View Full Version : Sinn Féin leadership and the IRA
This was dicussed on here before.
Looks like Bertie, McDowell and the Sinn-ers are taking the gloves off.
Story on RTÉ website (http://www.rte.ie)
Poor old Adams was flabergasted that Bertie thought he was in the IRA? McGuinness doing much the same, it's a government conspiricy, against working class people apparently.
Things are about to get very interesting in Irish politics.
Next thing Bertie will be saying SF....sorry the IRA are involved in cross border smuggling, drug distribution etc...
:eek:
Sure those Unionists are terrible for not sharing government with Gerry 'n Co but we in the Republic have different reasons for not wanting them in government.
How times are changing eh... Only a few years ago FF would have been the first people to defend SF if anyone accused them of being the same as the IRA.
:rolleyes:
Originally posted by SÓC
This was dicussed on here before.
Looks like Bertie, McDowell and the Sinn-ers are taking the gloves off.
Story on RTÉ website (http://www.rte.ie)
Poor old Adams was flabergasted that Bertie thought he was in the IRA? McGuinness doing much the same, it's a government conspiricy, against working class people apparently.
Things are about to get very interesting in Irish politics.
Think Bertie, Adams and McGuinness should all read Ed Maloney's "Secret History of the IRA", just to clarify their positions.....
Not sure I'd agree with the interesting part, but the Sinner's must be in the running for the Comical Ali Award for 2004...
brendy_éire
08/03/2004, 3:54 PM
Bertie & Co are only going for this for the media attention, looking at the forthcoming European and local elections, attempting to stop SF's growth.
As for Bertie not being in government with SF, that has nothing to do with the IRA. FF won't ever go into government with SF because their policies are too different. FF are a right wing, capitalist, conversative party, whereas SF are a centre-left party. They're not compatible for government. If SF was to be in government in the south, it would be with the Greens, the Socialists and Labour.
Once again, the Minister for 'Justice', and I use that term lightly, has gone about accusing people of committing crimes for which he has no evidence. If SF members are involved in smuggling, etc, prosecute them! Innocent until proven guilty? Obviously not in this country.
FF as a party are anti-working class. They promote private enterprise and put big business ahead of the workers. And as for the PDs, they sicken me to be honest. Ultra-capitalist, right wing scum, who'd like to see pensioners thrown out onto the street for not being able to afford being put in care.
McDowell really shows his ignorance by calling SF 'Nazis', when FF endorse the majority of the policies of the German Nazi Party.
It's a sad state of affairs when an Irish minister stoops to the use of name-calling. It says a lot for this government's attitude towards the opposition.
Woah there Brendy_Éire.
FF are endorsing the majority of the Nazi's policies? Name one? Nows who's name calling?
Jerry Adams wrote in An Phoblacht under the pen-name Brownie admitting that he was in the IRA. Thirty years later he's flabergasted that the Taoiseach thought he was in the IRA?
Bertie and BigMac mightnt be everyones cup of tea but they are not stupid. IMO they are sitting on something letting Sinn-ers get themselves into a mess like Adams has done.
Add this to the IRA involvement in an attempted kidnapping Belfast, IMO spells trouble for Sinn-ers south of the Border at least.
WeAreRovers
08/03/2004, 4:21 PM
Originally posted by SÓC
[B
Add this to the IRA involvement in an attempted kidnapping Belfast, [/B]
Woah there yourself, SOC. the word missing from that quote is alleged. Remember the Castlereagh break in? Trimble and co used that as an excuse to bring down the Assembly. Again the only evidence was the word of Hugh Ord.
No charges were brought mainly because even the dogs on the street knew it was an inside job and had nothing to do with the IRA. But that didn't matter to the Unionists and their apologists down here.
The latest black propaganda from McDowell and Ahern is scaremongering ahead of the elections. Nothing else. The fact that it plays into the hands of the Unionists and may well destroy what's left of the Peace Process is just a side effect that doesn't bother FF and the PDs.
