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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Martin McGuinness commander of Óglaigh na hÉireann

24567

Comments

  • #52
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    Morlar wrote: »
    The closest thing to what you are describing is this.



    You seem to suggest that one side (ie Republicans) should come forward with all the gory details without any similar response from ANY other side in the conflict ?

    Can you clarify that this is now your position ?

    That would categorically NOT fit the 'all sides' requirement then would it ?

    Otherwise, without ALL Sides agreement it is simply not possible for SF to establish a UN comission for Truth along these kind of reasonable considered lines :

    http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/13738

    My view is that agreement from ALL other parties to the conflict is a requirement. So far support for this is limited to a single political party. To be honest with you I do not know what FG/Labour would have to lose in this, I could understand what the British Govt may stand to lose, also reluctance among UVF/UDV/UFF etc is understandable, however with Unionist party support I don't see that as an unsurmountable challenge.

    I can 100% clarify that when the...
    Morlar wrote: »
    British Govt ... UVF/UDV/UFF

    get off their collective backsides and nominate their own candidates for the office of President of Ireland I will indeed be just as demanding on them.

    Until then... I see no other candidate in the current field who has questions to answer about his murky past, which could, allegedly, involve the death and murder or people on or outside of this island, or assistance to others who had that aim.

    I don't remember either the FG or Lab candidate having involvement in a not so secret army, with one ambition of overthrowing this state. So I'll agree with you on that point, neither FG nor Lab have anything to lose there.

    Martin is presenting himself as a uniter. A hardworking peacemaker who has moved on from his past.

    ....Once you agree not to ask him about it :rolleyes:


  • #53
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    You seem to be shifting your position from 'All sides need to come clean' to 'only martin is standing for election', ergo 'Only Republicans need to come clean'. I don't agree with that approach at all.

    To me the past of that conflict is so intense and complex and deep rooted that a comprehensive comission along the lines of what is outlined here :

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74505395&postcount=47

    would be beneficial and cathartic to basically everyone on both of these islands.

    It would mark the beginning of real and meaningful healing and forgiveness and understanding. Once that is achieved then the prospect of returning to those days can be laid to rest. As things stand now, presonally I do not think we are at that place yet, and in my view things could still slip backwards.

    Part of all of the above process is acknowledging that there were and are victims on all sides, some guilty, most innocent, some killed or maimed by one group and others killed and mained by another group (I would of course include victims, innocent and otherwise, of army wrongdoings and quasi-official collusion).

    If you approach such a subject as the troubles with a view that

    'One side must come clean in isolation to other sides of the conflict'

    then you are re-victimising one community and one set of victims. You are shortchanging them in preference to another set of victims for short term, disingenous political expediency. I had not read that release :

    http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/13738

    until I googled it earler, having read it and re-read now I have to say I am in full agreement with pretty much all of it.


  • #54
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    Morlar wrote: »
    You seem to be shifting your position from 'All sides need to come clean' to 'only martin is standing for election', ergo 'Only Republicans need to come clean'.

    then you are re-victimising one community and one set of victims. You are shortchanging them in preference to another set of victims for short term, disingenous political expediency.

    I've shifted from no position in this.

    All sides need to come clean.

    Martin is the one standing for the office of President.

    Where's the confusion?

    I think if anyone is doing re-victimisation it's Martin by the guff he's spouting about being a unifier.


  • #55
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    johngalway wrote: »
    I've shifted from no position in this.

    All sides need to come clean.

    Martin is the one standing for the office of President.

    Where's the confusion?

    I think if anyone is doing re-victimisation it's Martin by the guff he's spouting about being a unifier.

    Earlier today you were saying 'All sides need to come clean' now it's,
    'only martin is standing for election, republicans should go first' - that is in my view a politically expedient shift of position.


  • #56
    Master and commander
    Closed Accounts Posts: 448 ✭✭Master and commander


    GarryJ wrote: »
    Really? Are you joking?

    Show me the history book that details the time the Irish marched over to britian, forced the peace loving locals to invade Ireland at gun point, etc...

    I won't be voting for martin McGuinness, but statements like that almost puts me in the mind to do so.


    well before the whole war of independance thing, Ireland was more or less peaceful. Then along came the IRB and the Shinners and the sh!t hit the fan. So yeah, they pretty much caused it. If they were not there, it would not have happened.
    There is only one reason why they resorted to violence - because they did not have enough support from the people to achieve their aims by democratic means, then they tried to implement their policies by force.


  • #57
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    Morlar wrote: »
    Earlier today you were saying 'All sides need to come clean' now it's,
    'only martin is standing for election, republicans should go first' - that is in my view a politically expedient shift of position.

    No, it's statement of fact :confused:


  • #58
    PeterIanStaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭PeterIanStaker


    I wonder what the views of the familes of Private Patrick Kelly, Recruit Garda Gary Sheehan, and Detective Garda Gerry McCabe are on this?


  • #59
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    PeterIanStaker wrote: »
    I wonder what the views of the familes of Private Patrick Kelly, Recruit Garda Gary Sheehan, and Detective Garda Gerry McCabe are on this?

    They may dissaprove, they may have strong feelings on the subject. I am sure the media will be asking them soon enough.

    On the other hand they may take the view of a family member of a Claudy bombing victim who expressed support for his leadership role in the peace process & running for President.

    We will see if the media show both viewpoints a proportional level of interest.

    Would you be equally bothered if the families of victims of loyalist sectarian violence, or of british army violence/collusion expressed concern over an orange parade through the city, or at loyalist paramilitaries being feted by politicians in the south ? Or at a visit by the queen ?

    Visits and parades are a different thing to presidential elections, but the question is a valid one, basically I am wondering if your victim concern is for victims of republican violence or for all victims of violence ?


  • #60
    PeterIanStaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭PeterIanStaker


    Morlar wrote: »
    Would you be equally bothered if the families of victims of loyalist sectarian violence, or of british army violence/collusion expressed concern over an orange parade through the city, or at loyalist paramilitaries being feted by politicians in the south ? Or at a visit by the queen ?

    I am wondering if your victim concern is for victims of republican violence or for all victims of violence ?

    Yes, I'm concerned for all victims of violence. I'm no revisionist.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    PeterIanStaker wrote: »
    Yes, I'm concerned for all victims of violence.

    On the issue of victims of violence, what are your thoughts on the level of media attention of and all-party support for this initiative ?


  • #62
    shaneybaby
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 415 ✭✭shaneybaby


    Morlar wrote: »
    On the issue of victims of violence, what are your thoughts on the level of media attention of and all-party support for this initiative ?

    "The IRA has apologised to all those non-combatants it killed or injured and their families."

    That's pretty sound. any chance they'd show us where they're buried??


  • #63
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    shaneybaby wrote: »

    "The IRA has apologised to all those non-combatants it killed or injured and their families."

    That's pretty sound. any chance they'd show us where they're buried??

    You might be aware that there have already been efforts in that regard. Due to the circumstances and passage of time these have had mixed results. It's also likely that not all of those involved in the killings are still themselves still alive, it's equally unlikely that these things were well documented at the time for obvious reasons.

    If you read the link to the proposal for the 'Peace and Reconcilliation' comission you may find that that intl body may be the best avenue for a comprehensive, north/south forum for those victims families. As well as all other victims families too.

    I take it you also disregard the 1994/7 - 2011 period of McGuinness efforts ?

    Do you see any anomaly in the fact that the likes of FG /FF /Labour et al have no problem with Martin McGuinness sitting down with the DUP in a power sharing agreement up north of newry (as Deputy First Minister) but down this side of the border there is pronounced disdain at the violent legacy of those republicans directly involved in the troubles ?


  • #64
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Morlar wrote: »
    You might be aware that there have already been efforts in that regard. Due to the circumstances and passage of time these have had mixed results. It's also likely that not all of those involved in the killings are still themselves still alive, it's equally unlikely that these things were well documented at the time for obvious reasons.

    If you read the link to the proposal for the 'Peace and Reconcilliation' comission you may find that that intl body may be the best avenue for a comprehensive, north/south forum for those victims families. As well as all other victims families too.

    I take it you also disregard the 1994/7 - 2011 period of McGuinness efforts ?

    Do you see any anomaly in the fact that the likes of FG /FF /Labour et al have no problem with Martin McGuinness sitting down with the DUP in a power sharing agreement up north of newry (as Deputy First Minister) but down this side of the border there is pronounced disdain at the violent legacy of those republicans directly involved in the troubles ?


