Randy Archer wrote: » Francie , I am talking about precisely the same time period , you spoofer 😂😂😂!! I am even pointing out to you the papers of De Valera from 1933-1937 . You compete and utter waffler . Nothing but a liar ! You are talking rubbish !! Utter rubbish and you are refusing to read the court report from a case that was held in 1987-1990 Why do you, a grossly under educated person getting so much air time ? You have zero qualifications to challenge me on anything. You always fall flat Next time , read what I said , would save you a lot of time realising that you are wrong Your claim was that before GFA , Ireland had a constitutional claim to the North. It didn’t and never had
Deleted User wrote: » Any update on that mod,who told yous wrongly i reported your post??
Please don't tell me the British had legitimacy when another country had a constitutional claim on the part that was partitioned from the whole.
Deleted User wrote: » How.many gaa matches were cancelled over 1 team being held long until it come trough on radio it was called off?? Wouldnt be any fan of catholic church tbh,so dont really care....but speaking of churches in NI....didnt rev mccrea share a stage and speak in glowing terms about billy wright?? Knock yourself mate,always struck.me,most were normal people in.an abnormal envirnoment
Deleted User wrote: » Tell me their names,as i would like to get to bottom.of this They are telling lies and im.being accused of something ive not done
downcow wrote: » Thats rich
feargale wrote: » Very rich indeed. downcow I have asked you a question again and again about John Hume and you have persisted in declining to answer it. By so declining you are destroying any integrity your position might claim to possess. You have left your credibility in tatters. In decency you should fold your tent and ride into the sunset
timthumbni wrote: » Well I certainly can and would call him a terrorist as do many others. He was a member of a proscribed terrorist organisation ie the Ira. You are dancing around a bit anyway talking about motives and principles. You say he was put inside after being caught with a gun. I assume that he wasn’t planning on using it to help end world poverty so his principles could certainly be questioned. Anyway, if you support the actions of the IRA then just say it. You would have plenty of friends judging by some of the posts here. Someone even said they would struggle to condemn the actions of the Dissident Irish republicans. It’s certainly a rich tapestry.
timthumbni wrote: » And speaking of mass wasn’t one of the suspects in one of the most disgusting IRA actions in the Claudy bombings a priest. Just the 9 civilians murdered by the IRA that day, including 3 children, the youngest being an 8yr old girl.
But let’s not call these IRA “men” terrorists so quickly. We should probably sit down first and examine their home life and religious morals.
jm08 wrote: » You can call him what you like, but the only difference between him and the British Security Forces in NI and the PIRA is that the British forces got a licence to kill from the British Parliament / British Government / British people to kill people on the island of Ireland. 16 year olds are given this licence once they join the British Army. Sands carrying a gun would be perfectly legal in the US for example. My point about Sands and Storey is that they and their families were so badly treated by the British State that they resorted to defending themselves. The British State and British people need to acknowledge their part in creating the PIRA. Just for the record, I am not a never have been a supporter of the PIRA or any dissident republican paramilitaries. I think it was wrong their English bombing campaign. I do understand how they came about and I think that blame is entirely on the shoulders of the British State who allowed it to happen.
downcow wrote: » So there we have it, Francie confirming that he believes those who went out to kill my community simply because they were Protestant bear no responsibility - it was all the British state's fault
Fionn1952 wrote: » ....but that isn't what his post says at all, Downcow? In his post he states that he believes the British State are entirely responsible for the PIRA's existence (to quote the post, 'THAT blame lies entirely on the shoulders of the British state'. He doesn't state they are responsible for their actions after that. He may or may not think that is the case, but nowhere in the post you quoted does it say what you've just claimed. While I shouldn't have to state it, I know you have a tendency to run away with these things, so let me be clear that I am not stating this as my opinion, but rather explaining what is quite clearly stated in the post you responded to.