Having said all that Adams' denial of IRA membership was laughable. As Ed Moroney said in the Tribune yesterday, without Adams and McGuinness' involvement in the IRA there would be no Peace Process.
KOH
gerry adams was not in the ira in the same sense that clinton never had sex with monica lewinsky:rolleyes:
I don't give a sh*t for Sinn Fein and their ilk, but the fact that McDowell is allowed to get away with this is particularly worrying.
This is the guy who claims to know everything there is to know about the law and the legal system. He is an SC, a former Attorney General and the Minister for Justice.
YET he makes all sorts of allegations, claiming them as fact, but so far has not produced one single shred of evidence. If he has this evidence, it must be quite easy to bring charges.
If this guy, with all his self-proclaimed belief and knowledge of the law, can carry on like this, simply to boost the chances of a minor party to get votes, this country is even more f*cked than anybody thought.
So what are you saying patsh? That Adams and McGuinness aren't/weren't in the IRA? That the IRA isn't a active, illegal organisation in possession of guns/ammo/explosives?
That McDowell should accuse anyone else of being Nazi like is laughable, but that isn't the funniest thing about this whole episode...
dahamsta
08/03/2004, 5:13 PM
Originally posted by eoinh
gerry adams was not in the ira in the same sense that clinton never had sex with monica lewinsky"I did not have sexual relations with that paramilitary organisation."
I wonder does Gerry think being associated with the IRA is a slur on his name?
Sure he could always bring Mickey Mac to court?
brendy_éire
08/03/2004, 5:45 PM
Originally posted by SÓC
FF are endorsing the majority of the Nazi's policies? Name one? Nows who's name calling?
You've got me all wrong. I'm not calling anyone names. Ye see, you're taking me comparing FF policies with that of the Nazi Party as an insult. Not the case at all. FF are a very capitalist party, as are the Nazis. FF encourage private enterprise and give substancial tax breaks to businesses, as did the Nazis. Both FF and the Nazis called their opponents, particularly those on the left, nasty things and attempted to publicly discredit them by accusing them of crimes they didn't commit (FF accuse SF members of smuggling, kidnapping, etc. The Nazis accused the German Communist Party of setting fire to the Reichstag). FF share many policies with the Nazis, but they do differ on issues of race, nationalism, etc. There's a stigma attached to the Nazis by many that they were these terrible, evil people, but the majority of people making these assumptions don't even know what the Nazis policies were, apart from the 2nd World War and the anti-Semetism. When I say that FF share policies with the Nazis, I'm not engaging in name-calling, I'm just stating the facts.
Originally posted by SÓC
Jerry Adams wrote in An Phoblacht under the pen-name Brownie admitting that he was in the IRA. Thirty years later he's flabergasted that the Taoiseach thought he was in the IRA?
I would have assumed that Adams was a member of the IRA, it seems slightly inconceivable that he wouldn't have been, but why would he say that he wasn't? What's he got to benefit from by lying? And if he was in the 'RA, so what? Being in the 'RA isn't a big thing. Do people honestly care? The PSNI certainly don't.
Originally posted by SÓC
Add this to the IRA involvement in an attempted kidnapping Belfast, IMO spells trouble for Sinn-ers south of the Border at least.
As already mentioned, this is all alledged. The IRA leadership said they did not order any operation on Bobby Tohill. Enough said.
brendy_éire
08/03/2004, 7:03 PM
Originally posted by Conor74
Is this a serious post?!
Aye.
Originally posted by Conor74
The Nazis were famous for their use of violence, brutality and intimidation to pursue political goals.
Did I not say there were differences in policy?
Originally posted by Conor74
If only the IRA had confined their approach to 'calling their opponents nasty things' then perhaps we may have avoided a lot of the bloodshed.
History is full of 'what ifs'. Firstly, the last IRA campaign was prompted by the RUC and loyalist groups attacking Catholics, who turned to the IRA for protection. Secondly, Ireland unfree shall never be at peace. If the Brits had left, the bloodshed would certainly have been avoided.
Originally posted by Conor74
you may well agree with Sinn Fein, they are a perfectly legitimate party in a democracy and you are entitled to do so, but surely you can see that comparing the Government to Nazis doesn't make anyone think that Sinn Fein are some knights in shining armour.
FYI, I agree with a lot of the policies of SF, but I'm not 'Sinn Féin to the hilt'. I'm not speaking on behalf of SF, so don't feel that I'm attempting to promote them here, and I don't view them as 'knights in shining armour' either.
Are you trying to say that FF share no policies with that of the German Nazi Party? I'm not using the term 'Nazi' in a derogatory fashion, I'm using it in comparing policies. An intelligent person should be able to separate the economic policies of the Nazis from their racial and nationalist policies. FF share a great deal of their economic policies with the Nazis, as do the PDs.
Originally posted by Conor74
On a practical level, SF may well provide a viable alternative to the PDs in future coalitions, it's surely more likely than FG being able to make up the numbers with any party or parties.
In future coalitions with FF? I can't see that happening without policies changes in either party. They're too opposed with regard to economics.
TheRealRovers
08/03/2004, 9:29 PM
Originally posted by brendy_eire
Bertie & Co are only going for this for the media attention, looking at the forthcoming European and local elections, attempting to stop SF's growth.
True, All it is is propaganda from McDowell and Ahern who are afraid of SF growth
BTW I think the PD's are closer to the Nazi's with their right wing views and policies
Originally posted by Macy
So what are you saying patsh? That Adams and McGuinness aren't/weren't in the IRA? That the IRA isn't a active, illegal organisation in possession of guns/ammo/explosives?
That McDowell should accuse anyone else of being Nazi like is laughable, but that isn't the funniest thing about this whole episode...
I never mentioned that anything was funny, and I never mentioned the IRA.
If you want to have a debate with someone, at least read their post properly.
I'm saying that the self-proclaimed top legal expert in this country, a holder of Ministerial office, is spraying the most serious allegations left, right and centre without offering a shred of proof. or a hint of a prosecution.
The point seems to be entirely for possible electoral advantage.
If anyone thinks this is acceptable in a "democratic, liberal republic", then the word nazi is apt, but not in the way McDowell intended.
Wait a minute brendy_eire. Lets follow your logic.
Nuns are a lot like Nazis.
They have arms, legs, eyes, ears. They are both partial to wearing black. They follow the directions of one man.
:rolleyes:
As a member of FF I have no love for the PDs at all. They, to me at least, seem to have too much influence. But I do not think of McDowell as stupid. I really think he must be sitting on something if he's bring this up so much. The PDs and SF are very different. Their "target markets" for votes are miles apart. The main people who should fear SF are those on the left. McDowell wouldnt have that much to gain vote wise. I honestly think that he has something.
Yea sorry, alleged involvment. But then again the fact that the PIRA exists is a crime in itself.
But to be honest as with FF/FG and corruption; throw enough mud at SF and some will stick.
Paddy Ramone
09/03/2004, 9:31 AM
Originally posted by TheRealRovers
True, All it is is propaganda from McDowell and Ahern who are afraid of SF growth
BTW I think the PD's are closer to the Nazi's with their right wing views and policies
Well actually the Nazi's economic poliies would have more in common with the left than the extreme right wing laissez faire policies of the PD's. The Nazi party were against transnational corporate powers and extreme nationalist while the PD's support globalisation and Americanization and are anti-Nationalist.
Hitler was noted by Time magazine in 1938 for having anti-capitalistic policies. The Nazis would probably see the PD's as part of "the World Jewish Capitalist Conspiracy". It would more accurate to compare the PD's to extreme right of the Tory Party or the American Republican Party.
Originally posted by SÓC
But to be honest as with FF/FG and corruption; throw enough mud at SF and some will stick.
FF and FG corruption? Nice try, but we all know which party had the most corrupt councillor's/TD's/Ministers/Taoiseach...
Agree that the parties on the left have the most to gain, that's why you'll see Labour and the Greens keep their heads down. However, FF and the PD's must have something to gain, else they wouldn't be saying/supporting the view? For the PD's, it's obviously part of McDowell's plans to reverse take over FG...
Shoudnt the part comparing FF with the Nazi party be moved to another thread. One entitled comedy?
My, it only takes a few years for most terrorism to stop and peoples memories fade. Or maybe its something to do with the age of the posters?
I would never vote FF in a million years but to label it as like the Nazi party is utter bumkin.
DO SOME RESEARCH OR READ A BOOK. THE NAZIS WERE THE MOST EVIL IDEA EVER TO BE FOSTERED ON THE WORLD. SO MANY PEOPLE SUFFERED THAT ITS ALMOST UNIMAGINABLE.
Originally posted by Macy
FF and FG corruption? Nice try, but we all know which party had the most corrupt councillor's/TD's/Ministers/Taoiseach...
Agree that the parties on the left have the most to gain, that's why you'll see Labour and the Greens keep their heads down. However, FF and the PD's must have something to gain, else they wouldn't be saying/supporting the view? For the PD's, it's obviously part of McDowell's plans to reverse take over FG...
Ah Im not denying that more FF people have been caught, so far at least.
Of course FF/PDs have something to gain but not that much. It would surprise me if they didnt have something solid that they were keeping in reserve or bluffing. Let SF stew. Adams has already made himself look like a fool. Either way its a very risky road to go down.
Originally posted by SÓC
Ah Im not denying that more FF people have been caught, so far at least.
So have you anything in reserve for that accusation? You're clearly implying that other parties have as many corrupt members as FF :)
Originally posted by Macy
So have you anything in reserve for that accusation? You're clearly implying that other parties have as many corrupt members as FF :)
Lets just say if the Irish Press was around there would be more scéals doing the rounds;)
WeAreRovers
09/03/2004, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by SÓC
Lets just say if the Irish Press was around there would be more scéals doing the rounds;)
Surely if the Press was still around they'd have switched allegiance to the only remaining Republican party? ;)
KOH
Originally posted by SÓC
Lets just say if the Irish Press was around there would be more scéals doing the rounds;)
It could be argued that the corruption started with the setting up of the Irish Press...
patsh
09/03/2004, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by SÓC
Ah Im not denying that more FF people have been caught, so far at least.
It would surprise me if they didnt have something solid that they were keeping in reserve or bluffing. Let SF stew. Adams has already made himself look like a fool. Either way its a very risky road to go down.
1. "more FF people " ??? - 2 people from FG, NO ONE from any other party.
2. "It would surprise me if they didnt have something solid that they were keeping in reserve"
Are you serious?
A government keeps serious criminal charges in "reserve"..
For what?
So that they can be used when they feel the time is right?
As some sort of leverage?
Is this not akin to some sort of blackmail?....A serious criminal activity?
Are we a democracy or not?
Arrest Adams, McGuinness, Ferris and everyone/anyone else that they are accusing and bring charges against them.
Otherwise shut up.
eoinh
09/03/2004, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by patsh
Arrest Adams, McGuinness, Ferris and everyone/anyone else that they are accusing and bring charges against them.
Otherwise shut up.
McGuinness and Ferris have admitted being in the IRA - no one needs to accuse them.
Adams is making a fool of himself.
Personally i dont like murderers of my fellow countrymen like these walking around. Not only murderes but drug-dealers, punishment beaters and god knows what else.
When I say something in reserve I mean perhaps the Gardaí are close to making a breakthrough.
Or even something which would not lead to criminal charges but leave SF comprimised. Politically they already have made Adams look very stupid.
brendy_éire
09/03/2004, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by Paddy Ramone
Well actually the Nazi's economic poliies would have more in common with the left than the extreme right wing laissez faire policies of the PD's. The Nazi party were against transnational corporate powers and extreme nationalist while the PD's support globalisation and Americanization and are anti-Nationalist.
The Nazis didn't have a lot in common with the left really. While some policies, such their public work schemes and benefits for workers may seem all well and good to socialists, it must be remembered that the Nazis also banned trade unions and strikes. They also threw many trade union leaders and socialists into prison without trial.
Originally posted by eoinh
My, it only takes a few years for most terrorism to stop and peoples memories fade.
Terrorism? :rolleyes: Aye, I suppose someone had to use the word. Careful how you use it, eoinh. According to you then, it was 'terrorism' that created the Free State.
Originally posted by eoinh
I would never vote FF in a million years but to label it as like the Nazi party is utter bumkin.
But they have similar economic policies to that of the Nazis. That can't be disputed.
Originally posted by eoinh
DO SOME RESEARCH OR READ A BOOK. THE NAZIS WERE THE MOST EVIL IDEA EVER TO BE FOSTERED ON THE WORLD. SO MANY PEOPLE SUFFERED THAT ITS ALMOST UNIMAGINABLE.
The Nazis may have got a few of their policies wrong, such as Lebensraum (the acquisition of land to the east of Germany), Master Race theory, and their hatred of Communism, but that doesn't mean you can declare that everything they did was evil. They had many policies similar to those employed by many governments around the world at the present time, for example, the creation of public work schemes to build schools, hospitals and roads. Don't go saying stuff like 'The Nazis were the evil idea ever to be fostered on the world', it makes you sound stupid.
Originally posted by patsch
Arrest Adams, McGuinness, Ferris and everyone/anyone else that they are accusing and bring charges against them.
Otherwise shut up.
Completely agree. If SF are guilty of smuggling, kidnapping, etc, bring them to trial. Why would the Government withhold information about criminal activities? Would it not be a huge boost for their credibility, and a devastating blow to SF's, if they were able to secure a prosecution against someone like Adams or Ferris? It would set SF back years in electoral success.
If McDowell cannot produce evidence to support his accusations, he should shut up and get back to doing his job.
brendy_éire
09/03/2004, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Conor74
Nope, it was the sellout by Michael Collins...;)
Aye, the sellout traitor himself used guerilla tactics in the War of Independence. But apparently these tactics are called 'terrorism' nowadays.
Originally posted by brendy_eire
Aye, the sellout traitor
btw the majority of people supported the treaty.
btw2 he continued to support the IRA in the north after the treaty
btw3 Dev and Co's problem with the treaty wasn't partition, it was with the oath.
brendy_éire
09/03/2004, 1:17 PM
Originally posted by Macy
btw the majority of people supported the treaty.
btw2 he continued to support the IRA in the north after the treaty
btw3 Dev and Co's problem with the treaty wasn't partition, it was with the oath.
All irrelevant.
Ireland should never have been cut up, it should have been all or nothing. Either fight on or simply stop the war and add it to the list of failed rebellions. If that had been done, we would have a United Ireland now, by way of a vote. Then on top of that he turned his guns on his fellow countrymen. And for what? Simplying following their desire for Irish independence, as was the goal, or so claimed, of Collins during the War of Independence. And sure didn't the Brits love him for it. Why do ye think they played the Last Post as his body was leaving on a ship from Cork.
Like it or not, he gave up the north in return for the Free State, he sold out us and all those who have fought for our freedom through the years. A traitor to the Irish nation.
(God Conor hi, now look what ye've started! :rolleyes: )
Originally posted by brendy_eire
The Nazis may have got a few of their policies wrong
LOL
Please go and visit Ann Franks house or Belsen Bergen.
Their Public Works programmes were a preparation for war. Building Motorways to the east and west for instance helped fasten the deployment of their armies.
Ifs and buts brendy_eire.
Then again if the PIRA said tomorrow that the war was over and gave up their weapons they get a United Ireland a lot quicker, but sure that it look as though they lost so they cant do that. At least when the Institutions are in place the Republic has some small degree of input into the North.
You say we'd have a United Ireland by vote? How would that work? A majority of people in one area imposing their will on the minority. Sounds familiar.
Originally posted by brendy_eire
All irrelevant.
Ireland should never have been cut up, it should have been all or nothing. Either fight on or simply stop the war and add it to the list of failed rebellions. If that had been done, we would have a United Ireland now, by way of a vote. Then on top of that he turned his guns on his fellow countrymen. And for what? Simplying following their desire for Irish independence, as was the goal, or so claimed, of Collins during the War of Independence. And sure didn't the Brits love him for it. Why do ye think they played the Last Post as his body was leaving on a ship from Cork.
Like it or not, he gave up the north in return for the Free State, he sold out us and all those who have fought for our freedom through the years. A traitor to the Irish nation.
Look, we could go round in circles here forever - at the time it was felt that some was better than all, and the fact that they tried to keep Ulster as the partition line rather than the 6 counties (to ensure a nationalist majority). If they'd just had another failed rebellion, we would've had several more since then and the Unionists in the 6 counties would still not play ball. You could argue we'd only be at the 1922 stage now, or recently, even further than the ever from peace. The only Irishmen that Collins turned his guns on were those that wouldn't accept the majority decision of the people - those who wanted to "wade through the blood of irishmen" to get their own way (all over the oath, not partition).
Originally posted by brendy_eire
And sure didn't the Brits love him for it. Why do ye think they played the Last Post as his body was leaving on a ship from Cork.
Think you're mixing up love with respect.
WeAreRovers
09/03/2004, 2:03 PM
Originally posted by SÓC
Ifs and buts brendy_eire.
Then again if the PIRA said tomorrow that the war was over and gave up their weapons they get a United Ireland a lot quicker, but sure that it look as though they lost so they cant do that. At least when the Institutions are in place the Republic has some small degree of input into the North.
Eh, the war has been effectively over since August 1, 1994 (with a brief resumption courtesy of John Major) and the IRA have complied with De Chastelain and the decommisioning body but whatever they do isn't good enough for the Unionists (and increasingly the media and establishment down here.)
As for the Institutions they were up and running until the Unionists collapsed them with the aid of the 2 governments. The Unionists want a complete surrender from the IRA. As I'm sure Brendy Eire will tell you that will never ever happen. The folk memory of the beginning of the troubles is too strong for the Nationalist community to allow a surrender.
KOH
But isnt that silly. Letting pride get in the way of progress.
If the war is effectively over why not call a spade a spade and say its over. No mention of the word surrender.
Say the war is over, decommission the weapons. Disband the IRA.
Wait for the Unionist reaction. They would have no choice, no choice what so ever but to share power with SF. From there its just a slippery slope to a United Ireland.
WeAreRovers
09/03/2004, 2:25 PM
Originally posted by max power
yawn yawn yawn, grow up and get on with your lifes, its this sort of rubbish talking that keeps the fires of hate burning on this island.........the past is the past, if you want to live in the past disconnect your electricity and sit in the dark while complaining about the evil british and how great and fault free us Irish really are.....
Tell that to the families of the young men who killed themselves in Ardoyne...Tell that to the families of Rosemary Nelson, Robert Hamill and Pat Finucane, still looking for justice...Tell that to the people who have been effectively disenfranchised by the collapse of the Assembly...Tell that to the schoolgirls scarred for life by events at Holy Cross....Tell that to the residents of the Garvaghy Road....The list goes on and it's firmly in the present.
It's "Free State" attitudes like that which have us in the mess we're in. The people of the North were sold out in 1922 and we down here continue to wash our hands of our fellow countrymen and women. It represents a shameful stain on our national character.
