Sinn Fein appealing to the lowest common denominator

Monty Burnz

The Golden Miller wrote: »

so you accept it was behind the queens visit? a queen who is over a country who claims sovereignity to 6 of your own counties? so if the pope was going to come, most people and media outlets would be against it over what went on here, about how it would be insensitive to victims etc, yet after all the irish suffering and deaths at the hands of britain the queens visit was brilliant because everything that happened "was in the past".

Sure didn't the Brits apologise, same as SF/IRA? Don't these apologies wipe the slate clean, according to SF/IRA? Stop living in the past, man.

The Golden Miller wrote: »

did the government or the people who were for the visit stop to think how insensitive it would be to the irish in the north who suffered. did they ****. couldnt have cared in the slighest. just lick britains arse some more

And you came here claiming not to be a Shinner?

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

What? Do you have any clue what my stance is on a UI before you go talking out of your hole? Are you the type of idiot who uses terms like 'West Brit' and I've hurt your feelings? :rolleyes:

WTF are you even on about?

and out of interest what is your stance on a UI

Ruralyoke

The Golden Miller wrote: »

irish times even had a pull-out of how great the queens visit was at the time when she came over

Have a word with Martin Ferris, you know, the guy who said he would refuse to shake her hand and then lo and behold, (coming up to an election) decided "ah sure let's move on"

Time in between comments? less than 18 months.

Good ole Martin eh?

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

And you came here claiming not to be a Shinner?

never voted for them in my life. so anyone who wants a united ireland and dislikes what britain did to the country is automatically a "shinner"

Monty Burnz

The Golden Miller wrote: »

and out of interest what is your stance on a UI

I'll happily see a UI when a majority, North and South, vote for it. You know - like in the GFA.

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Sure didn't the Brits apologise, same as SF/IRA? Don't these apologies wipe the slate clean, according to SF/IRA? Stop living in the past, man.

And you came here claiming not to be a Shinner?

no they didnt apologise. they rambled on about how they said it was unfortunate that there was so much fighting between two counties.

and theres the mentality of what im talking about right there....in the past ye. isnt what went on in the catholic church in the past too? so either codemn both or neither. and the fact they have 6 counties means it aint in the past

Monty Burnz

The Golden Miller wrote: »

and the fact they have 6 counties means it aint in the past

'They' have them? You mean the majority of people in the 6 counties who want to be British have them? Ethnic cleansing, here we come.

How old are you?

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'll happily see a UI when a majority, North and South, vote for it. You know - like in the GFA.

you see i didnt need you to tell me what your stance was as the mentality of you and people of your ilk is quite obvious. first of all why would the people in the south have to agree to it to begin with. who are we to say other irish people can or cant be ruled by an irish government. its their birthright. but of course the irish government would opt to agree to something like that in the gfa. spinless cowards.

it a fair unionist majority in the north ye? or a convenient peice of land where unionists had a majority, cut off to uphold a status quo?

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

'They' have them? You mean the majority of people in the 6 counties who want to be British have them? Ethnic cleansing, here we come.

How old are you?

why not throw in the rest of ulster for the craic and see what the majority is then? or throw in a 10th county for good measure. democracy ye? ye lets all go around and hand pick counties that will make convenient majorities like the brits did. and sure we'll all call it democracy

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

'They' have them? You mean the majority of people in the 6 counties who want to be British have them? Ethnic cleansing, here we come.

How old are you?

another way of saying what about the 750,000 of unionists who dont want a united ireland? what about the other half of the community who do.....your own people. again, why look at it from the unionists point of view, you being an "irish" man and all that. if your not willing to argue for your own people, why argue at all

mattjack

The Golden Miller wrote: »

you see i didnt need you to tell me what your stance was as the mentality of you and people of your ilk is quite obvious. first of all why would the people in the south have to agree to it to begin with. who are we to say other irish people can or cant be ruled by an irish government. its their birthright. but of course the irish government would opt to agree to something like that in the gfa. spinless cowards.

it a fair unionist majority in the north ye? or a convenient peice of land where unionists had a majority, cut off to uphold a status quo?

You do realise, as it stands, SF are happy with the GFA ,acknowledging it and pledging to stand by it.

Monty Burnz

The Golden Miller wrote: »

you see i didnt need you to tell me what your stance was as the mentality of you and people of your ilk is quite obvious. first of all why would the people in the south have to agree to it to begin with. who are we to say other irish people can or cant be ruled by an irish government. its their birthright. but of course the irish government would opt to agree to something like that in the gfa. spinless cowards.

it a fair unionist majority in the north ye? or a convenient peice of land where unionists had a majority, cut off to uphold a status quo?

HA HA - NOW HE COMES OUT AGAINST DEMOCRACY ITSELF!!!

The Golden Miller

mattjack wrote: »

You do realise, as it stands, SF are happy with the GFA ,acknowledging it and pledging to stand by it.

because the have to ok with it, to be seen to "move forward" do you really think they are ok with a division still in the country?

Nodin

Monty Burnz wrote: »

No it was coined by ignorant knuckle-dragging morons who think that every Irish person should be the exact same as them.

Actually it was coined by Daniel O'Connell in a favourable context. Don't let that stop the sneer-fest though.

Monty Burnz

Nodin wrote: »

Actually it was coined by Daniel O'Connell in a favourable context. Don't let that stop the sneer-fest though.

I won't, thanks.

The Golden Miller

Monty Burnz wrote: »

HA HA - NOW HE COMES OUT AGAINST DEMOCRACY ITSELF!!!

no i dont. the north would have a vote first. if they voted into a united ireland, then we would to vote to see do we "accept them". WHO ARE WE to say another irish man in the north can or cant be ruled by an irish government? its their birthright as much as ours

gerryo777

Ruralyoke wrote: »

Have a word with Martin Ferris, you know, the guy who said he would refuse to shake her hand and then lo and behold, (coming up to an election) decided "ah sure let's move on"

Time in between comments? less than 18 months.

Good ole Martin eh?

He must be the first politician ever to do a U-turn.

gerryo777

The Golden Miller wrote: »

no i dont. the north would have a vote first. if they voted into a united ireland, then we would to vote to see do we "accept them". WHO ARE WE to say another irish man in the north can or cant be ruled by an irish government? its their birthright as much as ours

To be honest, they might be better off not being ruled by the shower running here (into the ground).

mattjack

The Golden Miller wrote: »

because the have to ok with it, to be seen to "move forward" do you really think they are ok with a division still in the country?

I don't know, what do you think ?

I doub't any self respecting SF member would like to be seen as being 'ok' with it and 'moving forward' just for the sake of it.

finty

The amount of shinners parading as non-political types on boards.ie is ridiculous.

They must teach this method of infiltrating internet forums in ogra sinn fein or something.

unfortunately the mask slips pretty quickly. laughable really

the shinners "love" their country......

anybody speaking against them is a west brit......

the irish times behind the love ulster parade.......

bloody hell scraping the bottom of the barrel with this guy

mattjack

finty wrote: »

The amount of shinners parading as non-political types on boards.ie is ridiculous.

They must teach this method of infiltrating internet forums in ogra sinn fein or something.

unfortunately the mask slips pretty quickly. laughable really

the shinners "love" their country......

anybody speaking against them is a west brit......

the irish times behind the love ulster parade.......

bloody hell scraping the bottom of the barrel with this guy

Also I'm a fine example of a 'coddled' Irishman.

Monty Burnz

finty wrote: »

The amount of shinners parading as non-political types on boards.ie is ridiculous.

They must teach this method of infiltrating internet forums in ogra sinn fein or something.

Well, I'm not at all political - I've never voted and I don't even know the names of any politicians but >insert Shinner historical narrative and policy positions, verbatim, here<

But sure what do I know, I'm only an ordinary apolitical person like yourselves.

Ruralyoke

gerryo777 wrote: »

He must be the first politician ever to do a U-turn.

In fairness now, a pretty big U-turn.

wyndhurst

swimming in a sea wrote: »

so you get a united Ireland and what have you got, a million British people now living in an Irish republic, now been told their land which they saw as British for 500 years is now Irish.

So how are you going to solve their problem?

It is amazing how the terms 'Brits' and 'British' are thrown around so much in relation to NI.
Even the real British citizens do not see NI as 'British' and that is because NI is part of the Island of Ireland.
Only ill informed, wannabee republicans, Celtic jersey wearing SF toe-rags keep refferring to the non-nationalist, non-republicans as British. They are the Irish portion of the United Kingdon of Great Britian and Northen Ireland. (Whether they like it or not).

Monty Burnz

wyndhurst wrote: »

It is amazing how the terms 'Brits' and 'British' are thrown around so much in relation to NI.
Even the real British citizens do not see NI as 'British' and that is because NI is part of the Island of Ireland.
Only ill informed, wannabee republicans, Celtic jersey wearing SF toe-rags keep refferring to the non-nationalist, non-republicans as British. They are the Irish portion of the United Kingdon of Great Britian and Northen Ireland. (Whether they like it or not).

Indeed. And of course as soon as a Northern Unionist goes to Britain, he's an Irishman, 'Paddy' or whatever. Ironic really.

LordSutch

wyndhurst wrote: »

It is amazing how the terms 'Brits' and 'British' are thrown around so much in relation to NI.
Even the real British citizens do not see NI as 'British' and that is because NI is part of the Island of Ireland.
Only ill informed, wannabee republicans, Celtic jersey wearing SF toe-rags keep refferring to the non-nationalist, non-republicans as British. They are the Irish portion of the United Kingdon of Great Britian and Northen Ireland. (Whether they like it or not).

Well now hang on there a minute . . . I happened upon a Martin McGuinness speech at the SF Ard feish on yesterdays RTE news, and even he went on to talk about respecting the beliefs and culture of the One Million British people who live in Northern Ireland. If people say they are British, then they are British, and if they claim to be Irish, likewise . . .

mattjack

LordSutch wrote: »

Well now hang on there a minute . . . I happened upon a Martin McGuinness speech at the SF Ard feish on yesterdays RTE news, and even he went on to talk about respecting the beliefs and culture of the One Million British people who live in Northern Ireland. If people say they are British, then they are British, and if they claim to be Irish, likewise . . .

He did not, did he ?

The fcuker, he's after ruining all 42 pages of this thread.

LordSutch

mattjack wrote: »

He did not, did he ?

The fcuker, he's after ruining all 42 pages of this thread.

Apparently he's softening up the hardliners in SF for his upcoming handshake with the (British) Queen

wyndhurst

LordSutch wrote: »

Well now hang on there a minute . . . I happened upon a Martin McGuinness speech at the SF Ard feish on yesterdays RTE news, and even he went on to talk about respecting the beliefs and culture of the One Million British people who live in Northern Ireland. If people say they are British, then they are British, and if they claim to be Irish, likewise . . .

This is all part of the SF propoganda machine. They use the term 'British' in Ireland in a derogatory fashion.
The facts are that anyone born on the Island of Ireland is defacto Irish.
They may be a citizen of the United Kingdon but they are certainly not British - FACT

LordSutch

wyndhurst wrote: »

They may be a citizen of the United Kingdon but they are certainly not British - FACT

So that One million people up North are not British at all (even though they claim to be)

Monty Burnz

LordSutch wrote: »

So that One million people up North are not British at all (even though they claim to be)

Well, 'British' appears to me to be a supra-national identity, like 'European'. If you are from Wales, you are Welsh and British. If you are from Scotland, you are Scottish and British. But for some reason, if you are from NI, you are not Irish and British?

wyndhurst

LordSutch wrote: »

So that One million people up North are not British at all (even though they claim to be)

Correct.

LordSutch

Well I dont buy that^ for one minute, and as Monty has said, you can be Welsh & British, Scottish & British, English & British, or even West Indian & British! so I see no reason why you cant be Irish & British . . . .

wyndhurst

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Well, 'British' appears to me to be a supra-national identity, like 'European'. If you are from Wales, you are Welsh and British. If you are from Scotland, you are Scottish and British. But for some reason, if you are from NI, you are not Irish and British?

Look Monty, it is not that difficult.....

England = English
Wales = Welsh
Scotland = Scottish
England + Wales + Scotland = Great Britian = British
Great Britian + Northern Ireland = UK of GB & NI

Ronin247

wyndhurst wrote: »

This is all part of the SF propoganda machine. They use the term 'British' in Ireland in a derogatory fashion.
The facts are that anyone born on the Island of Ireland is defacto Irish.
They may be a citizen of the United Kingdon but they are certainly not British - FACT

Depends on what you want to define as "British"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology_of_the_British_Isles

Chuck Stone

MMcG probably meant those who identify with Britain. Anyway, if they want to call themselves British they're perfectly entitled to. It annoys me when people try to tell Unionists that they're really Irish - they only are if they choose to be.

I'm no fan of government service provision but what always amuses me is those who decry socialism as if it were some grand conspiracy against the have-mores. We all live in a mixed economy of state-corporatism. Case in point - that symbol of capitalism and freedom, the car, drives around on evil, centrally planned, socialist roads.

One last thing. You can say what you like about SF politicians but people like Adams and MMcG are super dedicated to their parties. Gerry Adams has lived a large chunk of his life effectively on the run from the power of the British Security apparatus. I can't imagine many of the watery ****s we've had in the Dail being as interested in the job if it meant having to be as dedicated to their party and cause as Adams and co have been to theirs.

true

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Gerry Adams has lived a large chunk of his life effectively on the run from the power of the British Security apparatus.

So when he was in a leadership position in the Belfast IRA in the 70's - as many think/say he was - terrifying the majority of the people in the North , you think he was on the run from the law and from the security apparatus of the elected government of the time? Lets call a spade a spade?

Monty Burnz

wyndhurst wrote: »

Look Monty, it is not that difficult.....

England = English
Wales = Welsh
Scotland = Scottish
England + Wales + Scotland = Great Britian = British
Great Britian + Northern Ireland = UK of GB & NI

But it's a supra-national identity that you can opt into - hence British Indians etc. I've no problem with people identifying themselves as Irish and British. It's the self-hating Loyalist equivalent of our Celtic jersey-wearing knuckle-draggers who identify themselves as somehow exclusively 'British' that I find baffling and comical.

mattjack

Chuck Stone wrote: »

MMcG probably meant those who identify with Britain. Anyway, if they want to call themselves British they're perfectly entitled to. It annoys me when people try to tell Unionists that they're really Irish - they only are if they choose to be.

I'm no fan of government service provision but what always amuses me is those who decry socialism as if it were some grand conspiracy against the have-mores. We all live in a mixed economy of state-corporatism. Case in point - that symbol of capitalism and freedom, the car, drives around on evil, centrally planned, socialist roads.

One last thing. You can say what you like about SF politicians but people like Adams and MMcG are super dedicated to their parties. Gerry Adams has lived a large chunk of his life effectively on the run from the power of the British Security apparatus. I can't imagine many of the watery ****s we've had in the Dail being as interested in the job if it meant having to be as dedicated to their party and cause as Adams and co have been to theirs.

I think it goes with the terroritry in the North,I suppose anyone entering politics will most likely immerse themselves completely in it.

Another one that springs to mind is Austin Currie, moved to South after his wife was attacked at home having her breasts slashed by terrorists. .

He was , I think , one of the first people issued with a permit for a handgun in the South such was the threat against his life.

Chuck Stone

true wrote: »

So when he was in a leadership position in the Belfast IRA in the 70's - as many think/say he was - terrifying the majority of the people in the North, you think he was on the run from the law and from the security apparatus of the elected government of the time? Lets call a spade a spade?

I'm not interested in answering your stupid questions and it really is a stupid question full of assumptions and fallacies.

Ruralyoke

mattjack wrote: »

[/I]
He was , I think , one of the first people issued with a permit for a handgun in the South such was the threat against his life.

Wow. That's awful - never heard that.

Monty Burnz

mattjack wrote: »

I think it goes with the terroritry in the North,I suppose anyone entering politics will most likely immerse themselves completely in it.

Another one that springs to mind is Austin Currie, moved to South after his wife was attacked at home having her breasts slashed by terrorists. .

He was , I think , one of the first people issued with a permit for a handgun in the South such was the threat against his life.

Were these Republican or Loyalist terrorists? I can't recall.

mattjack

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Were these Republican or Loyalist terrorists? I can't recall.

Loyalist.

true

I remember Gerry fitt - then a leader of the SDLP - being denounced and attacked by Republicans during the hunger strike era. A decent man was Gerry Fitt.

Nodin

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Were these Republican or Loyalist terrorists? I can't recall.

Loyalists. They carved "UVF" on her chest.

Monty Burnz

Nodin wrote: »

Loyalists. They carved "UVF" on her chest.

Ah well, sure nobody had a monopoly on suffering etc. etc.

mattjack

One of the most humble people I ever met was a man who's niece was the first Greenfinch to die in the troubles, this man kinda changed my perception of people to certain degree.

When his niece died, he decided to sell up his farm and move from the North, .. you would think he'd would've have moved to a Loyalist stronghold or somewhere in England... he choose to move to the South.

Because he always felt Irish.... not Northern Irish or Southern Irish nor even British.

Nodin

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Ah well, sure nobody had a monopoly on suffering etc. etc.

whats that condescending drivel supposed to mean?

Fenian Army

Monty Burnz wrote: »

But it's a supra-national identity that you can opt into - hence British Indians etc. I've no problem with people identifying themselves as Irish and British. It's the self-hating Loyalist equivalent of our Celtic jersey-wearing knuckle-draggers who identify themselves as somehow exclusively 'British' that I find baffling and comical.

You never get tired of the lazy Celtic supporter stereotypes do you?

Monty Burnz

Nodin wrote: »

whats that condescending drivel supposed to mean?

I'm not sure, to be honest - perhaps you need to ask the man who popularised the expression?

"We are proud of those IRA volunteers and of those Sinn Fein activists and of their families who have held great hurt and who have despite demonisation and despite the attempts to vilify them remain proud, good humoured and looking forward to a new future," he said.

In a message to unionists, Mr Adams he said: "No-one has a monopoly on suffering."

I agree, it is offensive drivel.