Is it just me or have SF vanished?

RandomViewer

Deleted User wrote: »

And what would yous propose,to do when entire streets of catholics being burnt out and noone to defend them??

Seriously come on big man....you wouldnt bother to defend your home or community and sit on side of road looking for a handout after being burnt out and several of your neighbours killed,would you.......its our country,nationlists shouldnt need put up with this



Be a cold day in hell before i weep over killing likes of billy wright or georgy seawright.....but ya....keep turning other cheek,maybe they mightnt shoot your family members in the face,when their gang calls to your house and leave yous not needing a closed coffin

He's an ex guard , it's how they're trained to think.

Truthvader

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And what would yous propose,to do when entire streets of catholics being burnt out and noone to defend them??

Seriously come on big man....you wouldnt bother to defend your home or community and sit on side of road looking for a handout after being burnt out and several of your neighbours killed,would you.......its our country,nationlists shouldnt need put up with this



Be a cold day in hell before i weep over killing likes of billy wright or georgy seawright.....but ya....keep turning other cheek,maybe they mightnt shoot your family members in the face,when their gang calls to your house and leave yous not needing a closed coffin

Well that is total bollocks. Whatever the provos did they did not protect catholic areas in 1969. I Ran Away. As above the British army actually protected catholic areas in 1969

Truthvader

Truthvader wrote: »

Well that is total bollocks

What part is??......they had noone else to stand up.for them

Whatever the provos did they did not protect catholic areas in 1969. I Ran Away. As above the British army actually protected catholic areas in 1969

The provos didnt exist in 1969.

Actually remind me,how.many streets of cathoics were burnt out when the provos got up.and running???


They done piles and piles wrong,but when noone else there,they stepped up and defended their communities and its a shame,the state has never given em,the credit they deserve

RandomViewer

Truthvader wrote: »

Well that is total bollocks. Whatever the provos did they did not protect catholic areas in 1969. I Ran Away. As above the British army actually protected catholic areas in 1969

That's officials, PIRA didn't exist in 1969

timthumbni

Truthvader wrote: »

Is there any hope they will grow up?

Who? The OO?

Truthvader

timthumbni wrote: »

Who? The OO?

The marchy marchy goons trying to annoy their neighbours

RandomViewer

timthumbni wrote: »

Who? The OO?

Funny that Tommy Gorman wasn't reporting from the 11th night bonfires, RTE being impartial and all that

timthumbni

RandomViewer wrote: »

Funny that Tommy Gorman wasn't reporting from the 11th night bonfires, RTE being impartial and all that

Sorry, I have no idea who Tommy Gorman is.

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

Well that is total bollocks. Whatever the provos did they did not protect catholic areas in 1969. I Ran Away. As above the British army actually protected catholic areas in 1969

I have been around Boards for a while and barring one or two posters I have never come across a more woefully or is it willfully biased interpreter of the the facts of history.
The BA was sent in by a Labour government to protect Catholic areas but within months had managed to turn that Catholic community against them as they began to shore up the sectarian state rather than take it on. That was the tagedy and the crime...had they taken on the Orange sectarian state as they were eventually forced to do, none of it would have happened.

Read the factual history...here's the timeline of 1969...hardly a mention, much less an action by the IRA. How many bombs by loyalists and killings of Catholics, not to mention beatings can you count?
https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/othelem/chron/ch69.htm

Adam9213

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have been around Boards for a while and barring one or two posters I have never come across a more woefully or is it willfully biased interpreter of the the facts of history.
The BA was sent in by a Labour government to protect Catholic areas but within months had managed to turn that Catholic community against them as they began to shore up the sectarian state rather than take it on. That was the tagedy and the crime...had they taken on the Orange sectarian state as they were eventually forced to do, none of it would have happened.

Read the factual history...here's the timeline of 1969...hardly a mention, much less an action by the IRA. How many bombs by loyalists and killings of Catholics, not to mention beatings can you count?
https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/othelem/chron/ch69.htm

The battle of St Matthews one of the most popular ones because it was when the PIRA had even started attacking tand before there was a guerilla war, it was their first major action.