KOH
max power
09/03/2004, 2:28 PM
blah blah blah move on...enjoy the dark
TommyT
09/03/2004, 2:51 PM
Originally posted by brendy_eire
All irrelevant.
Ireland should never have been cut up, it should have been all or nothing. Either fight on or simply stop the war and add it to the list of failed rebellions. If that had been done, we would have a United Ireland now, by way of a vote. Then on top of that he turned his guns on his fellow countrymen. And for what?
Can we have a ''what if ?'' thread when you all get bored of this one ?
Adams speech last week was brilliant but he's asked for this by his ridiculous attitude, likewise McGuinness.
max power
09/03/2004, 3:31 PM
while workin the the north of Ireland i have been followed to the border by a car and told not to return next week to work, while traveling to other gigs my company provided us with yellow number plates so our cars would not stand out, the war is over eh ??? this is the sort of rubbish that i'm on about, move on and life youe life and not other peoples.....
brendy_éire
09/03/2004, 4:15 PM
Originally posted by SÓC
But isnt that silly. Letting pride get in the way of progress.
If the war is effectively over why not call a spade a spade and say its over. No mention of the word surrender.
No, it's not silly. The 'War', for many, won't be over until we have independence. Nor will the IRA (or something similar) will go away until we have independence.
There's a lot more than just pride involved in explaining why people won't say that the war is over. Drawing from experience of members of my own family (who grew up in Creggan, in Derry), it would be very difficult for them to admit that the war is over until the Brits leave. They've seen too many of their friends being shot dead. It was against the backdrop of incidents like Bloody Sunday and other British army/RUC killings many people joined the IRA. At very least, they'll want justice before declaring that their war is over.
Originally posted by SÓC
Say the war is over, decommission the weapons. Disband the IRA.
Wait for the Unionist reaction. They would have no choice, no choice what so ever but to share power with SF. From there its just a slippery slope to a United Ireland.
The rejectionist Unionists will never be satisfied. They will always find something to excuse themselves from playing their role. There's still an attitude held of "We don't want a Fenian about the place [Stormont]". They wish only to go back to the days of "A Protestant parliament for a Protestant people". Unfortunately, it really does seem that there are those who just do not want to share power with Catholics.
Originally posted by max power
while workin the the north of Ireland i have been followed to the border by a car and told not to return next week to work, while traveling to other gigs my company provided us with yellow number plates so our cars would not stand out, the war is over eh ??? this is the sort of rubbish that i'm on about, move on and life youe life and not other peoples.....
That was most likely the Red Hand Defenders (cover name for various loyalist groups), who threatened to shoot any car with a southern registration plate.
Ask the relatives of Rosemary Nelson or Danny McColgan if they are willing to simply "move on".
Personally, I can't 'move on' until, at very least, the British army is withdrawn from the streets of the north and the RUC/PSNI is fully reformed. And don't think my views are in any way extreme. Personally, I've suffered very little as a direct result of the Brits (was shot with a plastic bullet once when I was 8, and have been called a 'Paddy *******' or something similar on a few occasions), so it's a bit unrealistic to expect those who have suffered worse to be able to just draw a line in the sand and forget the past.
The past must be addressed before we can look to the future.
max power
09/03/2004, 4:15 PM
"the past must be adressed before we move to the future" that is the most sensible comment yet, looking and reflecting on our mistakes ( and yes i do mean our...both sides of the border and both sides of the political divide), not trying to create more problems...........
Lads, I'm not in the least interested in the Civil War, it was still causing trouble and strife in my own family up to about 10 years ago.
But on the topic of this thread:
There is no party going before the electorate in this country with as disreputable a bunch of candidates as SF (well, maybe those freaks in the in the Immigration Control crowd).
The fact that some of them are allowed to stand at all is disgraceful. It phsyically disgusts me that Martin Ferris, a convicted gun runner, should have been elected ahead of a man, (his party allegience is immaterial), who did as much as he could to stop the killing and try to get some sort of peaceful settlement.
But the so called liberal, caring, upstanding righteous Progessive Democrats, have a man, who is their effective leader, making a mockery of his profession, office and this so called republic, by his antics and mouthing off. Its SF now, but this creep is slowly but surely attacking virtually every civil liberty we have in this country.
He is making it acceptable to cast the most serious slurs against people, without a shred of proof, uses the most emotive threats to keep information from people that are entitled to it. He is an enthusiastic proponent of repealing the Freedom of Information Act, he has done nothing about the police force in this country, and wants to give the same highly suspect force increased powers to do what ever they like.
We all know exactly what Adams and Co. are, and can be wary of them.
It's the wolf in sheeps clothing that is far more likely to damage this society than any of the laughable semantics of SF.
Originally posted by Conor74
Developers are, more often than not, pretty hard nosed businessmen.
They are hardly going to start throwing money at parties that get a position of power once in a blue moon.
It's only natural that FF would have more corruption. It comes with the territory of being the biggest party. It's only natural that FG would be next, they've had their spells in office. As for the others, come on, like someone's gonna throw money to the Communist Party of Ireland to get a Section 4 plannng motion through? They say power corrupts, when the fringe parties get power they'll see it too, as it stands they'll have to go back and dust down their printing presses...ahem...
C'mon Conor...:rolleyes:
No matter what size your party is or how many times you are asked, you CAN say no.....
brendy-eire there will be a united ireland. the birth rates and last few census seem to indicate this.
IMO the british government and the british people want rid of northern ireland.
i wonder how the unionists would react if scotland became independent? c'mon the snp!
Actually the SNP are a good example of how a political wish for independence can be progressed without the need for terrorism
WeAreRovers
09/03/2004, 4:42 PM
Originally posted by eoinh
Actually the SNP are a good example of how a political wish for independence can be progressed without the need for terrorism
Very little state-sponsored terrorism or collusion or British Army on the streets or protestors being killed or lack of civil rights or jerrymandering or appalling housing and job prospects for the Catholic people of Scotland. No comparison whatsoever.
KOH
TommyT
09/03/2004, 4:42 PM
Originally posted by patsh
But the so called liberal, caring, upstanding righteous Progessive Democrats, have a man, who is their effective leader, making a mockery of his profession, office and this so called republic, by his antics and mouthing off. Its SF now, but this creep is slowly but surely attacking virtually every civil liberty we have in this country.
He is making it acceptable to cast the most serious slurs against people, without a shred of proof, uses the most emotive threats to keep information from people that are entitled to it.
In fairness he's deliberately made the allegations outside the Dáil so SF have the option of suing him for libel if it's not true. I'll still vote for a Raman ahead of McDowell any day.
Originally posted by WeAreRovers
Very little state-sponsored terrorism or collusion or British Army on the streets or protestors being killed or lack of civil rights or jerrymandering or appalling housing and job prospects for the Catholic people of Scotland. No comparison whatsoever.
KOH
Maybe thats because there was no real equivalent of the IRA in Scotland.
(i know there was the SNLA but they were tiny- or are, if they still exist)
TommyT
09/03/2004, 4:48 PM
Also the SNP have never won a majority of the seats or popular vote in Scotland unlike Ireland where the Union has lost every election since the franchise became reasonably broad and the Brits just ignored it.
TommyT
09/03/2004, 4:55 PM
Originally posted by Macy
btw the majority of people supported the treaty.
btw2 he continued to support the IRA in the north after the treaty
btw3 Dev and Co's problem with the treaty wasn't partition, it was with the oath.
btw 4, one thing always conveniently forgotten by our friends in the north is that the six counties were the least supportive of the republic (the real republic ;) ) during the Tan War. It was the one place the nationalist party wan' blown away.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.