

You can't seriously suggest one split from the other therefore must be connected, but stop these connections when the narrative doesn't fit.

Superfoods

McMurphy wrote: »

Quite easily.

It seems the dissidents evolved from the PIRA for much the same reason as the PIRA evolved from the OIRA.

You can't seriously suggest one split from the other therefore must be connected, but stop these connections when the narrative doesn't fit.

You need to read a little bit of history as well. Seems you are listening to the Sinn Fein BS a bit too much

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again, like the Adams fantasy allegations that don't equate to anything that happens in real life, this theory that the 'electorate' suddenly trusted SF is a nonsense.

It's 25 yrs since the GFA and the southern electorate (the partitionist element) are still going on about distrust but SDLP voters 'suddenly' switched over.

The reality is, the SF election machine didn't really get going until the 90's and they grew their support all the way through despite, censorship, intimidation, a fairly spectacular anti SF bias in the media and the not trivial fact that members of SF were shot dead.

All while the armed wing of Sinn Fein shot dead Fine Gael TDs, Conservative MPs, Ulster Unionist MPs etc and their members. Not a trivial fact either.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

All while the armed wing of Sinn Fein shot dead Fine Gael TDs, Conservative MPs, Ulster Unionist MPs etc and their members. Not a trivial fact either.

Who said it was a trivial fact?

SF grew it's vote all through those events. It is not defending SF nor supporting them to recognise simple fact.

Yet there are those here who are in denial about the nuance and wish to make broad declamatory statement which are not reflective of what was actually happening.

McMurphy

Superfoods wrote: »

You need to read a little bit of history as well. Seems you are listening to the Sinn Fein BS a bit too much

This is supposed to be some kind of rebuttal?

Why not tidy up the post with some facts or details that counter my post that quoted yours?

[Deleted User]

McMurphy wrote: »

Quite easily.

The provos departed from the IRA who then became known as the official IRA.
Their stance on who and what should be targeted was the reason for the split as far as I know.

It seems the dissidents evolved from the PIRA for much the same reason as the PIRA evolved from the OIRA.

You can't seriously suggest one split from the other therefore must be connected, but stop these connections when the narrative doesn't fit.

I thought the OIRA split from the PIRA because the leaders of the PIRA were more religious and wanted a catholic 32 county republic while the OIRA wanted a secular socialist Republic.

The Dissidents split because they thought that SF taking part in a partitionist devolved government betrayed their republican principles.

jm08

Superfoods wrote: »

No

Would it be the same IRA that Nobel Peace Prize winner Sean MacBride was Chief of Staff of between 1936-39?