Fury at tribute plan for IRA girl Farrell

djpbarry

twasantis wrote: »

every year in this country the government and people celebrate the death of those killed in the easter rising...

Not a fan of The Rising myself - I've already explained why.

twasantis wrote: »

nowhere in her conviction is the word terrorist used or mentioned!!!!

You don't think blowing up a hotel is an act of terrorism?

twasantis wrote: »

and how exactly was she wrong??

You said that she believed what she was doing was right. It wasn't.

TOMASJ

I see the puppets are at it in this posts as well, lets all just have a chorus of god save the queen. and humour them maybe with any luck they will go and live in that land of milk and honey, across the Irish sea

GuanYin

TOMASJ wrote: »

I see the puppets are at it in this posts as well, lets all just have a chorus of god save the queen. and humour them maybe with any luck they will go and live in that land of milk and honey, across the Irish sea

What an excellent debator you are. Seriously though, if you don't have any better contribution than to mock those who disagree with you, don't post on this forum.

To paraphrase a quote falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson,

"Without dissent, do we have democracy?"

TOMASJ

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

What an excellent debator you are. Seriously though, if you don't have any better contribution than to mock those who disagree with you, don't post on this forum.

To paraphrase a quote falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson,

"Without dissent, do we have democracy?"

If I could read any posts that warranted a sensible answer, I would have given one,

for instance

wrote:

They raised her. She was a monster. Logically that implies they raised a monster.

wrote:

As I said the so called army council of the IRA must really hate brass band music.

LordSutch

twasantis wrote: »

I Cannot Believe I Will Dignify U Wit Answer, But Seriously U Honestly Gonna Slate Her Family Saying They Reared A Monster????????

Grow Up!!!

But her family did rear a Monster, and of that there can be no doubt "Farrell had Bombed before" & she was about to Bomb again, she was a self proclaimed member of a Terrorist organisation called the "Provisional IRA" who have/ had a pretty good reputation of planting Bombs in all kinds of places, from Pub's to Shopping Centres to Parks to Busses . . . so yes 'She was a Monster' ~ unless you agree with the principle of planting Bombs? ~ in which case Farrell is probably some king of Patriotic Hero to you?

So 'You' Grow Up & get an education on what the IRA actually did to people before you start spouting off about how Great the IRA or their dead heroes are to you & your fellow Terrorist sympathisers.

TOMASJ

ArthurF wrote: »

But her family did rear a Monster, and of that there can be no doubt "Farrell had Bombed before" & she was about to Bomb again, she was a self proclaimed member of a Terrorist organisation called the "Provisional IRA" who have/ had a pretty good reputation of planting Bombs in all kinds of places, from Pub's to Shopping Centres to Parks to Busses . . . so yes 'She was a Monster' ~ unless you agree with the principle of planting Bombs? ~ in which case Farrell is probably some king of Patriotic Hero to you?

So 'You' Grow Up & get an education on what the IRA actually did to people before you start spouting off about how Great the IRA or their dead heroes are to you & your fellow Terrorist sympathisers.

Did you ever stop to think what creates these 'monsters' let me give you an example, the real heroes, the brits throw a cordon around a particular road street or village, loyalist paramilitaries, (I use that in the loosest terms) , enter that village kill a few nationalist,The RUC UDR E4, or whoever is on duty give free passage in and out, they then deny that their was ever a checkpoint in the area, hypocritically condemn these murders, after much anger, hold a sham inquiry delay findings indefinitely and move on to the next dirty deed, multiply this scenario by the dozen and you may understand what makes these 'monsters'. 'monsters' are made by unfair treatment of people, by rogue governments, namely Thatcher.

djpbarry

TOMASJ wrote: »

'monsters' are made by unfair treatment of people...

So you admit that she was a monster? Great. Glad that's settled.

A Dub in Glasgo

djpbarry wrote: »

So you admit that she was a monster? Great. Glad that's settled.

That is far too simplistic I'm afraid. She may have done what some people call monstrous things, does that make her a monster? I don't know, just like I do not call the mothers of all those soldiers/police/people who do monstrous things monster rearers.

Was Enola Gay a monster rearer? If not, why not?

It wasn't me!

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

She may have done what some people call monstrous things, does that make her a monster?

