Does SF/IRA actually want a conclusion to the peace process?

Cork

Mitchel McLaughlin and Arthur Morgan did not even see the murder of Jean McConville was not a crime

IF there are specific complaints to be made aganist the Gardai then they should be made thru the appropriate channels.

This discussion forum is not the place to discuss unsubstanciated allegations.

I may be the pot calling the kettle black but this forum is:
[

SIZE=3]Does SF/IRA actually want a conclusion to the peace process? [/SIZE]

mycroft

SIZE=3]Does SF/IRA actually want a conclusion to the peace process? [/SIZE]

I think there is relevance in this side issues, FTA and his cohorts, have long wandered around making spurious accusations. If there is a campaign (and thank's to FTA's resounding rebuttal thats one big bloody "IF") then it would suggest that this country's state has a long way to go itself before we have a true conclusion to the peace process.

We wait with baited breath for him to get back to us....

freedom's jcb

They will not however, decommision in the context of Unionist triuphalism and more importantly, no discernable guarantee that progree will continue regardless in future ie no suspensions every twon months.

decommissioning is a humiliation regardless of photo's and that will never change because why would they think that its only a humiliation if the loyalist and brits have photos, and why should the army allow any more concessions that splits republicanism any further and allows adams and mc guinness to take the republican movement down the road of containment, which is what is happening and all the anti republicans in this forum and across ireland and britain know this and laugh at claims that sinn fein will bring the united ireland by accepting a 6 county assembly and destroying the ira while the british are STILL here.

Besides, the IRA were prepared to put all arms beyond use recently.

I would think that it would be a dangerous presumption to think that ALL the pira army council agree with decommissioning, let alone the grass roots volunteers especially in rural areas who havent had their say ,and also where the adam's and mcguinness policy of defeat hasnt filtered in like it has in belfast,i havent met any republican who agree's with decommissioning, thats for sure.
The problem sinn fein have apart from all the lies,concessions,sell out's,expulsions,blatant hypocrisy and all the other crimes against republicanism and the republican commuinity is they sometimes confuse support for the ira as support for them ,and they assume that the republican commuinity have no support for the ira anymore and also after the years and years of supporting the ira,who engaged the british army in a war to remove the british from our land that the republican commuinity would suddenly decide to support decommissioning,the destruction of the ira while the british forces remain,and to betray the memories of the ira's volunteers who have died and been sold out by gerry and co.
it wont be allowed to happen because sinn feins policy will be found out hopefully soon before more damage to republicanism occurs.
The british army say they are here to protect the people from the ira ,if that is the case what justification have they to be in south armagh? And wouldnt it be more practical for the british goverment to withdraw the troops completely in such area's to show that they are willing to make "acts of completion" to aid the "peace process"? than to demand ira surrender to please unionism which is completely unacceptable.

Cork

freedom's jcb wrote:

decommissioning is a humiliation regardless of photo's and that will never change because why would they think that its only a humiliation if the loyalist and brits have photos, and why should the army allow any more concessions that splits republicanism any further and allows adams and mc guinness to take the republican movement down the road of containment, which is what is happening and all the anti republicans in this forum and across ireland and britain know this and laugh at claims that sinn fein will bring the united ireland by accepting a 6 county assembly and destroying the ira while the british are STILL here.
.

SF / IRA both signed up to the concent clause of the good Friday Agreement.


What is a posting like this doing in a politics forum?

What has an armed republican movement to do with democratic politics?

There is only one army in this country and it is not the IRA.

I am a democrat and I accept the democratic institutions of this state. Decision time is coming for the so called republican movement.

billy the squid

decommissioning is a humiliation regardless of photo's and that will never change because why would they think that its only a humiliation if the loyalist and brits have photos,

what makes you think that. the photos would be produced to the de chastelaine committtee and then released to everyone. how is proving to the rest of the world that the IRA is taking the moral high ground a "humilliation." I believe that it would do the opposite for the IRA.

and why should the army allow any more concessions that splits republicanism any further and allows adams and mc guinness to take the republican movement down the road of containment,

what army, and what makes you think that the governments of today both Irish and brittish, plan on containing the catholic population in the north of Ireland.

which is what is happening and all the anti republicans in this forum and across ireland and britain know this and laugh at claims that sinn fein will bring the united ireland by accepting a 6 county assembly and destroying the ira while the british are STILL here.

I would be dead set against people terrorising other people. I would not consider myself anti-republican. I would rather that if a united ireland were to come about, that it should do so through democratic means rather than the ever present threat of violence constantly in the background, and the criminal element in both sides both nationalist and unionist making them selves a tidy little sum from their smuggling and their protection rackets.

Oh and we accomplished an independent republic of Ireland in 1949 through dialogue and negotiation. the likes of the IRA should take a lesson from what happened back in the 1920s when the treaty was accepted in the then "free state" even though those involved did not get everything that they wanted.

It took nearly 27 years for the republic of ireland to cede from the brittish commonwealth after an agreement was reached between the irish and brittish in 1921.

How can the likes of the IRA expect people to sit down and talk to their representatives when they are carrying out acts of violence and crime.

.

would think that it would be a dangerous presumption to think that ALL the pira army council agree with decommissioning, let alone the grass roots volunteers especially in rural areas who havent had their say ,and also where the adam's and mcguinness policy of defeat hasnt filtered in like it has in belfast,i havent met any republican who agree's with decommissioning, thats for sure.

Just because someone is in favour of decommissioning does not mean that they are anti-republican.

I find it hard to believe in this day and age of internet message boards like this one, mass media etc that people in rural areas cannot make their voices heard. your making your voice heard right now.

The problem sinn fein have apart from all the lies,concessions,sell out's,expulsions,blatant hypocrisy and all the other crimes against republicanism and the republican commuinity is they sometimes confuse support for the ira as support for them

the difference between sinn fein and the IRA is the same as the difference between salt and vinegar crisps and smokey bacon crisps. they are both the same thing, just different flavours. if you support one, you support the otherin my opinion.

and they assume that the republican commuinity have no support for the ira anymore and also after the years and years of supporting the ira,who engaged the british army in a war to remove the british from our land that the republican commuinity would suddenly decide to support decommissioning,the destruction of the ira while the british forces remain

the brittish army remain in northern ireland because of the likes of the IRA and the unionist terrorist groups. if it was not for these groups of thugs, criminals and vandals, the brittish army would have left years ago. do you really think that the british government likes cutting back on the likes of health care and education in order to pay for the stationing of soldiers in northern ireland.

there is a nationalist movement in scotland but you dont see them living in the same conditions as they do in the north of ireland, why, because the nationalists in scotland formed a peaceful political party and ran for elections and act in a more civilized manner than the likes of the IRA.

The british army say they are here to protect the people from the ira ,if that is the case what justification have they to be in south armagh? And wouldnt it be more practical for the british goverment to withdraw the troops completely in such area's to show that they are willing to make "acts of completion" to aid the "peace process"? than to demand ira surrender to please unionism which is completely unacceptable.

who would protect the catholic community then, the IRA? yeah right.

FTA69

mycroft wrote:

So you've claimed that there is a systematic campaign by the Gardai in Free West Waterford, againist, legitmate, law abiding, members of SF

No I didn't, I said that many incidents of harrasment and assault have taken place in recent times, mostly connected with a few certain individuals in the party. A "systematic campaign" would include blanket persecution of party members which is not the case as they concentrate their efforts on some people while others are left alone.

When asked to present proof of this allegations you presented a tissue of irrelevant outdated nonsense.

I never claimed they were specifically relevant to Waterford, I was demonstrating that such behaviour is not unusual across the country. As I said, I have no evidence on a subject that is very hard to prove in the first place.

No you haven't you've not given a single specific example of the campaign you've mentioned. A campaign which you previously claimed to be a victim of
you've completely failed to demostrate in any way shape or form that such a campaign exists.

I have outlined examples of the sort of behaviour, despite your protestations I have no intention of naming individuals or specific occurences on the internet.

You've failed to provide one single link from one single sinn fein member condemning police behaviour, not the individual, but how about their elected representive. Are you trying to tell me you couldn't find a single statement by a single SF CC,or TD condemning such a campaign. Anything????

Sinn Féin in the north and south have made statements regarding this treatment many times, but honestly I have not found any press releases on google myself. That however, does not equate with them not having been made.

Are you trying to tell me that not one single Sinn Fein TD, County Councillor, or MEP would not leap at the chance to condemn intimidation of one of their constituents, one of their party members, on the recieving end of some intimidation by paid members of the state possibly working on orders from high up.

It is not as straight forward as you might think, when such a topic is raised the first thing people think is "IRA man, probably deserved it", it is not necessarily the potential publicity coup you make it out to be.

No every repubilcan, to a man, shuts their lips.

Complaints against assualts to the police have been made but the police have the happy knack of charging people "with attacking a Garda", most do indeed suffer in silence to be honest.

Is this an actual example of something that actually happened or are you just making more sh*t up?

My house was never raided thankfully, I know many people whose houses have though.

No you've claimed that there is a systematic campaign of intimidation

No I haven't.

When asked to present a single shred of co-oberating evidence, you present a host of outdated and irrelevant links, and then announce, that miraclously, every single soldarity Sinn Fein member who's been victimised doesn't want come forward and is quietly suffering in silence, depsite the fact, that massive political capital could be gained from highlighting this injustice, and that the campaign is illegal. And all this at a time when Sinn Fein political stock is rising (until the last few weeks) and credibitilty of the Gardai is in tatters.

I outlined the reasons for this above.

No. I'm pretty sure you're a liar. Actually I'm postive. LIAR.

At the end of the day mycroft you are entitled to your opinion.

FTA69

oscarBravo wrote:

It's forceful alright. The question is whether it constitutes an occupation.

The dictionary defines occupation as "the holding of a district by force" so yes it is an occupation.

So, are Unionist areas of Northern Ireland occupied by the British Army?

In a specifically military sense no it doesn't as they support said army (most of the time). In a political sense I would argue that the general British prescence in Ireland is maintained by the force of the British Army so any precence at all is an occupation.

Nope. But does it make it an occupation?

In my opinion yes it does, it is a domestic occupation.

Is "Free West Waterford" occupied by "Free State" forces?

You are putting words in my mouth now, there is a big differences between an army that routinely killed innocent people and engaged in naked military repression and the Free State Army who occasionally drives around escorting bank vans. No, it is not an occupation.

...and Alaska is an integral part of Canada, is it? What makes this island, uniquely in the world, politically indivisible?

An innacurate analogy there considering Ireland has a long history of being a cultural and national unit, up until about 1607, then we had cultural diversity but nevertheless on a uniquely Irish basis. Unioinism's greatest figurehead Edward Carson was from Dublin.

No, we were part of the United Kingdom then.

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but the facts were that a foreign country held this country down with naked military force. That to me (and to everyone else at the time) constitutes an occupation.

You believe in national self-determination when it suits you. If the majority in Northern Ireland wanted it to be an independent country, would you acknowledge their right to self-determination?

The Six County state is simply an aberhattion, it has no national or cultural history. It came into existence in 1920 against the wishes of the Irish people, it is hardly a country in its own right, rather an integral part of a larger entity, Ireland.

How often are cases brought? They shouldn't be hard to prove.

Rarely to be honest, the idea has been discussed often though. To be honest I'm not 100% up on this incitement business so I won't try and bluff. It doesn't change the fact that these marches have no right to take place in Nationalist areas though.

All of them? There's not one police officer in the PSNI that would be sympathetic to the nationalist cause?

It is an absolute contradiction in terms, there are of course some people within that organisation which are politically unconcerned and from a Nationalist background ie Mark Durkan's father. However, the force is 90% Protestant and 100% Unionist in its ethos.

Isn't there a rather effective police ombudsman to whom complaints about such behaviour could be made?

Effective?

And by contrast, Sinn Féin are on record as condemning atrocities by Republicans... how often? SF are in something of a glass house when it comes to throwing "condemnation" rocks.

Sinn Féin has often condemened certain IRA actions, they do not condemn the war that was fought though.

You were asked the question before (and didn't answer) - how many PSNI police officers must be fired to satisfy Sinn Féin? All of them? What are your criteria for a satisfactory police force? If SF want police reform, why are they not represented on the Policing Board?

A fair question, obviously the rank and file would have to be largely retained, a cull of certain senior officers would be a necessity considering most of them had some sort of hand in collusion with Loyalist death squads. Our criteria for a police force is that the Branch must be abolished in its current form and more power must be given to policing board. It is all about placing the police in the hands of the people as opposed to the state. We do not join the policing board because reform cannot be achieved from within that mechanism, only the British Government have that power and it is up to them to deliver the reform.

It's interesting to hear Northern policing described as "unaccountable" when it's usually held up as a model for how accountability should be set up in the Republic.

Similar reform needs to take place in the Gardaí as well.

He also claimed to have been arrested for membership of Sinn Féin. I called him out on this, but he never responded.

I was never charged with anything, least of all "membership of Sinn Féin", I never claimed that that was an offense. I claimed that being a Republican is usually reason enough.

oscarBravo

FTA69 wrote:

The dictionary defines occupation as "the holding of a district by force" so yes it is an occupation.

I've already posted my dictionary's definition, but here it is again: "Invasion, conquest, and control of a nation or territory by foreign armed forces."

FTA69 wrote:

You are putting words in my mouth now, there is a big differences between an army that routinely killed innocent people and engaged in naked military repression and the Free State Army who occasionally drives around escorting bank vans. No, it is not an occupation.

There's no such thing as the Free State Army; it's a figment of your rather vivid imagination. As for putting words in your mouth, I quoted the location specified in your user profile, and your oft-repeated misnomer for the republic we both live in.

FTA69 wrote:

An innacurate analogy there considering Ireland has a long history of being a cultural and national unit, up until about 1607, then we had cultural diversity but nevertheless on a uniquely Irish basis. Unioinism's greatest figurehead Edward Carson was from Dublin.

And Sinn Féin's founder Arthur Griffith's goal was a dual monarchy, with the King crowned in Dublin as well as London. Stuff changes, and in a much shorter timespan than four hundred years. Get with the program. Move on.

FTA69 wrote:

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but the facts were that a foreign country held this country down with naked military force. That to me (and to everyone else at the time) constitutes an occupation.

You have a nerve, frankly, describing my posts as opinion and your propaganda as facts. The fact is that almost every man, woman and child on this island considered themselves a subject of the United Kingdom at the start of the 20th century, and Ireland was recognised internationally as such. In fact, as I've indicated above, Sinn Féin's goal was a Free State with fealty to the British monarch. Your revisionism doesn't change the facts.

FTA69 wrote:

The Six County state is simply an aberhattion, it has no national or cultural history. It came into existence in 1920 against the wishes of the Irish people, it is hardly a country in its own right, rather an integral part of a larger entity, Ireland.

Are Alsace and Lorraine an integral part of France or Germany? Explain your answer.

FTA69 wrote:

It is an absolute contradiction in terms, there are of course some people within that organisation which are politically unconcerned and from a Nationalist background ie Mark Durkan's father.

Did you notice that you just contradicted yourself?

FTA69 wrote:

However, the force is 90% Protestant and 100% Unionist in its ethos.

Point me to an authoritative declaration of the PSNI's Unionist ethos, please. I can't find one on their website.

FTA69 wrote:

Effective?

That's what I said.

FTA69 wrote:

Sinn Féin has often condemened certain IRA actions, they do not condemn the war that was fought though.

They won't even condemn the murder of a mother. I'm not familiar with SF condemnation of IRA actions, can you point me to some examples?

FTA69 wrote:

A fair question, obviously the rank and file would have to be largely retained...

...but they're 90% Protestant and 100% Unionist in ethos, aren't they?

FTA69 wrote:

...a cull of certain senior officers would be a necessity considering most of them had some sort of hand in collusion with Loyalist death squads.

Which ones? Do Sinn Féin have a list of officers that have to go? If not, how will you decide? Do the Unionists get a say?

FTA69 wrote:

Our criteria for a police force is that the Branch must be abolished in its current form and more power must be given to policing board. It is all about placing the police in the hands of the people as opposed to the state. We do not join the policing board because reform cannot be achieved from within that mechanism, only the British Government have that power and it is up to them to deliver the reform.

There's nothing substantive in that answer. It reads like a political soundbite. Why, specifically, can't the police be reformed as it stands? What specific form should the Branch take? What specific powers should the policing board get?

I do find the answer deeply ironic: you go on and on about how the "Brits" have no right to be in "this country", and then declare that only the British government have the power to deliver what you are looking for.

FTA69 wrote:

Similar reform needs to take place in the Gardaí as well.

Similar in what way? Do they have a 100% Unionist ethos as well?

FTA69 wrote:

I was never charged with anything, least of all "membership of Sinn Féin", I never claimed that that was an offense. I claimed that being a Republican is usually reason enough.

Maybe I misunderstood, but you specifically said "I was arrested because I was a member of a legitimate, represented political party". Care to elaborate?

FTA69

oscarBravo wrote:

I've already posted my dictionary's definition, but here it is again: "Invasion, conquest, and control of a nation or territory by foreign armed forces."

I've also posted mine, I (and most other people) regard Britain as a foreign entity oscar, and yes, before you raise it again I acknowledge that the Six Counties come under the remit of the UK. What I don't acknowledge though, is that somehow constitutes an alteration in a long held nationality. By your logic people could only call themselves "Irish" post 1922, and even then only people in the 26 County.

There's no such thing as the Free State Army; it's a figment of your rather vivid imagination. As for putting words in your mouth, I quoted the location specified in your user profile, and your oft-repeated misnomer for the republic we both live in.

Well I don't regard them as the Army of the Irish Republic which had its first outing in 1916, I'd call them the "army of the 26 county state" but that would take longer to type. Besides, I hope my response answered your intial query as to if I consider Waterford to be occupied.

And Sinn Féin's founder Arthur Griffith's goal was a dual monarchy, with the King crowned in Dublin as well as London. Stuff changes, and in a much shorter timespan than four hundred years. Get with the program. Move on.

I am simply outlining the fact that Unionism was not unique to the Six Counties and that Unionism alone is not grounds for Six County independence.

You have a nerve, frankly, describing my posts as opinion and your propaganda as facts. The fact is that almost every man, woman and child on this island considered themselves a subject of the United Kingdom at the start of the 20th century, and Ireland was recognised internationally as such. In fact, as I've indicated above, Sinn Féin's goal was a Free State with fealty to the British monarch. Your revisionism doesn't change the facts.

Yep, but some stuff happened between 1901 and 1922 oscar, mainly the foundation of the Dáil and the War of Independence. Also, "every single person" did not see themselves as happly little Britons, the IRB had a very substantial following in the country albeit they were poorly organised and lacked direction. I also acknowledged the fact that Ireland was seen internationally as being just another part of the UK, this did not change Ireland's desire for independence or the fact that it was a national unit though. Sinn Féin also adopted Republicanism in 1917, I fail to see the point of your mentioning of 1905.

Are Alsace and Lorraine an integral part of France or Germany? Explain your answer.

I don't know oscar, I know little of the history of the region. I happen to know a little about Ireland though.

Did you notice that you just contradicted yourself?

No I didn't, I said he was from a Nationalist "background", I'm from a Fianna Fáil/ Fine Gael background, it doesn't make me either of the above though.

Point me to an authoritative declaration of the PSNI's Unionist ethos, please. I can't find one on their website.

They are there to maintain the structures of the state, a state which had an exclusively unionist ethos, the police obviously did not evolve along with the conditions surrounding it.

They won't even condemn the murder of a mother. I'm not familiar with SF condemnation of IRA actions, can you point me to some examples?

Mitchell McLaughlin said it was "wrong", Adams also once remarked that the "IRA needed to get their house in order".

...but they're 90% Protestant and 100% Unionist in ethos, aren't they?

Yes, but that ethos can be contained and eventually retirement and recruitment will change that statistic. It is removing the influence over these men by those who have directed such things as collusion which is a priority.

Which ones? Do Sinn Féin have a list of officers that have to go? If not, how will you decide? Do the Unionists get a say?

I would assume that as many as possible would be pensioned off.

There's nothing substantive in that answer. It reads like a political soundbite. Why, specifically, can't the police be reformed as it stands? What specific form should the Branch take? What specific powers should the policing board get?

Because the policing board has no power over the mechanisms which are used to implement reform. Only the British government has that power. If the Branch is directly answerable to the policing board any potential repeat of past accusations will be contained.

I do find the answer deeply ironic: you go on and on about how the "Brits" have no right to be in "this country", and then declare that only the British government have the power to deliver what you are looking for.

I have my own opinions but I also recognise that my party has signed up to an Agreement in which we and others have certain commitments. The fact remains policing reform is in the hands of the British Government and not in those of the Policing Board as the Stoop Down Low Party would have us believe.

Similar in what way? Do they have a 100% Unionist ethos as well?

They have a 100% anti-Republican ethos.

Maybe I misunderstood, but you specifically said "I was arrested because I was a member of a legitimate, represented political party". Care to elaborate?

No problem, I should have phrased my statement better, I meant that the police have no qualms about arresting Republicans in general and that Sinn Féin members (as the most visible) are usually the ones to recieve this treatment.

jbkenn

FTA69 wrote:

Free State Army who occasionally drives around escorting bank vans.

The reason the Army "occasionally drives around" is they are on ATCP duty, following a robbery of £432,984 from a security van near Newcastle West in County Limerick on 7 June 1978, where the lives of unarmed Gardai were threatened, to force the staff of the security van to hand over the cash.
Following this "wrong" the Government decided that all cash escorts be accompanied by armed troops, acting in aid to the civil power.

This robbery while committed with military precision and planning, was not carried by the PIRA, or any other armed group connected to, or known by Sinn Fein, and is widely believed by locals, to have been carried out by leprechauns who had lost their crock of gold

Here we go again, from www.military.ie

to aid the civil power (meaning in practice to assist, when requested, the Garda Síochána, who have primary responsibility for law and order, including the protection of the internal security of the State);

jbkenn

sceptre

FTA69 wrote:

the Free State Army who occasionally drives around escorting bank vans.

Yet again you don't appear to know the name of the country you live in...

true

FTA wrote : " I don't know oscar, I know little of the history of the region. I happen to know a little about Ireland though. "

LOL. From what I have read, I can safely say that our friend FTA from "Free West Waterford" knows very little true information about Ireland all right, but a lot about Ireland that seems to have been learnt from IRA propoganda sources. A little knowledge is indeed , literally, a dangerous thing.
As a person from south of the border, but who has many friends from both communities in the North, I can safely say FTA is pretty well incorrect on everything he speaks about with so much conviction. It is quite amazing. So much so I think it has to be a wind up. He cannot seriously believe all of the tens of thousands of orangemen are rioting drunkards , or that all of the RUC were / are bad people? He cannot seriously believe all of the IRA bombings were justified ? That all of the IRA murders were justified ?

mycroft

FTA69 wrote:

No I didn't, I said that many incidents of harrasment and assault have taken place in recent times, mostly connected with a few certain individuals in the party. A "systematic campaign" would include blanket persecution of party members which is not the case as they concentrate their efforts on some people while others are left alone.

You've stated that phone bugging, assaults, intimidation, assault on property, threats, and threats againist family members. And you don't call that a systematic premediated campaign

I never claimed they were specifically relevant to Waterford, I was demonstrating that such behaviour is not unusual across the country. As I said, I have no evidence on a subject that is very hard to prove in the first place.

Really but you feel free to spout allegations.

See it's funny, Mary Lou McDonald was on telly last night demanding that the government present proof, or cease making allegations about Sinn Fein.

Now here you are, making allegations about the state which you claim is happening but is hard to prove.

The wonderful thing is you won't see this as staggeringly hyprocritical behaviour on your part.

I have outlined examples of the sort of behaviour, despite your protestations I have no intention of naming individuals or specific occurences on the internet.

No you've named specific individuals, however those individuals appear to be related to assaults from around 96 and earlier. You just can't find any evidence.

Sinn Féin in the north and south have made statements regarding this treatment many times, but honestly I have not found any press releases on google myself. That however, does not equate with them not having been made.

I'm sure they said it, I just can't find it, need a hand picking up the straws you're clutching at?

Complaints against assualts to the police have been made but the police have the happy knack of charging people "with attacking a Garda", most do indeed suffer in silence to be honest.

I'm fare more intimidately aware with this kind of behaviour among the garda. However you're talking about a sustained campaign of, illegal wire tapping, assault property damage, not some drunken idiot done for lewd behaviour and finding an assault charge againist pegged onto the charge sheet, because he complained he was roughed up.

You've implied that the best trained police force in this state is engaged in a violent campaign of harassment of some and you can't find a shred of evidence to support this.


My house was never raided thankfully, I know many people whose houses have though.

When asked to present a single shred of co-oberating evidence, you present a host of outdated and irrelevant links, and then announce, that miraclously, every single soldarity Sinn Fein member who's been victimised doesn't want come forward and is quietly suffering in silence, depsite the fact, that massive political capital could be gained from highlighting this injustice, and that the campaign is illegal. And all this at a time when Sinn Fein political stock is rising (until the last few weeks) and credibitilty of the Gardai is in tatters.

And lets look at what you provided again shall we. Some snide inneudo, when called on it, you presented a host of irrelevant and outdated links, which where dismissed, and finally thrown togethe a hog pog of "I can't name names" "It's hard to prove", "heres an irevelant piece of gardai dirt"

You've made the allegation. If you can't support it retract it. Otherwise You're a contemptable liar, and your words and opinion cannot be trusted and are therefore an irrelevance to the rest of the community, and I'd urge other members to ignore you, and lies you spout.
At the end of the day mycroft you are entitled to your opinion.[/QUOTE]

oscarBravo

FTA69 wrote:

By your logic people could only call themselves "Irish" post 1922, and even then only people in the 26 County.

You're not following my logic very well. People who live in Wales call themselves "Welsh". That doesn't mean they're not in the United Kingdom.

FTA69 wrote:

Well I don't regard them as the Army of the Irish Republic which had its first outing in 1916, I'd call them the "army of the 26 county state" but that would take longer to type.

Their status is not affected in the slightest by how you regard them; they remain the only legitimate army in Ireland. How many members of the "Army of the Irish Republic" that you do recognise have taken part in UN peacekeeping missions?

FTA69 wrote:

No I didn't, I said he was from a Nationalist "background", I'm from a Fianna Fáil/ Fine Gael background, it doesn't make me either of the above though.

Does he have a 100% Unionist ethos?

FTA69 wrote:

They are there to maintain the structures of the state, a state which had an exclusively unionist ethos, the police obviously did not evolve along with the conditions surrounding it.

I note with interest your use of the past tense: "...had an exclusively unionist ethos".

The word "obviously" doesn't tell me anything here. It's not obvious to me; quite the contrary in fact. You have singularly failed to show any evidence that the PSNI have the Unionist ethos you accuse them of.

FTA69 wrote:

Mitchell McLaughlin said it was "wrong", Adams also once remarked that the "IRA needed to get their house in order".

Harsh words indeed.

(May contain traces of irony.)

FTA69 wrote:

I would assume that as many as possible would be pensioned off.

How will they be replaced? Promotion from within the existing 100% Unionist ethos ranks? Recruitment from outside?

FTA69 wrote:

[An Garda Síochána] have a 100% anti-Republican ethos.

While you're looking for the PSNI's "Unionist ethos" policy document, you might dig out the Garda "100% anti-Republican ethos" document as well: I can't find either on the relevant websites.

FTA69 wrote:

No problem, I should have phrased my statement better, I meant that the police have no qualms about arresting Republicans in general and that Sinn Féin members (as the most visible) are usually the ones to recieve this treatment.

You specifically stated that you had been arrested, and implied that it was because you were a Sinn Féin member. So, were you arrested or not? If so, on what charge?

freedom's jcb

SF / IRA both signed up to the concent clause of the good Friday Agreement.

the ira have said in countless statements that they are not a party to the gfa and what sinn fein do or sign i.e the mitchell principles of non-violence or anything else was a matter for them.http://irelandsown.net/IRAstmt2.html

so called republican movement.

well i would agree that sinn fein under the boots of adams and mc guinness are the so called republicans.
although i have a lot of respect for certain people within sinn fein i.e francie molloy,conor murphy and barry mc elduff ,(probably the only politicians within that movement who i could listen to without feeling violently sick) these people are being led down the road to nowhere or should i say "martin and gerry's road to nowhere"

what makes you think that

well sinn fein saying decommissioning is only a humiliation if there's pictures,where is the logic in that?if the ira totally decommission (which i can guess will probably would never have happened),then it would be total surrender and the loyalists, brits and the irish anti republican pro british element which is probably 90% of this forum know its a surrender for ira. the thing you anti republicans have never understood was that the british goverment and unionists want to defeat republicanism and the british and loyalists knew from day one in 1986 or whenever adams was talking to them that the ira couldnt be defeated militarily so they sniffed out the weakest links in the republican movement e.g adams and mcguinness and finished republicanism off politicially and in turn turned adams and mc guinness into well paid british ministers who are 'A' list celebrities too, whilst the people who have fought the war,spent their lifetime in jail or lie in a republican plot in the graveyards have to withstand the slap on the face which is their betrayal.