downcow wrote: » Fionn a valiant attempt at spinning but which bit of this do not understand " I think it was wrong their English bombing campaign. I do understand how they came about and I think that blame is entirely on the shoulders of the British State" let me be clear, I am pleased to see that he thinks the bombing was wrong, but he is entirely clear on where he places 100% of the responsibility. Which bit of that you do not understand, puzzles me PS apologies Francie, I realise now that it was not you who stated that and I edited my post accordingly, Fionn must have clicked quote before I got it edited. I trust you would not put all the responsibility for the slaughter of those two kids on the British state
Fionn1952 wrote: » The bit you don't understand is that stating that the British are to blame for the formation of the PIRA is not the same as stating the British are responsible for all of the actions of the PIRA, Downcow. The poster MAY fully believe that the British are fully responsible for all actions carried out by the PIRA, but that isn't what the post actually says. It says they are responsible for the formation of the PIRA (which I would call a gross oversimplification myself), but beyond that, you're speculating. I can edit my post to remove your misattribution of the statement to Francie (and this post after that also), as I don't doubt that was just an innocent mistake.
downcow wrote: » pathetic Fionn. Francie would you care to say whether you think it would be my style to wilfully mis-attribute something to you. I am going to learn something about Francie in his next post mmmm!
downcow wrote: » OK. Hands up. I misread what you said. Humble apologies Fionn. I thought you were doubting me I missed the 'don't'
downcow wrote: » We can always blame someone else for our mistakes. The scumbags who murdered innocent people in the Rising Sun bar could blame the IRA for planting the bomb in the Shankill fish shop which they reacted to. I do not accept that. They were sectarian killers. Exactly the same as the IRA were sectarian killers. Of course they can find excuses. Locally, they just wanted to drive every Protestant out of my area and the Brits were just a good excuse
jm08 wrote: » To clarify for you. I think the British STATE could have prevented the formation of the PIRA by a) realising that NI was a Sectarian State (British people like to portray themselves and being honest and good people who follow the rule of law). b) they should have ensured that the British troops sent to NI did what they were meant to do in the first place - protect catholics. c) Dismantled the sectarian government of NI and the gerrymandering. They had two chances to rectify these mistake - Sunningdale in 1973 and Anglo-Irish Agreement in 1985. They didn't. So yes, I do put the deaths of those 2 warrington children at the hands of the British State. What did the British State expect when they used their own troops to shoot dead civil rights protesters and then lied about it. It took them 40 years to admit what they did (putting the blame on the PIRA). If the State plays dirty all the time, expect their opponents to copy them.
jm08 wrote: » To clarify for you. I think the British STATE could have prevented the formation of the PIRA by a) realising that NI was a Sectarian State (British people like to portray themselves as being honest. fair and good people who follow the rule of law). b) they should have ensured that the British troops sent to NI did what they were meant to do in the first place - protect catholics. c) Dismantled the sectarian government of NI and the gerrymandering. They had two chances to rectify these mistake - Sunningdale in 1973 and Anglo-Irish Agreement in 1985. They didn't. So yes, I do put the deaths of those 2 warrington children at the hands of the British State. What did the British State expect when they used their own troops to shoot dead civil rights protesters and then lied about it. It took them 40 years to admit what they did (putting the blame on the PIRA). If the State plays dirty all the time, expect their opponents to copy them. Edit: There was a bomb warning about the one in Warrington to the Samaritans (presumably because the PIRA knew the British Security Forces were not shy to tell big porkies about warnings or worse still, to ignore them as they didn't care about the consquences).
downcow wrote: » Maybe you could give me an example of a government that never made a mistake? And of course the more powerful the nation the more the microscope is applied. Roi get away with little attention because they are insignificant. The terrible indiscretions which took place under Roi government, eg Church sexual abuse, discrimination against anyone different eg Presbyterians, travellers, gays, women, etc flies under the radar. If you were part of a major world nation like me you’d be under more scrutiny
Fionn1952 wrote: » There's a subtle but significant difference in atrocities and injustices which occur in a state and atrocities and injustices carried out by a state, Downcow. The reduction of some of the things done by the British to just, 'government mistakes' is also absurd. Shooting innocent children or carpet bombing cities, for example, isn't quite the same as setting the tax rate half a percent too high or underfunding a government project. Your pseudo-superiority complex about your Britishness won't change this.
jm08 wrote: » So yes, I do put the deaths of those 2 warrington children at the hands of the British State. ).
downcow wrote: » Interesting that you compared it to setting the tax rate and not to abusing and disappearing thousands of innocent kids 😳
downcow wrote: » They were sectarian killers. Exactly the same as the IRA were sectarian killers.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c6e76a2e0d85c3808d93c2f75a0c528d.svg)