Yes.

walrusgumble

the monster thing? without connecting the following as justification of the ira but would you consider the following as monsters (leave that for yourselves to decide)

certain and well documented members of unionism politics (some of whom right honourable members of westminister) who very heavily and vocally paraded rallied and complaint against civil rights movements, failed to speak out when catholics were turned away from jobs and social housing, refused to built a univeristy in the city of derry instead opting for the convenient smaller town but protestant domenant coleraine

or the certain and well documented unionist polticans who destroyed captain terrance o'neills efforts to solve the secterian divide by meeting lemass? or the other efforts of preventing Faulkner's led government because of the real motive of refusal to power share, allowing the unionist trade union members shut down all power supplies and public works in protest to power sharing - without a word from westminister (whose leader was more interested in investing into england - considering the time one could see why investment in england was priority)

or the certain and well documented unionist who were secretarian to the bone hollowing rome rule etc, ranting and raving in brussels at an address by the pope to the eu parliament - all not even as much as a wrap around the knuckles by fellow westminister peerss

the sdlp were a dominant nationalist voice, why couldn't the other unionist sides recognise their democratic willingness to share power, as oppose to always blame sein fein for every little nuck and cranny in order to kept direct rule the status quo? face facts, the m15 have tapped sinn fein offices in stormount (and found nothing), why not the offices of the other extreme unionist parties who enjoyed the support of their fellow militant groups? how come people like david irvine (whom many nationalists have respect for) was not castigated the same way as sinn fein. if members of sinn fein such as adams & co were still in the ra or still had connections, why were they not arrested in the early 1980-1990's (in light of all the collusion in the ruc and governments, why were they not arrested or faced with even fake documents proving their existing membership - brits had no problem doing this before the iraq war)

are those certain members of unionism, who made every excuse in the world over the past 40 years, and who by refusing to deal with even moderate nationalists (and moderate unionists) and attempting to obstruct in every way possible an agreement to come together and share power not have blood ontheir hands?

how many lives would have bein saved had all of unionism allowed moderate members of sinn fein and sdlp (or at least sdlp) enter talks for peace and establish stormount earlier? those do did not, are they monsters?

many people on these boards, particularily in history, enjoy denouncing and derriding the 1916 rising and or the war of independence with the luck of hindsight by saying well what did it get us, or stupidly compare ira of old with ira circa 1969-present. i challenge those who have those who use hindsight from those threads to say people, such as the Rev Ian Paisley and others were not monsters in the past. many treads are always focused on ira actorities and many are biased or people who try to as much as defend get ripped to shreads - fine these things are relevant, history should be reviewed and if new facts are found great, but in general, when threads such as these arise, the minute one speaks of loyalist attacks everyone is quite or counter argue something like ah but the ra did this and that.

this may be for another thread, but i agree, by branding someone a monster, look at why they became one, what cause them to take the dark road of militism as oppose to the democractic. there are many ways to be branded a monster - physical violence is only one.

oscarBravo

I think discussions of monster-rearing are best left out of the thread, thanks.

twasantis

ArthurF wrote: »

But her family did rear a Monster, and of that there can be no doubt "Farrell had Bombed before" & she was about to Bomb again, she was a self proclaimed member of a Terrorist organisation called the "Provisional IRA" who have/ had a pretty good reputation of planting Bombs in all kinds of places, from Pub's to Shopping Centres to Parks to Busses . . . so yes 'She was a Monster' ~ unless you agree with the principle of planting Bombs? ~ in which case Farrell is probably some king of Patriotic Hero to you?

So 'You' Grow Up & get an education on what the IRA actually did to people before you start spouting off about how Great the IRA or their dead heroes are to you & your fellow Terrorist sympathisers.

i would like to know were and at what stage i claimed anyone to be great????????


the fact that anyone could link her parents and they way they brought her up,to this thread is CHILDISH!!!!end of!!!do u blame yours for any problems in your life??????????

walrusgumble

oscarBravo wrote: »

I think discussions of monster-rearing are best left out of the thread, thanks.

how come you only intervene now? how come it was tolerated when referring to Farrell? how many actually knew what it was like to live there?

oscarBravo

Farrell is the subject of the thread; her parents are not.

As to what it was like to live there: there are those of us who refuse to accept that the social conditions, bad as they were, justify mass murder.

Finally, read the charter - specifically the bit about discussing moderation - before posting again.

