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

Bobby Sand death anniversary today

Options
124678

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    MavisDavis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,263 ✭✭✭MavisDavis


    Joey the lips wrote: »
    Which translates into I know nothing about bobby sands so I am not in a position to comment. He contributed a lot and considering he won a seat in the dail while fighting his campagn in prision I would say this was a brilliant achievement considering most fianna fail canidates outside should be in prision. He was a statesman who lived with years of sectarian hatred, forced out of a couchmans apprentaship, But as you say you know nothing. Thank you for taking the time to contribute to nothing! You contrabution is noted!

    No, it doesn't. I will repeat: I do not think that Bobby Sands contributed anything to Ireland. He was an IRA member during the Troubles, I do not have any respect for him.
    Don't "translate" my personal opinion into a lack of knowledge. I'm entitled to think what I wish. Thankin' you.


  • Options
    #93
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    And what did the government of the 26 counties do in the troubles to protect the nationalist community? After the Ballymurphy Massacre and Bloody Sunday - Where was the 26 county army to defend the nationalist community?

    They are great to head off to Chad for themselves - but when troubles arose closer to home, they weren't quick to do much/


  • Options
    #94
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    dlofnep wrote: »
    And what did the government of the 26 counties do in the troubles to protect the nationalist community? After the Ballymurphy Massacre and Bloody Sunday - Where was the 26 county army to defend the nationalist community?

    They are great to head off to Chad for themselves - but when troubles arose closer to home, they weren't quick to do much/

    You really do amuse me dlofnep. If it wasn't for The IRA neither the "Ballymurphy Massacre" or "Bloody Sunday" would have happened. Why? Because there would have been no UK forces on the streets of Northern Ireland.

    In fact, returning to the subject of the thread, Sands would never have been in prison (at least not for terrorist offences).


  • Options
    #95
    Joey the lips
    Registered Users Posts: 10,262 ✭✭✭✭Joey the lips


    MavisDavis wrote: »
    No, it doesn't. I will repeat: I do not think that Bobby Sands contributed anything to Ireland. He was an IRA member during the Troubles, I do not have any respect for him.
    Don't "translate" my personal opinion into a lack of knowledge. I'm entitled to think what I wish. Thankin' you.

    You dont seem to be thinking well, You contributed to a thread your not interested in and you cant seem to understand why your getting comebacks.... Do you not understand where this leave you :rolleyes:

    What you mean is you dont know of anything he contributed and your mind is not open to accepting he did anything so it kinda strikes me as daft that your contributing to a thread you have no interest in, have not knowledge of and have no thoughts on! Have you even read any of the links seen as though you keep coming back ;)


  • Options
    #96
    Can'tseeme
    Registered Users Posts: 611 ✭✭✭Can'tseeme


    futurehope wrote: »
    You really do amuse me dlofnep. If it wasn't for The IRA neither the "Ballymurphy Massacre" or "Bloody Sunday" would have happened. Why? Because there would have been no UK forces on the streets of Northern Ireland.

    In fact, returning to the subject of the thread, Sands would never have been in prison (at least not for terrorist offences).

    So did the UK forces shoot or target anyone who was in the IRA during the Ballymurphy massacre? Or would any taig or 'quaker' do. Honestly futurehope, your naive approach to the conflict in the north is frightening. You rightly so mention the horrible attack at Kingsmill but then you deliberately paste over horrendous acts like Ballymurphy or Bloody Sunday. Your ignorance is there for all to see.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    futurehope wrote: »
    You really do amuse me dlofnep. If it wasn't for The IRA neither the "Ballymurphy Massacre" or "Bloody Sunday" would have happened. Why? Because there would have been no UK forces on the streets of Northern Ireland.

    The IRA did not make the British armed forces pull the trigger on innocent civilians. They did that themselves. And if you researched Irish history, you'd know that the IRA was not the reason for the arrival of the British army in the north - it was infact to protect the catholic population from rabid loyalists.

    Although that soon led to collusion between the loyalists and British forces, which resulted in the British army attacking the catholic population. I find it hilariously hypocritical that you blame the IRA for the events of Bloody Sunday - but reject the notion that the attacks made by the IRA towards the Brits to be a product of British oppression in Ireland (If we are to go by your "as a result of" logic).
    futurehope wrote: »
    In fact, returning to the subject of the thread, Sands would never have been in prison (at least not for terrorist offences).

    Curious since the British army never served their time in prison for their terrorist offences.


  • Options
    #98
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Back on topic.

    untitled.jpg?t=1241635687

    RIP Bobby Sands. (9th March 1954 – 5th May 1981) - Aged only 27 years.

    A true patriot of Ireland. A man willing to give up his life under peaceful circumstances for his principles. A man with courage at the level that I could never dream of. Someone who had the balls to stand up against the British war machine and do what was right.


  • Options
    #99
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,588 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    :rolleyes:

    Could have sworn yesterday was Tuesday? Oh wait, forgot it was the Provos "maek poast for circle jerk" day. Honestly, do we need post made for every single commemoration of every single event on the Provo calendar? If anyones interested in comemorating the deaths of Bobby Sands, Mad Dog Adair or other terrorists theyll know already. Dont need public service announcements for every event of minor interest to particular political groups.
    These threads all turn out the same

    True, and I didnt even post in it for the first 7 pages. Im blameless.


  • Options
    #100
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Any relation Sand? (:

    Bobby was a very important figure in Irish history, like it or not and should be remembered. Johnny Adair and Bobby Sands are hardly comparable.

    Johnny Adair purposely went out and attacked catholics to feed his ego and hung out with known nazis. He would never have the courage to go on hunger strike for his principles. The same cannot be said for Bobby Sands. But as always, I don't expect you to ever say anything positive about any element of the Republican movement, so I take what you have to say with a grain of salt.

    PS: I think you thanked my by accident ;)


  • Options
    #101
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,588 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Bobby was a very important figure in Irish history, like it or not and should be remembered. Johnny Adair and Bobby Sands are hardly comparable....But as always, I don't expect you to ever say anything positive about any element of the Republican movement, so I take what you have to say with a grain of salt.

    Theyre both terrorists on opposing sides. You just support one and dislike the other because you sympathise with one of the sides. Dont pretend to edify it any further than that. Theres a guy out there, just like you except he idolises Adair and thinks Bobby Sands was a monster. I could have this conversation with him and apart from changing the names it would go the exact same way.

    I on the other hand, dislike both of them because they were terrorists. Im dont sympathise with either side. I sympathise with their victims. That annoys because while you would agree with me that Johnny Adair was a scumbag, you think your side are sadly misunderstood freedom fighters who might have made an error here and there. **** happens, etc etc.
    PS: I think you thanked my by accident

    No, not by accident.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    And were was Bobby Sands victim(s)? Adair spoke proudly of his attacks on catholics. He was in it for the need to boost his ego. Sands was in it to remove an oppressive force in his country. Hardly comparable.. Although I'm sure you'd like to make it appear that way.


  • Options
    #103
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,588 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    He was a member of the IRA - they rarely advertised which exact member did the killing, made the bombs or identified potential victims. Hes not been convicted of any murder that I am aware of, but neither has Martin McGuinness or Gerry Adams.

    And the dogs on the street know about them.


  • Options
    #104
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    So while you agree he was never convicted of anything - you still persist on comparing him with Adair. Even you surely must be able to see the distinction between Adair's philosophy for attacking catholics for the fun of it - and Bobby Sand's fight against British security forces (that is all he was ever alleged for taking part in).

    Surpise me Sand.


  • Options
    #105
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    ok, they did it with tears in their eyes, but they still did it..

    However it wasn't the reason the organisation existed.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    oh please, a peadophiles reason for being isn't to abuse children, but they are still a peado. ..

    The only way you can be defined as such (wonderful emotional example there) is by wanting to/abusing children, as far as I know.

    Now, you implied that his purpose was to "kill innocent people". I just want some back up for that.

    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    What are you saying, that the ITA wasn't a terrorist organisation?
    ..

    .....whoever they might be....
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    the murder of innocent people?

    That must be phrase of the day.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    most of them don't pick up guns in support of killing innocents

    And again, where exactly is this "support of killing innocents" coming from? Did the young Sands wake up and say today is a great day for "the murder of innocent people" and take up arms "in support of killing innocents"? A few sources, if you would.

    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    who knows, but if the IRA didn't think his death would serve a purpose then they would have stopped it rather than let him die like they did his fellow hunger strikers.

    ...and so its back once more to the 'They were mere pawns' line, despite the evidence to the contrary.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    In his defence he did renounce violence ..

    When, exactly, did Mandela do that?


  • Options
    #106
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,588 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    So while you agree he was never convicted of anything

    I am always amused by how self declared "republicans" will use the British Crown and its various agents as their standard of truth, justice and morality in everything.

    And of course he was convicted - how do you imagine he wound up in jail? He was convicted with the possession of firearms twice - the second time was what gave him the 14 year sentence as it was the same weapon used in an IRA attack on a furniture shop (I **** you not) where he abandoned two wounded comrades to the RUC, escaped in a car and was arrested later with the gun still on him ( not the sharpest knife in the drawer).

    But oh yeah, Im sure he spent all his time in one of Europes biggest, most active terrorist organisation in the most violent year of the troubles writing poetry, putting flowers in his hair and helping disabled children overcome the prejudice of society.
    - you still persist on comparing him with Adair.

    He joined the IRA in 1972, the year of the greatest death toll in the troubles, to take part in a terrorist campaign which included atrocities like Black Friday in which many innocent people were killed and over a hundred maimed. He had no issues with indiscriminate murder of anyone. He was not the Ghandi of our time.

    If you think that makes him a better man than Adair, thats reflective of your own tribal loyalties only.
    Even you surely must be able to see the distinction between Adair's philosophy for attacking catholics for the fun of it - and Bobby Sand's fight against British security forces

    Yeah, that furniture shop was the lynchpin of the British occupation. :rolleyes:
    Surpise me Sand.

    Surprise me, find me a Provo you dont make excuses for...


  • Options
    #107
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    Can'tseeme wrote: »
    So did the UK forces shoot or target anyone who was in the IRA during the Ballymurphy massacre? Or would any taig or 'quaker' do. Honestly futurehope, your naive approach to the conflict in the north is frightening. You rightly so mention the horrible attack at Kingsmill but then you deliberately paste over horrendous acts like Ballymurphy or Bloody Sunday. Your ignorance is there for all to see.

    The bottom line remains - no IRA campaign, no British Army, no "Ballymurhy Massacre" and no "Bloody Sunday" - very simple. Both these events suited The IRA - the more Nationalists killed by The British Army the better - all gist to the propaganda mill. A bit like the ten dead hunger strikers. Still Gerry and Martin have both done very well for themselves haven't they? Perhaps that was the idea all along.


  • Options
    #108
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    futurehope wrote: »
    The bottom line remains - no IRA campaign, no British Army, no "Ballymurhy Massacre" and no "Bloody Sunday" -

    As has been pointed out before, the deployment of the British Army was inevitable, given the inter-communal violence and partisan nature of the RUC.


  • Options
    #109
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    dlofnep said:
    The IRA did not make the British armed forces pull the trigger on innocent civilians. They did that themselves.

    The Army wouldn't have been there without The IRA campaign - what is it about that you can't accept? Anyone killed by The Army was killed as a result of the environment created by The IRA.
    And if you researched Irish history, you'd know that the IRA was not the reason for the arrival of the British army in the north - it was infact to protect the catholic population from rabid loyalists.

    That's right, Catholics begged The British Army to protect them and then thanked them with glass sandwiches. :rolleyes:
    Although that soon led to collusion between the loyalists and British forces, which resulted in the British army attacking the catholic population.

    Why didn't The Army kill more Nationalists? It would have been like cracking eggs with a stick - the statistics say it all - The IRA were the aggressors and Nationalists were treated with unbelievable restraint by any historical standards.
    I find it hilariously hypocritical that you blame the IRA for the events of Bloody Sunday - but reject the notion that the attacks made by the IRA towards the Brits to be a product of British oppression in Ireland (If we are to go by your "as a result of" logic).

    "British oppression in Ireland"? What a comic you are. What was this great oppression? Some inequalities in jobs and housing and the odd gerymandered local government ward? Yes, I can see how that merited blowing children to smithereens. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #110
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    dlofnep said:
    Bobby was a very important figure in Irish history, like it or not and should be remembered. Johnny Adair and Bobby Sands are hardly comparable.

    Johnny Adair purposely went out and attacked catholics to feed his ego and hung out with known nazis. He would never have the courage to go on hunger strike for his principles. The same cannot be said for Bobby Sands. But as always, I don't expect you to ever say anything positive about any element of the Republican movement, so I take what you have to say with a grain of salt.

    Funny enough Sands and Adair had something in common - neither were convicted of murder.

    As for Johny hanging out with Nazis, given the fact Bobby was in The IRA, you could say that was something else they had in common!;)


  • Options
    #111
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    dlofnep wrote: »
    And were was Bobby Sands victim(s)? Adair spoke proudly of his attacks on catholics. He was in it for the need to boost his ego. Sands was in it to remove an oppressive force in his country. Hardly comparable.. Although I'm sure you'd like to make it appear that way.

    The oppressive force in Ulster was The IRA - Adair wanted to remove that oppressive force.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    Nodin wrote: »
    As has been pointed out before, the deployment of the British Army was inevitable, given the inter-communal violence and partisan nature of the RUC.

    And the atmosphere was made ten times worse by the appearance of The IRA. No IRA and the Army would have gained full control and pacified Ulster in a relatively short time.


  • Options
    #113
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    futurehope wrote: »
    The Army wouldn't have been there without The IRA campaign - what is it about that you can't accept? Anyone killed by The Army was killed as a result of the environment created by The IRA.

    *sigh*

    I repeat, the army came in the first place to protect catholics from being burnt out of their homes by loyalists. To say that the Army wouldn't have been there without the IRA campaign is false.

    The IRA campaign heated up WHEN the British security forces starting attacking members of the catholic community, colluded with loyalists terrorists and upheld civil inequality.
    futurehope wrote: »
    That's right, Catholics begged The British Army to protect them and then thanked them with glass sandwiches. :rolleyes:

    Some protecting they did too when they gunned down a bunch of innocent civilins in Ballymurphy and Derry.
    futurehope wrote: »
    Why didn't The Army kill more Nationalists? It would have been like cracking eggs with a stick - the statistics say it all - The IRA were the aggressors and Nationalists were treated with unbelievable restraint by any historical standards.

    They didn't because there would have been international pressure 100 times worse than Bloody Sunday if they made it an everyday occurance. But rest assured, they didn't give a **** about the lives of civil liberties of catholics and they proved it time and time again.

    You tell the families of those who died on Bloody Sunday about the "restraint" shown on that day. I spoke personally to many involved in that day, and still to this day - they have no justice. Restraint you say? If that's your definition of restraint, I'd hate to see what your definition of aggression is.
    futurehope wrote: »
    "British oppression in Ireland"? What a comic you are. What was this great oppression? Some inequalities in jobs and housing and the odd gerymandered local government ward? Yes, I can see how that merited blowing children to smithereens. :rolleyes:

    As you have already mentioned, civil inequality, gerrymandering (which you consider to be harmless from what it seems), collusion with loyalist terrorists, routinely imprisonment of innocent people without a trial, physical attacks on catholic neighbourhoods, and cold blooded murder of men, women and children.

    Some comic :rolleyes:
    futurehope wrote: »
    The oppressive force in Ulster was The IRA - Adair wanted to remove that oppressive force.

    Oh did he now? And did that removal of oppressive force include the mindless slaughter of innocent catholic civilians for fun? I'm sure you have a poster of Adair on your wall judging by some of your comments.


  • Options
    #114
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Sand wrote: »
    And of course he was convicted - how do you imagine he wound up in jail? He was convicted with the possession of firearms twice - the second time was what gave him the 14 year sentence as it was the same weapon used in an IRA attack on a furniture shop (I **** you not) where he abandoned two wounded comrades to the RUC, escaped in a car and was arrested later with the gun still on him ( not the sharpest knife in the drawer).

