How long before Irish reunification?

downcow

timhenn wrote: »

I was just using your equations. Things aren't going very well for you.

my equation was quite simple and will stand of to scrutiny

(approx numbers from my head)

IRA killed 2,000
NI population 70's 1 million
USA population 70's 200 million
NI 200 times bigger than NI

2,000 x 200 = 400,000

....and of course i know both NI and USA were a bit bigger than i have shown and IRA didnt kill exactly 2,000

Now care to show us how you came up with the figure 1 million by armed forces??

Have you got off because of the primary school closures?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's an unbelievable fail actually.

How could you get it so wrong when it is written in black and white - Irish Republican Army (IRA)

Well the jury is out on this one. We are waiting for Timhen to come back and demonstrate where i said CAIN were claiming people as innocent when they were guilty. So if he doesnt highlight the relevant post soon then the judge will have ruled in my favour yet again.

I know you are spinning for him, but he wanted me to identify a mistake in CAIN hence i went straight to that town you have such an interest in and, lo and behold my first search found a mistake,

You see you guys are trying to defend the indefensible, and you would get away with it if this is an echochamber.

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

downcow wrote: »

my equation was quite simple and will stand of to scrutiny

(approx numbers from my head)

IRA killed 2,000
NI population 70's 1 million
USA population 70's 200 million
NI 200 times bigger than NI

2,000 x 200 = 400,000

....and of course i know both NI and USA were a bit bigger than i have shown and IRA didnt kill exactly 2,000

Now care to show us how you came up with the figure 1 million by armed forces??

Have you got off because of the primary school closures?

We're getting way off-topic now.

This all occurred because you disingenuously deconstructed my long post/answer to you in a pathetic attempt to make it look like I "owned" up for the killings of Protestants during the second civil war of the 20th century caused by British interference in Ireland and the loyalist bigotry that stemmed from partition.

You have NEVER recognised the reasons why the IRA came about and how Nationalists and Catholics might have had a legitimate grievance living in the apartheid that was the Six Counties during that era.

And the thing is, you won't. You'll come in here, flail about and spread crap everywhere all the while distracting the thread.

It's best to pack it up I think.

---

Let's get back to the matter at hand, the COVID-19 deaths in the North are about to spiral out of control it would seem.

I distinctly remember you and Rob talking to us about how great it was that life was continuing on normally in the face of the pandemic and how the British way of herd immunity was the way forward.

We see though that that was plainly bollox. You then managed to get on your high horse about SF somehow politicising the pandemic as some sort of anti-British stance in wanting to follow the South's more proactive and "draconian" early lockdown philosophy. I also remember any criticism of the UK stance was "anti-British" and waved away.

Anyway, care to revisit any of this?

downcow

BonnieSituation wrote: »

We're getting way off-topic now.

This all occurred because you disingenuously deconstructed my long post/answer to you in a pathetic attempt to make it look like I "owned" up for the killings of Protestants during the second civil war of the 20th century caused by British interference in Ireland and the loyalist bigotry that stemmed from partition.

You have NEVER recognised the reasons why the IRA came about and how Nationalists and Catholics might have had a legitimate grievance living in the apartheid that was the Six Counties during that era.

And the thing is, you won't. You'll come in here, flail about and spread crap everywhere all the while distracting the thread.

It's best to pack it up I think.

---

Let's get back to the matter at hand, the COVID-19 deaths in the North are about to spiral out of control it would seem.

I distinctly remember you and Rob talking to us about how great it was that life was continuing on normally in the face of the pandemic and how the British way of herd immunity was the way forward.

We see though that that was plainly bollox. You then managed to get on your high horse about SF somehow politicising the pandemic as some sort of anti-British stance in wanting to follow the South's more proactive and "draconian" early lockdown philosophy. I also remember any criticism of the UK stance was "anti-British" and waved away.

Anyway, care to revisit any of this?

