Convicted child killer canvassing for sinn fein[Mod warning-First Post]

Dan_Solo · 23-05-2014 02:03PM

bumper234 wrote: »

I would never lose a second of sleep over these or any other election results, I started this thread to point out that a convicted child killer is canvassing for a sinn fein candidate, People are well able to make of that what they will.

Well they have. The answer seems to be "not much".
I think we have maybe two posters here on record as changing their vote from SF because of this?
Why, were you voting SF yourself before this?

czx · 23-05-2014 02:03PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

That reason being the smear campaign built on the fears of the golden circle and their supporters you mean?
OK, got you now.

No, it's just pretty obvious to most people. Can't think of many parties which have such steadfast support. It doesn't make sense that SF are special enough to warrant such support

LuckyLloyd · 23-05-2014 02:05PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Answer me this then, a question that none of your fellow apologists have been able to answer.

Why was Warrington bombed on a Saturday lunchtime?
Why were the Birmingham pubs and the La Mon restaurant bombed on a Friday night?

The same question could be asked of Manchester, Harrods, Guildford and many more.

Because they decided to embark on a campaign of terror deliberately targetted at British citizens. A dirty business that was effective, even if it was morally questionable.

bumper234 · 23-05-2014 02:06PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Well they have. The answer seems to be "not much".
I think we have maybe two posters here on record as changing their vote from SF because of this?
Why, were you voting SF yourself before this?

I'd rather scoop out my own eyeballs with a spoon and feed them to feral cats

Barely There · 23-05-2014 02:08PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

So everybody who votes SF then?
Can we likewise have Failbots, Gaelbots, Labots and Antibots then?

Shinnerbot's a great word.

All the right-thinking people who condemn the murderous campaign of hate and terror carried out by SF/IRA have many varied political viewpoints, many of which I disagree with.

Shinnerbots on the other hand have about three basic arguments that they constantly bleat like badly-wired automats.

1) It was a war - bad stuff sometimes happens
2) Whataboutery all the bad stuff the Brits did?
3) Well all the other political parties are just as bad as the Shinners.

Try it out with any Shinnerbot post and you'll easily fit it into one of these categories.

Not one original thought among the lot of them.

Thus 'Shinnerbot'.

Dan_Solo · 23-05-2014 02:09PM

bumper234 wrote: »

I'd rather scoop out my own eyeballs with a spoon and feed them to feral cats

Precisely. So the sum total of shouting this from the rooftops is pretty much nada.
You go girl.

Dan_Solo · 23-05-2014 02:10PM

czx wrote: »

No, it's just pretty obvious to most people. Can't think of many parties which have such steadfast support. It doesn't make sense that SF are special enough to warrant such support

Steadfast indeed. Seems to be getting bigger every year though. It must be contagious.

Happyman42 · 23-05-2014 02:10PM

bumper234 wrote: »

I would never lose a second of sleep over these or any other election results, I started this thread to point out that a convicted child killer is canvassing for a sinn fein candidate, People are well able to make of that what they will.

He has been helping at many elections before this.
Sensational claim fail!

FTA69 · 23-05-2014 02:10PM

bumper234 wrote: »

To the first part,

Please name one who was convicted of the COLD BLOODED MURDER of civilian children, if you can't then your point is moot

The Brits didn't convict their own bumper because they didn't consider their particular atrocities to be crimes at all. Are you suggesting there were never any RAF bombers who later became politically active? No veterans of Malaysia? No veterans of Kenya?

Are you denying that the British Army killed children or something?

And if you accept the above to be true, how is the concept ex-British soldiers who participated in violent campaigns taking part in politics moot?

I have no issue with "Ex IRA members" campaigning for for sinn fein and in fact i encourage more of them to do it as it reminds people of the scum they are affiliated with. I have an issue with a CONVICTED CHILD KILLER canvassing for sinn fein members.

Similarly there's no point in b*tching about McMahon, he's one ex-combatant out of tens of thousands.

The IRA as a whole were responsible for civilian deaths, this is correct. Many former IRA members now participate in the political process. You disagree with this. ("scum" etc)

The British Army (of which you were a member personally) as a whole were responsible for civilian deaths, this is also correct. Many ex-soldiers now participate in the political process. You agree with this.