    All to attack British security forces with. What do you think they were going to fight British soldiers with and loyalist paras? Hurleys? Stones?
    Sand wrote: »
    But oh yeah, Im sure he spent all his time in one of Europes biggest, most active terrorist organisation in the most violent year of the troubles writing poetry, putting flowers in his hair and helping disabled children overcome the prejudice of society.

    He was never a member of the British army.
    Sand wrote: »
    He joined the IRA in 1972, the year of the greatest death toll in the troubles, to take part in a terrorist campaign which included atrocities like Black Friday in which many innocent people were killed and over a hundred maimed. He had no issues with indiscriminate murder of anyone. He was not the Ghandi of our time.

    Did you ask him to find out if he did or not? I don't dispute that the PIRA have many attacks to take onus for. I don't dispute that many innocent civilians died at their hands, and it's something that they will have to take ownership for. I do however dispute that they were there simply to attack and maim innocent civilians. And I do dispute your claims that Bobby Sands had "no issues with indiscriminate murder of anyone".
    Sand wrote: »
    If you think that makes him a better man than Adair, thats reflective of your own tribal loyalties only.

    Yes, he is 100 times the man Johnny Adair with. He did not routinely go out and beat up protestants for fun. His quarrel was not with the protestant population, but rather the British security forces. But, keep jumping to conclusions.


  • Options
    #115
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    What's curious about you Sand is, while I enjoy your questions towards me (some of which can be sometimes thought provoking) - I find it curious that you have yet to question the comments made by the likes of futurehope. I wonder why that is. Maybe you can answer.


  • Options
    #116
    futurehope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭futurehope


    dlofnep said:
    I repeat, the army came in the first place to protect catholics from being burnt out of their homes by loyalists. To say that the Army wouldn't have been there without the IRA campaign is false.

    And I've repeatedly stated that once The Army had established complete control then it could have left - LIKE IT HAS DONE. The IRA prolonged the presence of The British Army on Ulster's streets.
    The IRA campaign heated up WHEN the British security forces starting attacking members of the catholic community, colluded with loyalists terrorists and upheld civil inequality.

    The IRA campaign literally exploded and was a pre-meditated attempt to force a British withdrawal by force of arms. Young people were manipulated by ideologically driven Irish Republicans who had been waiting their chance.
    Some protecting they did too when they gunned down a bunch of innocent civilins in Ballymurphy and Derry.

    Within the context created by militant Republicans.
    You tell the families of those who died on Bloody Sunday about the "restraint" shown on that day. I spoke personally to many involved in that day, and still to this day - they have no justice. Restraint you say? If that's your definition of restraint, I'd hate to see what your definition of aggression is.

    My definition of aggression would have been if The Security Forces had driven The Catholic population from Ulster and/or killed thousands within a one or two year period. That is what has happened elsewhere in the world in similar circumstances - even recently.
    As you have already mentioned, civil inequality, gerrymandering (which you consider to be harmless from what it seems), collusion with loyalist terrorists, routinely imprisonment of innocent people without a trial, physical attacks on catholic neighbourhoods, and cold blooded murder of men, women and children.

    Civil inequality and gerrymandering do not merit mass murder. As for collusion, it's surprising there wasn't more (it might have saved some truly innocent Catholic lives). As for internment, that was practised in The ROI as well - and for good reason.
    Oh did he now? And did that removal of oppressive force include the mindless slaughter of innocent catholic civilians for fun? I'm sure you have a poster of Adair on your wall judging by some of your comments.

    No, I don't have a poster of Adair, but I assume when Loyalists killed truly innocent Catholics (less often than is often claimed), they did so to put pressure on The IRA to call off their campaign. This is often what happens when revolutionary combatants don't openly identify themselves - the state (or it's pro-state militias) target the insurgents support base instead.


  • Options
    #117
    Joey the lips
    Registered Users Posts: 10,262 ✭✭✭✭Joey the lips


    Its amazing how a political discussion about 10 men who had far reaching consequences on Irish politics and the future of the northern struggle can be discussed in such fashion, rather than analyise and study there achievements and political failures this thread has developed into a slagging match.

