Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Options
1…327328329331333

Comments

  • Options
    #9902
    Superfoods
    Closed Accounts Posts: 322 ✭✭Superfoods


    Sean.3516 wrote: »
    Are Sinners being deliberately obtuse by conflating the "Old" War of Independence era IRA with the PIRA of The Troubles?


    It is an easier sell in the US 1916, Michael Collins etc. That's why you see pictures of Mary Lou standing with painting of 1916 members etc.

    It's optics which works for the US fundraisers.


  • Options
    #9903
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Imagine an elected representative victim blaming the very people who they severely injured and maimed and denying them their lawful and rightful compensation. Then imagine slurring their good names as if they were working for the British in some "Dirty War'.

    The mask always slips with these people. When its wearing a loaf of Kingsmill bread, or shouting 'Up da Ra' after an election in Waterford, or victim blaming people who lost their limbs because of an SF/PIRA bomb.

    Anyone who thinks they are a normal political party would want their head examined.


  • Options
    #9904
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Sean.3516 wrote: »
    Are Sinners being deliberately obtuse by conflating the "Old" War of Independence era IRA with the PIRA of The Troubles?

    There are many differences between the two but the most important difference was that the Old IRA was recognised as the legitimate army of the democratically elected Dail Eireann.

    It existed from 1919 until 1922 when the Irish Republic was reorganised into the Irish Free State. Any groups claiming to be the IRA after that point (OIRA, PIRA etc.) were rogue organisations that had no mandate whatsoever from the Irish government to engage in military operations against Britain. In other words, they were criminals and terrorists.

    ah cop on - either both are 'terrorists' or neither are. stop trying to have your cake and eat it. at the time the Dail was classed as illegal by the brits (1919) so technically the IRA were as illegal then as later.

    The hypocrisy on here is astounding.


  • Options
    #9905
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    Imagine an elected representative victim blaming the very people who they severely injured and maimed and denying them their lawful and rightful compensation. Then imagine slurring their good names as if they were working for the British in some "Dirty War'.

    The mask always slips with these people. When its wearing a loaf of Kingsmill bread, or shouting 'Up da Ra' after an election in Waterford, or victim blaming people who lost their limbs because of an SF/PIRA bomb.

    Anyone who thinks they are a normal political party would want their head examined.

    dont like them, dont vote for them. If they are as terrible as you make out no-one will vote for them. Cant understand the need for the bleating about SF on boards. Who cares what you think of them - its the votes that keep them relevant. Those votes are increasing every time - except for one local election which was sure to be part of your reply.


  • Options
    #9906
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »
    dont like them, dont vote for them. If they are as terrible as you make out no-one will vote for them. Cant understand the need for the bleating about SF on boards. Who cares what you think of them - its the votes that keep them relevant. Those votes are increasing every time - except for one local election which was sure to be part of your reply.

    Do you hold the same view to the half dozen threads about FG/The Government on this forum, or is that OK?

    You are a self admitted member of SF, so of course it is in your self interest to make any criticism 'go away' kinda like how PIRA sorted many a problem themselves.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9907
    piplip87
    Registered Users Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭piplip87


    jm08 wrote: »
    Its part of republican custom to have an oration at the graveside. From what I've seen of that on youtube, at least social distancing rules seemed to be in operation and it was in the open.

    There was no graveside. He was cremated. It was a political rally.


  • Options
    #9908
    Superfoods
    Closed Accounts Posts: 322 ✭✭Superfoods


    maccored wrote: »
    ah cop on - either both are 'terrorists' or neither are. stop trying to have your cake and eat it. at the time the Dail was classed as illegal by the brits (1919) so technically the IRA were as illegal then as later.

    The hypocrisy on here is astounding.


    Sinn Fein have no issue trying to align themselves with 1916. I don't see them trying to align with Shankill Road bombing etc. Do you?



    If Sinn Fein are so proud of the PIRA why don't they have Mary Lou standing beside a painting of those people?


