How long before Irish reunification?

_blaaz

10-15 years

RobMc59 wrote: »

I`ll take it from your frantic attempts to back track you can`t answer as you know you`re wrong.

Im.not backtracking??


My position has been 100% consistant???


Do you even know what backtracking means.....i asked for further clarity and your moral position on killing folk....which you have run away from in favour of accusing me of backtracking

_blaaz

10-15 years

eagle eye wrote: »

So you think then that his killers should not have got released from prison early?

I taught they should been sent down for murder tbh and released under the gfa


How is a garda life worth more than an ruc officers life?

facehugger99

_blaaz wrote: »

My position has been 100% consistant???

I do always find these threads interesting, the shine a light under the rocks that SF/IRA sympathisers dwell and expose their morally repugnant views.

Next time your in your work canteen, try expressing what you've said here and see how many people back you up - I very much doubt you'd ever dare to.

_blaaz

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

I do always find these threads interesting, the shine a light under the rocks that SF/IRA sympathisers dwell and expose their morally repugnant views.

Next time your in your work canteen, try expressing what you've said here and see how many people back you up - I very much doubt you'd ever dare to.

Excpt i dont support sinn fein (think ive told yous this previously,but sure keep shouting shinner at me,in favour of discussion)


....i just believe in exposing hyprocrisy tbh

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

The first 4 were shot, and I named them. Can you name the other 2 for Francie, he never knew about that chapter in Republican history at all and as his opinion of Dev has gone down!

janfebmar...stop embarrassing yourself. Please.

My opinion of Dev, was always 'balanced' by the facts of his career. There isn't a political leader on this earth that I don't have a balanced view of.

As we have seen from you, you cheerfully ignore racism and barbarism to promote your Irish Bad/British Good message. Nobody is buying it...nobody.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

janfebmar...stop embarrassing yourself. Please.

My opinion of Dev, was always 'balanced' by the facts of his career. There isn't a political leader on this earth that I don't have a balanced view of.

Francie/dasvycc, you used to have a balanced view of Dev and praise him and defend him, According to you, he is "Notorious Dev" now, with a capital N, now that you learnt he executed six IRA men in Irish prison, by firing squad. As said before, it must be quite a shock to you. You used to have a lot more time for Dev. , because as you said yourself he was the "enemy of the enemy".

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As we have seen from you, you cheerfully ignore racism and barbarism to promote your Irish Bad/British Good message. Nobody is buying it...nobody.

I do not promote Irish Bad/British Good message because there were and are good and bad people in both countries. I am fortunate though I do not have the bigotry towards all things British that you have. Few people buy your Irish Republican good / everything (and everyone) else bad message.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Francie/dasvycc, you used to have a balanced view of Dev and praise him and defend him, According to you, he is "Notorious Dev" now, with a capital N, now that you learnt he executed six IRA men in Irish prison, by firing squad. As said before, it must be quite a shock to you. You used to have a lot more time for Dev. , because as you said yourself he was the "enemy of the enemy".

I defend some things Dev did and other things I criticise, as any normal rational person would do.
The 'Notorious Dev' was ascribed to your opinion of him.

I know the names of all the men and even some of the Gardai killed during the period as one of the Gaurds had an unusual name and two of them share their names with my surname and the name of one of my inlaws.
I have read 4 different books on Dev, the latest being David McCullagh's and many books about the period.
As usual you are talking unadulterated nonsense.

I do not promote Irish Bad/British Good message because there were and are good and bad people in both countries. I am fortunate though I do not have the bigotry towards all things British that you have. Few people buy your Irish Republican good / everything (and everyone) else bad message.

When have I criticised anything other than British policy in Ireland and their soccer fans behaviour?

I was in the north today for instance and renewed my yearly membership of the British National Trust, which I have used throughout northern Ireland and Britain walking with my many British and Irish friends. Please see above about your penchant for unadulterated nonsense. Quite who you think you are fooling I don't really know.

RobMc59

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

janfebmar wrote: »

Francie/dasvycc, you used to have a balanced view of Dev and praise him and defend him, According to you, he is "Notorious Dev" now, with a capital N, now that you learnt he executed six IRA men in Irish prison, by firing squad. As said before, it must be quite a shock to you. You used to have a lot more time for Dev. , because as you said yourself he was the "enemy of the enemy".

I defend some things Dev did and other things I criticise, as any normal rational person would do.
The 'Notorious Dev' was ascribed to your opinion of him.

I know the names of all the men and even some of the Gardai killed during the period as one of the Gaurds had an unusual name and two of them share their names with my surname and the name of one of my inlaws.
I have read 4 different books on Dev, the latest being David McCullagh's and many books about the period.
As usual you are talking unadulterated nonsense.

