Sinn Fein cancels bomber commemoration

maccored

mynamejeff wrote: »

and at the end of "wars" those who commit war crimes should be punished , the murder if innocents and targeting of civilians is a war crime no ??

like the SAS killing civillians in Loughgall? What about bloody sunday? Like where do you want to start?

maccored

maccored wrote: »

then in that case, maybe you can answer my question:

is blanket bombing etc acceptable to you?

Its the same moral issue as that you are asking about.

maccored wrote: »

right - your turn

I see blanch 152 is thanking posts without reading them again

No? Declining to answer?

Scratchly

maccored wrote: »

like the SAS killing civillians in Loughgall? What about bloody sunday? Like where do you want to start?

According to your earlier post we shouldn't be criticising these things because conflict is rough, people die and we need to cop on and grow up. So why are you bringing these up now?

Again its speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Everyone else condemns and is critical of crimes committed by all sides. The only ones picking and choosing what to criticise and what to give a pass to are those defending the IRA.

This all started because SF were trying to commemorate a terrorist who brought a bomb onto a public bus as if he was some kind of hero.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

So you are not able to admit that perhaps the PIRA and their ilk went too far, in their indiscriminate tactics of planting bombs in public places, killing innocent people and then not victim-blame afterwards or whatabout away the causes.

Fair enough, but you could have simply said that.

Classic Blanch. Make up an alternate understanding and criticise it.

I suggest you read over my comment and others again. You've missed the point.
Yes the IRA/BA/UVF etc. went too far from time to time.

Seriously, try reading it again.

maccored

Scratchly wrote: »

According to your earlier post we shouldn't be criticising these things because conflict is rough, people die and we need to cop on and grow up. So why are you bringing these up now?

Again its speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Everyone else condemns and is critical of crimes committed by all sides. The only ones picking and choosing what to criticise and what to give a pass to are those defending the IRA.

This all started because SF were trying to commemorate a terrorist who brought a bomb onto a public bus as if he was some kind of hero.

thats exactly my point - I mention it because mynameisjeff doesnt seem to differentiate

You really are letting these things just whoosh over your head. I put those deaths down to the same issue as the ira deaths. You are the people saying theres a difference.

If you want to point fingers and be childish, it wouldnt have happened if the british government and loyalists treated them neighbours fairly.. they didnt and started a conflict in which innocents of all sides were killed.

Its you who asked if it was ok to do that - not me. Obviously its not OK, but as i say - thats what happens in a conflict. the BA have done it - all armies have. people - innocent and combatants ('guilty' is a point of view) die.

So I ask you AGAIN - is it ok for the british army to kill innocents? If it is then your question is moot. if it isnt then you are being contradictory. You cannot have it both ways.

mynamejeff

maccored wrote: »

like the SAS killing civillians in Loughgall? What about bloody sunday? Like where do you want to start?

aaaa I see your going with the 13 year old boys understanding of conflict.

the ra were glorious freedom fighters, young men pushed tot he edge and the brits were all rabid imperialist pigs out to steal rape and kill

it aid your understanding I believe that the war criminals from all sides should all be in the same prison instead of being free to poison young peoples attituded and minds

different thread same bots

maccored

mynamejeff wrote: »

aaaa I see your going with the 13 year old boys understanding of conflict.

the ra were glorious freedom fighters, young men pushed tot he edge and the brits were all rabid imperialist pigs out to steal rape and kill

it aid your understanding I believe that the war criminals from all sides should all be in the same prison instead of being free to poison young peoples attituded and minds

different thread same bots

what makes them different from the british army? are they (BA) allowed to kill innocent people because the government say so. I ask you the same I just asked your pal in the post above.

ps - learn what a bot is as you dont seem to know.

James Brown

mynamejeff wrote: »

poor auld CA, just full to the brim of shinnerbots peddling the same old lies ,
its ok to bomb indiscriminately if a war
its ok to kidnap and execute innocent people accused if informing ,
its ok to beat people to death in sheds because they stood up for them selfs ,
its ok to glorify some scumbag who blew himself up by accident,
peados and rapists are grand long as they are part of the republican family
criminality is ok as long as the party gets its cut

sf ira are closer to a organised crime gang than a political party and will remain so under current leadership and attitudes

The irony.
Thrown in the Quinn murder sure...
Mary Lou in the RA now?
I think FF/FG have the criminality game sown up. It's tough to look after your own from opposition.

James Brown

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

In a campaign of terrorism, such as that engaged in by SF, the distinction between combatants and civilians does not apply. There was no war. Every killing was simply an act by vicious thugs of unlawful murder. Those who engaged in such murder were the scum of mankind, and to be vilified for eternity.
On the topic of murders by grouping during the troubles, it can be useful to disregard the paramilitaries of both sides that died - it was a good thing, and the world is a better place with out each and all of them. In a sense, it was an improvement to the standard of humanity on the planet, as a by-product of the troubles.

What is? Calling out government housing policy?

If you don't think the troubles or conflict had no point, that speaks to either your bias or ignorance.

You know this thread engaged in bullying the family of a dead man wanting to commemorate their son and many here are complete hypocrites using dead people and their families to bully another family.

mynamejeff

James Brown wrote: »

The irony.
Thrown in the Quinn murder sure...
Mary Lou in the RA now?
I think FF/FG have the criminality game sown up. It's tough to look after your own from opposition.

so which of those acts did sfira not have involvement ?

maccored

mynamejeff wrote: »

so which of those acts did sfira not have involvement ?

theres nothing on that list the british army havent done in their time. though you are fine with that. Talk about two sides of the mouth!

Who's sfira when they're at home?

mynamejeff

James Brown wrote: »

If you don't think the troubles or conflict had a point, that speaks to either your bias or ignorance.

What is? Calling out government housing policy?
You know this thread engaged in bullying the family of a dead man wanting to commemorate their son and many here are complete hypocrites using dead people and their families to bully another family.

didn't the family want to distance themselves ?
how about the family of the innocent man blown up by this idiot

realistically it was yet again another ham fisted tone deaf attempt by another shinner politician showing why he is unsuitable to hold office

mynamejeff

maccored wrote: »

theres nothing on that list the british army havent done in their time. though you are fine with that. Talk about two sides of the mouth!

Who's sfira when they're at home?

So that's you answer ?? deflect and refuse to answer ?
already said punish the guilty , equally


like I said different thread same bots

maccored

theres some experts of hamfistedness on this thread. dont be giving out about politicians when you avoid more questions than any of them

mynamejeff

mynamejeff wrote: »

didn't the family want to distance themselves ?
how about the family of the innocent man blown up by this idiot

realistically it was yet again another ham fisted tone deaf attempt by another shinner politician showing why he is unsuitable to hold office

The commeration was organised by his family


Ffg and their supporters piled on sending abusive messages to the family,and it was called off....in place of introspection about behaviour of their support,ffg have decided someone,this is the fault of sinn fein,as they always do

maccored

mynamejeff wrote: »

So that's you answer ?? deflect and refuse to answer ?
already said punish the guilty , equally


like I said different thread same bots

its not deflection when its a related fact. run off now and avoid a few more questions there with your pal

maccored

Deleted User wrote: »

The commeration was organised by his family


Ffg and their supporters piled on sending abusive messages to the family,and it was called off....in place of introspection about behaviour of their support,ffg have decided someone,this is the fault of sinn fein,as they always do

they have an issue with facts

Scratchly

maccored wrote: »

thats exactly my point - I mention it because mynameisjeff doesnt seem to differentiate

You really are letting these things just whoosh over your head. I put those deaths down to the same issue as the ira deaths. You are the people saying theres a difference.

This is a thread about SF commemorating a terrorist involved in planting bombs in London. The thread is filled with IRA apologists and supports who claimed that planting bombs in civillian locations was OK necessary.

This wasn't plucked out of the air to have a go at the IRA and ignore the Brits. People actually support terrorists targeting civilians.

So no, it's not "us" picking and choosing. It's you and the others defending terrorists who targeted civillians. You know it's clearly wrong so all you can do is play the old Shinner routine of whataboutery.

If you want to point fingers and be childish, it wouldnt have happened if the british government and loyalists treated them neighbours fairly.. they didnt and started a conflict in which innocents of all sides were killed.

And here we are talking out of both sides of the mouth again. It's wrong but... The Brits started it. That's your argument and you are calling me childish?

Its you who asked if it was ok to do that - not me. Obviously its not OK, but as i say - thats what happens in a conflict. the BA have done it - all armies have. people - innocent and combatants ('guilty' is a point of view) die.

It's not OK... But... Something something war, something something brits.

Every time you say it's not OK you immediately try to justify it.

So I ask you AGAIN - is it ok for the british army to kill innocents? If it is then your question is moot. if it isnt then you are being contradictory. You cannot have it both ways.

Killing innocent people is abhorrent. No ifs or buts. It's not me trying to have it both ways here.

James Brown

mynamejeff wrote: »

didn't the family want to distance themselves ?
how about the family of the innocent man blown up by this idiot

realistically it was yet again another ham fisted tone deaf attempt by another shinner politician showing why he is unsuitable to hold office

The family created it, a shinner jumped on board, then at the families request stepped away.
I think you are thinking of something else.

Seems to me you don't know the details.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

The commeration was organised by his family


Ffg and their supporters piled on sending abusive messages to the family,and it was called off....in place of introspection about behaviour of their support,ffg have decided someone,this is the fault of sinn fein,as they always do

FF/FG have no shame. Complete hypocrites. Use families to attack SF pretending to care. Then bully a family trying to commemorate their dead son.

maccored

Scratchly wrote: »

This is a thread about SF commemorating a terrorist involved in planting bombs in London. The thread is filled with IRA apologists and supports who claimed that planting bombs in civillian locations was OK necessary.

This wasn't plucked out of the air to have a go at the IRA and ignore the Brits. People actually support terrorists targeting civilians.

So no, it's not "us" picking and choosing. It's you and the others defending terrorists who targeted civillians. You know it's clearly wrong so all you can do is play the old Shinner routine of whataboutery.



And here we are talking out of both sides of the mouth again. It's wrong but... The Brits started it. That's your argument and you are calling me childish?



It's not OK... But... Something something war, something something brits.

Every time you say it's not OK you immediately try to justify it.



Killing innocent people is abhorrent. No ifs or buts. It's not me trying to have it both ways here.

grand, so you agree the british army are as bad any anyone and that these things happen in war.

What the hell was the point of your question then?

Scratchly

maccored wrote: »

grand, so you agree the british army are as bad any anyone and that these things happen in war.

What the hell was the point of your question then?

To highlight the fact you were as the other poster claimed talking out of both sides of your mouth the same as every other IRA apologist on here.

Every single time you said it was wrong or unacceptable it was tagged with a... But... The Brits, the war, the anything other than having to criticise IRA terrorists targeting innocent people.

Why can't you just say that IRA terrorists targeting civilians was wrong? Why are you trying to justify it?

maccored

Scratchly wrote: »

To highlight the fact you were as the other poster claimed talking out of both sides of your mouth the same as every other IRA apologist on here.

Every single time you said it was wrong or unacceptable it was tagged with a... But... The Brits, the war, the anything other than having to criticise IRA terrorists targeting innocent people.

Why can't you just say that IRA terrorists targeting civilians was wrong? Why are you trying to justify it?

all deaths are wrong - Im not too sure though I could ever say the IRA purposely targeted civilians - but regardless, all deaths are wrong.

I dont understand why you are pointing that out when war causes death. Didnt you know that already? Why are you focussing on one particular side as if they created the concept? Give out about ALL deaths - not just the ones caused by the IRA ...that is if the concept of war and people dying is something you never realised before (hence my 'grow up' statement)

Did I miss where deaths were being glorified? (you know, like the SAS have done when they shot joyriders)

maccored

Deleted User wrote: »

How can people who give warnings,be regarded as targeting civilians?

Deosnt make sense to me anyway

the idea that warnings arent passed on by the security forces is a concept some cant get their heads around (no! they'd never do that!). Like, theres a lad on here who didnt realise people die in wars

Scratchly

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How can people who give warnings,be regarded as targeting civilians?

Deosnt make sense to me anyway

It's been explained to you multiple times. You're just a terrorist supporter. You back from hiding after your posts saying more terrorist attacks will be necessary if there's no border poll? Hoping everyone would have forgotten about it perhaps?

maccored

Scratchly wrote: »

It's been explained to you multiple times. You're just a terrorist supporter. You back from hiding after your posts saying more terrorist attacks will be necessary if there's no border poll? Hoping everyone would have forgotten about it perhaps?

so lets get this straight - you agree the british army are as much terrorists as anyone? A straight yes or no will do - havent the time to be running after you to get your answer.

Scratchly

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Except i didnt say this....i said,its likely to decend into violence in place of democracy being blocked,with numourous international examples of such


Arent you the guy,who made jokes about blowing up bus full of pensioners?

Stop lying now. Let's rehash what our little terrorist fan here has said in this thread:

In response to terrorist activity in London:
Its not a crime to fight for Ireland.
Someone had to stand up and be counted.
I won't criticise them for doing what was necessary.
They were fighting against occupation. The North is still occupied.

When asked given the North being occupied is justification for terrorist attacks and the North is still occupied do you support renewed terrorist attacks he replied: A border poll will make more attacks unnecessary.

Imagine not only supporting terrorist attacks that involved the deaths of innocent people. But thinking it would be necessary to start again if there's no border poll.

maccored

Scratchly wrote:

It's been explained to you multiple times. You're just a terrorist supporter.

maccored wrote: »

so lets get this straight - you agree the british army are as much terrorists as anyone? A straight yes or no will do - havent the time to be running after you to get your answer.

?

mynamejeff

maccored wrote: »

so lets get this straight - you agree the british army are as much terrorists as anyone? A straight yes or no will do - havent the time to be running after you to get your answer.

talk about single "minded"

do you agree that blowing up pubs and shopping streets regardless of who might be in them is terrorism ?

for some one who spends all day every day on here you seem to have loads of time :rolleyes:

mynamejeff

mynamejeff wrote: »

do you agree that blowing up pubs and shopping streets regardless of who might be in them is terrorism ?

Should drew harris resign then??

Given his work in covering up for the glennane gang,who done dublin/monahan bombing along with numourous others in the 26 counties