  • Options
    #9909
    piplip87
    Registered Users Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭piplip87


    maccored wrote: »
    ah cop on - either both are 'terrorists' or neither are. stop trying to have your cake and eat it. at the time the Dail was classed as illegal by the brits (1919) so technically the IRA were as illegal then as later.

    The hypocrisy on here is astounding.

    The IRA during the War of Independence had a mandate from the Irish people. The provos did not. The vast majority north and south did not agree with them.

    The secret army (the provos) where not accountable to the people they claimed to represent. The often killed them.


  • Options
    #9910
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    Do you hold the same view to the half dozen threads about FG/The Government on this forum, or is that OK?

    If I dont like them dont vote for them? I dont vote for FF or FG and you dont see me starting threads about them - so I dont really get your point there
    You are a self admitted member of SF, so of course it is in your self interest to make any criticism 'go away' kinda like how PIRA sorted many a problem themselves.

    err ... what? Criticise all you want, I dont lose any sleep over it. except all i see is whinging, not criticism.

    The IRA existed because they had to, now they dont. No-one would want them back again and no-one would ever decide a conflict like what happened was great fun so lets do it again. That kind of thinking is incredibly stupid.


  • Options
    #9911
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    piplip87 wrote: »
    The IRA during the War of Independence had a mandate from the Irish people. The provos did not. The vast majority north and south did not agree with them.

    The secret army (the provos) where not accountable to the people they claimed to represent. The often killed them.

    the brits - who ruled the place at the time - viewed them as illegal. Really, all the south did was sell out the north for their own peace. You obviously didnt live in the north during the conflict. many, many people I knew supported them. You hadnt a clue what was going on at the time im sure anyway.

    The IRA could not have existed without public support. thats a fact you wont get around no matter how your fantasise it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9912
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Superfoods wrote: »
    Sinn Fein have no issue trying to align themselves with 1916. I don't see them trying to align with Shankill Road bombing etc. Do you?



    If Sinn Fein are so proud of the PIRA why don't they have Mary Lou standing beside a painting of those people?

    why would she? how is a picture of the victims of the shankill bombing and 1916 related? Outside of the IRA killing people? The IRA did that in the early 20th century too but apparently they were allowed to or somesuch waffle.


    in bold btw is is a classic example of the whataboutery mark likes to post pics about


  • Options
    #9913
    Superfoods
    Closed Accounts Posts: 322 ✭✭Superfoods


    maccored wrote: »
    the brits - who ruled the place at the time - viewed them as illegal. Really, all the south did was sell out the north for their own peace. You obviously didnt live in the north during the conflict. many, many people I knew supported them. You hadnt a clue what was going on at the time im sure anyway.

    The IRA could not have existed without public support. thats a fact you wont get around no matter how your fantasise it

    I lived in the North. Many many many people didn't support them. They had no mandate from the majority. Especially in the 80/90/2000's but they continued as is.

    So a few supported them you think the few are more important to the many?


  • Options
    #9914
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Superfoods wrote: »
    I lived in the North. Many many many people didn't support them. They had no mandate from the majority. Especially in the 80/90/2000's but they continued as is.

    So a few supported them you think the few are more important to the many?

    you lived in a completely different place than me then. where i was born, the IRA were needed as the RUC were a bit ****. I bet you were one of the ones on the orange days blocking the roads.


  • Options
    #9915
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »
    If I dont like them dont vote for them? I dont vote for FF or FG and you dont see me starting threads about them - so I dont really get your point there

    Again, you didn't answer the question. There are more busy threads about FG and the government on this forum. Are you going to hold those posters to your own high standard?
    The IRA existed because they had to, now they dont. No-one would want them back again and no-one would ever decide a conflict like what happened was great fun so lets do it again. That kind of thinking is incredibly stupid.


    The IRA still exists, its called the New IRA. Is that something you support, as the answer to that blows your argument out of the water.