Can you not see the slightest bit of hypocrisy here?

Instead you're hiding behind the nonsense that soldiers weren't ever "convicted" of killing children. This unfortunately, doesn't mean the British Army weren't responsible for children's death.

Dan_Solo · 23-05-2014 02:12PM

Barely There wrote: »

Shinnerbot's a great word.

All the right-thinking people who condemn the murderous campaign of hate and terror carried out by SF/IRA have many varied political viewpoints, many of which I disagree with.

Shinnerbots on the other hand have about three basic arguments that they constantly bleat like badly-wired automats.

1) It was a war - bad stuff sometimes happens
2) Whataboutery all the bad stuff the Brits did?
3) Well all the other political parties are just as bad as the Shinners.

Try it out with any Shinnerbot post and you'll easily fit it into one of these categories.

Not one original thought among the lot of them.

Thus 'Shinnerbot'.

Which is fairly hilarious considering you yourself are obediently listing all the generic moans from the anti-Sinn Fein smear campaign brigade.

Dan_Solo · 23-05-2014 02:14PM

FTA69 wrote: »

Instead you're hiding behind the nonsense that soldiers weren't ever "convicted" of killing children. This unfortunately, doesn't mean the British Army weren't responsible for children's death.

At least in McMahon's case you can say he has paid his legally required penalty. For BA murderers crimes are simply ignored.

bumper234 · 23-05-2014 02:14PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Well they have. The answer seems to be "not much".
I think we have maybe two posters here on record as changing their vote from SF because of this?
Why, were you voting SF yourself before this?

bumper234 wrote: »

I'd rather scoop out my own eyeballs with a spoon and feed them to feral cats

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Precisely. So the sum total of shouting this from the rooftops is pretty much nada.
You go girl.

Who knows whether people have changed their mind about voting SF? 880 posts but over 20,000 views, Not everyone reading this has posted a comment you know.

czx · 23-05-2014 02:20PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Steadfast indeed. Seems to be getting bigger every year though. It must be contagious.

I would love to know what makes SF so immune from the issues that seem to be present in other parties

Fratton Fred · 23-05-2014 02:21PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

You're kidding, right?
Having an evacuation at the busiest time of the week for a high street or pub is maximum disruption, not when they are closed.

So having your premises destroyed at midnight is less disruptive than at lunch time? If your business is destroyed, it's destroyed.

Unless, of course, you are trying to imply that the customers of that business are the actual targets, not the business itself.

Barely There · 23-05-2014 02:21PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Which is fairly hilarious considering you yourself are obediently listing all the generic moans from the anti-Sinn Fein smear campaign brigade.

I do believe this is the first time I've heard the 'I know you are but what am I' argument outside a primary school playground setting.

Well done,

bumper234 · 23-05-2014 02:24PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So having your premises destroyed at midnight is less disruptive than at lunch time? If your business is destroyed, it's destroyed.

Unless, of course, you are trying to imply that the customers of that business are the actual targets, not the business itself.

The real reason

Shortly before midday on 20 March 1993, The Samaritans in Liverpool received a bomb warning by telephone. According to police, the caller said only that a bomb had been planted outside a Boots shop.[5][6][7] Merseyside Police sent officers to branches of Boots in Liverpool and warned the Cheshire Constabulary, who patrolled nearby Warrington.[6] About 30 minutes later, at about 12:25,[7][8][9][10] two bombs exploded on Bridge Street in Warrington, about 100 yards (91 m) apart.[6] The blasts happened within a minute of each other.[8] One exploded outside Boots and McDonald's,[6] and one outside the Argos catalogue store.[1] The area was crowded with shoppers. Witnesses said that "the first explosion drove panicking shoppers into the path of the next blast just seconds later".[1] It was later found that the bombs had been placed inside cast-iron litter bins, causing large amounts of shrapnel.[10] Buses were organized to ferry people away from the scene and 20 paramedics and crews from 17 ambulances were sent to deal with the aftermath.[1]

Maximum disruption indeed:rolleyes:

Fratton Fred · 23-05-2014 02:27PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Because they decided to embark on a campaign of terror deliberately targetted at British citizens. A dirty business that was effective, even if it was morally questionable.

