Blackjack wrote: » Hopefully you'll hold the Civilians massacred in Dublin, Monaghan and Omagh in better esteem.
Blackjack wrote: » As long as you're willing to apply the same rules for all then, or is it just OK if the rules only apply to one side?
Fratton Fred wrote: » I do, do you?
Fratton Fred wrote: » bah, you're just looking for a fight, you know full well what I mean.
Mayo Exile wrote: » Have such bodies ever, ever, ever done wrong in your eyes? Also I am wondering were you mugged by a gang of vicious rationalists in the past which leads to your seemingly extremist empiricist viewpoint in this thread??
FlutterinBantam wrote: » :rolleyes: Makes a bit of a change from the usual fare being promulgated here I expect.
Blackjack wrote: » Not really - you'd suggested the following: "The IRA called it a war, but didn't wear uniforms. If they did, then a lot of these "Civilians" that were supposedly killed by the British Army or UVF would have been combatants." Are you suggesting that those killed in Dublin and Monaghan were members of the IRA, or another Combatant group?. Interesting that you put the UVF and the British Army in the same league there, incidentally.
Fratton Fred wrote: » no I'm not. i said a lot, not all. stop looking for a fight. who else was the collusion supposed to have been between?
Camelot wrote: » Yes, somebody else stated that D&M was the single worst atrocity of the Troubles, so I pointed that it was actually Omagh. (Dublin & Monaghan were multiple).
Camelot wrote: » My functioning brain cells tell me that some complete 'low lifes' with even fewer brain cells than me, planted a Bomb designed to maim & murder as many as possible!
Camelot wrote: » I'll tell you why I am staying on, its because this blasted thread is still here, in the middle of two UK election threads to which I am posting to.
Camelot wrote: » Dissedents indeed, but what about Provisional IRA attacks :cool:
Blackjack wrote: » Stop looking for a fight?. Do you just not want to answer the questions?
moonpurple wrote: » when you start to think the the Irish in the north who do not bend the knee to Rome are less equal to any other Irish then you start to think and talk in this way,
Fratton Fred wrote: » OK, I'll write this slowly this time to see if you can understand it better.No I'm not, I said "A lot" not all.
OhNoYouDidn't wrote: » But in the context of this debate you were flaming and you know it. Elements of the British military provided a bomb and logistical support to terrorists who killed 33 innocent people in no warning car bombs in a neighbouring state. Can you not see any problem with that? It is somewhat depressing that the three English guys on the thread are using varying levels of tactic to confuse the issue or defend the collusion. Shoe is on the other foot with something like the Eddie Fullerton muder and the Garda involvment, yet very few Irish people will defend their actions. I know its only the internet, but if you are wrapping the flag round you on this issue, how are we to move forward as two states in friendship?
OhNoYouDidn't wrote: » Elements of the British military provided a bomb and logistical support to terrorists who killed 33 innocent people in no warning car bombs in a neighbouring state.
OhNoYouDidn't wrote: » It is somewhat depressing that the three English guys on the thread are using varying levels of tactic to confuse the issue or defend the collusion. Shoe is on the other foot with something like the Eddie Fullerton muder and the Garda involvment, yet very few Irish people will defend their actions.
OhNoYouDidn't wrote: » I know its only the internet, but if you are wrapping the flag round you on this issue, how are we to move forward as two states in friendship?
Camelot wrote: » You convieniently forgot the word 'allegedly'.
Camelot wrote: » Move forward in friendship indeed, but not when words like 'allegedly' are convienently left out. By the way Oh No, if any elements of the security forces actually provided the Bomb & statistical support, then you can be perfectly sure that the three English guys you speak of + me would have no hesitation whatsoever in condeming them as scum bags, however, if your allegations were true (big if), it would point to the fact that those involved were low life renegades, who were certainly not ordered by their superiors to act in such a way, >
Camelot wrote: » Whereas when takling about IRA/INLA Bombs, that was their game, that was what they did on a weekly basis, that was what they were ordered to do, (from the Top down), their very Raison d'Etre was (to Bomb & maim at will on a regular basis) . . . .
It wasn't me! wrote: » How about we acknowledge that there was murder and mayhem on both sides, a huge proportion of which will never be properly confronted, and move on towards peace? That was the sentiment of the Good Friday Agreement, after all. What's more important, peaceful cooperation and community integration or answers? If you want to try and press things to people and governments, you're just going to undermine the spirit of the most important statement of peaceful intent this island has ever seen.
Fratton Fred wrote: » The context of this debate changed several times. You are looking for flaming, but it isn't there.
Fratton Fred wrote: » Can someone explain what the "Proof" is that the British provided the support you claim? Or is this like a lot of things, if someone says it enough times, it must be true?
OhNoYouDidn't wrote: » Agencies of the British state, funded by the British taxpayer who organisised death squads and bombings of a soverign capital to kill civilians to force political change. The fact that you are showing a moral equivalence between the behaviour of the British state and these groups is preciscely the problem with this debate. You are defending it.
Camelot wrote: » I can see what you are up to Oh No, but i'm not playing ball ........
OhNoYouDidn't wrote: » There was always supposed to be some form of reconciliation forum which was shelved. But the Dublin government abjectly failed to defend its citizens from foreign military attack and actively covered up the incident. Thats got nothing to do with the GFA and we should press for answers regardless.
moonpurple wrote: » wolpawnat wrote: 'this of course is due to the fact that the people that day were herded into the area where the bomb was,' yes the ruc would have herded a crowd into the path of a bomb, just as the people of nagasaki and hiroshima danced with delight as the atomic bombs were dropped on their city
moonpurple wrote: » I do not type for you my brother as you are probably 12, I type for the young who might digest your nonsense
moonpurple wrote: » you should be banned by now but it is better to shed light on the distorted views of the small group of nutters inbreeding will always produce on a small island on the western coast of europe
Fratton Fred wrote: » I have no doubt collusion went on, in fact I am surprised that people are surprised that it did. as a military man, do you not at least have empathy for a lot of it? I'm not expecting you to sympathise, but you must surely understand how a lot of otherwise respectable British Soldiers sank to these depths?
Fratton Fred wrote: » if killing a killer is terrorism then yes, but lets fact it, it is all semantics. The IRA called it a war, but didn't wear uniforms. If they did, then a lot of these "Civilians" that were supposedly killed by the British Army or UVF would have been combatants. don't forget, there is also well documented cases where collusion with UVF informers helped prevent some atrocities from being carried out.
Blackjack wrote: » Don't worry, the speed at which you type isn't really going to make any difference, as long as you are happy enough with the outcome. Honestly, it's an Internet message board - take your time - be happy with what you type, because it reads the same no matter how long you take to type it all out. Let's have a look what you have written though: I then asked you:As long as you're willing to apply the same rules for all then, or is it just OK if the rules only apply to one side? I asked:As long as you're willing to apply the same rules for all then, or is it just OK if the rules only apply to one side? and Hopefully you'll hold the Civilians massacred in Dublin, Monaghan and Omagh in better esteem. Cue accusations about looking for fights, etc, but you answered the following regarding the application of the same set of rules: I'm just wondering - given you think it's acceptable to use Terrorism to Murder Irish Citizens, and that is what happened here - Do you find it equally acceptable for the IRA to Murder a few British ones, given that a lot of them may have been in the UVF, or the British Army, such as the Guildford Bombings, or the Shankill Road Bombings?. You Probably don't, but could you perhaps at least have empathy for a lot of it?. Given that the the IRA became what it did from the late 60's by the complete failure of the British State to even start to permit anything close to Civil rights for a significant proportion of the Northern Irish Population, you can probably understand why people turned to the IRA and agents of violence, given their attempts at Peaceful means got a bunch of them shot? Or the fact that it was not until 1992 that the UDA was declared to be an illegal organisation, despite it being a case that they killed 80 people in 1972 alone. Do you not at least have empathy for a lot of it?.
moonpurple wrote: » in the 70s and 80s the ira and the south became siezed with the idea of undertaking what we saw in bosnia and its surrounding area, ethnic cleansing, a reversal of the year 1600 plantation of ulster,
Nodin wrote: » No, I'm afraid not.
Fratton Fred wrote: » I have no doubt collusion went on, in fact I am surprised that people are surprised that it did.as a military man, do you not at least have empathy for a lot of it? I'm not expecting you to sympathise, but you must surely understand how a lot of otherwise respectable British Soldiers sank to these depths?
Fratton Fred wrote: » I can't understand the use of bombs to kill any civilians, so no, I don't have any empathy. I have empathy where people chose to kill to protect themselves or others, but if that were the case, the people being kiled would not be civilians.