TOMASJ

djpbarry wrote: »

So you admit that she was a monster? Great. Glad that's settled.

A very childish simplistic post, I recommend you read the tread again

oscarBravo wrote: »

As to what it was like to live there: there are those of us who refuse to accept that the social conditions, bad as they were, justify mass murder.

In light of the atrocities the brits were involved in at the time in the occupied six, there are those of us who believe that eliminating brit solders armed with guns or brass instrumentals was legit in Ireland or Spain.

oscarBravo

TOMASJ wrote: »

...there are those of us who believe that eliminating brit solders armed with ... brass instrumentals was legit in Ireland or Spain.

Oh, I'm aware that there are people who think that way. It's such a very, very short step from the mass murder of musicians to that of children.

I find the best way to avoid that slippery slope into homicidal insanity is not to take the first step onto it.

But what would I know? I'm just a cowardly pacifist who disapproves of blowing up kids.

GuanYin

TOMASJ wrote: »

In light of the atrocities the brits were involved in at the time in the occupied six, there are those of us who believe that eliminating brit solders armed with guns or brass instrumentals was legit in Ireland or Spain.

Can you please explain the rationale in attempting to assassinate an army band in a country that is not you own or their as an action of legitimate freedom fighting as opposed to say, wanton terrorism and outright murder?

Surely one could make some argument if they atatcked armed soldiers in Ireland or England...but an army band in Gibraltar?

Can you explain this?

TOMASJ

oscarBravo wrote: »

I find the best way to avoid that slippery slope into homicidal insanity is not to take the first step onto it.

when you talk about, that slippery slope into homicidal insanity, I presume you include the british armed forces who have indeed as stated murdered musicians, Re (Miami showband) and children Martin McShane Coalisland Co Tyrone, Margaret Gargan Ballymurphy to name a few, You see no one involved can be portrayed as lilly white, the brits over and over in these post are deemed to have done no wrong in the occupied six. 'I WONDER WHY'

TOMASJ

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

Can you please explain the rationale in attempting to assassinate an army band in a country that is not you own or their as an action of legitimate freedom fighting as opposed to say, wanton terrorism and outright murder?

Surely one could make some argument if they atatcked armed soldiers in Ireland or England...but an army band in Gibraltar?

Can you explain this?

You do know that this army band, was in a country that did not belong to them either, I presume that they were able to shoot as well as play music,so the rationale might be that the IRA had as much right to be in Spain as the brits,

GuanYin

TOMASJ wrote: »

You do know that this army band, was in a country that did not belong to them either, I presume that they were able to shoot as well as play music,so the rationale might be that the IRA had as much right to be in Spain as the brits,

You deliberately avoiding my question.

What qualifies the IRA, going to another country, not involved in "our" dispute and killing people not involved in the conflict.

You can rationalise acts in Ireland or England as part of a cause. Once you go to another country, it becomes plain murder.

Unless you would likewise condone Al Qaeda strikes and actions in, say, major irish cities?

Fratton Fred

TOMASJ wrote: »

You do know that this army band, was in a country that did not belong to them either, I presume that they were able to shoot as well as play music,so the rationale might be that the IRA had as much right to be in Spain as the brits,

Have you heard the expression "That's none of your ****ing business"?

TOMASJ

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

You deliberately avoiding my question.

What qualifies the IRA, going to another country, not involved in "our" dispute and killing people not involved in the conflict.

The brits are the cause of 'our dispute' weater they be at any time in Iraq, Afghanistan, Spain,or Ireland, it matters not they belong to the same organization. (by the way apply that line of thinking to Iraq and asks yourself what authorizes the brits to kill people in Iraq )

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

You can rationalise acts in Ireland or England as part of a cause. Once you go to another country, it becomes plain murder.

(it becomes plain murder.) like was done to[SIZE=-1], Mairead Farrell, Danny McCann, and Sean Savage. 'in Spain'




[/SIZE]

TOMASJ

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Have you heard the expression "That's none of your ****ing business"?

'YES' and

murphaph

TOMASJ wrote: »

You do know that this army band, was in a country that did not belong to them either, I presume that they were able to shoot as well as play music,so the rationale might be that the IRA had as much right to be in Spain as the brits,

The people who live there overwhelmingly say it's british. Who does it belong to then?

TOMASJ

murphaph wrote: »

The people who live there overwhelmingly say it's british. Who does it belong to then?

The people of a little Island near China called Hong Kong, wanted to remain british, how come their wishes were not respected, and don't give the old chestnut about a 99 year lease, that would have been ignored if China had been a smaller country, might it have had something to do with them having a bigger army, and could not have been walked over.

GuanYin

TOMASJ wrote: »

The brits are the cause of 'our dispute' weater they be at any time in Iraq, Afghanistan, Spain,or Ireland, it matters not they belong to the same organization. (by the way apply that line of thinking to Iraq and asks yourself what authorizes the brits to kill people in Iraq )

So you think that our fight with the British, overwrites any international laws and the laws of other countries.

In effect, you think the IRA are above any law and don't need to follow any rules?

(it becomes plain murder.) like was done to, Mairead Farrell, Danny McCann, and Sean Savage. 'in Spain'

Or indeed the good people of Omagh or any other innocent victim of the IRA.


Again you ignored my point, do you think it is OK for Middle Eastern terrorists to go after British interests in Ireland.

Do you condone any actions they take on our soil and accept the collateral damage that may result? Because you can't condone the IRA acting overseas and not accept that we may suffer at the hands of others.

In anycase, my overall point is, the British government, whether they hide evidence or not, is at the end of the day accountable to the british people and the UN and indeed the world. The IrA aren't accountable to noone. They act on behalf of a small minority of extermists. The Irish people don't want them murdering people in their name, especially in other countries.

oscarBravo

TOMASJ wrote: »

when you talk about, that slippery slope into homicidal insanity, I presume you include the british armed forces who have indeed as stated murdered musicians, Re (Miami showband) and children Martin McShane Coalisland Co Tyrone, Margaret Gargan Ballymurphy to name a few,

Do you think it was OK for the Miami showband and those children you named to be murdered? I'd appreciate a straight answer with no ducking of the question.

Either you think those murders were justified, or you're indulging in breathtaking hypocrisy by saying that murderers whose cause you agree with are "legit", but other murderers are not.

Which is it?

TOMASJ wrote: »

You see no one involved can be portrayed as lilly white, the brits over and over in these post are deemed to have done no wrong in the occupied six. 'I WONDER WHY'

I'd like you to point out where I've suggested "the brits" have done no wrong. In fact, I'd like you to point out where I've been anything other than forthright in my condemnation of murdering scumbags of any stripe.

TOMASJ

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

So you think that our fight with the British, overwrites any international laws and the laws of other countries.

You cant have it both ways either [SIZE=-1]Gibraltar's[/SIZE] is british or not, if you think it is then how come it is not referred to as such by the english.


(it becomes plain murder.) like was done to, Mairead Farrell, Danny McCann, and Sean Savage. 'in Spain'

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

Or indeed the good people of Omagh or any other innocent victim of the IRA.

Yes like all innocent people, killed by the brits or the IRA or their puppets from the UDA, UVF, UFF, just to name a few.

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

Again you ignored my point, do you think it is OK for Middle Eastern terrorists to go after British interests in Ireland.

Do you condone any actions they take on our soil and accept the collateral damage that may result?

If a group of Iraq or Afgan soldiers attacked any british regiment in england or in the british occupied North, considering all the british terrorist have done to thoses people, yes I would say that was legit.

TOMASJ

TOMASJ wrote: »

when you talk about, that slippery slope into homicidal insanity, I presume you include the british armed forces who have indeed as stated murdered musicians, Re (Miami showband) and children Martin McShane Coalisland Co Tyrone, Margaret Gargan Ballymurphy to name a few, You see no one involved can be portrayed as lilly white, the brits over and over in these post are deemed to have done no wrong in the occupied six. 'I WONDER WHY'

Re read

oscarBravo wrote: »

Which is it? I'd like you to point out where I've suggested "the brits" have done no wrong. In fact, I'd like you to point out where I've been anything other than forthright in my condemnation of murdering scumbags of any stripe.

I didn't say 'YOU' ( I suggest you re read pathfinders posts)

Fratton Fred

so an armed struggle is ok and members of the military are justified targets....as long as they are British. Killing an unarmed army band is an acceptable act, but killing those who try to claim to be in an army and are on a mission to kill, is brutal murder.

There we see the absolute hypocrisy of the "Armed Struggle".