Sinn Fein...the future?

Can'tseeme

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Couldn't agree more with you dude and I've seen the same thing myself since all of my immediate family are from Belfast and W Belfast. Its RTE's reporting and the political point scoring you pointed out that gives people on this thread ammunition.

Happy Monday is living on some strange planet i tell ya.

It's very fustrating mate. People have no idea what it was like to live in a Protestant state for Protestant people. I could be hear all day bringing up things the British forces, RUC, unionists were up to, I really could. I know people all around me that suffered, my own family included. But what fecking good would it do. We live in a completely different environment now. Huge amount of work has been put in. But once again, Sinn Fein is brought up and we go back to cherrypicking the past to suit peoples argument.

NOGMaxpower

Mad Finn wrote: »

What's the future for Sinn Fein? They're simply Fianna Fail in waiting. We've seen the transformation before. From ardent socialist revolutionaries doing everything "for the people" to rapacious crony capitalists in Charvet shirts.QUOTE]

I was agreeing with your post right up until you made this fleeting statement lol. SF are way more left than FF and their policies are vastly different. Sure in 1918 they split to create FF because of their vast differences in policy. They will never become the FF beast why? Becauses unlike FF all their party members are volunteers (most on the dole) and those who do get a wage get paid minimum wage even if they're on a MEP salary. It all goes back into the party unlike FF who live in affluant areas, drive big fancy cars and have vast expense accounts.

Sorry but i whole heartedly disagree with your statement. Oh and for the record i was a FF supporting since i was able to vote but in the last 8 years I've been SF/Labour all the way. Why? Because I agree with their policies and social reform. I got sick of FF's front keeping the masses happy while raping us on the sly.

Liam Byrne

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Get your facts right before you berrate SF further. Again another example of how the media has shaped your opinion. You seem to forget too that SF publicly denounced this attack and were key in ensuring those who were responsible were brought to justice just last week.

Speaking of getting your facts right, please read what I'm saying before you jump to conclusions.

As I explained above, the question that Perestroika posed asked about "anyone" targetting innocents; not just SF/IRA.

And again, I'll say it - the same post by me also mentioned Warrington and Adare; any comment on the "strategic benefit" of those, or would you just prefer to misrepresent one out of the three in the hope that we'll ignore the other two that WERE supported / condoned / excused by SF ?

José Alaninho

Happy Monday wrote: »

You didn't comment on that Alliance party link did you?

Nodin covered it pretty well in my stead... oh, and a link from the Alliance Party is hardly going to be biased in any way now is it :rolleyes:

Can'tseeme

Mad Finn wrote: »

Young party my arse. They are in fact the oldest of all the main parties operating in the south, founded in 1905 (I think) before the Labour Party and way before Fianna Fail (1920s) Fine Gael (1930s) and the Greens. (whenever).

Unless of course you want to concede that the true inheritors of those who led the struggle between 1916 and 1921 are the two major parties and that today's Sinn Fein is a more recently born animal with very different stripes.

But you'd be kicked out of the gang pretty quickly for saying that.

What's the future for Sinn Fein? They're simply Fianna Fail in waiting. We've seen the transformation before. From ardent socialist revolutionaries doing everything "for the people" to rapacious crony capitalists in Charvet shirts.

Whether they supplant Fianna Fail or just gradually blend into them is uncertain, but that's where they're headed.

Not with my vote, I hasten to add.

Sorry, wrong choice of word from me. Just to clear up what I meant, They're a party that's only recently entered the politics of the south compared to the others.

NOGMaxpower

Happy Monday wrote: »

But you can't deny Warrington, Harrods, La Mon or Enniskillen.

You can't deny the murder of Garda Jerry McCabe - or perhaps RTE blamed you in error for that as well.

I accept the conflict is over and it is time to move on - but a key feature of the IRA campaign was deliberate targetted attacks on innocents and the justification of same by SF.

Now how many words of pigeon Irish can you string together to defend yourselves?

Ok we can list attrocities on both sides of the argument, I wont get started on collusion allegations that are now being proven or the fact that the British government incited hatred to the north in Irealnd by the Dublin bombings, internment, the Shankill Butchers etc etc (the list is endless).

But lets look at the facts, SF all along have been promoting peace through politics. The IRA went down the route of violence which in the end did prove a success. I will never condone the murder of innocent people but compare the IRA's actions with those of modern day terrorists like Al Qaeda. The IRA gave warning on every attack they ever committed and were always trying to reduce the # of innocent casualties. However true terrorism gives no warnings the difference between the two is vast. Also reports have confirmed the police/army and special branch were to blame for the major loss of life in the Omagh bombings.