Well firstly the thread was about a united Ireland and some on here thought they would points score with Covid.
I believe our government is doing a fairly good job dealing with Covid. I think you will find I said in a much earlier post that we will only know who’s got it right until a long way down the road. Our government has really pulled stops out, indeed I think almost too generous. I am part of a work team who are now at home on furlough with full wages thanks to my British government.
You are obviously very confident that your deaths are under control. I wouldn’t count your chickens before they hatch.
You should take a few minutes and listen to the BBC podcast More Or Less (I’ll try to find a link - an excellent program that takes a look at various statistics and this week took Covid)

with regard to your comments about how the most recent trouble started in Northern Ireland. I have never had any difficulty accepting that some middle to upper-class Unionists attempted to control the state for their benefit. But do not try and tell me that that in any way justified the IRA murdering, torturing and terrorising working class Unionists.
The IRA has put us in a place where we will never ever accept a united Ireland, and the hurt and damage is so deep that it will filter down through generations.

I have also challenged the blinkered view on here that Republican terrorists were nice people and loyalist terrorists were drug dealing thugs. I actually think you must not know about the terrible things they done to people or your stomach would turn. My stomach turns at some of the stuff the UVF done to people - it makes me feel physically sick. The IRA were better at it.

Could you give us some examples of some of the worst stuff that both sets of paramilitaries done during this conflict?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Well the jury is out on this one. We are waiting for Timhen to come back and demonstrate where i said CAIN were claiming people as innocent when they were guilty. So if he doesnt highlight the relevant post soon then the judge will have ruled in my favour yet again.

I know you are spinning for him, but he wanted me to identify a mistake in CAIN hence i went straight to that town you have such an interest in and, lo and behold my first search found a mistake,

You see you guys are trying to defend the indefensible, and you would get away with it if this is an echochamber.

What 'jury' is out on it?

You claimed the Cain site made a mistake.

Where was the 'mistake'?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Well firstly the thread was about a united Ireland and some on here thought they would points score with Covid.
I believe our government is doing a fairly good job dealing with Covid. I think you will find I said in a much earlier post that we will only know who’s got it right until a long way down the road. Our government has really pulled stops out, indeed I think almost too generous. I am part of a work team who are now at home on furlough with full wages thanks to my British government.
You are obviously very confident that your deaths are under control. I wouldn’t count your chickens before they hatch.
You should take a few minutes and listen to the BBC podcast More Or Less (I’ll try to find a link - an excellent program that takes a look at various statistics and this week took Covid)

with regard to your comments about how the most recent trouble started in Northern Ireland. I have never had any difficulty accepting that some middle to upper-class Unionists attempted to control the state for their benefit. But do not try and tell me that that in any way justified the IRA murdering, torturing and terrorising working class Unionists.
The IRA has put us in a place where we will never ever accept a united Ireland, and the hurt and damage is so deep that it will filter down through generations.

I have also challenged the blinkered view on here that Republican terrorists were nice people and loyalist terrorists were drug dealing thugs. I actually think you must not know about the terrible things they done to people or your stomach would turn. My stomach turns at some of the stuff the UVF done to people - it makes me feel physically sick. The IRA were better at it.

Could you give us some examples of some of the worst stuff that both sets of paramilitaries done during this conflict?

In any polling that has been done only 18% of Unionists 'could never accept a UI'.

Stop pretending that you speak for all of them. You speak for the belligerent end of Unionism, that is all.

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

We're getting way off-topic now.

This all occurred because you disingenuously deconstructed my long post/answer to you in a pathetic attempt to make it look like I "owned" up for the killings of Protestants during the second civil war of the 20th century caused by British interference in Ireland and the loyalist bigotry that stemmed from partition.

You have NEVER recognised the reasons why the IRA came about and how Nationalists and Catholics might have had a legitimate grievance living in the apartheid that was the Six Counties during that era.

