The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 3) Mod Notes and Threadbanned List in OP

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And we avoid the question...HOW did I know that would happen.

What I said about the earlier 'unequivocal' opinion, expressed a long time ago to YOU personally, which you decide to lie about:

That is a selective quote because you leave out the fact that there is a long postscript equivocating the killings of innocent people.
"Sorry, but not sorry"

Post the entire post, in full and linked.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

That is a selective quote because you leave out the fact that there is a long postscript equivocating the killings of innocent people.
"Sorry, but not sorry"

Post the entire post, in full and linked.

I did. A few posts ago. You asked a question, I answered it. Like anyone who looks at history I discussed what happened...it's causes and it's effects. I didn't condone any of it.

You lied Mark...own it.

Not man enough to withdraw the lie either.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I did. A few posts ago. You asked a question, I answered it. Like anyone who looks at history I discussed what happened...it's causes and it's effects. I didn't condone any of it.

You lied Mark...own it.

Not man enough to withdraw the lie either.

What post? Just Link it.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

What post? Just Link it.

I posted the link a few posts ago when I demolished your lie about me 'justifying the killing of children'.

I may be many things, but I have never stooped that low to try and win a debate.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I posted the link a few posts ago when I demolished your lie about me 'justifying the killing of children'.

I may be many things, but I have never stooped that low to try and win a debate.

When you had this preamble?

Did the bombing campaign bring results...nobody denies that...the timeline underlines the fact the British attitude changed and the GFA got signed. Is the GFA a help to nationalists...most certainly.

The end justifies the means.
Sorry, but not really sorry.

Equivocate away, it is your right I suppose, but don't get upset when people rightly call you out for justifying and defending the murder of children for 'the cause'.

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

Then why do SF TD's glorify these 'wrongs'?
Why do you justify the killings of innocent people, especially children?

"It was all wrong... BUT...."
There is always a but

"I am not racist.... BUT..."
That is the logic here.

You've never seen medals awarded to soldiers or remembrance day? Odd.
How many villages, towns, cities have armies carpet bombed?
Whats it, good killings because the ones doing it are recognised? Seems you're making excuses for the killers you like.

hatrickpatrick

markodaly wrote: »

Why do you justify the killings of innocent people, especially children?

What do you say to somebody who unequivocally condemns the killings of innocent people but absolutely does justify the killings of crown forces from the moment of the 1969 civil rights march up to the Good Friday Agreement, on the grounds that they were the aggressors in a conflict between an oppressed class and an oppressor class?

Your failure to acknowledge that there are a large contingent of SF supporters who fall into this category is frankly ridiculous. Those who condone the killing of innocent civilians are a minority. Those who condone the killing of crown forces and loyalist paramilitaries but unequivocally condemn the killing of innocent civilians are far greater in number.

Brendan Bendar

markodaly wrote: »

When you had this preamble?



The end justifies the means.
Sorry, but not really sorry.

Equivocate away, it is your right I suppose, but don't get upset when people rightly call you out for justifying and defending the murder of children for 'the cause'.

Beginning to crumble....... just sayin

stefanovich

blanch152 wrote: »

Go back to WW2, the Allied bombings were justified, and we were cowardly weasels for standing by and doing nothing.

I don’t think Hiroshima was justified. It has been argued that the bombing of Dresden was also unjustified.

grayzer75

markodaly wrote: »

Why do you justify the killings of innocent people, especially children?

The two parties who have run this country for decades facilitated the deaths of 9,000 children in mother and baby homes with their friends in the church so you can take your fake outrage elsewhere.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

When you had this preamble?



The end justifies the means.
Sorry, but not really sorry.

Equivocate away, it is your right I suppose, but don't get upset when people rightly call you out for justifying and defending the murder of children for 'the cause'.

Right...let's try it in other circumstances, again:

The carpet bombing of Dresden and Colonge killed thousands of men, women and children civilians but it did hasten the end of the war as it sapped the morale of Germany.

Is that sentence 'condoning' the deaths of those men, women and children?

This is fairly basic language in any historical discussion. You are using it to make scurrilous allegations and you are lying.

markodaly

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

What do you say to somebody who unequivocally condemns the killings of innocent people but absolutely does justify the killings of crown forces from the moment of the 1969 civil rights march up to the Good Friday Agreement, on the grounds that they were the aggressors in a conflict between an oppressed class and an oppressor class?

Id call that person a naive fool.

Let us be honest here. This was not about the civil rights of Catholics, sure, they want to sell today like that, but when all this kicked off in the late '60s and early 70's it was about the PIRA killing people solely to achieve a political aim, of a UI and to hell with any democratic mandate or the innocent people who died along the way.

"Compromise never achieved anything, compromise will never achieve anything..."
From the horse's mouth of Sean MacStiofan, Cheif of Staff of the PIRA, 1972

Your failure to acknowledge that there are a large contingent of SF supporters who fall into this category is frankly ridiculous. Those who condone the killing of innocent civilians are a minority. Those who condone the killing of crown forces and loyalist paramilitaries but unequivocally condemn the killing of innocent civilians are far greater in number.

Having your cake and eating it, I am afraid.
If SF came out and unequivocally apologised for all the hurt and mayhem the PIRA caused on this island then I may agree, but they don't. They is little or no remorse for the people murdered on this Island by the PIRA. None.

Just look at the abuse the likes of Austin Sack gets.
SF won't give out any information in regards many of the bombings that killed innocent people.
This being a good example.

If SF/PIRA really want to atone for their sins of killing innocent people, then why won't they hand over information to the relevant authorities about two bombs that killed 21 people?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-54573551

SF is basically a cult.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Right...let's try it in other circumstances, again:

The carpet bombing of Dresden and Colonge killed thousands of men, women and children civilians but it did hasten the end of the war as it sapped the morale of Germany.

Is that sentence 'condoning' the deaths of those men, women and children?

This is fairly basic language in any historical discussion. You are using it to make scurrilous allegations and you are lying.

We are not having a historical discussion though are we.
You are a die in the wool supporter of SF and the PIRA, therefore you have money in the game. Let us not be obtuse here.

One may as well be discussing the merits of WWII strategy, or how bad the Nazi's really were with a holocaust denier and Nazi sympathizer, not a fair debate nor one you can have in good faith...

You are free to condemn without question all the killings, especially innocent children, by the PIRA, without equvication.
Otherwise, my charge stands unquestioned and unchallenged.

McMurphy

stefanovich wrote: »

Associating yourself with former terrorists is not a good look.

Seems this post might be a bit of a pickle for you stef, here we can see FG, FF and Labour have absolutely zero problems associating with former terrorists, in fact this one was even plonked into the upper house.


Fine Gael



Labour



Even Michaél got in on the act.




Reversing beeper to sound in 3......2........1.........:D

stefanovich

markodaly wrote: »

Id call that person a naive fool.

Let us be honest here. This was not about the civil rights of Catholics, sure, they want to sell today like that, but when all this kicked off in the late '60s and early 70's it was about the PIRA killing people solely to achieve a political aim, of a UI and to hell with any democratic mandate or the innocent people who died along the way.

"Compromise never achieved anything, compromise will never achieve anything..."
From the horse's mouth of Sean MacStiofan, Cheif of Staff of the PIRA, 1972



Having your cake and eating it, I am afraid.
If SF came out and unequivocally apologised for all the hurt and mayhem the PIRA caused on this island then I may agree, but they don't. They is little or no remorse for the people murdered on this Island by the PIRA. None.

Just look at the abuse the likes of Austin Sack gets.
SF won't give out any information in regards many of the bombings that killed innocent people.
This being a good example.

If SF/PIRA really want to atone for their sins of killing innocent people, then why won't they hand over information to the relevant authorities about two bombs that killed 21 people?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-54573551

SF is basically a cult.

Hilarious, he sounds like an Irish Oswald Mosley.

stefanovich

McMurphy wrote: »

Seems this post might be a bit of a pickle for you stef, here we can see FG, FF and Labour have absolutely zero problems associating with former terrorists, in fact this one was even plonked into the upper house.


Fine Gael



Labour



Even Michaél got in on the act.




Reversing beeper to sound in 3......2........1.........:D

Just because I condemn the behaviour of Sinn Fein does not mean I like any of the other parties here.

Hang on a minute, wasn't she the woman abused by the PIRA?

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

Reversing beeper to sound in 3......2........1.........:D

Not sure about you, but to me, using a victim of sexual abuse to score some political points online is pretty sick to me, nevermind the fact she was groomed when very young.

Oh, here comes the 'Yea, but she was a member of the RNU for a bit' comeback but that, holds no water.

Yourself and others make great hay and yarns about the M&B homes scandal, yet will use an abuse victim to score some internet points in the same breath.

I think it shows us all your motivation here and the morals that back up your posting style. Everyone is fair game, even rape victims.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

We are not having a historical discussion though are we.
You are a die in the wool supporter of SF and the PIRA, therefore you have money in the game. Let us not be obtuse here.

One may as well be discussing the merits of WWII strategy, or how bad the Nazi's really were with a holocaust denier and Nazi sympathizer, not a fair debate nor one you can have in good faith...

You are free to condemn without question all the killings, especially innocent children, by the PIRA, without equvication.
Otherwise, my charge stands unquestioned and unchallenged.

Here it is, from over a year ago. You are LYING through your teeth about another poster. How much lower can you go?

FrancieBrady wrote:

The killing of anyone was abhorrent, the killing of innocent children despicable.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114209584&postcount=8675

BTW: The conflict/war is 'history' thankfully. If you ask a question about what achieved what then EXPECT to have that question answered in the same way a question about any historical war/conflict can be answered as demonstrated in the 'Dresden/Cologne' one.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here it is, from over a year ago. You are LYING through your teeth about another poster. How much lower can you go?

The thing is you posted a long equivocation of how the PIRA were justified in killing people in that post. Therefore your 'Oh it was bad' doesn't really hold water.
It the same with all your previous posts like that

"It was all wrong BUT..."
"Sorry, but not sorry..."