Any hoo we could repeat these arguments all day. Happy Monday do you just hate SF based on the propeghanda you've been force fed for the past 40 years or do you have any real foundation???

NOGMaxpower

Can'tseeme wrote: »

It's very fustrating mate. People have no idea what it was like to live in a Protestant state for Protestant people. I could be hear all day bringing up things the British forces, RUC, unionists were up to, I really could. I know people all around me that suffered, my own family included. But what fecking good would it do. We live in a completely different environment now. Huge amount of work has been put in. But once again, Sinn Fein is brought up and we go back to cherrypicking the past to suit peoples argument.

Dude I hear your plight. I've had family members locked up for no reason other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, tortured in long kesh and harrassed by the RUC and army for years. I've had cousins burned out of their homes in mixed areas. Also personaly i was subjected to years of harrassment by the special branch down south why? Because my folks were from Belfast nothing more nothing less.

But of course people like this Happy Monday bloke wont believe any of this and will continue to support the plight of the agressor. Maybe one day the truth will come out of how the Brits managed the north. If you want a similar example of hardship you need not look any further than Aparthide in South Africa and or India as an example of how the British rule nations within their former empire.

Happy Monday

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Ok we can list attrocities on both sides of the argument, I wont get started on collusion allegations that are now being proven or the fact that the British government incited hatred to the north in Irealnd by the Dublin bombings, internment, the Shankill Butchers etc etc (the list is endless).

But lets look at the facts, SF all along have been promoting peace through politics. The IRA went down the route of violence which in the end did prove a success. I will never condone the murder of innocent people but compare the IRA's actions with those of modern day terrorists like Al Qaeda. The IRA gave warning on every attack they ever committed and were always trying to reduce the # of innocent casualties. However true terrorism gives no warnings the difference between the two is vast. Also reports have confirmed the police/army and special branch were to blame for the major loss of life in the Omagh bombings.

Any hoo we could repeat these arguments all day. Happy Monday do you just hate SF based on the propeghanda you've been force fed for the past 40 years or do you have any real foundation???

Yes - my uncle - a Garda - was murdered by Republicans in 1980.

Liam Byrne

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

The IRA gave warning on every attack they ever committed and were always trying to reduce the # of innocent casualties.

"reduce" the number ? So you're accepting that they knew that their actions would kill some ?

The only way to "reduce" the number to ZERO is to not attack.

Saying that they're "not as bad as al-Quaida" doesn't mean they're not bad; and [while I'm not saying I agree with al-Quaida] al-Quaida didn't park a bomb in a town centre and walk home while it did its damage.

If you drive a car into a crowd @ 120mph, does it matter if you're blowing your horn to "warn" them to get out of the way ? If they die, who's fault is it - yours, the stewards / police, or the victims ?

NOGMaxpower

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Speaking of getting your facts right, please read what I'm saying before you jump to conclusions.

As I explained above, the question that Perestroika posed asked about "anyone" targetting innocents; not just SF/IRA.

And again, I'll say it - the same post by me also mentioned Warrington and Adare; any comment on the "strategic benefit" of those, or would you just prefer to misrepresent one out of the three in the hope that we'll ignore the other two that WERE supported / condoned / excused by SF ?

"Stratgic Benefit" hmm well 1st off SF had nothing to do with either attack. Its just a fact that when attacks were made who did the world look to for answers/reasons, SF. this doens't make them responsible.

Anyhoo what was the benefit, simple "media exposure and attacking infrastructure" normal gorilla tactics. Bringing the war to the British homeland because at the time propeghanda meant the average Brit had no idea why the Irish were at war with them.

1st attack was on a gas works where 1 police officer was killed so they could blow up the target.
2nd attack, boots and argos were hit resulting in deaths of children (again very said and well i never condone the murder of innocents).
Warnings were given on both attacks thus reducing the overall casulty numbers.

Im sure you knew the spate of these bombings? 3 dead compared to July 7 bombings in England resulting in 52 deaths. Again if the IRA wanted to they could've killed far more people but they didn't so they weren't targeting innocent people they were targeting key places of interest and infrastructure to maximise the impact and media exposure of their attacks. Might I add that this type of attack is the only weapon the IRA had against the might of the British arsenal.

NOGMaxpower

Happy Monday wrote: »

Yes - my uncle - a Garda - was murdered by Republicans in 1980.

well m sorry for your loss Happy Monday i've lost family and friends to the troubles too. but i dont see why you'd relate the IRA killing your uncle to SF who have been promoting peace since their conception.

marco murphy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Sorry mate, it's you that's being "unreal".

The question was



Did you see that word in bold ? anyone



So I didn't "try to link Omagh with SF" at all. Let me try this again :

I do not understand how anyone could target and / or murder innocent people.

But your defensive and OTT response is EXACTLY the problem; leaving aside the fact that you ducked the mention of Warrington COMPLETELY, to the point of not even mentioning it in your post; you ASSUMED that I was linking Omagh with Sinn Fein, when in actual fact I was answering the precise question that you posed :rolleyes:

And you also ducked the reference to Adare - typical! :rolleyes: So don't accuse me of running away from the question, when you choose to pick one out of three to get on your high horse and misrepresent, while ignoring the other two.

Yes, the thread's about Sinn Fein, but I was answering your question and simultaneously proving that being anti-violence / murder isn't selective.

Ok so you don't understand. Does that not tell you something. Does that not tell you that there was no agenda to murder innocent people? It wouldn't benefit whatsoever to the strategy employed by the IRA.

Liam Byrne

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

.....people like this Happy Monday bloke wont believe any of this and will continue to support the plight of the agressor.

FFS! Telling it like it is without taking sides is NOT "supporting the plight of the aggressor".

If anything, we're supporting the plight of the innocent victims, who were not the aggressors!

BTW, who were the aggressors in the attack in Adare ? In the attack on Warrington ? Because you seem to be "supporting the plight of the aggressor" yourself.

Liam Byrne

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Bringing the war to the British homeland

Ah yes....

Adare
Co. Limerick
British Homeland
AK47 1996

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Warnings were given on both attacks thus reducing the overall casulty numbers.

There's that word "reducing" again. :rolleyes:

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Again if the IRA wanted to they could've killed far more people

And if I wanted to I could kill a lot more people this week than I'm actually going to (which is zero).

Liam Byrne

Perestroika wrote: »

Ok so you don't understand. Does that not tell you something. Does that not tell you that there was no agenda to murder innocent people?

I completely fail to follow your attempt at logic....are you implying that because I don't understand something, it doesn't exist ?

I don't understand nuclear fusion, either.

NOGMaxpower

Liam Byrne wrote: »

FFS! Telling it like it is without taking sides is NOT "supporting the plight of the aggressor".

If anything, we're supporting the plight of the innocent victims, who were not the aggressors!

BTW, who were the aggressors in the attack in Adare ? In the attack on Warrington ? Because you seem to be "supporting the plight of the aggressor" yourself.

Jasus now you're getting into childish arguments of he started it lol.

I condone no attack on any innocent person however I do have an understanding of why it happend as opposed to complete ignorrance as to why it happend.

Why are you only supporting the plight of innocent victims that dont include Irish, nationalist, republican casualties?

NOGMaxpower

I wonder how old you are Liam? You seem to argue like a child with no point at all other than trying to prove your opinion is right? i dont think anyone else here is doing that lol.

Liam Byrne

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Why are you only supporting the plight of innocent victims that dont include Irish, nationalist, republican casualties?

Show me where I said that, or retract it immediately.

marco murphy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I completely fail to follow your attempt at logic....are you implying that because I don't understand something, it doesn't exist ?

I don't understand nuclear fusion, either.

LOL. You continue refusal to debate why murdering civilians might be effective...

You'e suggesting its just done for the sake of it. Ludicrious

Liam Byrne

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

I wonder how old you are Liam? You seem to argue like a child with no point at all other than trying to prove your opinion is right? i dont think anyone else here is doing that lol.

:rolleyes:

Liam Byrne

Perestroika wrote: »

LOL. You continue refusal to debate why murdering civilians might be effective...

You'e suggesting its just done for the sake of it. Ludicrious

I never said it was effective. But it happened far too often.

Would you prefer to believe that EVERY SINGLE IRA OPERATION was "unauthorised", or that "something went wrong" ?

Now THAT'S ludicrious!

If "something went wrong" the first time I did something, and it caused people to lose their lives, I'd stop.

Anyways, we're (again) gone WAY off-topic......which seems to happen every time someone replies "here's why we couldn't vote Sinn Fein - because they have different morals/ethics/views of what's acceptable".......

marco murphy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I never said it was effective. But it happened far too often.

Would you prefer to believe that EVERY SINGLE IRA OPERATION was "unauthorised", or that "something went wrong" ?

Now THAT'S ludicrious!

If "something went wrong" the first time I did something, and it caused people to lose their lives, I'd stop.

I'm leaving it here. You're suggesting that the IRA targetted civilians for no reason. I, for arguments sake, didn't deny it straight away, but asked you to suggest why one of the most professional guerilla armies in the world (according to the brits) would target and murder innocent civilians for unknown reasons. You failed to answer. You can't answer.

NOGMaxpower

lets be honest the IRA looked at it as casualties of war where like any war you attempt to minimize the impact on civilians. Its a sad result on both sides however its a necessary evil and the end justify the means.

Perestroika

Perestroika wrote: »

LOL. You continue refusal to debate why murdering civilians might be effective...

You'e suggesting its just done for the sake of it. Ludicrious

Without going back through the thread, are you really that far apart?

Both of you call it murdering civilians. This is what Sinn Fein and the IRA did, let's not fall out over their thinking, that was appalling enough. You may disagree with their motives, one might say it was a means to an end and to force talks, one might say it was to protect their rackets and drug patches, one might say invoking terror is what terrorists do, one might say it was to kill as many of the perceived opposition as possible, one might say it's because they liked to kill, I guess different atrocities involved different aspects of some or more of those motives.

NOGMaxpower

Deleted User wrote: »

Without going back through the thread, are you really that far apart?

Both of you call it murdering civilians. This is what Sinn Fein and the IRA did, let's not fall out over their thinking, that was appalling enough. You may disagree with their motives, one might say it was a means to an end and to force talks, one might say it was to protect their rackets and drug patches, one might say invoking terror is what terrorists do, one might say it was to kill as many of the perceived opposition as possible, one might say it's because they liked to kill, I guess different atrocities involved different aspects of some or more of those motives.

Conor again SF never once killed anyone get that straight again you're a subject of propeghanda i know thats hard pill to swallow but thats what you are by tying the two together.

paddyland

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

I wonder how old you are Liam? You seem to argue like a child with no point at all other than trying to prove your opinion is right? i dont think anyone else here is doing that lol.

Such a statement from a guy with Maxpower in his name. How big is the exhaust pipe on YOUR car?

There is no excuse anywhere, ever, for murder, accidental or deliberate, intentional or unintentional.

Sinn Féin today are irrefutably linked to murderers, and will be for as long as the present generations are alive.

Unless the day comes when they publicly disown these people, and stop with all this 'political prisoners' guff.

Mary Lou stated on TV the other night that people are crying out for change, for a whole new political direction. And she was right.

Unfortunately, she and the party of apologists she represents will NEVER be that change. Their brand name is tarnished for a long time to come.

NOGMaxpower

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Conor again SF never once killed anyone

Yes.

Similarly FF never donned a mask and a surgical gown, and bizarrely everyone blames them for the crisis in healthcare!

Noone can tell me someone like SF representative Martin Ferris isn't a terrorist. He wasn't smuggling them in for a good party.

NOGMaxpower

paddyland wrote: »

Such a statement from a guy with Maxpower in his name. How big is the exhaust pipe on YOUR car?

There is no excuse anywhere, ever, for murder, accidental or deliberate, intentional or unintentional.

Sinn Féin today are irrefutably linked to murderers, and will be for as long as the present generations are alive.

Unless the day comes when they publicly disown these people, and stop with all this 'political prisoners' guff.

Mary Lou stated on TV the other night that people are crying out for change, for a whole new political direction. And she was right.

Unfortunately, she and the party of apologists she represents will NEVER be that change. Their brand name is tarnished for a long time to come.

I got the name off a hairdryer (Simpsons pisstake) and i am probably older than you lol.

"Unless the day comes when they publicly disown these people, and stop with all this 'political prisoners' guff."

They have come out and totally disowned violence Mart M came out and publicly called those who committed the attacks on the 2 engineers and pizz delivery guys as well as the Police officer who were murdered, (dissedent republicans) traitors and condemed any future attacks.

Again yet another person proving that the medias propeghanda has shaped your opinion. Please base them on facts or at least know the facts.

NOGMaxpower

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes.

Similarly FF never donned a mask and a surgical gown, and bizarrely everyone blames them for the crisis in healthcare!

Noone can tell me someone like SF representative Martin Ferris isn't a terrorist. He wasn't smuggling them in for a good party.

conjecture.

Plus he's done his time and dedicated the rest of his life to politics and peace. Are you saying people aren't allowed to change?

NOGMaxpower

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Plus he's done his time and dedicated the rest of his life to politics and peace. Are you saying people aren't allowed to change?

Oh they are.

And we are allowed to snigger at the suggestion. Particularly when you hear his thoughts on the Jerry McCabe murder.