And the thing is, you won't. You'll come in here, flail about and spread crap everywhere all the while distracting the thread.

It's best to pack it up I think.

---

I have pointed this out before.

This most disingenuous of posters has done this with you, me and Junkyard Tom.

Taken a part of an answer as some pathetic little victory and when challenged runs away from it for as long as he can.

It's all about 'wee' victories for his 'wee country'.

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

downcow wrote: »

I am pleased you regard the IRA as guilty. In the same way I regard the UFF as guilty.

I regard the Unionist security apparatus as guilty, not just the 'UFF', I doubt there was a single person in the RUC/UDR who was unaware of the collusion their colleagues were up to. UDR/UVF/RUC/UFF - blurred line between the lot of them.

The UDR/UVF/RUC/UFF shared weapons, intelligence, people, and shared in responsibility for the 1000 Catholics (or people mistaken for Catholics) killed by Unionist murder gangs.

John Oliver Weir - RUC.
William "Billy" McCaughey- RUC.
Billy Hanna - UDR.
Robin "The Jackal" Jackson - UDR member and an alleged RUC Special Branch agent
Robert McConnell - UVF and 2nd Battalion UDR corporal.
Laurence McClure - UVF volunteer and RUC SPG
James Mitchell - an RUC Reserve.
Robert John "R.J". Kerr - UDA commander.
Harris Boyle - UDR soldier and UVF volunteer.
Wesley Somerville - UDR soldier and a UVF lieutenant.
Gary Armstrong - RUC sergeant.
Captain John Irwin - UDR intelligence officer
Thomas Raymond Crozier - UDR, and UVF.
James Roderick McDowell - UDR, and UVF
John James Somerville - UDR
Norman Greenlee - UDR soldier and UVF volunteer.
Gordon Liggett - (UDA).
William Ashton Wright - UDR soldier.
Joey Lutton - UDR.
Laurence Tate - UDR
William Thomas Leonard - UDR
Ian Mitchell - RUC
David Wilson - RUC

That's only what we have an idea of. The so-called 'security forces' were a breeding ground for sectarian serial murderers and collusion with Unionist murder gangs was endemic.

timhenn

10-15 years

Downcow, I stated that the british side killed over 1,000 innocents. You wanted to know who was counted as being an innocent:

downcow wrote: »

‘You have a slightly warped sense of who is innocent and who is guilty.
Just to clarify- are you saying the off duty policeman who was shot in the back while with his family is guilty, while the ira man who’s family claimed he was in nothing who was shot is innocent?
Just trying to understand your rational.’

Any chance of an answer?

I directed you towards the CAIN website which has all the data. I stated you could go through it case by case if you wished. And I even followed up to see how your research was going:

timhenn wrote: »

Any update on your research into what the CAIN website got wrong according to you? How many of the over 1,000 innocents killed by the british side were not actually innocent?

You then came back with this:

downcow wrote: »

Firstly, I have already told you I hold the CAIN website in high regard and it is fairly accurate. But as I said there are mistakes, and as you know I dont make stuff up.
So here is the first case I looked up from the town that Francie keeps mentioning.

https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/cgi-bin/dyndeaths.pl

They have him out for a wee walk when the army shot him. The truth was very different. He was lying in wait, balaclava on and sniper rifle in had. He was preparing to take a shot at an RUC patrol when the army (following a challenge) shot him dead. He was the most notorious local IRA sniper of the era.
so, as i say, CAIN make mistakes

This case was noted as a PIRA victim, not as an innocent. So you still provided nothing to counter the fact that the british side killed over 1,000 innocents.

downcow wrote: »

Timhen
wrong on both counts. You don't like it when your proved as wrong

show me where I claimed that CAIN noted some people killed as innocent when they were not.

You claimed they made no mistakes. the first person i checked was a mistake. I always admit when i am wrong, indeed i enjoy learning so like to be corrected, you should grow a set and accept you were wrong on both counts

We were discussing innocents killed by the british side. You've done nothing to dispute the figures. And you also haven't shown any mistake made by the CAIN website. That killing is under dispute. So you are wrong on both counts.

