downcow wrote: » So now you are questioning the ni life and times survey. Haha you’ll find you could hold you next meeting in a phone box It’s highly respected by one and all (except Francie)
Fionn1952 wrote: » The post you've quoted should've been phrased to include the term civilians, as it was in my initial post. It was in the link provided; Loyalists were responsible for the murder of 22 Catholic civilians, in total only 27 Protestant civilians have been killed since the GFA. I already stated that I couldn't identify a breakdown of this, but I would presume that >5 of these were committed by Loyalists, which would leave the number killed by Republicans at under 22. Even if Republicans were responsible for every civilian Protestant death (which we know they weren't), your statement that they had killed, 'many times more....' would be incorrect.
Fionn1952 wrote: » Still skipping over this, Downcow?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Nope...questioning the validity and competence of Trimble's 'special adviser' considering where Trimble led Unionism. Is it a recent poll?
Fionn1952 wrote: » 2019 is the most recent L&T poll on the topic, Francie.
Natterjack from Kerry wrote: » republicans north and south to give up the quest for a united Ireland
maccored wrote: » more avoidance - well done
downcow wrote: » It wasn’t me claimed the ira were peacemakers and that they hadn’t killed anyone post gfa. I am simply evidencing that some nonsense is claimed on here. And it’s more than nonsense when lives are wrecked.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I presented the data that clearly shows that NO deaths are attributed to the IRA in the 3 years after the GFA 1999/2000/2001. FACT. What is also a FACT is that the IRA were NOT engaged in a tit for tat in the run up to the GFA with Loyalists, which was ANOTHER claim of yours. I will attach it again and I suggest you study it and withdraw.
maccored wrote: » you claimed republicans werent looking for peace when adams and humes started talks in the late 80s. History proves you're talking bollox in that regard
downcow wrote: » Wrong and wrong I did not claim the IRA were involved in tit-for-tat in the lead up to GFA. In fact quite the contrary. I pointed out that they had to massively reduce their sectarian killing because they were chasing votes since the mid-80s and some of their voters did not like them killing people just because they were Protestants. Please answer the question I asked instead of continually posting up stats from the Internet. Who Do You Think murdered Eamon Collins in January 1999 following his brazen return to Newry in spite of the IRA telling him he would be murdered if he returned. So Francie, don't misquote me so as you can give the answers you want, and please answer simple questions
downcow wrote: » Are you really naïve enough to think that the IRA had got one morning and decided they wanted to be the nice guys and therefore they would drop other objectives and seek peace. These are the same guys that still carry out horrific murders (even though Francie think they do not). Are you for real? Makes all those slaughtered the squabble here even more pathetic if you are correct. The IRA were overwhelmed with informers, right to the very top of the organisation. They were operating from within a catholic community who was being indiscriminately slaughtered by loyalist thugs in retaliation for pointless IRA attacks. The military were getting more and more sophisticated. The IRA were not being the good guys. They needed a fig leaf to get out of the hole they dug. I did not think the Republican leadership would have the audacity, given how they devastated lives, and indeed tortured and murdered many of their own loyal members to unwittingly cover for British agents, to look after themselves in the process. They got their Armani suits, holiday homes in Donegal, seats in the British institutions in Stormont, etc, etc, while their volunteers were left with the guilt and trauma. So do I think they became Buddhists overnight - absolutely not
maccored wrote: » so you are in denial then that the humes and adams talks lead to the peace process. says a lot - typical unionist.
downcow wrote: » Are you really naïve enough to think that the IRA had got one morning and decided they wanted to be the nice guys and therefore they would drop other objectives and seek peace. These are the same guys that still carry out horrific murders (even though Francie think they do not).
FrancieBrady wrote: » I have no idea who killed Eamonn Collins. What I do know is that there are no deaths attributed to the IRA in 1999/2000/2001 according to CAIN. Loyalists, whom you claimed stopped when the IRA stopped killed 29 people in those 3 years. I.E. While the IRA worked on the peace, Loyalism and dissidents were trying to wreck the peace. Those are the FACTS of the stats. If you can dispute that with backed up sources, go ahead. Third invitation to you now to do so. You hate statistics and facts. This we know.
Junkyard Tom wrote: » Yeah forget that.
Granadino wrote: » Unreal that stats are being used by a few folk as a themuns v usuns.
Natterjack from Kerry wrote: » A debate such as the above unfortunately continues NI as a failed entity. The difference now though is that it is 100% the fault of republicans, still obsessed with a united Ireland when it is in the interest of all that they should work on building what they have, which is now very good, rather than chasing a ghost of the past. Let it go lads, let it go.
jm08 wrote: » How do you mean ''let it go''? Let what go? What difference will it make?