Gardai (and Shatter) failed to enforce the law at RIRA funeral

Laminations

@Happyman42 for all your attempts to equate the current dissidents with past terror groups, trying to justify your position that they should be negotiated with you certainly criticised others for thinking they were the same

Happyman42 wrote: »

Yep, that age group might confuse RIRA with the IRA. More educated adult people wouldn't. :rolleyes:

Happyman42 wrote: »

I really don't think you should be on a political forum if you don't know the difference between RIRA and the IRA.
It may be confusing but it is essential to know.

So educate us all, what's the difference?

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

You reached for the stock answer of the partitionist, that is what I pointed out.
Whether you are or not, I don't know or really care tbh.

Are you a partionist now yourself Happyman?

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

You reached for the stock answer of the partitionist, that is what I pointed out.
Whether you are or not, I don't know or really care tbh.

Pointing out the rather obvious (that whatever was done to combat the PIRA, it worked) is the 'stock answer of the partitionist'?

Really? I wonder what the stock question is.

Happyman42

Laminations wrote: »

@Happyman42 for all your attempts to equate the current dissidents with past terror groups, trying to justify your position that they should be negotiated with you certainly criticised others for thinking they were the same






So educate us all, what's the difference?

You'll have to write that again, it makes no sense as a question to me.

Jogathon

Well, I'm not going to get involved in the silly shouty politicking here but I did want to praise the guards for their measured response.

They refused to get involved in a dog fight at the funeral, and instead are calmly dealing with the illegal activity when these guys think that they have got away with it. Well done on a calm and (imo) correct response.

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

You reached for the stock answer of the partitionist, that is what I pointed out.
Whether you are or not, I don't know or really care tbh.

I think it is a fair conclusion to think you support the removal of partition through whatever means.

Otherwise you wouldn't call posters partitionists.

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

You'll have to write that again, it makes no sense as a question to me.

What's the difference between RIRA and the IRA that is essential to know?

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

You'll have to write that again, it makes no sense as a question to me.

Why am I not surprised. It seems pretty straightforward to me.

Monty Burnz

Jogathon wrote: »

Well, I'm not going to get involved in the silly shouty politicking here

There's only one silly shouter. He gets that way when he loses an argument. And he repeats himself rather a lot.

Laminations

Jogathon wrote: »

Well, I'm not going to get involved in the silly shouty politicking here but I did want to praise the guards for their measured response.

They refused to get involved in a dog fight at the funeral, and instead are calmly dealing with the illegal activity when these guys think that they have got away with it. Well done on a calm and (imo) correct response.

I also commend them for their work and these latest arrests. But one does not necessitate the other, managing the funeral so that intervention would've been possible without it becoming a dogfight was my point. I was never suggesting that they try and breach a 500-1000 strong crowd. Also I'm not sure allowing a crime to happen to then catch the culprits for it later is a good approach, but it's worked. So I'm happy enough

Laminations

Monty Burnz wrote: »

There's only one silly shouter. He gets that way when he loses an argument. And he repeats himself rather a lot.

Discrediting a terrorist sympathiser is not politicking so I'd ignore that 'silly' comment

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Pointing out the rather obvious (that whatever was done to combat the PIRA, it worked) is the 'stock answer of the partitionist'?

Really? I wonder what the stock question is.

Here is your glib comment in response to my contention that 'coming for men in their beds' (internment) didn't work, which was further pointing out that the 'law' did not solve the conflict in the North as it won't solve the current rise of the dissidents.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Why, is there a united Ireland and I didn't notice it? :rolleyes:

The classic partitionist will make that type of comment because they need to see the IRA/Sinn Fein as being defeated. Everytime SF make gains electorally they come out of the woodwork spouting the same nonsense.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

The classic partitionist will make that type of comment because they need to see the IRA/Sinn Fein as being defeated. Everytime SF make gains electorally they come out of the woodwork spouting the same nonsense.

If I might call you on a glaring (and pretty ignorant) assumption here: you are speaking as if SF and the IRA 'own' the concept of a united Ireland. I'd be delighted to see it.

You are like an American who thinks that they invented and own democracy.

Craptacular

Happyman42 wrote: »

it won't solve the current rise of the dissidents.

What rise? Where's the evidence of a rise?

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

Here is your glib comment in response to my contention that 'coming for men in their beds' (internment) didn't work, which was further pointing out that the 'law' did not solve the conflict in the North as it won't solve the current rise of the dissidents.

Again I'll ask. The conflict in the north and the current rise of the dissidents are equivalent? How?
And the IRA and RIRA are different? How?

K-9

Laminations wrote: »

Again I'll ask. The conflict in the north and the current rise of the dissidents are equivalent? How?
And the IRA and RIRA are different? How?

They aren't different in Happymans eyes.

They support the removal of partition so its fair to assume he supports both.

I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong.

Laminations

K-9 wrote: »

They aren't different in Happymans eyes.

They support the removal of partition so its fair to assume he supports both.

I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong.

But then he'd be a partitionist? He has criticised others on these boards for assuming the IRA and RIRA are the same. I'm well aware they are different, hence RIRA shouldn't necessarily be treated the same re negotiation and concession, as Happyman suggests they should.

Monty Burnz

Laminations wrote: »

But then he'd be a partitionist? He has criticised others on these boards for assuming the IRA and RIRA are the same. I'm well aware they are different, hence RIRA shouldn't necessarily be treated the same re negotiation and concession, as Happyman suggests they should.

Its...almost...as if...his position makes no sense...I can't understand...

K-9

Laminations wrote: »

But then he'd be a partitionist? He has criticised others on these boards for assuming the IRA and RIRA are the same. I'm well aware they are different, hence RIRA shouldn't necessarily be treated the same re negotiation and concession, as Happyman suggests they should.

But how are they different as regards partition?

Happyman obviously thinks partition is very important, otherwise he wouldn't call people partitionists!

I'm sure it isn't a meaningless slur he hasn't thought through.

Happyman42

Laminations wrote: »

Again I'll ask. The conflict in the north and the current rise of the dissidents are equivalent? How?
And the IRA and RIRA are different? How?

Taking quotes out of context to create a new argument is commonly called deflection on these here Boards.
Very good Laminations, couldn't find any 'quotes' to support your previous accusations?

Laminations

K-9 wrote: »

But how are they different as regards partition?

Happyman obviously thinks partition is very important, otherwise he wouldn't call people partitionists!

I'm sure it isn't a meaningless slur he hasn't thought through.

To allow peace, the IRA has accepted partition in the interim and recognise the GFA as a roadmap towards a democratic reunification. RIRA do not accept the GFA and will not accept partition in the interim or in the ever. They want 'Brits out' and will use violence to try and hasten that aim...but their actual actions - attacks on drug dealers, robbery, extortion, murder of rival gang members, bombing shopping streets - tells me that RIRA have no particularly republican aim and use the 'Brits out' as a convenient sop to the anger of many working class people and other common criminals who are highly uneducated or misinformed about the circumstances that led to their predicament.

Now that majority agreement has been reached on a resolution (in the GFA), RIRA cannot and should not be negotiated with or legitimised in any way. They are an affront to democracy and hold the people of this island in contempt.

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

Taking quotes out of context to create a new argument is commonly called deflection on these here Boards.
Very good Laminations, couldn't find any 'quotes' to support your previous accusations?

The conflict in the north and the current rise of the dissidents are equivalent? You suggested that many times on this thread. How?

And the IRA and RIRA are different? Or do you want to say they are similar now? Either way, how?

HoggyRS

14 people arrested in connection with what happened at the funeral

1 person arrested in connection with the murder of Alan Ryan in broad daylight.

Craptacular

HoggyRS wrote: »

14 people arrested in connection with what happened at the funeral

1 person arrested in connection with the murder of Alan Ryan in broad daylight.

Sounds about right. Ryan was shot by only one shooter after all.

Laminations

HoggyRS wrote: »

14 people arrested in connection with what happened at the funeral

You do know that what happened at the funeral was connected to the dissident terrorists and criminals RIRA, which is connected to murders of many others?

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

Taking quotes out of context to create a new argument is commonly called deflection on these here Boards.
Very good Laminations, couldn't find any 'quotes' to support your previous accusations?

Coming from the guy who has dodged about a dozen questions in the last 3 pages, accusations of 'deflection' are a tad rich.

HoggyRS

Laminations wrote: »

You do know that what happened at the funeral was connected to the dissident terrorists and criminals RIRA, which is connected to murders of many others?

It was the Reals showing respect to a member of their group. Its common place up north at funerals. I don't subscribe to the Reals way of thinking but I have always thought the volley of shots over a casket was a great send off to people who have died from the republican tradition I support.

Just heard that Armed special branch members raided Alan Ryans mothers house today.

HoggyRS

Craptacular wrote: »

Sounds about right. Ryan was shot by only one shooter after all.

Most murders involve only one person pulling the trigger, stabbing with the knife etc. That doesn't stop accomplices being arrested etc.

You'll get a few likes for that though so fair play, mission accomplished.

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Its...almost...as if...his position makes no sense...I can't understand...

In an effort to avoid further deflection, here is my position again;
RIRA will grow into a threat to the stability of this state and the GFA. To brand them as 'common criminals' is dangerous and irresponsible and is making a huge and lethal mistake.
The GFA left people behind. People, I believe to be committed to a republican ideal (doesn't matter what you or I think about that ideal or whether they match previous groups or not).
Now, I have said I believe that the 'law' will not be able to deal with that, as it wasn't able to deal with it for 40 years.
Eventually, after thousands of deaths, maiming, destroyed lives, people with the will to search for a negotiated settlement HAD to sit down and do just that.
My contention is that certain dogma's and policies (proven to be ineffectual by history) are being reverted to again, and I am calling that irresponsible and stupid and lethally dangerous for our future.
The OP wanted force to be used at a funeral, and has contended that suppression is the only way to deal with this. I say, it won't work and has never worked on this island. The existence of the GFA, once thought impossible, proves my point.

JustinDee

Happyman42 wrote: »

In an effort to avoid further deflection, here is my position again;
RIRA will grow into a threat to the stability of this state and the GFA. To brand them as 'common criminals' is dangerous and irresponsible and is making a huge and lethal mistake

It is what they are. No two ways about it. Racketeering, extortion, kidnapping, armed robbery and murder would testify as qualificable traits.

Happyman42 wrote: »

The GFA left people behind . . .

No it didn't. The majority spoke. That is what democracy entails, a majority voice.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

Eventually, after thousands of deaths, maiming, destroyed lives, people with the will to search for a negotiated settlement HAD to sit down and do just that.
My contention is that certain dogma's and policies (proven to be ineffectual by history) are being reverted to again, and I am calling that irresponsible and stupid and lethally dangerous for our future.

If history is repeated, I don't think it is the fault of the forces of democracy - it will be the fault of those 'left behind' (i.e. the hardliners who refuse to compromise or respect the democratic wishes of the majority). It's entirely possible that they will continue to murder people (and of course make a handy living from licensing drug sales) for decades only to come to the same conclusion that SF/PIRA did - you can't murder your way to UI.

Craptacular

HoggyRS wrote: »

Laminations wrote: »

You do know that what happened at the funeral was connected to the dissident terrorists and criminals RIRA, which is connected to murders of many others?

It was the Reals showing respect to a member of their group. Its common place up north at funerals. I don't subscribe to the Reals way of thinking but I have always thought the volley of shots over a casket was a great send off to people who have died from the republican tradition I support.

It was an illegal discharge of firearms in a public area. The gardaí were dead right hauling suspects in about the matter. The fact that those waving guns around wrap their activities in a flag is irrelevant.

Craptacular

Happyman42 wrote: »

RIRA will grow into a threat to the stability of this state and the GFA.

What are you basing this statement on?

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It's entirely possible that they will continue to murder people (and of course make a handy living from licensing drug sales) for decades only to come to the same conclusion that SF/PIRA did - you can't murder your way to UI.

We heard all that before they sat down and done a deal. (including those making that claim)
There are checks and balances and clauses in the GFA to deal with anybody breaking it's terms, as you well know.

Happyman42

Craptacular wrote: »

What are you basing this statement on?

On 'my' opinion that the quest to rid this island of British occupation is cyclical.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

We heard all that before they (including those making that claim) sat down and done a deal.
There are checks and balances and clauses in the GFA to deal with anybody breaking it's terms, as you well know.

I'm not sure what point you are addressing. We did indeed hear that stuff about not being able to murder your way to a UI before and after the GFA. It's fact.

But what is your reference to checks and balances about? I never said anything about the signatories to the deal breaking its terms.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

On 'my' opinion that the quest to rid this island of British occupation is cyclical.

The North is not subject to 'occupation', unless you mean in the sense that well over a million people who consider themselves British live there, as have their ancestors for hundreds of years.

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The North is not subject to 'occupation', unless you mean in the sense that well over a million people who consider themselves British live there, as have their ancestors for hundreds of years.

That is your opinion, unfortunately it isn't the opinion of RIRA.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

That is your opinion, unfortunately it isn't the opinion of RIRA.

It's not really a matter of opinion, is it? Unless you think that NZ and other countries are also under occupation? Under what objective definition can it be claimed to be 'occupied'?

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It's not really a matter of opinion, is it? Unless you think that NZ and other countries are also under occupation?

It doesn't matter what you or I think. That is not what we are examining.
RIRA have the stated aim of removing the British 'occupation' of this island by whatever means neccessary.

Laminations

HoggyRS wrote: »

I have always thought the volley of shots over a casket was a great send off to people who have died from the republican tradition I support.

Alan Ryan was not from or did not die from any republican tradition. He was involved in gang warfare, extortion, drug money and common criminality.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

It doesn't matter what you or I think. That is not what we are examining.
RIRA have the stated aim of removing the British 'occupation' of this island by whatever means neccessary.

Yes, and as the PIRA learned, you can't murder your way to a UI. The RIRA need only open a book to learn this fact, but seem determined to carry on with murder and criminality. So in what sense is it the fault of the democrats if the hardliners keep on killing?

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

On 'my' opinion that the quest to rid this island of British occupation is cyclical.

The quest has now got a mechanism within the GFA, it no longer needs violence,. You continue to fail to realise the difference between the IRA and RIRA is that the former operated in a vaccuum of political will, where there was the problem of partition and no resolution, where there was British thuggery and discrimination and a great sectarian tension. They also operated in a manner that was very different to what RIRA is now involved in. RIRA operate in a time where these is a resolution, there are political channels ans progress and the north has a fairer police force and the demographics have changed. There is no appetite for 'struggle' not that I see any of their gangland criminality as representing any kind of struggle against British forces.

You have no basis to claim that RIRA will grow in strength unless you think they are equivalent in some way to the IRA and as appealing in a time of peace.

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

That is your opinion, unfortunately it isn't the opinion of RIRA.

What is your opinion? Is the north under occupation? Should we accept the partition of Ireland until its resolved via the mechanisms in the GFA?

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Yes, and as the PIRA learned, you can't murder your way to a UI.

Again, that's your opinion and is unimportant and off topic here.

So in what sense is it the fault of the democrats if the hardliners keep on killing?

To paraphrase an old saying, when democrats do nothing, chaos will thrive.
History teaches us that suppression does and achieves nothing. If it did, would SF be knocking on the doors of our government and be sharing power in Northern Ireland?

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

Again, that's your opinion and is unimportant and off topic here.

In what sense is it off topic?

And it is not just my opinion - I can point to failed terrorist campaigns by the PIRA, INLA and IPLO as evidence. What evidence do you have that it can be done? Who has the stronger claim?

Happyman42 wrote: »

To paraphrase an old saying, when democrats do nothing, chaos will thrive.
History teaches us that suppression does and achieves nothing. If it did, would SF be knocking on the doors of our government and be sharing power in Northern Ireland?

The democrats are not doing nothing - they are governing in partnership. What exactly did you expect from the GFA?

Happyman42

Laminations wrote: »

The quest has now got a mechanism within the GFA, it no longer needs violence,. You continue to fail to realise the difference between the IRA and RIRA is that the former operated in a vaccuum of political will, where there was the problem of partition and no resolution, where there was British thuggery and discrimination and a great sectarian tension. They also operated in a manner that was very different to what RIRA is now involved in. RIRA operate in a time where these is a resolution, there are political channels ans progress and the north has a fairer police force and the demographics have changed. There is no appetite for 'struggle' not that I see any of their gangland criminality as representing any kind of struggle against British forces.

You have no basis to claim that RIRA will grow in strength unless you think they are equivalent in some way to the IRA and as appealing in a time of peace.

Whch is all hunky dory if you signed up to and agree with the GFA. :rolleyes:

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

In what sense is it off topic?

And it is not just my opinion - I can point to failed terrorist campaigns by the PIRA, INLA and IPLO as evidence. What evidence do you have that it can be done? Who has the stronger claim?

The democrats are not doing nothing - they are governing in partnership. What exactly did you expect from the GFA?

We are discussing the RIRA, who didn't sign up to the GFA. The GFA therefore is irrelevant in a discussion about how to deal with the RIRA.

Monty Burnz

Happyman42 wrote: »

We are discussing the RIRA, who didn't sign up to the GFA. The GFA therefore is irrelevant in a discussion about how to deal with the RIRA.

But you have not offered any solution other than to concede to their demands - which is a united Ireland. This 'solution' is not on the table.

What do you propose the democrats talk about with them then?

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

Whch is all hunky dory if you signed up to and agree with the GFA. :rolleyes:

So they are on a quest to rid the country of British 'occupation' but when a resolution emerges to do that peacefully, they don't sign up for it? And you think they will grow in strength after the overwhelming majority did accept this resolution? Bonkers