  • Options
    #9916
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    Again, you didn't answer the question. There are more busy threads about FG and the government on this forum. Are you going to hold those posters to your own high standard?




    The IRA still exists, its called the New IRA. Is that something you support, as the answer to that blows your argument out of the water.

    you are saying people cant give out about the government? hahahahaha

    Im saying why are you whinging about SF constantly? they arent in government, nothing they do affects you, yet here you are, talking about them all day.

    On the other hand, its quite right people can complain about those who are running the country for them


  • Options
    #9917
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »
    you are saying people cant give out about the government? hahahahaha

    No, not saying that at all.

    I am saying that your own attempts to shut down a debate in regards SF rings hollow when its clear you don't hold other posters or thread to the same high standard you demand here.
    Im saying why are you whinging about SF constantly? they arent in government, nothing they do affects you, yet here you are, talking about them all day.

    They arent in government? How paritionist of you!


  • Options
    #9918
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »




    The IRA still exists, its called the New IRA. Is that something you support, as the answer to that blows your argument out of the water.

    How can my answer to if I support the New IRA (which I dont), blow my contention that people dont do these things for the fun of it?

    The people in the New IRA disagreed with the GFA - like the DUP did, except they backtracked when they realised it was the only way to retain power. the New IRA dont exist for the craic of it. they exist because those people dont trust the british government.

    I don't disagree with the GFA so I have a different viewpoint that the New IRA. If there was no GFA and things were as bad in the north, then that might be different - but the reality is there is a GFA and thats all people like me wanted - a political say.

    There wasnt much of a political path to follow before the GFA for nationalists in the north. You'd know all this if you didnt spend all your time posting about sf on boards


  • Options
    #9919
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    No, not saying that at all.

    I am saying that your own attempts to shut down a debate in regards SF rings hollow when its clear you don't hold other posters or thread to the same high standard you demand here.

    'you don't hold other posters or thread to the same high standard you demand here' ... by criticising the two parties that are in government?

    You ARE saying that

    They arent in government? How paritionist of you!

    SF arent in government. they are in government in the north, which is a different jurisdiction. Give up the comedy - its not working for you


  • Options
    #9920
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    maccored wrote: »
    you are saying people cant give out about the government? hahahahaha

    Im saying why are you whinging about SF constantly? they arent in government, nothing they do affects you, yet here you are, talking about them all day.

    On the other hand, its quite right people can complain about those who are running the country for them

    People can complain about what they want to complain about.

    Not a surprise though that supporters of a fascist-like party like Sinn Fein want to shut down discussion. The Nazi party rose to power in the early 1930s in the same sort of way, by suppressing criticism of their policies in favour of all-out attack on whoever was in government and whatever they did. I am not saying that Sinn Fein are as evil as the Nazis, but the tactics to seek power - populist opposition to everything a government proposes together with a complete absence of practical solutions - are eerily similar.


  • Options
    #9921
    Sean.3516
    Registered Users Posts: 862 ✭✭✭Sean.3516


    maccored wrote: »
    ah cop on - either both are 'terrorists' or neither are. stop trying to have your cake and eat it. at the time the Dail was classed as illegal by the brits (1919) so technically the IRA were as illegal then as later.

    The hypocrisy on here is astounding.

    Yes, both were illegal under British rule but the Republican position post-1916 was that the Irish Republic existed and it was simply a matter of securing its existence from an occupying force. So from Dail Eireann's position they were its legitimate army. You had two separate authorities claiming to be the legitimate rulers of Ireland at that time. Deciding which one was the true authority meant fighting a war. The result of that war was a compromise that meant the Irish Republic being reorganised into the Irish Free State and the IRA becoming the Free State Army.

    Yes, the Provos like the Old IRA were illegal in the eyes of the British. But unlike the Old IRA, Dail Eireann never adopted them in an official capacity. They were solo actors. They had no legitimacy.