    Either way it's all irrelevant. Martin McGuinness is not going to get elected.

    Comments like his 'west brit' remark yesterday show how out of touch he would be with the average man or woman on the street down here. The west brit term is not used as much in the Republic as it would be in the 6 counties

    Accusing the media of west brit tendencies will only encourage them to go digging, and turning up the skeletons that undoubtedly reside in Mr. McGuinness' wardrobe. It also shows a startling naïvety on his part too.

    Don't get me wrong, as i mentioned earlier in this thread (which does seem to have been taken over by civvies like myself, and for my part i apologise for that) I'd have a lot more time for McGuinness than i would for Adams. As a matter of fact, if Adams came to my door I'd have no hesitation in closing it on his face. With McGuinness I'd at least listen to him.


  • #65
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    gatecrash wrote: »
    Either way it's all irrelevant. Martin McGuinness is not going to get elected.

    That's yet to be decided & if it was so irrelvant & unlikely then I think there would be less interest in the subject than there actually is.
    gatecrash wrote: »
    Comments like his 'west brit' remark yesterday show how out of touch he would be with the average man or woman on the street down here. The west brit term is not used as much in the Republic as it would be in the 6 counties

    Accusing the media of west brit tendencies will only encourage them to go digging, and turning up the skeletons that undoubtedly reside in Mr. McGuinness' wardrobe. It also shows a startling naïvety on his part too.

    I think you are taking one thowaway remark and blowing it out of reasonable proportion. Having said that I don't use the phrase 'westbrit' but as regards the likes of certain dublin based journalists like Myers and Edwards I don't think it's that wide of the mark. There are those in the republic of Ireland who would prefer us to still be a part of the british empire or at the least the british commonwealth. Dismissing those as 'westbrit' is not very polite but as a piece of slang language it conveys the intended meaning.

    In any event I doubt the detractors will get enough mileage to take that single word and sink a campaign with it.

    On the subject of inconvenient past and facts coming to light, I would have more concern at the prospect of Norris being elected and that 'sympathetic to pederasty' interview tape showing up the next evening on cnn.

    McGuinness' past has been open to investigation for 40 yrs+ so if there were facts to be uncovered they would have come out long ago, before he was appointed Deputy first minister in a power sharing agreement with the DUP for example.
    gatecrash wrote: »
    Don't get me wrong, as i mentioned earlier in this thread (which does seem to have been taken over by civvies like myself, and for my part i apologise for that) I'd have a lot more time for McGuinness than i would for Adams. As a matter of fact, if Adams came to my door I'd have no hesitation in closing it on his face. With McGuinness I'd at least listen to him.

    I am a civvy too, this thread was intended mainly to guage opinions of our current & former serviing & part time military but it's not supposed to be 100% restrictive in that.


  • #66
    PeterIanStaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭PeterIanStaker


    Morlar wrote: »
    On the issue of victims of violence, what are your thoughts on the level of media attention of and all-party support for this initiative ?


    If this initiative were to go ahead, I personally would like to see it run along the lines of the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning. Don't let politicians North or South anywhere near it, they'd only make an mess of it.

    As for the media, I couldn't care less what they think, as they thrive on butting outdated ideologies - Imperialism, Unionism and Republicanism against each other, long after they've passed their sell - by date.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Morlar wrote: »
    That's yet to be decided & if it was so irrelevant & unlikely then I think there would be less interest in the subject than there actually is.

    I dunno Morlar, I think there is a lot of interest in McGuinness as a side affect of the shiny new toy aspect of him and his campaign. A lot of people down here would have registered him on their radars as a result of his re-invented self over the last 15 years, but now there will be an active interest, as opposed to passive interest.

    But still not enough to get him over the line.


    Morlar wrote: »
    I think you are taking one thowaway remark and blowing it out of reasonable proportion. Having said that I don't use the phrase 'westbrit' but as regards the likes of certain dublin based journalists like Myers and Edwards I don't think it's that wide of the mark. There are those in the republic of Ireland who would prefer us to still be a part of the british empire or at the least the british commonwealth. Dismissing those as 'westbrit' is not very polite but as a piece of slang language it conveys the intended meaning.

    In any event I doubt the detractors will get enough mileage to take that single word and sink a campaign with it.

    I'm not blowing anything out of reasonable proportion. Politicians live and die by their throwaway remarks. And that throwaway remark was a stunningly stupid throwaway remark, and i think his campaign is going to be a bit of an eye opener for him. The thought processes in the republic are significantly different to the ones in the 6 counties.

    And i wasn't annoyed or upset by his west brit remark, I was just surprised that a politician i regarded as a canny operator would make such an elementary error, by commenting like that to the press.

    Morlar wrote: »
    On the subject of inconvenient past and facts coming to light, I would have more concern at the prospect of Norris being elected and that 'sympathetic to pederasty' interview tape showing up the next evening on cnn.

    McGuinness' past has been open to investigation for 40 yrs+ so if there were facts to be uncovered they would have come out long ago, before he was appointed Deputy first minister in a power sharing agreement with the DUP for example.

    McGuinness activities may have been open to investigation for 40+ years but lets not forget that for around 20 of those years he was a member of an illegal secret organisation, which needed secrecy in order for it to survive.

    After that, and when he was heavily involved in the peace process, the media may not have wanted to dig too deeply into his past, in case they set the process back.
    Remember how sickened we all were, as a nation united, in August 1998. Does anyone want to go back to that? Would the media want to attack one of the men responsible for trying to being an end to that? No, so he would have gotten an easy ride. Now though, he's standing for the highest office in the land, and the truth, and the questions about his activities in the past HAVE to come out.


    Morlar wrote: »
    I am a civvy too, this thread was intended mainly to guage opinions of our current & former serviing & part time military but it's not supposed to be 100% restrictive in that.

    Fair enough so. I don't know why, but I always thought you were/are a serving member.


  • #68
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    As a side issue there was an interesting article today on the bbcNI site about this subject, I could find it nowhere on rte.ie/news despite the fact that the inquests (Gerard Evans) are ongoing in Dublin as we speak

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-15005649

    basically they have just uncovered victim 9 of 16 republican victims. There is no mention of any missing victims of loyalist violence, it's possible that there were none throughout the entire troubles or that they were not recorded as such.


  • #69
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    gatecrash wrote: »
    I'm not blowing anything out of reasonable proportion. Politicians live and die by their throwaway remarks. And that throwaway remark was a stunningly stupid throwaway remark, and i think his campaign is going to be a bit of an eye opener for him. The thought processes in the republic are significantly different to the ones in the 6 counties.

    I think he is a canny politician. That remark was a surprise to me to be honest but the more I think about it the more I think he was doing what politicians do, - playing to the crowd. Speaking not to the media but through them.

    Look at it this way that remark stirred interest, will definitely go down well with a bulk of his support base and those who may be disenfranchised by the current political scene anyway, it will also generate discussion, while being essentially harmless to his campaign (imo).

    I think election managers probably put a percentage of voters in the 'Never going to vote for our candidate EVER' pile. DUP do so with SF voters and vice versa. FF do so with hardcore left voters and so on. Those most offended by the remark probably fit that profile anyway (from the SF perspective), so in terms of damaging his campaign I don't see it as a big issue.


  • #70
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Morlar wrote: »
    I think he is a canny politician. That remark was a surprise to me to be honest but the more I think about it the more I think he was doing what politicians do, - playing to the crowd. Speaking not to the media but through them.

    Look at it this way that remark stirred interest, will definitely go down well with a bulk of his support base and those who may be disenfranchised by the current political scene anyway, it will also generate discussion, while being essentially harmless to his campaign (imo).

    I think election managers probably put a percentage of voters in the 'Never going to vote for our candidate EVER' pile. DUP do so with SF voters and vice versa. FF do so with hardcore left voters and so on. Those most offended by the remark probably fit that profile anyway (from the SF perspective), so in terms of damaging his campaign I don't see it as a big issue.


    The point remains that i don't think his support base will be big enough.

    If people want to thumb their nose at the government and establishment, then the candidate they will more than likely pick is Norris. And he's another I wouldn't vote for. I'd give McGuinness my vote before Norris. While straying dangerously close to politics and going O/T, imho this presidential election is almost a race to the bottom. There is not one candidate to get remotely excited about.


  • #71
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    gatecrash wrote: »
    The point remains that i don't think his support base will be big enough.

    If people want to thumb their nose at the government and establishment, then the candidate they will more than likely pick is Norris. And he's another I wouldn't vote for. I'd give McGuinness my vote before Norris. While straying dangerously close to politics and going O/T, imho this presidential election is almost a race to the bottom. There is not one candidate to get remotely excited about.

    I think this race was a bit of an x-factor/reality tv-style race to the bottom being as it was dominated by norris up to that point and beyond norris there was not much character to the whole thing.

    Norris is no longer a candidate though & his support base withered following revelations about use of seanad eireann headed notepaper among other things.

    I think this Presidential race is now a different animal.

    Up to now the flamboyant Norris has dominated the campaign with nare a single 'issue' in sight. The campaign now (in my view) has become a meaningful and useful exercise for Irish people to engage in, regardless of how they intend to vote or what the final result turns out to be. I think there was a tendency in the Republic to brush the troubles and the legacy under the carpet, that approach is now being challenged, or at least brought into the light of day. For such a huge part of our recent history that shaped characters and defined identities on this island and which was an overwhelming factor in all of our childhoods to be essentially un-talked about is not healthy or constructive.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Stovepipe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,984 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    Hi all,
    Wee Marty is too close to his old mates, it's too soon and the IRA are still too involved in criminality affecting our State. He can't expect to be supping tea in the Aras with the Garda Commissioner while his old pals are laundering diesel/smuggling/killing teenagers in Monaghan farmyards.He cannot claim to respect our State while his mates are using parts of it for criminal acts. I don't give a **** if he was a peacenik in Sri lanka or South Africa if there are parts of this island where Southern Catholics can't go in safety, as a legacy of his old mates' work.
    try again, Marty.


    regards
    Stovepipe


  • #73
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    I think you are confusing the activities of the RIRA or CIRA with those of the provisionals pre 1994/7 ceasefire (in relation to McGuinness 1970's role within the provisional IRA).

    You also ignore the fact that he's publicly spoken out against & denounced CIRA/RIRA. You do recall he referred to them as 'Traitors to Ireland' - correct ?

    From someone literally living on the firing line to risk his life in doing that means more (in my view) than all the blanket condemnations from journalists and politicians in leafy suburbs of Ireland combined.

    Btw do you refer to Norris as 'wee Davey' ?


  • #74
    johnmcdnl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭johnmcdnl


    Stovepipe wrote: »
    Hi all,
    Wee Marty is too close to his old mates, it's too soon and the IRA are still too involved in criminality affecting our State. He can't expect to be supping tea in the Aras with the Garda Commissioner while his old pals are laundering diesel/smuggling/killing teenagers in Monaghan farmyards.He cannot claim to respect our State while his mates are using parts of it for criminal acts. I don't give a **** if he was a peacenik in Sri lanka or South Africa if there are parts of this island where Southern Catholics can't go in safety, as a legacy of his old mates' work.
    try again, Marty.


    regards
    Stovepipe

    his old mates that he has called traitors

    his old mates who have threatened to kill him

    and wouldn't the Catholics in the south safety be affected by the Unionist gangs which is kinda yeah....... of course it's Marty's fault...

    Martin McGuiness may have been a leader of the IRA years ago but have many leaders of countries in the world today that are seen as heroes despite their voilent history - of course Nelson Mandela is the obvious example... despite his voilent history when he made steps to bring peace it's what brought the real chance... exactly what Martin McGuiness has does in the past 15 years or so to try to bring about peace and real change in the north...


  • #75
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Morphéus wrote: »
    I personally think of him in his guise as a terrorist, a supporter of murderers of irish soldiers and gardai and member of an illegal armed group .

    As besides the British Army (and security forces of all sorts of descriptions) who have "legally" murdered countless people throughout the world.

    Irish and British Army Personnel are often together at various official events, they're even known to play Gaelic Football and other such things together, do you kick up the same fuss towards them given incidences such as the Dublin/Monaghan bombings, Bloody Sunday, collusion in the murder of scores of Irish citizens etc...?


  • #76
    Stovepipe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,984 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    @morlar,
    the use of the "Wee Martin" is already a matter of record. See Nell McCafferty and others.

    MMG condemned those who were engaged in criminality under the flag of RIRA/CIRA, not those who, as alleged ex-PIRA, continue to engage in criminality. Ask the gardai about the alleged activities of the Dublin IRA sometime.

    I think it's too soon and the wounds too raw for MMG to become the titular Head of the Irish DF. I took an oath to defend the State against the likes of him. I meant it then and still feel the same way.

    regards
    Stovepipe


  • #77
    Foghladh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 393 ✭✭Foghladh


    Morlar wrote: »
    I think he is a canny politician. That remark was a surprise to me to be honest but the more I think about it the more I think he was doing what politicians do, - playing to the crowd. Speaking not to the media but through them.

    Look at it this way that remark stirred interest, will definitely go down well with a bulk of his support base and those who may be disenfranchised by the current political scene anyway, it will also generate discussion, while being essentially harmless to his campaign (imo).

    I think election managers probably put a percentage of voters in the 'Never going to vote for our candidate EVER' pile. DUP do so with SF voters and vice versa. FF do so with hardcore left voters and so on. Those most offended by the remark probably fit that profile anyway (from the SF perspective), so in terms of damaging his campaign I don't see it as a big issue.

    The thing about politics though is the swing vote, not the support vote. In the last general election in the Republic, SF polled just under 10% of first preference votes. And that was on the back of a massive anti-FF feeling and in the depths of recession. The swing needed by SF is pretty huge and it won't be helped by 'West Brit' comments because who are they aimed at? Any one who disagrees with SF politics?

    I believe there's a huge gulf in what SF believe to be the case in the Republic and what exists. I'm 36. I'd have to go back to my great-grandfather to find someone who lived pre-partition. I personally don't have that burning desire to unite.


  • #78
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    Foghladh wrote: »
    The thing about politics though is the swing vote, not the support vote. In the last general election in the Republic, SF polled just under 10% of first preference votes. And that was on the back of a massive anti-FF feeling and in the depths of recession. The swing needed by SF is pretty huge and it won't be helped by 'West Brit' comments because who are they aimed at? Any one who disagrees with SF politics?

    I have not seen any 'RedC' style polls so far but of the actual candidates who are in the running McGuinness is ahead in every poll on this subject I have seen.

    This from the independent.ie newspaper website :
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/presidential-election-2881563.html
    Presidential Election

    Tuesday September 20 2011

    With a number of presidential candidates now unlikely to have the numbers to get on a ballot paper, who would you vote for?

    Gay Mitchell 12% Yes
    Michael D Higgins 21% Yes
    Mary Davis 13% Yes
    Sean Gallagher 8% Yes
    Martin McGuinness 45% Yes

    I believe there was also an Rte poll yesterday which had the same result.

    In any event, I think the 'westbrit' comment has been done to death at this stage in fairness. I really do think there is only so much mileage detractors can get out of that one.


  • #79
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Morlar wrote: »
    I have not seen any 'RedC' style polls so far but of the actual candidates who are in the running McGuinness is ahead in every poll on this subject I have seen.

    This from the independent.ie newspaper website :
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/presidential-election-2881563.html



    I believe there was also an Rte poll yesterday which had the same result.

    In any event, I think the 'westbrit' comment has been done to death at this stage in fairness. I really do think there is only so much mileage detractors can get out of that one.

    A poll a month in advance of the actual election will end up having little to no bearing on the result.

    There is no way those percentages will turn out the way they are in your quote


  • #80
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    gatecrash wrote: »
    A poll a month in advance of the actual election will end up having little to no bearing on the result.

    There is no way those percentages will turn out the way they are in your quote

    It's not my quote it's the independent newspaper, hardly known for it's republican slant.

    There is another one here from rte website referring to cork FM :

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0922/president1.html
    In a text poll run by the radio station, Cork 96FM, this morning, Mr McGuinness emerged with 61% support, followed by David Norris on 15%. All other candidates came in on single figures.

    I don't contend those polls will turn out to be exactly accurate.

    My point is that the claims he will poll -10% are wide of the mark.


  • #81
    HellsAngel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 715 ✭✭✭HellsAngel


    Stovepipe wrote: »
    Hi all,
    Wee Marty is too close to his old mates, it's too soon and the IRA are still too involved in criminality affecting our State. He can't expect to be supping tea in the Aras with the Garda Commissioner while his old pals are laundering diesel/smuggling/killing teenagers in Monaghan farmyards.He cannot claim to respect our State while his mates are using parts of it for criminal acts. I don't give a **** if he was a peacenik in Sri lanka or South Africa if there are parts of this island where Southern Catholics can't go in safety, as a legacy of his old mates' work.
    try again, Marty.


    regards
    Stovepipe
    "Wee Marty" the guy is about 6 feet tall !!!! :D Shows how little you do actually know about him. Appearently he was quite a good Gaelic player having grown up a few yards from Celtic Park and might have followed his brother Tom who won 3 Ulster senior and one All Ireland U21 medal with Derry had it not been for the troubles. Now off and read your Andy McNab BS stories about how the British army save the world James Bond style.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Stovepipe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,984 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    @hellsangel,
    The adjective "wee" to describe people, regardless of actual height, is widely used in Northern Ireland, as you know perfectly well, so put down your crayon and think for a bit.

    regards
    Stovepipe


  • #83
    HellsAngel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 715 ✭✭✭HellsAngel


    Stovepipe wrote: »
    @hellsangel,
    The adjective "wee" to describe people, regardless of actual height, is widely used in Northern Ireland, as you know perfectly well, so put down your crayon and think for a bit.

    regards
    Stovepipe
    I never heard a man almost 6 feet tall been described as "wee" in the six counties or anywhere else in my life !!!!! I suppose been 6 feet tall is small to Andy McNab's giant SAS superhero's !!!!!


  • #84
    Stovepipe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,984 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    Hi there
    @HA,
    You really do need to get over your fixation with the SAS! :eek: It's conduct unbecoming for such a hardened republican such as yourself to keep referring to them. Your fellow chuckies might ostracise you from the Felons Club or they might even stop your subscription to An Phoblacht.

    Honestly, save your breath and your bandwidth arguing with me. I won't be voting for McGuinness anytime soon.

    regards
    Stovepipe


  • #85
    HellsAngel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 715 ✭✭✭HellsAngel


    Would people not find that since Martin had plenty of ' hands on experience ' in the 70's etc he would make a good head of the Irish Army ?


    Martin-McGuinness-Sinn-Fein-candidate-2011-Irish-presidential-elections.jpg12109426a63941075b157568236l.jpg


  • #86
    Poccington
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Poccington


    HellsAngel wrote: »
    Would people not find that since Martin had plenty of ' hands on experience ' in the 70's etc he would make a good head of the Irish Army ?


    Martin-McGuinness-Sinn-Fein-candidate-2011-Irish-presidential-elections.jpg12109426a63941075b157568236l.jpg

    There's the little problem of the fact that his hands on experience came from time spent in an organisation that didn't quite recognise the DF's right to call themselves OnH.


  • #87
    xflyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭xflyer


    Well said stovepipe, or M


  • #88
    Reg'stoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭Reg'stoy


    Interesting thread this, I asked a question on this forum about members of the army saluting the queen when she was here. Members of the army as was pointed out, had no choice as she is the head of state of our close neighbours. Some went so far as to say that those who refused should be dismissed from the army.

    In as much as individual members of the army have a vote in the upcoming election they do therefore have a say in their future commander in chief. Would not the same edict that as an elected head of state (our own) should he not be given the same respect that was demanded when the queen visited our shores.

    Should he win, I'll nail my colours up here by saying I won't be voting for him, he will be the elected head of state and as such head of the army. An interesting point arose on a radio show during the week, is his position purely ceremonial or does he figure in the chain of command.

    Just a side bar here, in his former position as deputy head of the northern assembly was he entitled to a salute if he had made an offical visit.

    Will the soldiers who serve in the Aras be given the choice to leave and serve some where else or should they be told YOU SERVE the President whom ever they are FULL STOP!!

    I ask this above question as I'm interesting in seeing similar responses or not to my question re salutes. I was surprised at some responses to that question, as I thought, in my opinion, that personnal beliefs should be taken into account.


  • #89
    ChunkyLover_53
    Closed Accounts Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ChunkyLover_53


    If Martin McGuinness is voted in as President of Ireland then he'll have been democratically elected by the majority of the people of Ireland.

    Why wouldn't a soldier salute him?

    Since when do serving soldiers have a choice as to who they serve or salute? Orders is orders. If you disobey there are plenty of disciplinary consequences in place.

    It comes with the territory. Same with the Queens visit, everyone built a bridge and jogged on over it. Job done, and done well.