Since you like to be corrected, I'm going to say, you're welcome.

timhenn

10-15 years

downcow wrote: »

my equation was quite simple and will stand of to scrutiny

(approx numbers from my head)

IRA killed 2,000
NI population 70's 1 million
USA population 70's 200 million
NI 200 times bigger than NI

2,000 x 200 = 400,000

....and of course i know both NI and USA were a bit bigger than i have shown and IRA didnt kill exactly 2,000

Now care to show us how you came up with the figure 1 million by armed forces??

Have you got off because of the primary school closures?

You were pulling figures out of thin air so I followed suit. Hence I was following your equations.

Primary school would be preferable to your way of life. You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with being proven wrong on this website!

Sinbad_NI

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I regard the Unionist security apparatus as guilty, not just the 'UFF', I doubt there was a single person in the RUC/UDR who was unaware of the collusion their colleagues were up to. UDR/UVF/RUC/UFF - blurred line between the lot of them.

The UDR/UVF/RUC/UFF shared weapons, intelligence, people, and shared in responsibility for the 1000 Catholics (or people mistaken for Catholics) killed by Unionist murder gangs.

John Oliver Weir - RUC.
William "Billy" McCaughey- RUC.
Billy Hanna - UDR.
Robin "The Jackal" Jackson - UDR member and an alleged RUC Special Branch agent
Robert McConnell - UVF and 2nd Battalion UDR corporal.
Laurence McClure - UVF volunteer and RUC SPG
James Mitchell - an RUC Reserve.
Robert John "R.J". Kerr - UDA commander.
Harris Boyle - UDR soldier and UVF volunteer.
Wesley Somerville - UDR soldier and a UVF lieutenant.
Gary Armstrong - RUC sergeant.
Captain John Irwin - UDR intelligence officer
Thomas Raymond Crozier - UDR, and UVF.
James Roderick McDowell - UDR, and UVF
John James Somerville - UDR
Norman Greenlee - UDR soldier and UVF volunteer.
Gordon Liggett - (UDA).
William Ashton Wright - UDR soldier.
Joey Lutton - UDR.
Laurence Tate - UDR
William Thomas Leonard - UDR
Ian Mitchell - RUC
David Wilson - RUC

That's only what we have an idea of. The so-called 'security forces' were a breeding ground for sectarian serial murderers and collusion with Unionist murder gangs was endemic.

Interesting take on guilty there.
I’ve no doubt there was a great deal of collusion, be a very naive fool to think those getting killed by a common enemy wouldn’t work out how to come together.
But all guilty (how many thousands) and all in the know on what was going on, think that’s a step into the unknown and more fictional than fact at this stage. I’ve seen plenty of articles and books but nothing pointed to this level of knowledge, least not that I recall, am I wrong, is there a mass of info out there on this or just your hunch? I don’t mean individual cases, I mean en mass.

In any case, how far down the tree would you go in terms of guilt?
Were the shop keepers guilty just by serving them for example.

Something that has stuck in my mind for the sheer awfulness was the proxy bombs where they used civilians to drive the bombs in. Do you think that was justified, weren’t the civilians used at that sort of level of distance from the SFs? Were these people also in the know / guilty?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What 'jury' is out on it?

You claimed the Cain site made a mistake.

Where was the 'mistake'?

Francie
here is the facts
Cain say "Shot while walking through St Malachy's estate, Castlewellan, County Down."
I said "The truth was very different. He was lying in wait, balaclava on and sniper rifle in had. He was preparing to take a shot at an RUC patrol when the army (following a challenge) shot him dead. He was the most notorious local IRA sniper of the era"

Are you really trying to tell me those two accounts are compatible?. Try to have integrity Francie

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

In any polling that has been done only 18% of Unionists 'could never accept a UI'.

Stop pretending that you speak for all of them. You speak for the belligerent end of Unionism, that is all.

link please?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have pointed this out before.

This most disingenuous of posters has done this with you, me and Junkyard Tom.

Taken a part of an answer as some pathetic little victory and when challenged runs away from it for as long as he can.

It's all about 'wee' victories for his 'wee country'.

Francie. I have made endless offers to engage eg recently suggesting one simple question each that the other must answer but you don't want to engage honestly and clearly

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I regard the Unionist security apparatus as guilty, not just the 'UFF', I doubt there was a single person in the RUC/UDR who was unaware of the collusion their colleagues were up to. UDR/UVF/RUC/UFF - blurred line between the lot of them.

The UDR/UVF/RUC/UFF shared weapons, intelligence, people, and shared in responsibility for the 1000 Catholics (or people mistaken for Catholics) killed by Unionist murder gangs.

John Oliver Weir - RUC.
William "Billy" McCaughey- RUC.
Billy Hanna - UDR.
Robin "The Jackal" Jackson - UDR member and an alleged RUC Special Branch agent
Robert McConnell - UVF and 2nd Battalion UDR corporal.
Laurence McClure - UVF volunteer and RUC SPG
James Mitchell - an RUC Reserve.
Robert John "R.J". Kerr - UDA commander.
Harris Boyle - UDR soldier and UVF volunteer.
Wesley Somerville - UDR soldier and a UVF lieutenant.
Gary Armstrong - RUC sergeant.
Captain John Irwin - UDR intelligence officer
Thomas Raymond Crozier - UDR, and UVF.
James Roderick McDowell - UDR, and UVF
John James Somerville - UDR
Norman Greenlee - UDR soldier and UVF volunteer.
Gordon Liggett - (UDA).
William Ashton Wright - UDR soldier.
Joey Lutton - UDR.
Laurence Tate - UDR
William Thomas Leonard - UDR
Ian Mitchell - RUC
David Wilson - RUC

That's only what we have an idea of. The so-called 'security forces' were a breeding ground for sectarian serial murderers and collusion with Unionist murder gangs was endemic.

I am going to guess (don't have stats) that 40,000+ served and 100's were murdered. is it really surprising that a few colluded with loyalists, What i can't understand is why some colluded with the ira.
I think your list amounts to 0.005% of members, but it is late and i have had a few drinks courtesy of our chancellor so i might have a point in the wrong place

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Francie
here is the facts
Cain say "Shot while walking through St Malachy's estate, Castlewellan, County Down."
I said "The truth was very different. He was lying in wait, balaclava on and sniper rifle in had. He was preparing to take a shot at an RUC patrol when the army (following a challenge) shot him dead. He was the most notorious local IRA sniper of the era"

Are you really trying to tell me those two accounts are compatible?. Try to have integrity Francie

Integrity? Excuse me?

The circumstances of Magorrian's death are 'disputed' and you want me to believe the account of a force that lied for almost 40 years about the killing ofs of Bloody Sunday and had to have a British PM apologise in the HoC?

Are you having a laugh here?

downcow

timhenn wrote: »

Downcow, I stated that the british side killed over 1,000 innocents. You wanted to know who was counted as being an innocent:



I directed you towards the CAIN website which has all the data. I stated you could go through it case by case if you wished. And I even followed up to see how your research was going:



You then came back with this:



This case was noted as a PIRA victim, not as an innocent. So you still provided nothing to counter the fact that the british side killed over 1,000 innocents.



We were discussing innocents killed by the british side. You've done nothing to dispute the figures. And you also haven't shown any mistake made by the CAIN website. That killing is under dispute. So you are wrong on both counts.

Since you like to be corrected, I'm going to say, you're welcome.

what exactly do you mean by the killing is under dispute?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Integrity? Excuse me?

The circumstances of Magorrian's death are 'disputed' and you want me to believe the account of a force that lied for almost 40 years about the killing ofs of Bloody Sunday and had to have a British PM apologise in the HoC?

Are you having a laugh here?

So are saying he was just out for a dander?

downcow

timhenn wrote: »

You were pulling figures out of thin air so I followed suit. Hence I was following your equations.

Primary school would be preferable to your way of life. You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with being proven wrong on this website!

Why don't you do what i did and give us the rational for your figure.
You know just because you guys are in the majority and backing eachother up, it doesnt make you any less wrong

downcow

Sinbad_NI wrote: »

Interesting take on guilty there.
I’ve no doubt there was a great deal of collusion, be a very naive fool to think those getting killed by a common enemy wouldn’t work out how to come together.
But all guilty (how many thousands) and all in the know on what was going on, think that’s a step into the unknown and more fictional than fact at this stage. I’ve seen plenty of articles and books but nothing pointed to this level of knowledge, least not that I recall, am I wrong, is there a mass of info out there on this or just your hunch? I don’t mean individual cases, I mean en mass.

In any case, how far down the tree would you go in terms of guilt?
Were the shop keepers guilty just by serving them for example.

Something that has stuck in my mind for the sheer awfulness was the proxy bombs where they used civilians to drive the bombs in. Do you think that was justified, weren’t the civilians used at that sort of level of distance from the SFs? Were these people also in the know / guilty?

While we are on the subject. I am always curious why loyalists working with RUC is always 'collusion', while republicans working with RUC is always 'agents', without attacking me could anyone enlighten me?

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

Sinbad_NI wrote: »

Interesting take on guilty there.
I’ve no doubt there was a great deal of collusion, be a very naive fool to think those getting killed by a common enemy wouldn’t work out how to come together.

The Glenanne Gang killed over 120 people - only one was a Republican. It was a campaign of deliberate targeting of 'upwardly mobile' innocent Catholics not unlike Patrick Kielty's Father. Are you describing innocent Catholics a 'common enemy'? Seriously?

But all guilty (how many thousands) and all in the know on what was going on, think that’s a step into the unknown and more fictional than fact at this stage. I’ve seen plenty of articles and books but nothing pointed to this level of knowledge, least not that I recall, am I wrong, is there a mass of info out there on this or just your hunch? I don’t mean individual cases, I mean en mass.

I think of it in much the same way as I think of the Catholic Church here. People knew, not least of all clerics, that bad shit was happening. That's not to say there weren't good people in an institution but they knew that institution was rotten.

In any case, how far down the tree would you go in terms of guilt? Were the shop keepers guilty just by serving them for example. Something that has stuck in my mind for the sheer awfulness was the proxy bombs where they used civilians to drive the bombs in. Do you think that was justified, weren’t the civilians used at that sort of level of distance from the SFs? Were these people also in the know / guilty?

Not something I've given much thought to to be honest. None of it sits well with me. Even the ones who 'deserved' their untimely deaths left emotionally broken loved-ones behind.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

So are saying he was just out for a dander?

If you can show anything other than hearsay that he wasn't out walking, knock yourself out.

He may have been the most notorious sniper of all time, but if he was out walking then until it proved different that is all I have to go on.

I am not taking the word of a British soldier at face value - sorry.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The Glenanne Gang killed over 120 people - only one was a Republican. It was a campaign of deliberate targeting of 'upwardly mobile' innocent Catholics not unlike Patrick Kielty's Father. Are you describing innocent Catholics a 'common enemy'? Seriously?

.

This is how terrorism works. If you kill only IRA or security forces then only IRA or security forces have to worry. Kill civilians and you terrorise a whole community. Its what both sides were very good at. and actually it was loyalists upping this to attacking random catholic bars etc that drove the IRA to Stop killing protestants. It got too scarry

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

downcow wrote: »

is it really surprising that a few colluded with loyalists

I don't think unionist killers did much without elements of the security forces knowing what they were doing. Also if they'd been killing Republicans/Provos then I'd say that would have been fair enough tbh but they weren't - they were murdering ordinary innocent Catholic people in a campaign of terrorism.. terrorism in its purest from - it was unbridled hate of Catholics - any Taig will do.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you can show anything other than hearsay that he wasn't out walking, knock yourself out.

He may have been the most notorious sniper of all time, but if he was out walking then until it proved different that is all I have to go on.

I am not taking the word of a British soldier at face value - sorry.

So tell me. Do you believe he was just out for a dander??? or do you believe me that he was on a killing mission??? - You are so slippery, you never ever answer a question

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I don't think unionist killers did much without elements of the security forces knowing what they were doing. Also if they'd been killing Republicans/Provos then I'd say that would have been fair enough tbh but they weren't - they were murdering ordinary innocent Catholic people in a campaign of terrorism.. terrorism in its purest from - it was unbridled hate of Catholics - any Taig will do.

heres the problem - you think

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

downcow wrote: »

actually it was loyalists upping this to attacking random catholic bars etc that drove the IRA to Stop killing protestants. It got too scarry

What a disgusting view to expound. Unionist murder gangs only ever strengthened support for the Provos.

It might justify the unionist murder campaign in your twisted mind but thank goodness Republicans didn't target the innocent Protestant population in the same manner as unionists did with innocent Catholics.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What a disgusting view to expound. Unionist murder gangs only ever strengthened support for the Provos.

It might justify the unionist murder campaign in your twisted mind but thank goodness the Republicans didn't target the Protestant population in the same manner as unionists did.

They killed nearly 2,000 people. if we remove the accidents. what percentage of those they killed do you thin k would be protestant?
catch yourself on, they targeted protestants endlessly.

I forgot that i owe francie some evidence on that - coming shortly

Junkyard Tom

15-20 years

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What a disgusting view to expound. Unionist murder gangs only ever strengthened support for the Provos.

It might justify the unionist murder campaign in your twisted mind but thank goodness the Republicans didn't target the Protestant population in the same manner as unionists did.

The only reason they shot entire pub full of catholics was the ira were running rings around the brits and it was pure desperation stuff


For an organisation that was supposedely defeated,it was from a pure military,tactical viewpoint at its peak in the 1990s.....it was brits what tried bring the north in a balkens style civil war in the 90s,but adbandoned it when the ira began to flatten their city centres

Sinbad_NI

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The Glenanne Gang killed over 120 people - only one was a Republican. It was a campaign of deliberate targeting of 'upwardly mobile' innocent Catholics not unlike Patrick Kielty's Father. Are you describing innocent Catholics a 'common enemy'? Seriously?



I think of it in much the same way as I think of the Catholic Church here. People knew, not least of all clerics, that bad shit was happening. That's not to say there weren't good people in an institution but they knew that institution was rotten.



Not something I've given much thou to to be honest. None of it sits well with me. Even the ones who 'deserved' their untimely deaths left emotionally broken loved-ones behind.

I think that lot were a bunch of crazed murderers, same as all the rest. They got away with it, got a taste for it and then what followed was unbelievably awful.
No, innocent Catholics of course aren't guilty. Nor the common enemy.
What I meant was, they got together because the common enemy (the IRA) was murdering them. Badly worded on my part. Unreserved apologies, not what I meant.
How they could thrn take this hatred out on innocent people is far beyond me. **** what a mess this place was in back then.

Your Catholic church comparison. How many stood up and did something about that? And how long did it go on for first? Was everyone guilty of the offence for all those years, were they all guilty as you claim all the SF personal were?
Did they all deserve to be killed?

No side came out of this **** show with the moral compass pointing in their direction. The Catholic community certainly had a hell of a lot to complain about. Absolutely no argument there.
I'm far from happy about what my supposed "people" have done in the past.