McMurphy

stefanovich wrote: »

Just because I condemn the behaviour of Sinn Fein does not mean I like any of the other parties here.

Not two shiny shytes could I give who you like, or dislike, I'm simply replying to your post, seems to me at least 4 of our political elite party's have zero issue using or associating with former terrorists, deal with it.

Knew that reversing beeper would be fired up, just knew it.

markodaly wrote: »

Not sure about you, but to me, using a victim of sexual abuse to score some political points online is pretty sick to me, nevermind the fact she was groomed when very young.
.

They didn't just use her to score points online mark, they went further, and endorsed her being made a senator, despite knowing full well she was a high ranking member of the same group responsible for the Omagh atrocity.

But sure they got to troll the Shinners with her for a while, that's what mattered.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

The thing is you posted a long equivocation of how the PIRA were justified in killing people in that post. Therefore your 'Oh it was bad' doesn't really hold water.
It the same with all your previous posts like that

"It was all wrong BUT..."
"Sorry, but not sorry..."

Where in that post do I say 'the IRA were 'justified' in killing people?

I'll quote it for you and others:

Desperate today Mark?

I didn't defend anything...you asked a question. I answered it.

Did the bombing campaign bring results...nobody denies that...the timeline underlines the fact the British attitude changed and the GFA got signed. Is the GFA a help to nationalists...most certainly.

Join the dots.
The killing of anyone was abhorrent, the killing of innocent children despicable.

stefanovich

Deleted User wrote: »

If there wasnt partition,the pira wouldnt been fighting


3 year olds,learn about cause and consequence

So 1916 was a bad idea then?

blanch152

markodaly wrote: »

Not sure about you, but to me, using a victim of sexual abuse to score some political points online is pretty sick to me, nevermind the fact she was groomed when very young.

Oh, here comes the 'Yea, but she was a member of the RNU for a bit' comeback but that, holds no water.

Yourself and others make great hay and yarns about the M&B homes scandal, yet will use an abuse victim to score some internet points in the same breath.

I think it shows us all your motivation here and the morals that back up your posting style. Everyone is fair game, even rape victims.

That poster does it all the time. It is vile and more than pretty sick.

Continuing the abuse of a victim in that way is the product of a very sick mind.

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

But sure they got to troll the Shinners with her for a while, that's what mattered.

No, you are using a female sexual abuse victim to score some internet points. Someone who was systemically abused and groomed by the PIRA elite.
Well done you, all I say. It tells us a lot, if we didn't know it already.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where in that post do I say 'the IRA were 'justified' in killing people?

I'll quote it for you and others:

Did the bombing campaign bring results...nobody denies that

The end justifies the means = equivocation of PIRA actions and bombs.

stefanovich

Deleted User wrote: »

Nah.....though the brits bombing the most densly populated slums in europe at the time,amounted to a war crime imo

Maybe the Acts of Union in 1800?

markodaly

blanch152 wrote: »

That poster does it all the time. It is vile and more than pretty sick.

Continuing the abuse of a victim in that way is the product of a very sick mind.

It is pretty degenerate and disgusting behaviour tbh but nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to the cult of SF and what they would do to protect their own image.

Maria Cahill is just one example of thousands.

McMurphy

markodaly wrote: »

No, you are using a female sexual abuse victim to score some internet points. Someone who was systemically abused and groomed by the PIRA elite.
Well done you, all I say. It tells us a lot, if we didn't know it already.

Someone needs to skull a pint of cop-on.

No I'm not, I'm pointing out how people, entire political parties actually will use people and drop them like a hot shot when they have no further use for them.

Mairia Cahill was a member of the same terrorist organisation responsible for the Omagh bombing - this is a fact, no one can deny it.

The same Maira Cahill was made a senator to our upper house, this is also a fact that no-one can deny.

Where is she now?

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

No I'm not,

Yes you are, that is why you brought her up in the first place, to get some virtual backslaps and points, for 'Showing us!'

By all means, keep using her, a victim of sexual assault, by the PIRA elite, as some trump card, but it just chips away at any lofty moral high ground you think you have. It is nauseating behaviour.

Where is she now?

Cahill was co-opted into an SDLP council seat in Lisburn and Castlereagh council in July 2018. She had to withdraw from the local election campaign in April 2019, due to a law requiring candidates to publish their home addresses. Cahill was unable to do so due to threats made against her. The British Government subsequently apologised.

Cahill, along with the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, sued the Secretary of State and the NIO, which resulted in a settlement in January 2021. As part of the court proceedings, the British Government gave a commitment to change the law and did so in June 2020. Candidates are no longer required to publish their home addresses when standing for election.

Still getting abuse for SF and their chums it seems.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

The end justifies the means = equivocation of PIRA actions and bombs.

So you are in fact saying that anyone who lays out the cause and the results of a military action...is justifying that action. A lot of people in the frame for justifying the Nazi's so.
How astoundingly ridiculous.