    The IRA came about because of a need and thomas sitting on his [EMAIL="a@se"]a@se[/EMAIL] filling in his avon order sheet in waterford will never understand or care how sean in belfast was constantly getting his windows put in and his children threatened going to school. He will never care either, How could thomas care about someone 150 miles away when he does not care about his next door neighbour. As far as thomas is concearned Sean can go to hell. But a true nationalist regardsless of his politics would not have setteled for this.

    However a group of men like Joe Cahill Bobby sands and Martin Doherty( Who gave his life protecting all in Window Scanlons against a UVF [EMAIL="b@mb"]b@mb[/EMAIL] plot) decided enough was enough. What thomas fails to see if these lads did not have the support of there community they would have never lasted how long they did.

    So when we all sit here and knock the IRA what we fail to see is "Our opinion does not matter" there support was written in there formation. You catch the drift. They formed because of a need and hence they disbanded because of a lack of need.

    Its just a shame that those who can not analyise politics for what it is did not activly discuss this. Its also a shame that those who are just out to contribute nothing but moaning and insults cant shut up to let a real discussion develop. I shall leave the last word to Bobby

    "They have nothing in their entire imperial arsenel that can break the spirit of one irish man who does not want to be broken"


  • Options
    #118
    Happy Monday
    Registered Users Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Joey the lips wrote: »
    They formed because of a need and hence they disbanded because of a lack of need. They have nothing in their entire imperial arsenel that can break the spirit of one irish man who does not want to be broken.

    They disbanded because they recognised that Jonny Adair and Billy Wright had become even more proficient at killing innocents than they had.
    They disbanded because they recognised they had put back the cause of Irish unity 100 years.
    They disbanded because they recognised that political agitation would have achieved far more than 30 years of murder.
    They disbanded because they came to see that 1 million Protestants represented the British presence in Northern Ireland and not just the Army.


  • Options
    #119
    Joey the lips
    Registered Users Posts: 10,262 ✭✭✭✭Joey the lips


    Happy Monday wrote: »
    They disbanded because they recognised that Jonny Adair and Billy Wright had become even more proficient at killing innocents than they had.
    They disbanded because they recognised they had put back the cause of Irish unity 100 years.
    They disbanded because they recognised that political agitation would have achieved far more than 30 years of murder.
    They disbanded because they came to see that 1 million Protestants represented the British presence in Northern Ireland and not just the Army.


    Keep dreamin, god and ian paisley loves a dreamer! Its clear your another future hope anyway! You do realise it people like you refering to prostants as being the "enemy" of the IRA is what creates the sectarian divide.

    It will carry on for many year thanks to you and will give credability to RIRA and CIRA. Well done! I need not say more.


  • Options
    #120
    O'Coonassa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭O'Coonassa


    Joey the lips wrote: »
    So when we all sit here and knock the IRA what we fail to see is "Our opinion does not matter" there support was written in there formation. You catch the drift. They formed because of a need and hence they disbanded because of a lack of need.

    Actual need lasted from 1968-73 max and there was already an IRA. The Rosary Brigades formed to defend their communities fair enough, and were even armed by Dublin, but when they started killing members of their community by shooting and indiscriminate bomb-blast they lost all credibility in any claim to be Defenders.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Joey the lips
    Registered Users Posts: 10,262 ✭✭✭✭Joey the lips


    Happy Monday wrote: »
    They disbanded because they recognised that Jonny Adair and Billy Wright had become even more proficient at killing innocents than they had.
    They disbanded because they recognised they had put back the cause of Irish unity 100 years.
    They disbanded because they recognised that political agitation would have achieved far more than 30 years of murder.
    They disbanded because they came to see that 1 million Protestants represented the British presence in Northern Ireland and not just the Army.
    Happy Monday wrote: »
    Yes - I have voted for FF.

    Why - they have always represented a safe pair of hands.

    I mean why would you want people with little or no experience in government running the show.

    Plus I find it hypocritical of the opposition parties to condemn FF on each and every issue and then come 100% on side on Lisbon.

    Makes you think that principles come a bad second to getting their grubby hands on power.


    Its just a shame you did not understand your own party principles when you commented, then again if i were you I would deny them as well.

    Well done Ian!


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement