The glorious 12th

FrancieBrady · 15-07-2019 11:30pm

J Mysterio wrote: »

The 'Republicans' were sent 'letters of comfort' to say Her Majesty's Government would not seek to prosecute. This was done to 'seal the deal' as it were. The lads on 'the other side' weren't quite as bothered at the time.

Further, this article may be of interest.

Maybe the blame should be laid where it lies...their 'partners' in this much vaunted 'Union' they keep on about.

Imreoir2 · 15-07-2019 11:30pm

downcow wrote: »

Quite simply treat them all the same and I’ll not have a problem. While Gerry etc have letters of comfort so as they can’t be charged then I’ll support the soldiers to get them as well. I like equality

If that soldier is responsible for murdering innocent people, you you really think they deserve immunity from prosecution?

Junkyard Tom · 15-07-2019 11:34pm

downcow wrote: »

Quite simply treat them all the same and I’ll not have a problem.

If they'd been treated the same they'd have been jailed not long after their killings and described as murdering terrorists.

Yes, let's have equality.

downcow · 15-07-2019 11:38pm

armaghlad wrote: »

You aren’t really stating equivalents though. Hunger striker banners obviously don’t bother me, to the best of my knowledge none of them deliberately shot and killed any civilians;

What do you think they were in prison for. Slipping a stitch in their knitting? They belong to a very effective sectarian killing machine that often shot and killed civilians.
Do you really not know this??

FrancieBrady · 15-07-2019 11:39pm

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

If they'd been treated the same they'd have been jailed not long after their killings and described as murdering terrorists.

Yes, let's have equality.

306 people (that we know about) were killed by the BA. 156 were civillians of them 61 were children.
4 soldiers in total were convicted of murder and ALL of them were released after 2 to 3 years and allowed to rejoin the army.

Speaks profoundly for itself.

downcow · 15-07-2019 11:43pm

Imreoir2 wrote: »

If that soldier is responsible for murdering innocent people, you you really think they deserve immunity from prosecution?

They deserve a letter of comfort no more or no less than Gerry. Is that not fair?
Or would you give it to one and not the other?

firemansam4 · 15-07-2019 11:44pm

downcow wrote:

Quite simply treat them all the same and Iâ€™ll not have a problem. While Gerry etc have letters of comfort so as they canâ€™t be charged then Iâ€™ll support the soldiers to get them as well. I like equality

2 wrongs don't make a right, wrongs that your government in Westminster signed up to BTW.

Nobody should be supporting the actions of that soldier but hey if it goes with your political beliefs, who cares if he killed some innocent catholics huh? You need to defend you military heroes no matter what I guess.

FrancieBrady · 15-07-2019 11:45pm

downcow wrote: »

They deserve a letter of comfort no more or no less than Gerry. Is that not fair?
Or would you give it to one and not the other?

Take the Letters Of Comfort out on Westminster, it was they in their usual duplicitous perfidious way that issued them.

Imreoir2 · 15-07-2019 11:47pm

downcow wrote: »

They deserve a letter of comfort no more or no less than Gerry. Is that not fair?
Or would you give it to one and not the other?

No, it's not. As far as I am aware Garry Adams is not suspected of personal involvement in a murder. If he was then you would have a point, but I don't think that is the case.

Please answer the question though. Do you believe it is right that Soldier F be given imunity if they are gulty of murder?

FrancieBrady · 15-07-2019 11:52pm

Imreoir2 wrote: »

No, it's not. As far as I am aware Garry Adams is not suspected of personal involvement in a murder. If he was then you would have a point, but I don't think that is the case.

He is talking about Gerry Kelly I think, who didn't get a letter of comfort. He got a
royal prerogative of mercy because the British wanted him back from The Netherlands to finish his sentence. He got it for 'escaping' - not the for the bombing of the Old Bailey which he was convicted for.

downcow · 15-07-2019 11:54pm

firemansam4 wrote: »

2 wrongs don't make a right, wrongs that your government in Westminster signed up to BTW.

Nobody should be supporting the actions of that soldier but hey if it goes with your political beliefs, who cares if he killed some innocent catholics huh? You need to defend you military heroes no matter what I guess.

So the question remains unanswered whether you would call for the banners supporting the hunger strikers be removed.
Some on here said they didn’t kill civilians. One of them was directly involved in the kings mill massacre, separating a bus load of civilians in to prods and catholic’s and then murdering all the Catholics - and he has a kids play park named after him. But let’s get the para banners down cause they were bad boys.

downcow · 15-07-2019 11:59pm

Imreoir2 wrote: »

No, it's not. As far as I am aware Garry Adams is not suspected of personal involvement in a murder. If he was then you would have a point, but I don't think that is the case.

Ask the civilians who were burnt alive at their dinner in la mon or the family of Jean McConville. They may not agree with you

Junkyard Tom · 15-07-2019 11:59pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

killed by the BA.

Also, the salient point, when it comes to BA killings is that all too often the message to the loved ones of those killed was 'they deserved it' because the soldiers who did the killing were exonerated via sham enquiries or no investigation at all.

What people tend to forget is that the Bloody Sunday and Ballymurphy families were/are fighting to have their loved ones found innocent.

FrancieBrady · 15-07-2019 11:59pm

downcow wrote: »

So the question remains unanswered whether you would call for the banners supporting the hunger strikers be removed.
Some on here said they didn’t kill civilians. One of them was directly involved in the kings mill massacre, separating a bus load of civilians in to prods and catholic’s and then murdering all the Catholics - and he has a kids play park named after him. But let’s get the para banners down cause they were bad boys.

Are you willing to take all banners and statues in northern Ireland down that lionises and makes heros of British army figures and Unionist figures of contention, like Carson?
Have you ever walked around just Belfast as a member of the nationalist community with sensitive eyes similar to your Unionist ones, open? Be thankful that all symbolism of your identity and 'culture' is allowed maybe?

Imreoir2 · 16-07-2019 12:03am

downcow wrote: »

Ask the civilians who were burnt alive at their dinner in la mon or the family of Jean McConville. They may not agree with you

I am asking you, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer? I want your opinion, not wataboutery or suggestions of other people who should be asked.

firemansam4 · 16-07-2019 12:05am

downcow wrote:

So the question remains unanswered whether you would call for the banners supporting the hunger strikers be removed. Some on here said they didnâ€™t kill civilians. One of them was directly involved in the kings mill massacre, separating a bus load of civilians in to prods and catholicâ€™s and then murdering all the Catholics - and he has a kids play park named after him. But letâ€™s get the para banners down cause they were bad boys.

I've already stated what I thought about the IRA in my previous post so yes I don't support seeing the hunger strikers banners up either.

But there is a difference in that the hunger strikers were looked up to as hero's because of the actual hunger strikes and standing up to the British government, not as much for some of the killings some of them carried out.
Soldier f is looked up to as a hero because he shot some catholics.

downcow · 16-07-2019 12:16am

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I am asking you, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer? I want your opinion, not wataboutery or suggestions of other people who should be asked.

Few here believe there is the slightest chance he will be found guilty of murder so it’s a hypothetical question.
I actually would draw a line under the whole thing and have no more prosecutions. I no that’s probably not a majority view in my community. But we must move on.

downcow · 16-07-2019 12:19am

firemansam4 wrote: »

I've already stated what I thought about the IRA in my previous post so yes I don't support seeing the hunger strikers banners up either.

But there is a difference in that the hunger strikers were looked up to as hero's because of the actual hunger strikes and standing up to the British government, not as much for some of the killings some of them carried out.
Soldier f is looked up to as a hero because he shot some catholics.

The paras are looked up to as hero’s because they stood up to terrorism.
You should look back at what you are saying - it would be like me saying to you that the hunger strikers are looked up to because they slaughtered Protestants. I would have a little more empathy with you than to say that.

FrancieBrady · 16-07-2019 12:23am

downcow wrote: »

Few here believe there is the slightest chance he will be found guilty of murder so it’s a hypothetical question.
I actually would draw a line under the whole thing and have no more prosecutions. I no that’s probably not a majority view in my community. But we must move on.

..and amazingly, the 'question' asked remains unanswered. Marvelous.

I'll re-ask as it is spot on...Downcow, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer?

firemansam4 · 16-07-2019 12:28am

downcow wrote:

The paras are looked up to as heroâ€™s because they stood up to terrorism. You should look back at what you are saying - it would be like me saying to you that the hunger strikers are looked up to because they slaughtered Protestants. I would have a little more empathy with you than to say that.

But I said soldier f, not the paras as a whole, I just can't see how anyone could defend him after the things he has stated. Its sickening.

downcow · 16-07-2019 1:15am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

..and amazingly, the 'question' asked remains unanswered. Marvelous.

I'll re-ask as it is spot on...Downcow, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer?

Yes. My preference is that there would be no more £200m enquiries, no more investigations and no more prosecutions. The troubles ended 20 years ago and we can’t go on forever picking over the scab.
Now I dont enjoy seeing torturers, mass killers and bombers getting off but it is pragmatic.

downcow · 16-07-2019 1:19am

firemansam4 wrote: »

But I said soldier f, not the paras as a whole, I just can't see how anyone could defend him after the things he has stated. Its sickening.

Are you equally sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours or are you less sqeemish when it was the other sort they murdered.?
You are trying to be simplistic and it’s not simple

maccored · 16-07-2019 8:51am

downcow wrote: »

Are you equally sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours or are you less sqeemish when it was the other sort they murdered.?
You are trying to be simplistic and it’s not simple

justified one by giving out about the other?

droidman123 · 16-07-2019 8:53am

downcow wrote: »

Yes. My preference is that there would be no more £200m enquiries, no more investigations and no more prosecutions. The troubles ended 20 years ago and we can’t go on forever picking over the scab.
Now I dont enjoy seeing torturers, mass killers and bombers getting off but it is pragmatic.

So by that thinking you dont think they should of been hunting down nazis 40-50 years after the war?

janfebmar · 16-07-2019 9:01am

There should be no hunting down of soldiers while paramilitary murderers walk free.

lawred2 · 16-07-2019 9:06am

janfebmar wrote: »

There should be no hunting down of soldiers while paramilitary murderers walk free.

you believe soldiers should be held to lesser standards than members of proscribed organisations?

janfebmar · 16-07-2019 9:10am

lawred2 wrote: »

you believe soldiers should be held to lesser standards than members of proscribed organisations?

Murderers in proscribed organisations were set free. 200 Republicans got amnesty letters or whatever you want to call them too.

lawred2 · 16-07-2019 9:13am

janfebmar wrote: »

Murderers in proscribed organisations were set free. 200 Republicans got amnesty letters or whatever you want to call them too.

They weren't state operatives.

How can you not see the simply chasmic difference?

The equivalents of the IRA are not British Paras but members of terrorist organisations like the UVF and the UDA. Until that registers with your poisoned well of a mind this 'discussion' will simply circle the drain for years to come.

FrancieBrady · 16-07-2019 9:24am

downcow wrote: »

Yes. My preference is that there would be no more £200m enquiries, no more investigations and no more prosecutions. The troubles ended 20 years ago and we can’t go on forever picking over the scab.
Now I dont enjoy seeing torturers, mass killers and bombers getting off but it is pragmatic.

The only route is a fully transparent and comprehensive (involving all those who were players in the conflict/war) truth commission.

That is the only process that serves all the victims and might restore the moral integrity and authority of those who should not have been players in the first place - the government and army of Great Britain.

But it will take many years before they get that integrity back as they are using Ireland as a pawn again at the moment..

downcow · 16-07-2019 9:29am

maccored wrote: »

justified one by giving out about the other?

I was quite categoric. It is you who refuses to answer the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

Stop moaning ffs · 16-07-2019 9:32am

downcow wrote: »

I was quite categoric. It is you who refuses to answer the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

British soldiers shot and killed british citizens.

That’s a matter of fact.

Trying to hide and Protect those soldiers from justice is beyond appalling.

downcow · 16-07-2019 9:33am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The only route is a fully transparent and comprehensive (involving all those who were players in the conflict/war) truth commission.

The big problem here is that the ira code does not allow it.
....and do you know how that rings so hollow when Gerry Adams still states quite categorically that he was never in the ira.

downcow · 16-07-2019 9:34am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

British soldiers shot and killed british citizens.

That’s a matter of fact.

Trying to hide and Protect those soldiers from justice is beyond appalling.

What about addressing the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours? Could it even be beyond appalling??

Stop moaning ffs · 16-07-2019 9:36am

downcow wrote: »

What about addressing the question
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours? Could it even be beyond appalling??

Always with the refusal to answer and address the problem
I’m not aware of anyone that killed people running for election.
Oh wait...there was that one uvf guy what was his name

FrancieBrady · 16-07-2019 9:39am

downcow wrote: »

The big problem here is that the ira code does not allow it.
....and do you know how that rings so hollow when Gerry Adams still states quite categorically that he was never in the ira.

The IRA and SF want a Truth Commission, it is being blocked by the British and some Unionists.

“The Sinn Féin leadership helped to facilitate this engagement because we sincerely believe there is a responsibility to assist families bereaved in the conflict if and when we can, though this may not be possible in all cases.

Republicans are very conscious of the hurt and suffering which has been caused through conflict in our country.

Sinn Féin believes that there needs to be an effective process for dealing with all legacy issues. Weston Park only dealt with six cases. But there are many more families who seek truth and closure.

Therefore, the British and Irish governments should invite a reputable and independent international body to establish an Independent International Truth Commission.

Adams, nor anybody else is not going to begin a 'one sided truth commission', PLEASE do not go down that ridiculous rabbit hole.

I wouldn't expect any side to do that, they would start an internal war in their own side.

downcow · 16-07-2019 9:40am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Always with the refusal to answer and address the problem
I’m not aware of anyone that killed people running for election.
Oh wait...there was that one uvf guy what was his name

Try answering the question. It’s very simple a succinct
You are ducking and diving

downcow · 16-07-2019 9:43am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The IRA and SF want a Truth Commission, it is being blocked by the British and some Unionists.

Adams, nor anybody else is not going to begin a 'one sided truth commission', PLEASE do not go down that ridiculous rabbit hole.

I wouldn't expect any side to do that, they would start an internal war in their own side.

Well many seem to want security forces to tell all they know. What was Bloody Sunday enquiry about if it was asking for the truth on one atrocity

FrancieBrady · 16-07-2019 9:48am

downcow wrote: »

Well many seem to want security forces to tell all they know. What was Bloody Sunday enquiry about if it was asking for the truth on one atrocity

And it took 40 years to drag the truth out. This is from the GOVERNMENT.
As yet 47 years later nobody has stood in a court of law to answer for what happened and it is only one token soldier. Nobody from the apparatus of government will stand trial for it either, or for the long and sophisticated cover up and whitewash (if what we have now is the 'TRUTH' many many people, from judges to soldiers, lied and covered it up).

Stop moaning ffs · 16-07-2019 9:49am

downcow wrote: »

Try answering the question. It’s very simple a succinct
You are ducking and diving

Which ‘killer’ are you referring to and where are they running for election?

downcow · 16-07-2019 9:55am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Which ‘killer’ are you referring to and where are they running for election?

It really shouldn’t matter. It is a general principal. I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

Stop moaning ffs · 16-07-2019 9:57am

downcow wrote: »

It really shouldn’t matter. It is a general principal. I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

That’s some serious waffling non answer there’s DC
You asked a question.
I asked you who were you referring to
You waffle on with a non answer.
And repeat the question you just refused to elaborate on

You’re some skit I’ll give you that

FrancieBrady · 16-07-2019 10:02am

downcow wrote: »

It really shouldn’t matter. It is a general principal. I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer
“Are you sickened by how anyone could vote for people who have murdered their civilian neighbours?

I will answer that. If people involved in a conflict/war have stood down from that, decommission their weapons then as a democrat I cannot object to them taking part in the political process. On either side.
And I don't have a problem with people voting for them either.

downcow · 16-07-2019 10:05am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

That’s some serious waffling non answer there’s DC
You asked a question.
I asked you who were you referring to
You waffle on with a non answer.
And repeat the question you just refused to elaborate on

You’re some skit I’ll give you that

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

lawred2 · 16-07-2019 10:09am

downcow wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

which murderers stood for public office?

downcow · 16-07-2019 10:09am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I will answer that. If people involved in a conflict/war have stood down from that, decommission their weapons then as a democrat I cannot object to them taking part in the political process. On either side.
And I don't have a problem with people voting for them either.

Thanks francie. So can you see why I would just like soldier f left alone and am happy people call for him to be left alone.

I wouldn’t go quite as far as you in that I would be a wee bit troubled if he stood for election and my community Elected him in massive numbers. But I appreciate how you think that would be fine and honourable

FrancieBrady · 16-07-2019 10:10am

downcow wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

Well i don't really see the point of the question. 'Peace' was always going to present this scenario, people with a vested interest in the future of the state getting involved in the negotiated agreement and the democratic process.

You seem to be only annoyed by those YOUR side call murderers getting involved, while the nationalist/republican side have to deal with the British (who also killed/murdered them) and Loyalists.

Cuts both ways this one. Soldiers returned from conflict/war all through history and led normal democratic lives.

Stop moaning ffs · 16-07-2019 10:11am

downcow wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs. Francie seems to have understood it and had the guts to answer it. We’ll never know how you feel about people voting for murderers.

Which paramilitary orginastion are the DUP linked to again?

You vote for them right?

What’s your point exactly?
Pa I’ve never had to make this call at a polling station in my life. As far as I know none of the parties down this way run around killing people or drug running

downcow · 16-07-2019 10:34am

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Which paramilitary orginastion are the DUP linked to again?

You vote for them right?

What’s your point exactly?
Pa I’ve never had to make this call at a polling station in my life. As far as I know none of the parties down this way run around killing people or drug running

Do the shinners not stand in your area?

Stop moaning ffs · 16-07-2019 10:38am

downcow wrote: »

Do the shinners not stand in your area?

They do. Mary Lou is actually td for my area.
I’m not aware of her killing anyone though?
If you know something we don’t you should probably call the police.

downcow · 16-07-2019 10:47am

Some of What I’ve learnt so far from you guys.

Paisley was in the OO up to 1962
The para flags and banners genuinely annoy some of you.
There is still incredible levels of misunderstanding and prejudice against my community in roi.
We all need to work harder at getting in the other’s shoes.

What I hope francie etc has learned.
Nationalists are being fed some utter nonsense about the community they share this island with.
Paisley did not form the independent OO
Contrary to nationalist urban myth, there has been less than two years this century when the NI first minister was also a member of the OO.
Arlene foster is not in the orange order.

What I think ‘stop moaning ffs’ has learnt
Nothing (sadly)

The glorious 12th

Comments