As the situation worsened, Catholic residents feared that the gathering crowds of loyalists would attempt to invade the Short Strand and burn them from their homes. Local IRA members retrieved weapons from arms dumps. A young resident, Jim Gibney, recalled: "I saw neighbours, people I knew, coming down the street carrying rifles. I was just dumbstruck by this experience. I'd never seen such a thing before".

British soldiers eventually arrived in armoured vehicles and cordoned off the roads around the Short Strand, which denied the IRA "any hope of reinforcement".
A small group of IRA members and members of the Citizens' Defence Committee took up positions in the church grounds and in adjoining streets. The IRA members were armed with M1 carbines successfully preventing the incursion of loyalist mobs and militants.

This action brought a great deal of support for armed conflict on one hand you had the peaceful SDLP who after the shooting began, Stormont MP Paddy Kennedy went with Short Strand residents to the local RUC base cried and demanded protection for their homes which never came, and on the other hand you had the IRA who risked their lives some of whom were killed trying to protect the local people, ask the families who were shaking and scared in their homes do they think the IRA men who died were terrorists I doubt they'll say they were.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_St_Matthew%27s

RandomViewer

timthumbni wrote: »

Sorry, I have no idea who Tommy Gorman is.

He spells it wrong, doesn't he
,they got him to do the voiceover on the report at 9 that the blond girl did at six

dwayneshintzy

smurgen wrote: »

Prudential one of the largest insurance and financial companies in the world set up a campus in Letterkenny in 2017. 1500 employees now. I'd say you don't know much about much if we're honest?

Prudential have been in Letterkenny for a lot longer than since 2017, when they moved to a bigger campus. They'd been at the top of Business Park Road before that, and have been in Letterkenny since 2000 (known as Pramerica).


Saw that lad who's arguing with you state that there are hardly any "locals" who work in Pramerica as well, which is nonsense.

FrancieBrady

Adam9213 wrote: »

The battle of St Matthews one of the most popular ones because it was when the PIRA had even started attacking tand before there was a guerilla war, it was their first major action.

As the situation worsened, Catholic residents feared that the gathering crowds of loyalists would attempt to invade the Short Strand and burn them from their homes. Local IRA members retrieved weapons from arms dumps. A young resident, Jim Gibney, recalled: "I saw neighbours, people I knew, coming down the street carrying rifles. I was just dumbstruck by this experience. I'd never seen such a thing before".

British soldiers eventually arrived in armoured vehicles and cordoned off the roads around the Short Strand, which denied the IRA "any hope of reinforcement".
A small group of IRA members and members of the Citizens' Defence Committee took up positions in the church grounds and in adjoining streets. The IRA members were armed with M1 carbines successfully preventing the incursion of loyalist mobs and militants.

This action brought a great deal of support for armed conflict on one hand you had the peaceful SDLP who after the shooting began, Stormont MP Paddy Kennedy went with Short Strand residents to the local RUC base cried and demanded protection for their homes which never came, and on the other hand you had the IRA who risked their lives some of whom were killed trying to protect the local people, ask the families who were shaking and scared in their homes do they think the IRA men who died were terrorists I doubt they'll say they were.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_St_Matthew%27s

Although partitionists and Unionists (actually to a lesser degree than partitionists) try desperately to do is portray a situation were the IRA had no support.
The fact of the matter is that they did.
The partitionist will say...but they didn't vote for SF, they voted for the SDLP. As has been shown earlier and several times on these boards the facts do not support this contention for a number of reasons.
The first being that SF simply didn't have the electoral machine to capture the vote...the actual voting records shows them growing through the period.

And secondly, they like the lazy idea that SF 'stole' the SDLP vote. This is the most desperate one. The truth is that increasingly, the SDLP were seen as ineffective, cozy and not representative. This wasn't helped by their fondness for comfy seats and titles and kicking balls down the road.

The truth is, the people saw who delivered for them, and voted accordingly.

Truthvader

Deleted User wrote: »

And what would yous propose,to do when entire streets of catholics being burnt out and noone to defend them??

Seriously come on big man....you wouldnt bother to defend your home or community and sit on side of road looking for a handout after being burnt out and several of your neighbours killed,would you.......its our country,nationlists shouldnt need put up with this



Be a cold day in hell before i weep over killing likes of billy wright or georgy seawright.....but ya....keep turning other cheek,maybe they mightnt shoot your family members in the face,when their gang calls to your house and leave yous not needing a closed coffin

This just sounds unstable.

Neither the Provos or the officials defended anyone. Shooting an unarmed farmer in front of his family because he is a protestant or leaving a bomb in a shop is not defending anyone. The truth is that the Catholic areas welcomed the British Army as the only force that was going to defend them. Sadly people like Gerry Adams manipulated the army presence to create a subhuman society and equally sadly the British Army got sucked into choosing sides. Actually you should talk to the squaddies who were on the ground. Many of them hated working with RUC or UDR who they rightly identified as causing problems but as Gerry Adams and his crew began to kill them attitudes hardened. Clearly Bloody Sunday was a disaster and perhaps if the Para's had been arrested and charged the situation could have been rescued. Ultimately the entire province became a playground for psychopaths and the likes of Adams and Paisley.

Truthvader

Deleted User wrote: »

The british army had clocked up over 100 killomgs before bloody sunday



How is linking up with loyalist paramilitaries to kill innocent catholics (like say 150 innocent outta 151 victims for one particular group of peacemakers as you like to call em)?



The brits were only ever there to protect their empire,by the mid 90s,they had their belly full of it

Only mad people think the Brits regard Northern Ireland as part of the "Empire". It is a piece of **** they can't get off their shoe

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

This just sounds unstable.

Neither the Provos or the officials defended anyone. Shooting an unarmed farmer in front of his family because he is a protestant or leaving a bomb in a shop is not defending anyone. The truth is that the Catholic areas welcomed the British Army as the only force that was going to defend them. Sadly people like Gerry Adams manipulated the army presence to create a subhuman society and equally sadly the British Army got sucked into choosing sides. Actually you should talk to the squaddies who were on the ground. Many of them hated working with RUC or UDR who they rightly identified as causing problems but as Gerry Adams and his crew began to kill them attitudes hardened. Clearly Bloody Sunday was a disaster and perhaps if the Para's had been arrested and charged the situation could have been rescued. Ultimately the entire province became a playground for psychopaths and the likes of Adams and Paisley.

Another little lie that partitionists love to promote - the they were all 'physchopaths' lie.
They cannot allow the fact that many of these men and women began to work for the peace and in democratic politics when an agreement was reached and became hugely popular figures in their community's...people whom we know were active service members of the IRA...people like Martin McGuinness (the 'good' RA man because we hate Adams ) and Bobby Storey who are honoured and celebrated by their communities and beyond.

Hard one for them to swallow.

Physchopaths cannot just stop in the way the IRA did.

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have been around Boards for a while and barring one or two posters I have never come across a more woefully or is it willfully biased interpreter of the the facts of history.
The BA was sent in by a Labour government to protect Catholic areas but within months had managed to turn that Catholic community against them as they began to shore up the sectarian state rather than take it on. That was the tagedy and the crime...had they taken on the Orange sectarian state as they were eventually forced to do, none of it would have happened.