Effective in what way? Warrington was the final straw for a lot of PIRA sympathisers which eventually forced them to the negotiating table.

Similarly, pressure was put on the British Government to put an end to it all, so they were forced to negotiate.

Effective in achieving the PIRA's sole aim of a United Ireland by physical force? I think it's pretty safe to say we are still a good way off that.

Grayson · 23-05-2014 02:29PM

Happyman42 wrote: »

That Churchill should have been tried for war crimes for his terror bombing?
I absolutely do.

http://www.rense.com/general85/ddes.htm

It should be noted too that the Black and Tans came about as a result of Churchill's suggestion when he was Secretary Of State for War in 1920. Lovely chap.

Great link. I love the language it uses.

Ilja Ehrenburg, Stalin's Jewish propaganda demon

If you'd read the history of it you'd see that Churchill was initially against it but was swayed by Harris.

Either way, he did sign off on it and it was horrific.

How does this relate to a guy killing two kids on a boat? Are we going to bring in every horrible crime ever committed by anyone to try and excuse him?

czx · 23-05-2014 02:31PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

A dirty business that was effective, even if it was morally questionable.

Morally questionable?!

Dan_Solo · 23-05-2014 02:31PM

Barely There wrote: »

I do believe this is the first time I've heard the 'I know you are but what am I' argument outside a primary school playground setting.

Well done,

At least you were man enough not even to bother denying it. Congrats on that.

humanji · 23-05-2014 02:48PM

There's too much pettiness going on here. Stick to the topic and stop having a go at each other.

RollieFingers · 23-05-2014 02:53PM

Just on my way out the door to vote for Sinn Fein, g'wan the lads!

Happyman42 · 23-05-2014 02:54PM

Grayson wrote: »

Great link. I love the language it uses.

If you'd read the history of it you'd see that Churchill was initially against it but was swayed by Harris.

Either way, he did sign off on it and it was horrific.

How does this relate to a guy killing two kids on a boat? Are we going to bring in every horrible crime ever committed by anyone to try and excuse him?

No, just highlighting what happens when you embark on a campaign of terror and the hypocrisy of some in trying to vilify one when ignoring the actions of others.
The conflict/war happened, it was nasty and vicious and people died and where wounded. Like they do in all wars/conflicts as demonstrated. There is no such thing as a more 'moral' war.
What matters is who is now active in seeking a long term peaceful democratic solution.

Iwasfrozen · 23-05-2014 02:55PM

Happyman42 wrote: »

I challenge you to name one member of SF who has confessed to being a 'terrorist'.

Please back it up with quotes.

Martin Mc Guinness there are others but you only asked for one.

kingchess · 23-05-2014 02:57PM

people wanted SF to give up the gun and use political means only-and when they did they are attacked for their past,people wanted them in government in the north but they are not clean enough to be in government in the south?I am not a SF supporter because I do not think their policies makes sense about the economy,

bumper234 · 23-05-2014 02:58PM

RollieFingers wrote: »

Just on my way out the door to vote for Sinn Fein, g'wan the lads!

Makes me think

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/05/17/article-1387878-0C1D311000000578-842_634x379.jpg

bumper234 · 23-05-2014 02:59PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Martin Mc Guinness there are others but you only asked for one.

He will come back and say MMcG admitted he was in the IRA but never used the word "terrorist"

Kevhog1988 · 23-05-2014 03:03PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Martin Mc Guinness there are others but you only asked for one.

Martin McGuiness would never refer to himself or any other volunteer as a terrorist…..

czx · 23-05-2014 03:03PM

RollieFingers wrote: »

Just on my way out the door to vote for Sinn Fein, g'wan the lads!

You're sure to have a blast

Thelonious · 23-05-2014 03:04PM

bumper234 wrote: »

He will come back and say MMcG admitted he was in the IRA but never used the word "terrorist"

The Provisional IRA were not terrorists, they were freedom fighters.

Convicted child killer canvassing for sinn fein[Mod warning-First Post]

Comments