  • #90
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    ChunkyLover_53 wrote: »
    If Martin McGuinness is voted in as President of Ireland then he'll have been democratically elected by the majority of the people of Ireland.

    Why wouldn't a soldier salute him?

    Since when do serving soldiers have a choice as to who they serve or salute? Orders is orders. If you disobey there are plenty of disciplinary consequences in place.

    It comes with the territory. Same with the Queens visit, everyone built a bridge and jogged on over it. Job done, and done well.

    However, if the Minister for defence decrees that the candidate is unsuitable, who should the DF follow?
    The Populist figurehead with a dubious terrorist past, or the elected legislator,responsible for defence and justice policy with a proven career in the legal practice?


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    mcko
    Registered Users Posts: 755 ✭✭✭mcko


    As was said after the Curragh Mutiny
    Those who take the pay and wear the uniform of the state must be the non policitial servents of the state be they soldiers or policemen.

    I hold the presidents commission and if the people of Ireland want to elect Martin then who am I to say the people of Ireland are wrong. If you don't like him as commander and chief you can always leave.
    I am sure the Free State Army didn't like FF taking power in the 30s but hey ho that's the system we have .:P


  • #92
    Rawhead
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭Rawhead


    goldie fish wrote: »
    However, if the Minister for defence decrees that the candidate is unsuitable, who should the DF follow?
    The Populist figurehead with a dubious terrorist past, or the elected legislator,responsible for defence and justice policy with a proven career in the legal practice?

    One man gets elected in a free open election by a popular majority and that's ok, another man does the same and that's wrong because you don't like him.
    You weren't behind the Lisbon or Nice reruns by any chance?


  • #93
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    mcko wrote: »
    As was said after the Curragh Mutiny
    Those who take the pay and wear the uniform of the state must be the non policitial servents of the state be they soldiers or policemen.

    I hold the presidents commission and if the people of Ireland want to elect Martin then who am I to say the people of Ireland are wrong. If you don't like him as commander and chief you can always leave.
    I am sure the Free State Army didn't like FF taking power in the 30s but hey ho that's the system we have .:P

    What curragh mutiny?


  • #94
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Rawhead wrote: »
    One man gets elected in a free open election by a popular majority and that's ok, another man does the same and that's wrong because you don't like him.
    You weren't behind the Lisbon or Nice reruns by any chance?

    I'm not saying that. I'm saying who do you follow?


  • #95
    Disco Volante
    Closed Accounts Posts: 71 ✭✭Disco Volante


    mcko wrote: »
    As was said after the Curragh Mutiny
    Those who take the pay and wear the uniform of the state must be the non policitial servents of the state be they soldiers or policemen.

    I hold the presidents commission and if the people of Ireland want to elect Martin then who am I to say the people of Ireland are wrong. If you don't like him as commander and chief you can always leave.
    I am sure the Free State Army didn't like FF taking power in the 30s but hey ho that's the system we have .:P

    Well said, I think it pretty much sums up the thread for me.


  • #96
    savagecabbages
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭savagecabbages


    goldie fish wrote: »
    However, if the Minister for defence decrees that the candidate is unsuitable, who should the DF follow?
    The Populist figurehead with a dubious terrorist past, or the elected legislator,responsible for defence and justice policy with a proven career in the legal practice?



    willie%20odea.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Good point.


  • #98
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    savagecabbages wrote: »
    willie%20odea.jpg

    Yeah but........

    He never fired it :cool:

    Small, but important point.......


  • #99
    savagecabbages
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭savagecabbages


    And a valid one too.

    The point I was aiming at (no pun intended) is that McGuinness is now no more than a politician just like all the rest of them. He'll do or say whatever the electorate want to see/hear. In a way thats a good sign. The people of the north have by and large moved on, so now the politicians are preaching from the 'moved on' book...

    When was the last time (if ever) a minister for defence had any first hand experience or service?


  • #100
    bath handle
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 370 ✭✭bath handle


    savagecabbages wrote: »

    When was the last time (if ever) a minister for defence had any first hand experience or service?
    Barrett in 1980. Tully in the 1981. Mulcahy in the 50s


  • #101
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    savagecabbages wrote: »
    When was the last time (if ever) a minister for defence had any first hand experience or service?

    I wouldn't call being part of an illegal organisation that didn't recognise the state as 'service'. But that's just me.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement