Saoradh dissident republican march in Dublin

Farawayhome

The Soviet Union defeated the Nazi's. Honestly, how many times have people been corrected on basic history?

RobMc59

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Didn't come across like that.




You were just having a little dig. Fair enough.

I probably was which is uncalled for in the current situation.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The IRA were in talks with the British government long before any GFA.



If you knew your history you'd know DeValera supported Hitler and went to the German ambassadors home to give condolences upon hearing of Hitler's death. FYI: The U.S. and many others saved the Brits ass.

Even the PIRA don't support or condone the Real or continuity IRA, so what are you talking about? So when the average drug dealer can pick up a gun you think the current shower are using weapons hid from twenty odd years ago by an organisation they don't belong to?

You have a very warped sense of history, I would like to see some original material confirming this.

Ireland was a soft member of the Allies during WW2.

https://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/de-valera-hitler-the-visit-of-condolence-may-1945/

" Both Maffey and Gray were fully aware that de Valera was not pro-Axis and that he had been of considerable covert assistance to the Allies during the course of the war. He had never shown any admiration for Hitler or for the Nazis during the 1930s or during the war years."

I think you could do with a history lesson yourself.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I see your point. But again reality confounds your notion. SF agreed a deal with the DUP to get the institutions up and running. But the backroom DUP (the same one that scotched the May agreement with the EU) said no to that.

What are SF meant to do, just cave in and allow the DUP to keep vetoing progress?

Sinn Fein were not prepared to accept a non-sectarian Languages Act, and wanted to continue a sectarian policy of separate languages Acts.

Farawayhome

Farawayhome wrote: »

The Soviet Union defeated the Nazi's. Honestly, how many times have people been corrected on basic history?

You really have plugged yourself in to the collective.

The SFOS directors would be very proud.

PeadarCo

Matt Barrett wrote:

He was a fair weather Nazi sympathiser? Fair enough so. Ask any polish about Ireland leaving the lights on. Away the point was being put forward that 'the brits saved our asses' in WW 2. Hardly, they needed saving themselves and I think had an in with Hitler.

He wasn't a sympathiser. From reading different accounts he seemed not to get along with the US ambassador partly due to tension on how far Ireland would openly support the allies(a lot of what Ireland did was secret at the time). It seems that De Valera by signing the book of condolences was acting as a strictly neutral nation as much to spite the ambassador as anything. It was a stupid thing to do especially with hindsight.

In terms of WW2 what has it to do with the thread? Under the Good Friday agreement it was accepted that the border can only change with a vote. Unfortunately that means its perfectly acceptable for the British army to be in Northern Ireland it is their country. They will leave however if the majority of the people in Northern Ireland can be convinced to leave. So getting the Brits out is as simple as persuading the people of Northern Ireland to vote them out.

briany

The current iterations of the IRA, whether it be the New IRA, the Continuity IRA or any other outfit have no mandate. What they think is a mandate is really just the following of a minority culled from run down areas dotted around the island (you could say they're economically and socially repressed vs politically oppressed). The associated political groups are a pretty deluded shower, too. No right-thinking Irish person with a decent life would want to have anything to do with any of these groups.

If British soldiers were to suddenly start brutalising people on the streets of NI again, I could see a logic to the existence of armed Republican groups, i.e. violence begets violence, but there's absolutely no call for these glorified gangsters attempting to destabilise the peace that has been achieved.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Sinn Fein were not prepared to accept a non-sectarian Languages Act, and wanted to continue a sectarian policy of separate languages Acts.

*Sectarian?

A deal was reached and then un-reached.

So who was not prepared to go back into devolved government?

FrancieBrady

PeadarCo wrote: »

He wasn't a sympathiser. From reading different accounts he seemed not to get along with the US ambassador partly due to tension on how far Ireland would openly support the allies(a lot of what Ireland did was secret at the time). It seems that De Valera by signing the book of condolences was acting as a strictly neutral nation as much to spite the ambassador as anything. It was a stupid thing to do especially with hindsight.

In terms of WW2 what has it to do with the thread? Under the Good Friday agreement it was accepted that the border can only change with a vote. Unfortunately that means its perfectly acceptable for the British army to be in Northern Ireland it is their country. They will leave however if the majority of the people in Northern Ireland can be convinced to leave. So getting the Brits out is as simple as persuading the people of Northern Ireland to vote them out.

The 'border' is under threat of change and I certainly got no vote on it.

Blazer

briany wrote: »

The current iterations of the IRA, whether it be the New IRA, the Continuity IRA or any other outfit have no mandate. What they think is a mandate is really just the following of a minority culled from run down areas dotted around the island (you could say they're economically and socially repressed vs politically oppressed). The associated political groups are a pretty deluded shower, too. No right-thinking Irish person with a decent life would want to have anything to do with any of these groups.

If British soldiers were to suddenly start brutalising people on the streets of NI again, I could see a logic to the existence of armed Republican groups, i.e. violence begets violence, but there's absolutely no call for these glorified gangsters attempting to destabilise the peace that has been achieved.

They never had a mandate. This is about controlling all the illegal activities the IRA get upto ie diesel laundering, cigarette smuggling, drugs etc.
A border makes it far harder but not impossible for them to continue their illegal activities.
Even if the unification happened this scum would still engage in illegal activities, the threatening of witnesses, armed robbery etc etc. Nothing would really change.

FrancieBrady

Blazer wrote: »

They never had a mandate. This is about controlling all the illegal activities the IRA get upto ie diesel laundering, cigarette smuggling, drugs etc.
A border makes it far harder but not impossible for them to continue their illegal activities.
Even if the unification happened this scum would still engage in illegal activities, the threatening of witnesses, armed robbery etc etc. Nothing would really change.

You clearly have never lived near to a border. The harder the border is, the harder it is for the general public to cross, therefore the smuggler, (willing to take the risks) makes more money doing what the general public don't want to do/risk.

i.e. the IRA, if they are smuggling, would be all for as hard a border as they could get.

Blazer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

i.e. the IRA, if they are smuggling, would be all for as hard a border as they could get.

lol lol Francie..you're a gas man...as thick as **** but gas all the same.

Farawayhome

Aegir wrote: »

You really have plugged yourself in to the collective.

The SFOS directors would be very proud.

Are you denying factual history and who are these SFOS directors?

Baggly

Blazer wrote: »

lol lol Francie..you're a gas man...as thick as **** but gas all the same.

Mod

Don't post in this thread again.

Farawayhome

PeadarCo wrote: »

He wasn't a sympathiser. From reading different accounts he seemed not to get along with the US ambassador partly due to tension on how far Ireland would openly support the allies(a lot of what Ireland did was secret at the time). It seems that De Valera by signing the book of condolences was acting as a strictly neutral nation as much to spite the ambassador as anything. It was a stupid thing to do especially with hindsight.

In terms of WW2 what has it to do with the thread? Under the Good Friday agreement it was accepted that the border can only change with a vote. Unfortunately that means its perfectly acceptable for the British army to be in Northern Ireland it is their country. They will leave however if the majority of the people in Northern Ireland can be convinced to leave. So getting the Brits out is as simple as persuading the people of Northern Ireland to vote them out.

The Good Friday agreement is long gone. It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with any treaty and argue for changes.

PeadarCo

FrancieBrady wrote:

The 'border' is under threat of change and I certainly got no vote on it.

The Good Friday agreement was an agreement on the border. It resulted in changes to the Irish constitution that recognised the border in its current form and that Northern Ireland is part of the UK. If you live in North Ireland you got to vote in the brexit vote and subsequent general election. That's the unfortunate reality that Northern Ireland is part of the UK until a democratic vote decides otherwise. That's what people signed up to with the Good Friday agreement. I'd agree with you about the issues Brexit causes for the border however shooting and killing people won't solve it as the British establishment have already washed their hands of Northern Ireland. If you want to avoid a hard border the long term question is how do you persuade those undecided or unionist to vote for a united Ireland. Bombing and killing people didn't work for the British so why should it work for the new group of terrorists.

PeadarCo

Farawayhome wrote:

The Good Friday agreement is long gone. It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with any treaty and argue for changes.

So what changes would you make?

zapitastas

blanch152 wrote: »

Sinn Fein were not prepared to accept a non-sectarian Languages Act, and wanted to continue a sectarian policy of separate languages Acts.

Do you want to expand on what you mean by a sectarian languages act?

Farawayhome

PeadarCo wrote: »

So what changes would you make?

I'd rip up the deal personally, there's only one way we can move forward on this island in my opinion. It has to happen in order to have a lasting peace and a replacement of two troublesome states to form one functioning, vibrant country.

FrancieBrady

PeadarCo wrote: »

The Good Friday agreement was an agreement on the border. It resulted in changes to the Irish constitution that recognised the border in its current form and that Northern Ireland is part of the UK. If you live in North Ireland you got to vote in the brexit vote and subsequent general election. That's the unfortunate reality that Northern Ireland is part of the UK until a democratic vote decides otherwise. That's what people signed up to with the Good Friday agreement. I'd agree with you about the issues Brexit causes for the border however shooting and killing people won't solve it as the British establishment have already washed their hands of Northern Ireland. If you want to avoid a hard border the long term question is how do you persuade those undecided or unionist to vote for a united Ireland. Bombing and killing people didn't work for the British so why should it work for the new group of terrorists.

I agree with that, but some didn't sign up to the GFA, and have used violence and other means to bring it down. Supporting Brexit being one of them.

The problem with that is that if it results in a hard border then many will see the GFA being reneged on by one party to it. Where that brings us doesn't bear thinking about.

Tomas81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I agree with that, but some didn't sign up to the GFA, and have used violence and other means to bring it down. Supporting Brexit being one of them.

The problem with that is that if it results in a hard border then many will see the GFA being reneged on by one party to it. Where that brings us doesn't bear thinking about.

The GFA cannot stand if Brexit is followed through. It is democratically not possible. Another referenda would need to take place.

James Brown

PeadarCo wrote: »

He wasn't a sympathiser. From reading different accounts he seemed not to get along with the US ambassador partly due to tension on how far Ireland would openly support the allies(a lot of what Ireland did was secret at the time). It seems that De Valera by signing the book of condolences was acting as a strictly neutral nation as much to spite the ambassador as anything. It was a stupid thing to do especially with hindsight.

In terms of WW2 what has it to do with the thread? Under the Good Friday agreement it was accepted that the border can only change with a vote. Unfortunately that means its perfectly acceptable for the British army to be in Northern Ireland it is their country. They will leave however if the majority of the people in Northern Ireland can be convinced to leave. So getting the Brits out is as simple as persuading the people of Northern Ireland to vote them out.

So with all that was known about Hitler's regime, he went to offer condolences, despite being a supporter of the allies, to stick it to the most powerful nation in the allies? Fair enough so DeValera was a self serving un-patriotic snake.

Agreed. I was responding to anothers comment, as you no doubt know having trailed my last few comments quoting as much. So why ask me? Go ask him/her. Convenient to take something by force, introduce your own brand of 'democracy' then have the natives seek a vote to undo it all.

BBFAN

Farawayhome wrote: »

I think you might be on to something. There's an air of support for the British security forces emerging from many of the posts here. How many of the posters are actually British or unionist in persuasion?

From the brand new poster backing up another brand new poster. :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

BBFAN

How on earth can people claim there are no Shinnerbots on Boards when we all of a sudden have at least 3 new Boardsies jumping into this argument.:rolleyes:

Baggly

Mod

BBFAN, make a decent contribution to this discussion or don't post here again.

WinnyThePoo

De valera a Hitler fan?. Nice rewriting of history there.

timthumbni

Actually the red hand protest by those girls outside the republican office in Londondoire was pretty effective visually. The absolute state of those dissidents who stood trying to look hard against those girls was in stark contrast.

Farawayhome

BBFAN wrote: »

From the brand new poster backing up another brand new poster. :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

BBFAN wrote: »

How on earth can people claim there are no Shinnerbots on Boards when we all of a sudden have at least 3 new Boardsies jumping into this argument.:rolleyes:

This is the tactic used for decades now. The British government first used it in the 70's. If you're critical of the British security forces, then you must be a shinner. The truth is, it's absolutely normal to be against the murder, maiming and intimidation inflicted on Nationalists by the British armed forces. There's nothing extreme about it, to feel sympathy for the victims of their terror is what decent people should feel.

They’ve been putting up posters on Cork university campus

https://www.thejournal.ie/saoradh-recruiting-students-at-ucc-4605437-Apr2019/

timthumbni

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

They’ve been putting up posters on Cork university campus

https://www.thejournal.ie/saoradh-recruiting-students-at-ucc-4605437-Apr2019/

I can imagine their selling point. Come get a degree. Have fun. Learn to shoot wee girls. Spend loads of time behind bars. Join the Ira. Its new and improved *

Pretty depressing really.

nah man the question people will always ask you is do you support or attempt to justify in any way the IRA's terrorist campaign

thatd be the question people would ask id say

SF was the front for a terrorist org for decades

it sticks.

notwithstanding the cause and the great work done to get GFA achieved they should have disbanded with the IRA and if theyd wanted to stay in politics done so under the auspices of a new party with as clean a slate as they could. as it is the people involved still give off a fair air of disrespect for the legitimate authority of the state (and the uh constantly refreshing stream of identikit online scrappers underline this with their identikit positions on say roscommmon vigilantes)

thats the reality for the majority of people i know. it hasnt gone away you know.

timthumbni

I think it was John Hume who described the PIRA murderous actions as the biggest hinderance to any possible so called united ireland in the future. Of course he was right.

How can the clowns in Londondoire in the Ira (new) now think this is going to achieve anything? Their apology was cringeworthy and made them sound like the sub humans they are.

janfebmar

To get back to the Republican march by those in paramilitary style clothing in Dublin, it does look bad. As someone else said, can you imagine 48 hours after the Christchurch mosque shootings 150 white racists in combat fatigues parading through Auckland, or 48 hours after the Manchester arena bombing Islamists dressed in black parading through London?

Farawayhome

timthumbni wrote: »

I think it was John Hume who described the PIRA murderous actions as the biggest hinderance to any possible so called united ireland in the future. Of course he was right.

How can the clowns in Londondoire in the Ira (new) now think this is going to achieve anything? Their apology was cringeworthy and made them sound like the sub humans they are.

In fairness, can't the same be said in the opposite direction? The murderous actions of unionists and British state forces have been the biggest hindrance on any Nationalist accepting partition?

timthumbni

Up to £10k reward apparently for catching the republican or republicans responsible for the murder of Lyra.

citytillidie

Farawayhome wrote: »

In fairness, can't the same be said in the opposite direction? The murderous actions of unionists and British state forces have been the biggest hindrance on any Nationalist accepting partition?

Shhh some people don't accept that loyalists and the BA did nothing wrong

Patty Hearst

They seem to have some connection with Antifa



Alleged leader here seen with a man wearing an Antifa hoodie.



Again at an anti fascist rally

Creol1

Farawayhome wrote: »

In fairness, can't the same be said in the opposite direction? The murderous actions of unionists and British state forces have been the biggest hindrance on any Nationalist accepting partition?

Opposing loyalist brutality and republican brutality are not "opposite" or mutually exclusive positions. People like John Hume spent 30 years explaining this but it seems this still has to be spelt out to people.

seamus

citytillidie wrote: »

Shhh some people don't accept that loyalists and the BA did nothing wrong

One of the cornerstones of the Good Friday Agreement is that those involved will end the incessant bickering over who did what, and retribution after retribution. There can be no moving forward while all sides are acting in revenge.

While non-state actors are not bound to the GFA, if the individual is to support the spirit of the GFA, then they too have to move on. You can be a Nationalist, you can be angry at the Loyalists. But if you support the GFA, then you have a intellectual obligation to move on. To acknowledge that nobody is worse than anyone else. If you continue to be hung up on the actions of one party, then you are indirectly perpetuating the violence.

Nobody is right. The IRA, in all its forms, the Nationalists, the Loyalists, the RUC, and the BA, they all did wrong. They all did scummy, vicious, brutal things. None of them are better than any of the others. Nobody "started it".

The "New IRA" have murdered an innocent person. They have now officially joined the same league of scumminess as the BA and the rest of them. No action they take from here on out can ever be considered the moral high ground or the greater good.

But everyone else is moving on. Recognising their scumminess and at least acknowledging that they can't erase their legacy, but can avoid making it worse.

timthumbni

citytillidie wrote: »

Shhh some people don't accept that loyalists and the BA did nothing wrong

But in this instance I assume you accept it was neither the BA nor loyalists who shot dead a 29 yr old girl in Londondoire.

Those solely to blame in this murder are Irish republicans, yes? I think the good people up there have even elected someone close to those groupings to the council, yes?

Sometimes people need to accept their own failings instead of blaming others.

The city needs to accept it has a very serious problem. This has just highlighted it further and in a very deadly way. Though the bomb at the courthouse and numerous other incidents regarding republicans up there recently show this isn’t just an isolated incident.

As I said the first step to solving a problem is accepting you have a problem. Blaming the brits and Bloody Sunday can only get you so far.

silverharp

Patty Hearst wrote: »

They seem to have some connection with Antifa

i always associate antifa with trust fund losers in posh parts of the US :pac:

I'm probably one of the most non-sectarian, and non-violent posters on these threads.

I'm convinced that the GFA is the only way forward.

I'm also convinced that a hard border is an unimaginable threat to peace.

What is totally depressing about these threads, is that they always end up being tit for tat arguments.

So, how come there is such unwillingness to even try to see both sides of the coin?

Here is the historical abbreviation of history.

Ireland was invaded by Britain.
There was nothing "glorious" or honourable about the appalling treatment of the Irish people.

The Easter rising eventually led to the formation of the Republic.
Unfortunately, the 6 Counties was not part of that Republic.

After years of sectarianism, the civil rights marches began - and Bloody Sunday was the result.
Which, in turn, became the greatest recruitment tool the IRA ever had.

These are all historical facts.

Yet, to read many of the posts on here, you'd be forgiven for thinking that each side were Angels in the conflict.

The truth is a lot more nuanced.
Murder is murder. It should not matter whether the victim was Protestant or Catholic, Nationalist or Unionist.

It should not matter which "side" held the gun that murdered an innocent person. It was still murder, and there were wrongs and rights on BOTH sides.

Can we please try to listen to one another viewpoints, and understand them?

I get that there are scars - deep scars. I understand that refusal by one side, or the other, to understand, or, worse, deflect from the wrongs by blind defence of one's own "side" in the conflict, is inflammatory.

So here's my twopence worth.

I condemn unreservedly the murder of Lyra McKee.
I condemn unreservedly the murder of innocent Catholics and Protestants, whether by loyalist or Republican paramilitaries, or the British army.

If we accept that murder is wrong, then why is there a "but" if it comes from our own "side"?

None of that, however, means we should ignore, or indeed, forget, the wrongs that were done - by both sides.

So, the question is - what is it going to take for people to be able to state that x, y, or z was a causative factor in events? Without being accused of being an apologist? (And yes, I am aware that some people are apologists!)

We can, and should, do better - in my opinion.
But will we? Or will the victims of the troubles - on both sides- continue to be disrespected by being used as political footballs?

We need to do better if we want to build a lasting peace, we really do.

Berserker

timthumbni wrote: »

How can the clowns in Londondoire in the Ira (new) now think this is going to achieve anything? Their apology was cringeworthy and made them sound like the sub humans they are.

Well, we've reached the point of a reward being offered, so they've got some sort of hold people. Not sure if it's respect or fear but people are not willing to out these thugs for some reason. Haven't heard about too many arrests relating to the ATM thefts being conducted by the IRA of late also.

gaelwave

Smash Facism and kill innocent journalists - Saoradh.

Utter Consternation

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Someone or something like this one would imagine, Emmet.

Nail hit firmly on the head there Johnny.

Berserker

Deleted User wrote: »

So, how come there is such unwillingness to even try to see both sides of the coin?

Here is the historical abbreviation of history.

Ireland was invaded by Britain.

......

We need to do better if we want to build a lasting peace, we really do.

Your 'historical abbreviation of history' is not accurate. Ireland was not invaded by Britain. As for doing better, the people of NI need to make a statement on that by not voting for the usual suspects in elections. That's the starting point for change. There are some really good politicians and parties in NI, politicians and parties who could make real progress but they just don't get a look in. If people want things to change, they need to change who they vote for.

citytillidie

timthumbni wrote: »

But in this instance I assume you accept it was neither the BA nor loyalists who shot dead a 29 yr old girl in Londondoire.

Those solely to blame in this murder are Irish republicans, yes? I think the good people up there have even elected someone close to those groupings to the council, yes?

Sometimes people need to accept their own failings instead of blaming others.

The city needs to accept it has a very serious problem. This has just highlighted it further and in a very deadly way. Though the bomb at the courthouse and numerous other incidents regarding republicans up there recently show this isn’t just an isolated incident.

As I said the first step to solving a problem is accepting you have a problem. Blaming the brits and Bloody Sunday can only get you so far.

Did I blame either of them for last week? Nope I am just pointing out that not all sides are innocent and people have to accept that.

There is a change in the city with people speaking out against them. I can't speak for those who voted for them hopefully they will not vote for them in May.

There is knuckle draggers on both sides who want a return to being bullies and thats what we have to beat here now.

Berserker

citytillidie wrote: »

There is a change in the city with people speaking out against them. I can't speak for those who voted for them hopefully they will not vote for them in May.

Any idea why they police have had to offer a reward for information on the killing? Would have thought that the police would be swamped with information on them given the change.

Tomas81

Berserker wrote: »

Any idea why they police have had to offer a reward for information on the killing? Would have thought that the police would be swamped with information on them given the change.

Police didn't offer it. Crime stoppers did, they are a charity.

citytillidie

Berserker wrote: »

Any idea why they police have had to offer a reward for information on the killing? Would have thought that the police would be swamped with information on them given the change.

People there beside Lyra may have given statements already police have said they have had 140 contacted them about it. The reward is from crimestoppers who offer anonymous online forms or confidential telephone calls it may take that for someone beside the shooter to grow up and come forward.

There is a change in the city but still that fear too for your own safety if you so come forward.

That is what needs to be beat that fear of coming forward with vital evidence. It is no different to other police forces offering rewards for people providing vital information