grayzer75 wrote: » So what's SF's reasoning?
walshb wrote: » The cops reasoning is entirely different to SFs.
grayzer75 wrote: » The cops aren't happy with the fines either because they haven't been told how to enforce them or who is actually collecting them. They also said there's no power of entry to stop house parties so if the occupant doesn't open the front door to them there's nothing they can do.
Truthvader wrote: » Eh it actually is an argument. We are talking about people running a political party here. If you like please assemble a list of sociopathic thugs from around the world in various other jurisdictions and I will have the same view of them.
walshb wrote: » No surprise SF against fines being imposed on those breaking Covid rules.. Fines will be issued to absolute toe rags. Because that’s what it takes before a fine is imposed. It’s a last resort issue...nobody win be fined for no obvious and clear reason, or for any behaviours that they cannot easily rectify...
mynamejeff wrote: » it was raised by another poster in fact , Im interested how you equate supporting a organisation that not only facilitated the murder of a child for no reason and then protected the murdering scumbag with your own morality. I mean to any normal minded human its indefensible isn't it ? im not the one who made him a victim nor the one who continues to support those that did your on really thin ice francie
Truthvader wrote: » Yeo, I did hear the whitewashed pack of lies and drivel for the sad useless thug. My understanding is that his principle contribution to the "peace process" was to rob a bank - leaving aside all his previous depravity which was all useless FF an FG did arise from a conflict about 100 years ago. They are not reporting to a criminal "cohort" to use your new word, they are not running multiple murderers as candidates and their members are not involved in organised crime, nor are they beating boys to death in sheds in "unauthorised" actions As to the whinging about "selective victims" no-one else is glorifying and celebrating criminals or saying they had "no choice" or that the murder of two boys out shopping in Warrington "got results" If you can find anything remotely similar in any party running candidates here I will happily select them too.
FrancieBrady wrote: » What? Seriously? Ask whoever it was that included it in the count of the victims of the conflict. Jesus, how many of the killings could you ask that question of...think about it for a minute. All those random sectarian killings. The victims of Kingsmill, the Bloody Sunday dead. But Jeff heads to Google, finds a particularly emotive one and tries to make it some sort of exception to the general savagery and brutality that tragically happened. Victim exploitation, nothing more and nothing less.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Repeating blanch's fingers in his ears, partitionist argument (they aren't looking for a vote down here) isn't actually an argument. What you are saying is that you have no interest in what actually happened. You main concern is not 'victims', it is to block a democratically mandated political party you don't like.
FrancieBrady wrote: » You clearly were not listening to those who eulogised Storey and his contribution to the community after the conflict/war ended. There have been many many players in the conflict/war who have been 'buried' since, up to and including Maggie Thatcher and I have never felt the need to be so hateful about them. The utter lack of respect for family and those left behind is another feature of this cohort on here. It wasn't a 'pretend funeral', he was taken to the church and cremated afterwards, like thousands of others. That you didn't know the details of what was to happen is your own fault. What you are going to have to get over (because it is pointless bile) is that just like FF and FG who rose out of the ashes of a similarly vicious and nasty conflict/war is that SF have as much a democratic mandate as anyone else on this island.
mynamejeff wrote: » how would this murder be connected to the gfa then ? political or military goal?
Truthvader wrote: » These people are not candidates or members of any party in the Republic. Have a "wee look" at Pol Pot. WTF are you on about ?
FrancieBrady wrote: » If you knew anything about what the different sides propose in a Truth Recovery Process then you would know the above isn't true. I haven't defended or justified a single act of violence in the entire conflict/war. Have a read and inform yourself. There are many options available if the political will was there with those responsible (actually mandated by the GFA and as yet shelved) for initiating a Process.https://pureadmin.qub.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/7455652/McEvoy_Mallinder_Models_on_Truth_Amnesty_Prosecution_3_Dec_2013.pdf You can I am sure, find as easily as you find select victims SF's views on a TRP on the mighty Google machine too.
grayzer75 wrote: » Have a wee look at Dee Stitt, Jackie McDonald and the DUP good lad.
mynamejeff wrote: » Legacy issues would only cover legit political or military murders right ? so sf should hand over the murders then , as there was no political or military reason for it , it was just a scumbag murdering an innocent child who annoyed one of their physio thugs . still not to late for them to own up . you are trying badly to defend the indefensible …… again but I guess its a job
FrancieBrady wrote: » I don't think anyone justifies the killing of a 15 year old Jeff. Just as nobody would justify dropping a bomb indiscriminately from 10,000ft. Again you ask one side to 'hand over' their own. It isn't going to happen. Leacy issues are a blockage to proper justice and closure. ONLY the two governments can move that process forward.
blanch152 wrote: » I have read some sanctimonious self-serving bullsh!t in my time on here, but never have I seen a post as full of untruths and lies about other posters. It is very easy to spot posters who are merely interested in point-scoring. They put up gifs and pictures with little comment other than whataboutery and engage in Twitter-dumpng from no-mark Twitter accounts.
mynamejeff wrote: » so how does that justify the murder of a innocent 15 year old child with the intellect of a 9 year old in furtherance of a free and united Ireland under sf ? did sf hand over the killers for justice ?
McMurphy wrote: » There was a thread here quite recently discussing the Glenanne gang, and covering the collusion that took place between the British state, it's security forces and loyalist paramilitaries and their murder of over 130 innocent Catholics. The documentary the thread was about showed reconstructions of various murders on Catholics which had members of the RUC still in uniform, drive the killers away to safety in police cars. You will find very few of the same posters in this thread, who are - castigating the provos for "murdering Catholics" in that thread doing likewise because (I guess) there's no political hay to be made from that as it isn't covering their favourite sport "shinner bashing". They don't care for the victims, be they innocent Catholics, protestants, paramilitaries or members of security forces, they are only interested in point scoring. Simple as that.
Truthvader wrote: » Not true. Sinn Fein made it quite clear at the pretend funeral for the sociopath Bobby Storey that they celebrate and glorify his sad useless life and all the pointless acts of cruelty he was involved with. Plus Sinn Fein remain under the control of the IRA and many of their members and TD's are unrepentant thugs and killers. No other party is controlled by and peopled by these kinds of people and no other party is celebrating and justifying their wretched part in what you refer to as the "war/conflict". You can complain about it being a "selective list but it is Sinn Fein who are selecting the list. If the Parachute Regiment or the Shankill Butchers or any other criminal enterprise were seeking votes or controlled by criminals they too would be "selected"
FrancieBrady wrote: » Well you have proved yourself more than capable of finding victims Jeff. In answer to the second part of your question I need to ask you a question that might make you examine if the word 'justify' is appropriate here: When Leo hangs a photo of Collins in his office and proudly stands in front of it, is he 'justifying' the killing of the Cairo Gang members, many of them in their beds? Republicans were one side in a conflict/war in this country. Their conflict/war is over as far as I am concerned, as is the conflict/war of Loyalists and the British. I have argued here that everyone has to be allowed to remember their dead with respect. I don't see cenotaph ceremonies as 'justifying' what the British did for instance.
mynamejeff wrote: » not hard to find sf ira victims though is it , how can they(your party ) justify this killing ?
FrancieBrady wrote: » So you just went to google and found a new victim for the list? Wow.
Truthvader wrote: » If the Parachute Regiment or the Shankill Butchers or any other criminal enterprise were seeking votes or controlled by criminals they too would be "selected"