Just because someone is in favour of decommissioning does not mean that they are anti-republican.

what are they then? i have honest to god never met a person who calls themselves a republican in favour of decommissioning and as well as that billy if someone claims to support the ira then why would they support decommissioning because whats the point of supporting the ira or any republican armed group when you on the other hand support removing the weapons because an army without weapons ceases to be and is effectively finished and useless.

find it hard to believe in this day and age of internet message boards like this one, mass media etc that people in rural areas cannot make their voices heard. your making your voice heard right now.

ill agree with you there that people in rural areas like myself can have there voices heard but i wasnt as such refering to that.i meant the rural units of the ira and the rural supporters of the ira who like me see a lot of the sinn fein leadership as not really republicans but as people who would settle for living under british rule indefinitely so long as they can be in charge and i was refering to the fact that a lot of rural people and urban too signed up for the gfa on a "wait and see" basis and were fairly cynical about it,well patience
is wearing thin thats for sure.

act in a more civilized manner than the likes of the IRA.

well i suppose 600 sas bullets used in loughgall and other cases of british ruthlessness,callousness and basicially politicians looking for blood and usually getting it as regards to amount of shoot to kill incidents in ireland especially in tyrone is civilised is it?Or maybe the lvf killing taxi drivers to force down marches or the killing of the 3 quinn boys is civilized is it?the shankill buthchers cutting up people in belfast i suppose is civilized too?.if you claim to be neutral billy in codemning armed groups why dont you justify that?

billy the squid

what are they then? i have honest to god never met a person who calls themselves a republican in favour of decommissioning and as well as that billy if someone claims to support the ira then why would they support decommissioning because whats the point of supporting the ira or any republican armed group when you on the other hand support removing the weapons because an army without weapons ceases to be and is effectively finished and useless.

SDLP

Fianna Fail call them selves the republican party, yet they dont have a military wing.

oh and where did i say i supported the IRA.

oh and if your going to quote me then read my post before replying to it.

I will reprint the piece you tried to reply to and selected certain words that might have suited you.

here goes

there is a nationalist movement in scotland but you dont see them living in the same conditions as they do in the north of ireland, why, because the nationalists in scotland formed a peaceful political party and ran for elections and act in a more civilized manner than the likes of the IRA.

I await your reply

true

Freedoms jcb wrote "if someone claims to support the ira then why would they support decommissioning because whats the point of supporting the ira or any republican armed group when you on the other hand support removing the weapons because an army without weapons ceases to be and is effectively finished and useless."

The IRA is not an army, it is an illegial terrorist group.
If it did not have weapons/ semtex, it would still be part of the democratic process like everyone else. If the IRA was "finished and useless", as you say, would that not be great ? It is what most people on this island are working towards.

toiletduck

freedom's jcb wrote:

the british and loyalists knew from day one in 1986 or whenever adams was talking to them that the ira couldnt be defeated militarily

you forget to mention that the IRA realised it could never win militarily...

Cork

Originally Posted by FTA69
Mitchell McLaughlin said it was "wrong"

I put on 2 differant colour socks today - I was wrong.

But killing a mother is 10 was criminal.

You cannot have a democratic party with links to a criminal organisation.

It is up now to SF to decide what direction it wants to go.

SF cannot have it both ways.

freedom's jcb

oh and where did i say i supported the IRA.

firstly i have never said you supported the ira billy and i would like you to point out where in the post were i said you did.What political party do you support billy ?because it would definitely make things a lot clearer as regards to your beliefs.

the sdlp arent a republican party and they would be the first to admit that and as far as fianna fail goes what have they done to justify calling themselves the "republican" party?These 2 parties are nationalist parties who accept british rule in ireland while republicans and republican parties dont (sinn fein being the exception because they use useless cross border bodies as there justification for selling out their republican past).republicans have never in the past accepted british rule and as the saying goes "the best weapon we have is our refusal" and the heroes of the united irishmen or the men of 1916 would be disgusted with irish men and woman accepting british rule in the north eastern part of the country

the reason i quoted you was because people like you are always very quick to reflect on the ira's actions while forgetting the acts of the other participants in the war, the loyalists and the brits.And while im on the subject of loyalists, do you support loyalists actions to push orange marches down catholic areas?
dont you think that the people in these areas dont want to see the marches down their streets and let the people who have killed eddie mc goldrick,the 3 quinn boys,robert hamill and others win so that they can show their rabid bigotry and intimidate these areas?

If the IRA was "finished and useless", as you say, would that not be great ? It is what most people on this island are working towards.

i have never said the ira were finished and useless because that is certainly not the case.the point i was making was sinn fein supporting the ira while supporting decommissioning defies logic and how could they support the pira who are a military army determined to bring an united ireland while supporting decommissioning that would take the ira's weapons away?
do you honestly not recognise the danger of a split in the republican movement true?and in you and other anti republicans pursuit of surrender you are making that danger a very distinct reality because people are finally learning the futility of joining splinter groups and will aim to reclaim the republican movement for the republican commuinity and they will oust the sell out element from sinn fein leadership.

billy the squid

political party do you support billy ?because it would definitely make things a lot clearer as regards to your beliefs.

I always voted independent straight down the line. if that answers your question.

as fianna fail goes what have they done to justify calling themselves the "republican" party?

there was that llittle thing in 1949 when what was then the "free state" became an independent country by cedeing its membership of the brittish commonwealth. that was under de valera's government, a fianna fail government.

These 2 parties are nationalist parties who accept british rule in ireland while republicans and republican parties dont (sinn fein being the exception because they use useless cross border bodies as there justification for selling out their republican past).

and therein lies the problem. by your logic a nationalist is someone who aspires to a united ireland, where as a republican aspires to a united ireland. except the republican would like to satisfy a little bloodthirstyness on the way to their goal. where as a nationalist would do it by democratic means.

republicans have never in the past accepted british rule and as the saying goes "the best weapon we have is our refusal" and the heroes of the united irishmen or the men of 1916 would be disgusted with irish men and woman accepting british rule in the north eastern part of the country

I'm not living in the day of the United Irishmen, I am living in the here and now and have to live with the realities of the here and now. in the here and now there are a massive number of people living in the north who whould prefer to remain a part of the united kingdom, their feelings have to be taken into consideration also. they were not even alive when the likes of cromwel came to ireland so they cannot be expected to pay the price of what he did.

the reason i quoted you was because people like you are always very quick to reflect on the ira's actions while forgetting the acts of the other participants in the war, the loyalists and the brits.And while im on the subject of loyalists, do you support loyalists actions to push orange marches down catholic areas?
dont you think that the people in these areas dont want to see the marches down their streets and let the people who have killed eddie mc goldrick,the 3 quinn boys,robert hamill and others win so that they can show their rabid bigotry and intimidate these areas?

it is a little rich dont you think quoting crimes that the loyalists carried out when you think how republicans cannot even admit that leaving ten children without a mother is a crime.

at least the loyalist movement showed restraint after the quinn deaths because they knew that they were in the wrong. the same happened when the pipe bomb was fired at those catholic children on their way to school. their efforts lost their impetus because their supporters knew in their hearts and sould that the millitant element of loyalism had crossed the forbidden line.

the point i was making was sinn fein supporting the ira while supporting decommissioning defies logic and how could they support the pira who are a military army determined to bring an united ireland while supporting decommissioning that would take the ira's weapons away?

your "war" is over and there is no more need for guns

do you honestly not recognise the danger of a split in the republican movement true?

well we have the INLA the C-IRA the P-IRA the R-IRA how many more splits can you expect. the IRA seems to be going around like a headless chicken with its members doing what they like, the murder of Gerry McCabe was an example of this. the leadership of the IRA didnt even acknowledge it happening at first. so tell me if the IRAs members are going around doing what they like, what difference would a "split" in the IRA make.

sceptre

billy the squid wrote:

there was that llittle thing in 1949 when what was then the "free state" became an independent country by cedeing its membership of the brittish commonwealth. that was under de valera's government, a fianna fail government.

That was under Costello's FG-and-friends government (though the "free state" got a new name over a decade before). However, the leaving of the commonwealth and the formal declaration of a republic wasn't such a big deal (it even came from an off-the-cuff remark Costello made in Canada) compared to deValera's manoeuverings by using the Statute of Westminster to put the country in a position where a new constitution (declaring a republic all bar the declaration) could be passed. If it looks like a republic and quacks like a republic, it's still a republic even if one insists that it's called a duck. Not that I'm sure that actually makes FF any more a "republican party" than, say SF but see below for comments about the bastardisation of that word for what appears to be for no particular reason other than a piss-poor slogan that couldn't sound good to anyone who actually thought about what they were hearing.

Personally I've always wondered when "republican" became a synonym for "32 counties united (marxism optional but desirable) or you can bugger off, shyster" (don't bother making suggestions, it doesn't matter anyway). It's one of those nice words where a minority (at least two minorities in different countries that I can think of) pretends it means something in particular when the rest of the planet regard it as something else grounded in actual etymological evolution. "You can't be a real republican (big R or small) because you consort with the evil (insert government here)" sounds a bit well, contrived. Ditto all the other uses for "X isn't republican because..." (unless X is Pol Pot or similar and because includes something to do with personal rights and/or elections). It's, well it's rather poor. Rarely was that Princess Bride quote ("You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means") more appropriate.

Mighty_Mouse

wonderful Berti!

Peace process - finito



i.e. Adams will do well to control most northern irish republicans who feel their efforts have been thrown back in their face.

(whether or not ye agree with berti - surely noone can agree with politically naive moves like this) Its akin to Trimble pulling the rug under the last "breakthrough"

FTA69

true wrote:

FTA wrote : " I don't know oscar, I know little of the history of the region. I happen to know a little about Ireland though. "

LOL. From what I have read, I can safely say that our friend FTA from "Free West Waterford" knows very little true information about Ireland all right, but a lot about Ireland that seems to have been learnt from IRA propoganda sources. A little knowledge is indeed , literally, a dangerous thing.
As a person from south of the border, but who has many friends from both communities in the North, I can safely say FTA is pretty well incorrect on everything he speaks about with so much conviction. It is quite amazing. So much so I think it has to be a wind up. He cannot seriously believe all of the tens of thousands of orangemen are rioting drunkards , or that all of the RUC were / are bad people? He cannot seriously believe all of the IRA bombings were justified ? That all of the IRA murders were justified ?

You are questioning my sorces of information? This coming from a man who posted a link to the site of that ultra-Unionist redneck, Willie Frazer?

And what IRA propaganda sources are these true, considering you are so up on my personal political development? I also never stated that every member of the Orange Order was a "rioting drunkard" but the fact remains that that organisation preaches religious supremacy and is entirely sectarian in its outlook. It also collaborates with Loyalist death squads through its mechanisms. The RUC, while containing many innocuous members, was also overwhelmingly sectarian, stands condemned by human rights organisations all over the world and remains largely unreformed today.

I also never sought to justify every single action undertaken by the IRA.

FTA69

oscarBravo wrote:

You're not following my logic very well. People who live in Wales call themselves "Welsh". That doesn't mean they're not in the United Kingdom.

I never denied that Ireland was a part of the UK, I simply stated that we were our own nation and as such had (and have) the right to national self-determination. I pointed out to you that the 26 counties were part of the UK pre 1922 and then asked you was the British prescence legitimate here because of that simple fact.

Their status is not affected in the slightest by how you regard them; they remain the only legitimate army in Ireland. How many members of the "Army of the Irish Republic" that you do recognise have taken part in UN peacekeeping missions?

What has the UN got to do with anything, the fact remains they aren't the Óglaigh na hÉireann who fought and died in 1916.

Does he have a 100% Unionist ethos?

I'm not informed on the subject of his political persuasions, but he did fight for a force that had a 100% Unionist ethos.

I note with interest your use of the past tense: "...had an exclusively unionist ethos".

Sinn Féin would argue that the vestiges of the state are now less Unionist and are taking the form of a more inclusive model.

The word "obviously" doesn't tell me anything here. It's not obvious to me; quite the contrary in fact. You have singularly failed to show any evidence that the PSNI have the Unionist ethos you accuse them of.

The fact that during the Short Strand pogrom PSNI/RUC members stood around chatting with Loyalist paramilitary figures while Loyalist mobs assembled and while missiles (including pipe bombs) were being thrown speaks for itself. Continued collusion with said Loyalists ended up in the details of Sinn Féin councillors ending up in the hands of the UDA and UVF. The fact they baton Nationalists off their own streets to force bigoted marches through them also doesn't highlight their new-found "impartiality".

Harsh words indeed

You asked for examples of condemnation and I gave them to you.

How will they be replaced? Promotion from within the existing 100% Unionist ethos ranks? Recruitment from outside?

Obviously it would take time but recruits from England or the 26 Counties could help dilute the influence of the Unionist old guard.

While you're looking for the PSNI's "Unionist ethos" policy document, you might dig out the Garda "100% anti-Republican ethos" document as well: I can't find either on the relevant websites.

The Guards are vehemently opposed to Sinn Féin (and other Republicans) and they have been since their inception. Or else they park their vans opposite our commemorations with telephoto cameras due to an interest in photography, I don't think there are any budding David Attenboroughs among them though.

You specifically stated that you had been arrested, and implied that it was because you were a Sinn Féin member. So, were you arrested or not? If so, on what charge?

I stated that Sinn Féin members are obvious Republicans, under the Offenses Against the State Act the police don't need a valid reason as they do other charges. I am not going into the details of this incident on the internet.

true

FTA69 wrote " You are questioning my sorces of information? This coming from a man who posted a link to the site of that ultra-Unionist redneck, Willie Frazer?"

In response to you posting a link to a "republican" (your word, not mine) " terrorist website , I posted a link to a site dedicated to victims of terrorism, to show you the other side of the coin , as I said.


FTA69 said "It ( the Orange Order ) also collaborates with Loyalist death squads through its mechanisms."Proof, FTA, when and where ? And how would you know ? By reading an Phoblocht I suppose. Yeah, you will learn a lot of facts there.


FTA69 said "The RUC, while containing many innocuous members, was also overwhelmingly sectarian, stands condemned by human rights organisations all over the world and remains largely unreformed today."

It is the PSNI today, which accepts more Catholics than Protestants per head of population in the North. It also accepts and advertised widely for recruits from south of the border. It was never condemned "by human rights organisations all over the world". Yes, there have been a few bad apples, as in all organisations, but it has had to put up with the biggest terrorist onslaught in Europe. Many people have great respect for the bravery and dedication of the security services. The same RUC you despise very quickly tracked down and arrested and jailed the culprits after the Greysteele, and other massacres / murders of Catholics. Oh , you do not remember this?


FTA69 wrote I also never sought to justify every single action undertaken by the IRA

It seemed like it. So which IRA action do you not justify , never mind condemn ?

true

FTA69 wrote "The Guards are vehemently opposed to Sinn Féin (and other Republicans) and they have been since their inception. Or else they park their vans opposite our commemorations with telephoto cameras due to an interest in photography, I don't think there are any budding David Attenboroughs among them though."


Not all Guards, FTA, not all Guards. Thetre has been collusion between the Guards and the IRA in many instances ( murders of Justice Gibson and his wife, murders of numerous RUC men in different incidents , the house search at Claremorris etc etc ). Then again , you are probably too young and too far from the action in "Free West Waterford" to be familiar with these.

jbkenn

Welcome back FTA69, missed you the last few days, things just aint the same without you

FTA69 wrote:

What has the UN got to do with anything, the fact remains they aren't the Óglaigh na hÉireann who fought and died in 1916.

Neither are the class A gob$hites you keep waxing lyrical about.

I'm not informed on the subject of his political persuasions, but he did fight for a force that had a 100% Unionist ethos.

had, past tense now committed to a 50/50 membership

Sinn Féin would argue that the vestiges of the state are now less Unionist and are taking the form of a more inclusive model.

Wonders will never cease, but progress none the less.

The fact that during the Short Strand pogrom PSNI/RUC members stood around chatting with Loyalist paramilitary figures while Loyalist mobs assembled and while missiles (including pipe bombs) were being thrown speaks for itself. Continued collusion with said Loyalists ended up in the details of Sinn Féin councillors ending up in the hands of the UDA and UVF. The fact they baton Nationalists off their own streets to force bigoted marches through them also doesn't highlight their new-found "impartiality".

Ye should write in and complain.

Obviously it would take time but recruits from England or the 26 Counties could help dilute the influence of the Unionist old guard.

You dont know much about police training, do you, bit more to it than giving a couple of morons baseball bats, and, sending them around to beat the living $hit out of some young fellow

The Guards are vehemently opposed to Sinn Féin (and other Republicans) and they have been since their inception. Or else they park their vans opposite our commemorations with telephoto cameras due to an interest in photography, I don't think there are any budding David Attenboroughs among them though.

Maybe they just want to swap stories with the 3 bird watchers from Colombia, or maybe they are doing their duty and gathering intelligence on people who pose a threat to the state.

I stated that Sinn Féin members are obvious Republicans, under the Offenses Against the State Act the police don't need a valid reason as they do other charges. I am not going into the details of this incident on the internet.

You dont have to go into detail, a simple yes or no answer will do

jbkenn

mycroft

FTA69 wrote:

The Guards are vehemently opposed to Sinn Féin (and other Republicans) and they have been since their inception. Or else they park their vans opposite our commemorations with telephoto cameras due to an interest in photography, I don't think there are any budding David Attenboroughs among them though.

Hey FTA seeing as you're ignoring my demands from earlier in this thread care to provide proof of this accusation? Furthermore can you not get it into your head that in the interest of avoiding further terrorist attacks and deaths a police force must feel that examiniing who attents republican commemorations to track potential terrorists is justified. You do not adhere to the laws of either country yet at the same time demand that the governments of both countries adhere to the version of their constitutions that suite you.

I stated that Sinn Féin members are obvious Republicans, under the Offenses Against the State Act the police don't need a valid reason as they do other charges. I am not going into the details of this incident on the internet.

Okay screw you FTA go into details or I am presenting the list of surprious unsupported allegations that you constantly present as facts, and I'll argue that your consistent assetion of statements that you cannot support aside from your own allegations is justification for your banning from this forum.

jbkenn

mycroft wrote:

Okay screw you FTA go into details or I am presenting the list of surprious unsupported allegations that you constantly present as facts, and I'll argue that your consistent assetion of statements that you cannot support aside from your own allegations is justification for your banning from this forum.

Ah Je$u$ dont ban him, he's great craic, gives a great insight into the "Republican" mindset, not that it's much of a mindset.

jbkenn