I do not promote Irish Bad/British Good message because there were and are good and bad people in both countries. I am fortunate though I do not have the bigotry towards all things British that you have. Few people buy your Irish Republican good / everything (and everyone) else bad message.

When have I criticised anything other than British policy in Ireland and their soccer fans behaviour?

I was in the north today for instance and renewed my yearly membership of the British National Trust, which I have used throughout northern Ireland and Britain walking with my many British and Irish friends. Please see above about your penchant for unadulterated nonsense. Quite who you think you are fooling I don't really know.

I trust you doffed your cap if you passed a picture of Her Brittanic Majesty.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When have I criticised anything other than British policy in Ireland and their soccer fans behaviour?

So you never said anything negative about British policy in Europe or WW2 or anything negative about Royalty for example?

You are fooling nobody Francie.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I trust you doffed your cap if you passed a picture of Her Brittanic Majesty.

No Rob, I find monarchies of any kind nauseating.
I was at a dinner in England once...a very formal affair where they asked all to rise and toast the monarch, I remained seated. Not because of what the monarch represents here in Ireland but because in general I object to the notion of class systems and royalty or why I should have to pay respects to it or give any deference. That's for you 'subjects' to do.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

So you never said anything negative about British policy in Europe or WW2 or anything negative about Royalty for example?

You are fooling nobody Francie.

Don't mistake arguing with your glorified versions of what actually happened with a dislike of the British people. At the moment I feel deeply sorry for an awful lot of them because they are watching the UK tear itself apart.

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Are they carrying guns?

Pretty simple.if youve read my posts....im abit dismayed that you havnt read my posts clarifying anyone.carrying a gun has to.accept risks that go.with it


Perhaps some further considered comprehension on your part would be helpful

Democratic security forces are entitled to be armed.

Thug terrorists are not.

Simple as.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Democratic security forces are entitled to be armed.

Thug terrorists are not.

Simple as.

A large portion of the 'democratic security forces' in northern Ireland' ended up disgraced, renamed or stood down after the recent conflict.

blanch152

Those promoting a united Ireland will have to deal with some legacy issues first:

https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/mairia-cahill-a-missing-suspect-and-a-troubling-silence-38351909.html


"The accused, who has now become something of a Houdini, was once an extremely senior republican, and a former Sinn Fein activist, so it is quite something that a number of Sinn Fein members have been on the airwaves since the story broke, and yet none of them has been asked if they know whether anyone in the party knows where he is, or if they would publicly call on him to give himself up to police.

Whether they have any influence over him or not is irrelevant, he's unlikely to listen anyway, but it is a matter which goes to the very heart of public confidence with regards to their commitment to the rule of law on alleged child abuse cases.

The party's previous behaviour on kindred issues is a matter of record. The fact that not one press corps hack or broadcaster thought it pertinent to ask, is actually more worrying.

Have we become fatigued or complacent when it comes to alleged cases of abuse by former IRA men?

Or do we simply hold Sinn Fein to a lower standard than every other political party?

I ask this question because, in comparison, had it been a Fine Gael former member who had skipped bail on similar alleged charges, it's a sure bet that the Taoiseach would be doostepped. McDonald or Adams, on the other hand?"

And people get excited about someone falling off a swing? This is far more serious.

Odhinn

blanch152 wrote: »

Democratic security forces are entitled to be armed.

Thug terrorists are not.

Simple as.

...by which lights we'd still be under British rule.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Those promoting a united Ireland will have to deal with some legacy issues first:

Everybody has to deal with abuse cases blanch, if somebody is guilty of them they should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Do you think you have found another block on a UI?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A large portion of the 'democratic security forces' in northern Ireland' ended up disgraced, renamed or stood down after the recent conflict.

That poster was dragging the name of two Gardai through the mud. Disgraceful posting.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A large portion of the 'democratic security forces' in northern Ireland' ended up disgraced, renamed or stood down after the recent conflict.

Renamed means nothing. Telecom Eireann was renamed Eircom was renamed Eir etc. So you mean disgraced or stood down? What do you mean by a "large portion"? The vast majority of the hundreds of thousands of people who served in the security forces done so lawfully and properly. Their objective was always to get the paramilitaries to cease violence / surrender or have their weapons put beyond use: they achieved that objective and kept their own weapons.

There were of course some rotten apples in the security forces, but define a large portion?

blanch152

Odhinn wrote: »

...by which lights we'd still be under British rule.

There is a very good argument that if 1916 and the War of Independence had not happened at that point in time, independence would have come later, we would not have seen the oppressive Catholic society in the South and neither would we have seen the sectarian governments in the North, and this island could well have been a much better place and have secured its independence in the period after the Second World War.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Everybody has to deal with abuse cases blanch, if somebody is guilty of them they should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Do you think you have found another block on a UI?

That particular one has a large smell about it, particularly after Gerry Adams blog where he admitted that the IRA facilitated moving child abusers out of various jurisdictions.

LuckyLloyd

The completion of the national project won’t be sidetracked by attacks on SF or any other party. When it comes down to it, it will be the national will. It’s only a matter of time, and Unionists have long known that as the truth of the matter.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Renamed means nothing. Telecom Eireann was renamed Eircom was renamed Eir etc. So you mean disgraced or stood down? The vast majority of the hundreds of thousands of people who served in the security forces done so lawfully and properly.

Sure jan...sure.

On 18 April 2003 as part of the third report into collusion between Ulster loyalist paramilitaries, RUC, and British Army, Sir John Stevens published an Overview and Recommendations document (Stevens 3).[45] Stevens' intention was to make recommendations which arose from serious shortcomings he had identified in all three Inquiries.[46]

The third Stevens Inquiry began in 1999, and referred to his previous reports when making his recommendations. Stevens' third inquiry focused in detail on only two of the killings in which collusion was alleged; that of Brian Adam Lambert in 1987 and of Pat Finucane in 1989. Stevens used the following criteria as a definition of collusion while conducting his investigation:

The failure to keep records or the existence of contradictory accounts which could limit the opportunity to rebut serious allegations.
The absence of accountability which could allow acts or omissions by individuals to go undetected.
The withholding of information which could impede the prevention of crime and the arrest of suspects.
The unlawful involvement of agents in murder which could imply that the security forces sanction killings.[48]

Police Ombudsman

In a report released on 22 January 2007, the Police Ombudsman Dame Nuala O'Loan stated Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) informers committed serious crimes, including murder, with the full knowledge of their handlers.[49] The report stated that RUC Special Branch officers created false statements, blocked evidence searches and "baby-sat" suspects during interviews.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There is a very good argument that if 1916 and the War of Independence had not happened at that point in time, independence would have come later, we would not have seen the oppressive Catholic society in the South and neither would we have seen the sectarian governments in the North, and this island could well have been a much better place and have secured its independence in the period after the Second World War.

....and as janfebmar protests when defending racists and white suprematists...we might all have been speaking German.

janfebmar

You said "a large portion Francie. How big is a "large portion" of the hundreds of thousands who served in the security forces in N. Ireland during the troubles? 50 people? 500? 5000? 50,000

FrancieBrady wrote: »

....and as janfebmar protests when defending racists and white suprematists..

I was not the one defending Russell. As regards Churchill, I said he had his flaws, like everyone. Churchills right hand man was an Irishman, I suppose you will say that was racist because he wanted an Irishman under him?

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

You said "a large portion Francie. How big is a "large portion" of the hundreds of thousands who served in the security forces in N. Ireland during the troubles? 50 people? 500? 5000? 50,000

I would say the entire police force (RUC) and a home based battalion (The UDR) sttod down or renamed in shame, and those in the BA (how many we still don't know) that colluded in killings and shot innocents that the British government had to apologise for, to be a 'large portion' of the security forces.
If you wish to do a head count of good and bad...knock yourself out on that one.

Odhinn

blanch152 wrote: »

There is a very good argument that if 1916 and the War of Independence had not happened at that point in time, independence would have come later, we would not have seen the oppressive Catholic society in the South and neither would we have seen the sectarian governments in the North, and this island could well have been a much better place and have secured its independence in the period after the Second World War.

Cack. I'd suggest reading up on the Ulster volunteers and the ulster covenenant, which emerged four years before 1916.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you wish to do a head count of good and bad...knock yourself out on that one.

So of the hundreds of thousands, you do not know how many broke the law.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

So of the hundreds of thousands, you do not know how many broke the law.

I know that the RUC was disgraced by the Stevens report and was reformed and renamed after the Patten recommendations. I know that the UDR was similarly disgraced, merged into the RIR and then stood down. And I don't yet know either the extent of what both above did or how many, but it was sufficient to warrant getting rid of them or reforming them. I also don't know the extent of involvement of the BA in collusion and killing and neither do you. But the British government have had to make significant apologies for killings and there are more revelations to come.

Handwave all that away like you do racism and white suprematism etc etc.

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Democratic security forces are entitled to be armed.

Thug terrorists are not.

Simple as.

I still fail to see moral difference between killing someone if your in an army/police or if your in a paramilitary??

Killing people is immoral irregardless


Either your againest violence/gunmen or your not imo

(kinda sickened i missed being the 1916 post :pac: .....kudos odhinn)

FrancieBrady

Odhinn wrote: »

Cack. I'd suggest reading up on the Ulster volunteers and the ulster covenenant, which emerged four years before 1916.

Extraordinary how partitionists can so easily block out all other context, isn't it.