Read the factual history...here's the timeline of 1969...hardly a mention, much less an action by the IRA. How many bombs by loyalists and killings of Catholics, not to mention beatings can you count?
https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/othelem/chron/ch69.htm

"The BA was sent in by a Labour government to protect Catholic areas"

Well thanks for that Francie. Finally we agree on something. Also agree on the attacks by Protestants on the Civil Rights marches and the history of beatings and burnings. And the failure of the Unionist State to protect Catholics and the general ****tiness of everything

Where we disagree is that you are taken in by the lie that the Provos protected anyone or provided anything but misery. It would have been fully understandable if the Provos had protected catholic areas but even if they wanted to they did not have the weapons at the beginning. Truth is that Gerry and every other closet sociopath took the opportunity to indulge their most base instincts in pursuit of power. Regardless of how unfair the state was it does not justify one murder of an unarmed man or one bomb in a random pub. As above the defence of an area under attack would have been acceptable but all the Provos managed was to gain control of their own little tribal empires after a miserable thirty years devoted to random thuggery

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Another little lie that partitionists love to promote - the they were all 'physchopaths' lie.
They cannot allow the fact that many of these men and women began to work for the peace and in democratic politics when an agreement was reached and became hugely popular figures in their community's...people whom we know were active service members of the IRA...people like Martin McGuinness (the 'good' RA man because we hate Adams ) and Bobby Storey who are honoured and celebrated by their communities and beyond.

Hard one for them to swallow.

Physchopaths cannot just stop in the way the IRA did.

To be clear I regard McGuiness and Storey as sociopathic criminals capable of inflicting any cruelty on any random person to promote themselves and whatever they wanted. I suspect Adams is a far more cunning and twisted individual and expect the truth about him will trickle out at some point

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

"The BA was sent in by a Labour government to protect Catholic areas"

Well thanks for that Francie. Finally we agree on something. Also agree on the attacks by Protestants on the Civil Rights marches and the history of beatings and burnings. And the failure of the Unionist State to protect Catholics and the general ****tiness of everything

Where we disagree is that you are taken in by the lie that the Provos protected anyone or provided anything but misery. It would have been fully understandable if the Provos had protected catholic areas but even if they wanted to they did not have the weapons at the beginning. Truth is that Gerry and every other closet sociopath took the opportunity to indulge their most base instincts in pursuit of power. Regardless of how unfair the state was it does not justify one murder of an unarmed man or one bomb in a random pub. As above the defence of an area under attack would have been acceptable but all the Provos managed was to gain control of their own little tribal empires after a miserable thirty years devoted to random thuggery

'Sociopaths' now? I guess it follows the path of somebody desperate to misrepresent the actual history.

Can you tell us exactly 'when' killing' and murder is 'justified'? Because if I look around me, 'killing' and even 'murder' on much grander scales is routinely 'justified' and even celebrated by the apparatus and states the people of the north were up against.

I'll tell you why they are 'justified' - because sometimes, sadly, attack is the best form of defence. Don't be so willfully naive to deny that that is exactly what always happens in these situations. Stop ignoring that the writing was on the wall...read the fecking history - the British government of the time KNEW exactly what would happen. Wilson went to tremendous lengths NOT to radicalise the communities north and south. He knew what would happen.
Sadly the Tories came to power and as we now know only too clearly, they just don't care. As Reginald Maulding chillingly said in the HOC at the time - there was an 'acceptable level of violence' for them.

'Sociopath's and psychopaths''? Sure...it's always the 'paddy' with people like yourself. Read the history.

Hamsterchops

Truthvader wrote: »

To be clear I regard McGuiness and Storey as sociopathic criminals capable of inflicting any cruelty on any random person to promote themselves and whatever they wanted. I suspect Adams is a far more cunning and twisted individual and expect the truth about him will trickle out at some point

In fairness McGuinness did (to a degree) redeem himself by taking the political path later in life....

Truthvader

Truthvader wrote: »

This just sounds unstable.

Its clearly not....what is unstable in it??

Its all entirely factual

Neither the Provos or the officials defended anyone. Shooting an unarmed farmer in front of his family because he is a protestant or leaving a bomb in a shop is not defending anyone. The truth is that the Catholic areas welcomed the British Army as the only force that was going to defend them. Sadly people like Gerry Adams manipulated the army presence to create a subhuman society and equally sadly the British Army got sucked into choosing sides. Actually you should talk to the squaddies who were on the ground. Many of them hated working with RUC or UDR who they rightly identified as causing problems but as Gerry Adams and his crew began to kill them attitudes hardened. Clearly Bloody Sunday was a disaster and perhaps if the Para's had been arrested and charged the situation could have been rescued. Ultimately the entire province became a playground for psychopaths and the likes of Adams and Paisley.

Blaming nationlists for bloody sunday and saying it was diaster is pure lie....it was a clumination of 6 months of mini massacres perpetuated by the brits to crush an uprising and teach nationlists to toe line



Il.ask again....since you appear to forget....how many streets of catholics were burnt out,when the ira got up.and running???


....they had noone else to defend em,only for the ira,their wouldnt be any nationlists lef in large tracts of the 6 counties

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Its clearly not....what is unstable in it??

Its all entirely factual



Blaming nationlists for bloody sunday and saying it was diaster is pure lie....it was a clumination of 6 months of mini massacres perpetuated by the brits to crush an uprising and teach nationlists to toe line



Il.ask again....since you appear to forget....how many streets of catholics were burnt out,when the ira got up.and running???


....they had noone else to defend em,only for the ira,their wouldnt be any nationlists lef in large tracts of the 6 counties

The very same people who will tell you about 'Unionists fears of a UI and what might happen them' have absolutely no empathy of understanding (willfully IMO) of what it felt like to be a Nationalists or even just a Catholic in those days.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The very same people who will tell you about 'Unionists fears of a UI and what might happen them' have absolutely no empathy of understanding (willfully IMO) of what it felt like to be a Nationalists or even just a Catholic in those days.

Even today....not one newspaper covered the enmass burning of our national flag or bonfires light at the enterence to short strand and scores of bottles/fireworks thrown at nationlist homes there


50 odd years after battle for st matthews and nationlists still put up with this

blanch152

Truthvader wrote: »

This just sounds unstable.

Neither the Provos or the officials defended anyone. Shooting an unarmed farmer in front of his family because he is a protestant or leaving a bomb in a shop is not defending anyone. The truth is that the Catholic areas welcomed the British Army as the only force that was going to defend them. Sadly people like Gerry Adams manipulated the army presence to create a subhuman society and equally sadly the British Army got sucked into choosing sides. Actually you should talk to the squaddies who were on the ground. Many of them hated working with RUC or UDR who they rightly identified as causing problems but as Gerry Adams and his crew began to kill them attitudes hardened. Clearly Bloody Sunday was a disaster and perhaps if the Para's had been arrested and charged the situation could have been rescued. Ultimately the entire province became a playground for psychopaths and the likes of Adams and Paisley.

The long-term effects of Adams' behaviour still linger.

West Belfast is possibly the most deprived area in North-West Europe (possibly the most depraved too) mainly due to the mafia-like grip which Sinn Fein and the IRA maintained over it for the last 50 years. In many ways, it is like mafia enclaves in southern Italy - miserable for the general population, but the few at the top of the criminal pile profiting from that misery, while the State is unable to gain much influence over the area to improve the peoples' lives. The lavish funeral of Bobby Storey is just one example of this wealth available to the few.

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Sociopaths' now? I guess it follows the path of somebody desperate to misrepresent the actual history.

Can you tell us exactly 'when' killing' and murder is 'justified'? Because if I look around me, 'killing' and even 'murder' on much grander scales is routinely 'justified' and even celebrated by the apparatus and states the people of the north were up against.

I'll tell you why they are 'justified' - because sometimes, sadly, attack is the best form of defence. Don't be so willfully naive to deny that that is exactly what always happens in these situations. Stop ignoring that the writing was on the wall...read the fecking history - the British government of the time KNEW exactly what would happen. Wilson went to tremendous lengths NOT to radicalise the communities north and south. He knew what would happen.
Sadly the Tories came to power and as we now know only too clearly, they just don't care. As Reginald Maulding chillingly said in the HOC at the time - there was an 'acceptable level of violence' for them.

'Sociopath's and psychopaths''? Sure...it's always the 'paddy' with people like yourself. Read the history.

Poor Francie, so invested in the false Sinn Fein narrative and determined to justify anything. I can only repeat random murder is not "defending" anyone, attacking innocent people is not OK. You don't seem to know this and have swallowed the big ball of **** whole so that in your head if something bad happens to you it is justifiable to murder or injure any passing man woman or child. Its just not Francie and if you don't get this no-one can help you

blanch152

Truthvader wrote: »

To be clear I regard McGuiness and Storey as sociopathic criminals capable of inflicting any cruelty on any random person to promote themselves and whatever they wanted. I suspect Adams is a far more cunning and twisted individual and expect the truth about him will trickle out at some point

Fully agree, Adams is the most chilling individual I have ever met. There is just something wrong about him.

Truthvader

Deleted User wrote: »

Its clearly not....what is unstable in it??

Its all entirely factual



Blaming nationlists for bloody sunday and saying it was diaster is pure lie....it was a clumination of 6 months of mini massacres perpetuated by the brits to crush an uprising and teach nationlists to toe line



Il.ask again....since you appear to forget....how many streets of catholics were burnt out,when the ira got up.and running???


....they had noone else to defend em,only for the ira,their wouldnt be any nationlists lef in large tracts of the 6 counties

In what parallel universe is anyone blaming Catholics for Blood Sunday???

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

Poor Francie, so invested in the false Sinn Fein narrative and determined to justify anything. I can only repeat random murder is not "defending" anyone, attacking innocent people is not OK. You don't seem to know this and have swallowed the big ball of **** whole so that in your head if something bad happens to you it is justifiable to murder or injure any passing man woman or child. Its just not Francie and if you don't get this no-one can help you

It isn't anybody's 'narrative'.

If there is another 'narrative', it is up to you to present it.

The sociopath / psychopath one doesn't stand up to a second of scrutiny because International Agreements are not known cures for such conditions. You cannot just switch such tendencies off.
I have already said that some criminal and indeed unstable elements attached themselves to the IRA and other groups but to a massively large degree the IRA ceased operations on orders. To such extent that all monitoring agencies have been satisfied.

We await your counter 'narrative'.

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It isn't anybody's 'narrative'.

If there is another 'narrative', it is up to you to present it.

The sociopath / psychopath one doesn't stand up to a second of scrutiny because International Agreements are not known cures for such conditions. You cannot just switch such tendencies off.
I have already said that some criminal and indeed unstable elements attached themselves to the IRA and other groups but to a massively large degree the IRA ceased operations on orders. To such extent that all monitoring agencies have been satisfied.

We await your counter 'narrative'.

You're beyond help Francie. The likes of Bobby Storey, swaggering about the place, Pearse McAuley, the killers of Paul Quinn, Joe Rafferty, Robert McCartney just couldn't stop themselves no matter what they were given. Plus all the local thugs still running their little empires in ****hole estates. As before all this crap about "defending" anything does not stand up against what they actually did unless of course in the twisted Sinn Fein mind the thousands of random bombings and murders were "regrettable" but part of a "war",

Not true Francie.

Why not take a break and pop down to the Guards and report all that criminality in your area?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It isn't anybody's 'narrative'.

If there is another 'narrative', it is up to you to present it.

The sociopath / psychopath one doesn't stand up to a second of scrutiny because International Agreements are not known cures for such conditions. You cannot just switch such tendencies off.
I have already said that some criminal and indeed unstable elements attached themselves to the IRA and other groups but to a massively large degree the IRA ceased operations on orders. To such extent that all monitoring agencies have been satisfied.

We await your counter 'narrative'.

Sorry, Francie, but giving any credit to the IRA for stopping its campaign is equivalent to praising a man who stopped beating his wife and divorced her leaving her with long-term disabilities and no money to pay for her care.