    If you believe that things like democratic consent matter at all, you have to recognise this distinction


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9922
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    SF arent in government. they are in government in the north,

    Ouch!


  • Options
    #9923
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Sean.3516 wrote: »
    Yes, both were illegal under British rule but the Republican position post-1916 was that the Irish Republic existed and it was simply a matter of securing its existence from an occupying force. So from Dail Eireann's position they were its legitimate army. You had two separate authorities claiming to be the legitimate rulers of Ireland at that time. Deciding which one was the true authority meant fighting a war. The result of that war was a compromise that meant the Irish Republic being reorganised into the Irish Free State and the IRA becoming the Free State Army.

    Yes, the Provos like the Old IRA were illegal in the eyes of the British. But unlike the Old IRA, Dail Eireann never adopted them in an official capacity. They were solo actors. They had no legitimacy.

    If you believe that things like democratic consent matter at all, you have to recognise this distinction



    Britain ruled ireland, the IRA of old were illegal. they killed people. they killed civilians. if you believe people saying a grouping is legal, then that makes it ok to kill, then you are really missing the point. Its either morally something you can stand behind or not. when it came to both versions, they had no other choice in their times. That has changed since the GFA - which is why the likes of the dissidents arent supported by many of those who might have supported other versions of the IRA.

    But - to say one was 'right' and the other was 'wrong' is just silly talk.


  • Options
    #9924
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    Ouch!

    whats your issue with that?


  • Options
    #9925
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    blanch152 wrote: »
    People can complain about what they want to complain about.

    Not a surprise though that supporters of a fascist-like party like Sinn Fein want to shut down discussion. The Nazi party rose to power in the early 1930s in the same sort of way, by suppressing criticism of their policies in favour of all-out attack on whoever was in government and whatever they did. I am not saying that Sinn Fein are as evil as the Nazis, but the tactics to seek power - populist opposition to everything a government proposes together with a complete absence of practical solutions - are eerily similar.

    course they can complain, but they shouldnt complain about the number of SF threads etc etc when they are creating them themselves.

    I done history for my O and A levels. Theres no similarity between SF and the Nazis. FG mind you - thats a different story


  • Options
    #9926
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »
    whats your issue with that?

    What you wrote was an oxymoron.

    You stated both a non-truth and a contradictory truth in the very same sentence. Impressive actually.


  • Options
    #9927
    tikkahunter
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭tikkahunter


    https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0826/1161323-victims-tweet-troubles/

    Just say what you want , remove it and move on . Then repeat.


  • Options
    #9928
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »

    The people in the New IRA disagreed with the GFA - like the DUP did, except they backtracked when they realised it was the only way to retain power. the New IRA dont exist for the craic of it. they exist because those people dont trust the british government.

    Yet you claimed there was no IRA but then admit that there actually is an IRA... so which is it?


  • Options
    #9929
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    What you wrote was an oxymoron.

    You stated both a non-truth and a contradictory truth in the very same sentence. Impressive actually.

    so sf arent in government in the north then? or no, they are in power here? which is incorrect because you seem to think one of them is.


  • Options
    #9930
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    Yet you claimed there was no IRA but then admit that there actually is an IRA... so which is it?

    I claimed there was no IRA (the provos dont exist) but then there is an IRA (the New IRA)?

    Are you on drugs mark? Seriously? Can you please explain your bit of waffling there as I cant make head nor tail of it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9931
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    tikkahunter wrote: »
    https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0826/1161323-victims-tweet-troubles/

    Just say what you want , remove it and move on . Then repeat.
    In a tweet that was later deleted, the former MEP said that the pensions were mainly for those who fought Britain's "dirty war" in Ireland and mainly for those involved in collusion.

    She might have a bit of a point there. Im sure those working for the RUC in the loyalist death squads will get the pension. if thats the case so should everyone else involved. either make it that only innocent, non involved civillians get it, or that everyone does.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement