Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Poor Alex
Options
Comments
-
From WikipediaIn pop culture, the term nazi (lowercase "n") can also be coupled with another word to imply overzealousness, aggression or hostility -- negative qualities often associated with the Nazi Party. Such usage was popularized in the November 2, 1995 episode of the successful 1990s sitcom Seinfeld. The plot centered around a soup stand vendor who dispenses his wares in a harsh manner, thus becoming the titular "Soup Nazi." Such usage of the term is often humorous, although it can also be a pejorative. Other examples include feminazi, grammar nazi, fashion nazi, and Econazi. Many criticize the use of such terms as they appear to diminish the crimes of Nazi Germany during the Second World War.
some people almost beg to be offended when they hear the description nazi0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Earthman wrote:Whats important is that Fr Reid is getting results.
It's up to the authorities to deal with the criminality issues and as I said they have every intention of doing exactly that.
I believe it is to the people of NI (inc. the Church)to deal with the IRA & its criminality.
Fr. Reid made a mistake and he did in fairness apologise.
It is regretable - his credabillity has been damaged.0 -
II found mention of the book recommended by Sand, "I met Murder
on the Way - The Story of the Pearsons of Coolacrease" by Alan Stanley.
It is about a violent IRA action in 1921 against a family of "Cooneyites" named Pearson who lived in Coolacrease House, Cadamstown, Co. Offaly. The farmhouse was burned and the two eldest sons were reportedly shot in the groin, in the presence of their family, and allowed to slowly bleed to death.
Someone posted this about the shooting:
"Richard and Abraham Pearson were shot dead by the IRA on 30th June 1921. I have a copy of the Military Court of Inquiry into their deaths and also a copy of the IRA report from the Offaly No 2 Brigade for that month. There is NOTHING in the court of inquiry about they being shot in the groin deliberatey. Their mother and sisters do state that they were taken out into the yard and put up against a wall and both shot.
The IRA report states that both men were shot after they fired on an IRA party trenching a road. They were shot for 'leveying war against forces of the Republic'. There was a substantial protestant [population] around the Birr area in 1921 and these were the only ones that were ever killed. A week before, the same IRA unit shot dead three local men for informing ALL of whom were catholics.
I can supply copies of both reports to anyone that wants them or the exact reference numbers in the Public Record Office in Kew and the Mulcahy papers in UCD."
http://www.politics.ie/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8310&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=50
Another posting by a different author has this:
"Extract from the statement given by Michael Cordial QM 3RD Battalion, Offaly No 2 Brigade given to Bureau of Military History on 13/12/57....
'The Pearsons were a family who lived on an extensive farm or estate about one mile from Cadamstown and about 3 miles from Kinnitty. They were- particularly so, the male members of the family, father and three sons violently oppossed to the National Movement and they looked with contempt on local Volunteers or IRA men.
Things reached a climax sometime before the truce when they fired with shotguns on a small party of volunteers who were blocking a road. One volunteer, a man named Heeney was seriously wounded. A full report on the matter was made to Brigage staff who after serious deliberation ordered that the four male members of the Pearson family should be executed and their house burned down.
On 30th June 1921 a party of about 30 men were mobilised to implement the order. The house was surrounded and all women folk were removed from the scene. Fortunately for themselves the father and one son were away from home that day. The other two sons, Richard and Abraham were captured in a hayfield. They were brought into the yard and informed of the order. A firing party was appointed and the executions were there and then duly carried out. Next the house and outhouses were set on fire. Heavey explosions were heard while the house was burning which indicated that a large amount of ammunition was stored in it'.
Extract of witness statement given by LT Col C.R Wood RAMC given to military Court of Inquiry into death of Abraham Pratt Pearson held in Birr on 2/7/21......'I examined the wounds and found extensive wounds on left cheek,left shoulder,left thigh and lower third of left leg. In addition there was a wound through the abdomen.The latter wound had an entrance at this point and appeared to have its exit at the lower part of the back fracturing the lower part of the spinal column'. "
http://www.politics.ie/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8310&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=75
Eoghan Harris did a review of the book, maybe more a reaction to it, in the Irish Independent. I could like Harris except for his insistence on terming Catholics, "Roman Catholics". You generally know you are reading or hearing something written or said by a Protestant in Ireland when you hear Catholics termed "Roman Catholics". For some reason, maybe because they both are so inclined to switch in a moment from reasonable speech to spitting rage, I often confuse Harris and Eamonn McCann.0 -
Ok things are getting circular here, yes it is, not it isnt etc etc ad nauseum.Fr Reid =no public condemnations of Republicans =more influence with them=progress to todays position.
This basically comes down to your position regarding his interview anyway. Let me ask you, when the Provos are ignoring anyone they can paint even loosely as a unionist, and those from the communitys intimidated by SFIRA punishment attacks are silenced by respect figures like Reid coming out and saying there is no alternative to punishment beatings where does the end of punishment beatings come from? The goodness of SFIRAs hearts? Do they agree to stop beating people as a political maneuvere but never recognise that they dont have the right?
You say he needs to be SFIRAs biggest fan in public. I say he could have protected his position without endorsing their reasoning behind punishment beatings, and without undermining anyone else who might criticise punishment beatings. Which is what hes done. He didnt just protect his position, he didnt remain merely neutral, he went in and attacked the view that there is no justification for punishment beatings.The problem with that sir is you are refusing to recognise the reality that hundreds of thousands of people in NI are well aware of these punishment beatings and McCartney and yet still vote SF.
Ergo your position vis vis Republicans being shown the door doesnt hold water.
Which would have *NOTHING* to do with those punishment beatings, illegal arms, and terrorist groupings regularly being endorsed by respected figures like Reid would it? No, that would be wholly unconnected, one of those million monkeys with a million typewriters creating a shakespeare play type freak occurences. I mean, when people are consistently told by peacemakers like Reid that SFIRA are alright to beat people up it sinks in doesnt it? This is the whole problem with the peace proccess so far. And its just laughable that youre now justifying the means (cheerleading SFIRA) with the predictable end ( guys who commit punishment beatings polling 10% support).
As I said before, pragmatism is seeing where we want to go and moving in that direction at all times. People in love with the concept of another little side deal cant see the wood for the trees. Statements like what Reid made regarding punishment beatings move the proccess *back*, not forward.The only consolation i can offer you is that the law is and will continue to be rigourously applied to the criminality associated with them.
Only until the next regrettably neccessary side deal that will bring us to the promised land though. If at all.Hang on a second where did he say that he agree's with punishment beatings? Exactly where has he said they are the way to go?
He said there was no alternative to them in Catholic communitys.However he tried to explain that the attacks occurred in the context of there being no police service in nationalist areas.
“There is an absence of a police force that has functionality in nationalist districts and people are going around who are raping, who are breaking into houses, who are joy-riding and knocking people down, who are terrorising the elderly people. There are drugs of course … Those people, whoever they are, they will do something about it themselves.”
There is a police force Reid, its called the PSNI.If you are to take that approach to what is just analysis then,we may as well say the pope agreed with the nazis because he understood why some people were in the Hitler youth.
Yes, I could also carry that analogy forward and say it would only be comparable if the Pope said he understood that people *are* in the Nazi Youth because no one else was dealing with the Zionist menace. You used past tense, Reid clearly still believe there *is* no alternative.Certainly.
I'd imagine though that he did not have the cop on to realise the implication of the analogy.
Polished Gerry would never say something like that.
He may well think it though.
And again, he doesnt have the polish to realise calling people Nazis is a boo boo, but is polished enough to play mind games with the Provos?Eh wheres this coming from? I'm only talking about Fr Reids role.
How are you extending that to every and anyone else?
So am I. Im assumed Im allowed to deal with your point that Reid shouldnt criticise SFIRA without being accused of going off-topic? If Reid shouldnt criticise, and SFIRA ignores everyone else, that adds up to 0 criticism. Which is where the above is coming from.Thats another Rant Sand and has nothing whatsoever to do with Fr Reid.
Again, see above. You claimed that Reids cheerleading was bringing results - do I simply not challenge that if I do not want to be accused of going off topic? And Reids approach has, as you noted yourself, brought about a wonderful situation where a sizable proportion of the electorate vote for punishment beatings. Yes, Reids style brings progress. Progress to where though? Not to a place where punishment beatings are eliminated.Someone posted this about the shooting:
Oh Someone. I know him well, word is his bond. And indeed he has to hand the IRA version of events. The official version. Theyve never been afraid to take a hard look at themselves and be honest rather than expedient.
FFS Tom...That Orwell guy made a great point about books, the best ones being the ones that tell us what we already know. Id stay away from that "I met murder along the way" book if I were you, it could endanger your mindset. And it doesnt fit in with your demand for state propaganda regarding only Prodestant outrages against Catholics.0 -
Advertisement
-
I've already stated why I think Fr Reid would not want to be put in a position of publically criticising Republicans.Sand wrote:Ok things are getting circular here, yes it is, not it isnt etc etc ad nauseum.
This basically comes down to your position regarding his interview anyway. Let me ask you, when the Provos are ignoring anyone they can paint even loosely as a unionist, and those from the communitys intimidated by SFIRA punishment attacks are silenced by respect figures like Reid coming out and saying there is no alternative to punishment beatings where does the end of punishment beatings come from? The goodness of SFIRAs hearts? Do they agree to stop beating people as a political maneuvere but never recognise that they dont have the right?
By not doing so and beavering away in the background he is getting and has got results.
As regards the punishment beatings its a known fact that most of these are being done by loyalists at the moment.You criticise Fr Reid for not publically condemning them even though in my opinion he'd be better off continuing on the course he's going as it has got results.
Let me ask you this then-Why are so many pepole voting for SF in the North? Is it because they know that things have came a long way since the early 90's and the 80's and they trust their politicians to continue at a pace acceptable to nationalist voters along the road to full normality.
It is a secret ballot, theres no intimidation in the booths.
I never said that and you should know I didn't-but this wouldn't be the first time in this thread that you add to what I say would it?You say he needs to be SFIRAs biggest fan in public.
Did he say they were right? I asked you that already and you havent shown me where he has said they were right.I say he could have protected his position without endorsing their reasoning behind punishment beatings, and without undermining anyone else who might criticise punishment beatings. Which is what hes done. He didnt just protect his position, he didnt remain merely neutral, he went in and attacked the view that there is no justification for punishment beatings.
I have to ask you again to show me where Fr Reid has said its right.You've not done so, you've only shown where he has said he understands why its happening as those involved see no alternative.Which would have *NOTHING* to do with those punishment beatings, illegal arms, and terrorist groupings regularly being endorsed by respected figures like Reid would it? No, that would be wholly unconnected, one of those million monkeys with a million typewriters creating a shakespeare play type freak occurences. I mean, when people are consistently told by peacemakers like Reid that SFIRA are alright to beat people up it sinks in doesnt it?
Quite frankly Sand your post is now descending into the realms of Bullshit.This is the whole problem with the peace proccess so far. And its just laughable that youre now justifying the means (cheerleading SFIRA) with the predictable end ( guys who commit punishment beatings polling 10% support).
Nowhere ever have I condoned IRA criminality or any criminality on this board and I'm not doing so now.
You are misrepresenting my position here wholesale.Credit me with some inteligence please.
You seem impervious to the progress made in the last 15 years as if to say we are still in the rut of several murders a week commonplace in the 80's.As I said before, pragmatism is seeing where we want to go and moving in that direction at all times. People in love with the concept of another little side deal cant see the wood for the trees. Statements like what Reid made regarding punishment beatings move the proccess *back*, not forward.
You also seem impervious to what I've said regarding the best way to negotiate with people who are on a road you dont agree with and put them on the road that you do agree with.
But hey thats your perogative.
I've not agreed with any Republican violence and I can see how to encourage those I'd wholesale disagree with, to see the light.I'd see the merit in persistance with that stance.
Thats saying he understands why they happen, it's not saying they are right-but hey you put your own spin on it if you want.He said there was no alternative to them in Catholic communitys.
I'll look at it objectively thanks.
It's Fr Reid but anyway, yes and it's only slowly becoming more acceptable to some.There is a police force Reid, its called the PSNI.
Time will improve on that-Any Northern Republican will tell you that and theres hundreds of thousands of them according to recent votes.
It's an evolution Sand not a revolution.If those beatings and associated criminality were such an issue, people wouldnt be voting for SF in the North.Yes, I could also carry that analogy forward and say it would only be comparable if the Pope said he understood that people *are* in the Nazi Youth because no one else was dealing with the Zionist menace. You used past tense, Reid clearly still believe there *is* no alternative.
There clearly *are* people willing to accept a certain level of beatings and criminality for now otherwise they wouldnt support SF.Thats probably the point that Fr Reid was making.
Most of those voters,I'd like to think will be of the opinion that there is some work going on in the background to end that activity and I've no doubt Fr Reid would be one of those background beavers.
The reduction in Republican beatings would be evidence of that.
The rest of the criminality is well capable of being looked after by the law.
I'd ask you not to misrepresent that position of mine as a condoning of punishment beatings when clearly it is not.
You dont have to be a member of toast masters to have good negotiation skills.And again, he doesnt have the polish to realise calling people Nazis is a boo boo, but is polished enough to play mind games with the Provos?
With Respect I've indicated very good reason for Fr Reid being carefull to keep himself in a position to hold court with Republicans and be able to persuade them to go on the current road.So am I. Im assumed Im allowed to deal with your point that Reid shouldnt criticise SFIRA without being accused of going off-topic? If Reid shouldnt criticise, and SFIRA ignores everyone else, that adds up to 0 criticism. Which is where the above is coming from.
As for 0 criticism,As you know pope John Paul wasnt listened to by the IRA and he was the head of the religion they supposedly used as the reason for their campaign.So like you are flogging a dead horse with that one.
It would be far more logical to recognise that the multi faceted approach of persuasion(Fr Reids private role) and law enforcement( eg the Garda raids on houses in Cork and the investigations in Manchester ) is getting us slowly but surely to where we want to be, rather than be gung ho and allow mad men to return to violence.
wheres this off topic scream coming from? I never mentioned anything about something being off topic-I merely hinted at you being impervious to there being any progress at all.It's as if you think we are back in the 80's with a few murders every week or couple of days.
Again, see above. You claimed that Reids cheerleading was bringing results - do I simply not challenge that if I do not want to be accused of going off topic?
As for "cheerleading" thats a loaded statement indicative of not looking at a thing objectively and just being interested in one side of the coin to be honest.
You want perfection,I recognise that-I do too but not at a price of undoing the progress so far.If people are not yet ready to reject punishment beatings, thats regretable, but They will eventually.It's part and parcel of a fcuked up society to be honest but one thats undergoing repair.And Reids approach has, as you noted yourself, brought about a wonderful situation where a sizable proportion of the electorate vote for punishment beatings. Yes, Reids style brings progress. Progress to where though? Not to a place where punishment beatings are eliminated.
They will eventually.
Nothing about that makes them more acceptable or cheerleads them though.0 -
Out of interest was this level of indignation at Fr. Reid's comments any way comparable to when people like Michael McDowell (an elected politician) and Eoghan Harris compared Sinn Fein to the Nazis or does it only work one way?
Have either of them apologised for their comments?
I don't really see the difference to be honest.0 -
Sand wrote:He got into an argument with William Frazer, who lost his father, two uncles and two cousins who were all murdered by the South Armagh IRA. William Frazer now capaigns for FAIR, which represents victims of the IRA in South Armagh. I think its clear from the website, and indeed his argument with Reid, that William Frazer is deeply angered by the murders of his family - which is to be expected. Reid was seemingly rattled by the accusations Frazer threw at him, asking why Protestants should believe a Redemptionist priest from Clonard monastary where "weapons were fired and where priests at funerals had spoken of IRA heroes".
To be honest, it would seem that Willie Frazer is guilty of exactly the type of anti-Nationalist rhetoric which has created the comparison to Nazi's in the first place. One look at his website will certainly clear up any confusion surrounding that.
It seems all well and good to remind the world continually of the misdeeds of the Provos, however to even attempt to question the misdeeds of the Loyalists/Unionists brings about a passionate "but look what they did to us" response. As someone said earlier, some people just can't wait to take offence.
Until Northern Ireland gets over Historical events and BOTH communities start to respect each others cultures they'll never get on. Whining about is either North or South of the Border (or from anywhere else for that matter) is not going to make shag all difference.0 -
Depeche_Mode wrote:Out of interest was this level of indignation at Fr. Reid's comments any way comparable to when people like Michael McDowell (an elected politician) and Eoghan Harris compared Sinn Fein to the Nazis or does it only work one way?
Have either of them apologised for their comments?
I don't really see the difference to be honest.
Nah, all the people who like to be offended are only offended when it suits0 -
A Dub in Glasgo wrote:Nah, all the people who like to be offended are only offended when it suits
Yeah I though so. I think what annoys me most about this is that the guy has done so much to bring peace to Ireland, he was the one who initiated the talks between Adams and Hume which was the beginning of the end of the need for militant republicanism and fittingly was there at its end. The guy has done so much good work yet one un-PC comment and all of a sudden he is the worst in the world and the knives are out.0 -
Advertisement
-
Because some people can never pass up an opportunity to stick the knife in and twist it just to prove to the world how interested they are in peace0
-
I've already stated why I think Fr Reid would not want to be put in a position of publically criticising Republicans.
Yes, and I think its clear he went much farther than simply protecting his friendship with whatever Provo figures he has the ear of....Gerry Adams perhaps. While I feel he should be criticising SFIRA if only because no one else can, I can accept he might not want to. Fair enough, he should then restrain himself from attacking those who argue punishment beatings are unjustifiable. We can go round this roundabout as many times as you like, it comes down to the same thing.By not doing so and beavering away in the background he is getting and has got results.
Sizeable electoral support for punishment beating was one result you mentioned alright.It is a secret ballot, theres no intimidation in the booths.
Damage is already done when opinion shapers tell the public that punishment beating isnt such a big deal. Tell people that sort stuff long enough and theyll believe it.Did he say they were right? I asked you that already and you havent shown me where he has said they were right.
Yes I did, he said there was no alternative. That is practically word for word endorsement of SFIRAs position that there is no acceptable police force.It's an evolution Sand not a revolution.If those beatings and associated criminality were such an issue, people wouldnt be voting for SF in the North.
And again Reid and Co are telling them its not an issue. Blair is telling them its not an issue when he invites SFIRA to Chequers. Ahern is telling them its not an issue when he sings the praises of SFIRA. The Irish-American lobbies tell them its not a big deal when they arrange cosy publicity with Administration figures. Are you surprised that people think its not an issue?I'd ask you not to misrepresent that position of mine as a condoning of punishment beatings when clearly it is not.
Well while Im happy to misrepresent people as the next person, what I accused you of and what you took so much exception to is here...And its just laughable that youre now justifying the means (cheerleading SFIRA) with the predictable end ( guys who commit punishment beatings polling 10% support).
As above I said you were using the SFIRA support to justify Reids cheerleading SFIRA approach. Not punishment beatings themselves. Is that such a gross misrepresentation of what you said?You seem impervious to the progress made in the last 15 years as if to say we are still in the rut of several murders a week commonplace in the 80's.
Not impervious, but is the price of turning those murders from several a week to several a year worth paying when it is democratic principles like all parties adhering to the law? Northern Ireland is already a deepl ill society, is telling them constantly that violence and politics are compatible if regrettable the way to go? And those several murders a year, if theyre carried out by party workers of the ruling administration, even in a "non-official" capacity will you be willing to look the other way whilst the matter becomes regrettably hushed up for the greater good?
AFAIR, one of the McCartneys said after SFIRAs declaration in the summer that the real test was for SFIRA to do nothing (seriously anyway) illegal, forever. How many bank robberies will be carried out by dissidents and renegades who arent dissident or renegade enough to be informed on to the PSNI - unacceptable as they are to this faction of the ruling administration?You also seem impervious to what I've said regarding the best way to negotiate with people who are on a road you dont agree with and put them on the road that you do agree with.
Which the peace proccess hasnt done - it has simply decided to forget about certain unimportant things we feel we can sacrifice so we can get the murders down from a few a week to a few a year.
See below...wheres this off topic scream coming from? I never mentioned anything about something being off topicEh wheres this coming from? I'm only talking about Fr Reids role.
How are you extending that to every and anyone else?Thats another Rant Sand and has nothing whatsoever to do with Fr Reid.You want perfection,I recognise that-I do too but not at a price of undoing the progress so far.
Some progress if its undone by Reid not acting as the unofficial SFIRA press officer.I don't really see the difference to be honest.
SFIRA arent a broad social/political/ethnic community like protestant unionists whom Reid hurled his insult at.
SFIRA are ultra violent nationalist socialists with a paramilitary wing who hold themselves above the law and possessed an apparently recently decomissioned armoury. I dont know where people get the Nazi vibe from.It seems all well and good to remind the world continually of the misdeeds of the Provos, however to even attempt to question the misdeeds of the Loyalists/Unionists brings about a passionate "but look what they did to us" response. As someone said earlier, some people just can't wait to take offence.
If the likes of Reid can come on and say Catholics were treated like Jews, that Unionists are Nazis, that SFIRA is whiter than white in its campaign and never attacked the unionist community, and only fought because they were forced to then its not Loyalists/Unionists who need the history lesson/reality check though is it? Especially when posters come on here after and say "Yeah, hes right!"The guy has done so much good work yet one un-PC comment and all of a sudden he is the worst in the world and the knives are out.
Not one, several.0 -
Sand wrote:If the likes of Reid can come on and say Catholics were treated like Jews, that Unionists are Nazis, that SFIRA is whiter than white in its campaign and never attacked the unionist community, and only fought because they were forced to then its not Loyalists/Unionists who need the history lesson/reality check though is it? Especially when posters come on here after and say "Yeah, hes right!"
Perhaps you could provide a link to where Reid has said that "SFIRA" are whiter than white, then maybe what you say will have some credibility. However, by associating him with others because it suits you, does not lend any credence to your assumptions.
Links please, if you will (credible ones, not something from the extremist side, if you don't mind).0 -
Perhaps you could provide a link to where Reid has said that "SFIRA" are whiter than white, then maybe what you say will have some credibility.
Links please, if you will (credible ones, not something from the extremist side, if you don't mind).
Ooooh well Id just love to have credibility with someone I dont even know!And someone who hasnt even bothered to watch the interview or read a transcript. And a wonderful example of debating style, go through a post thats making a lenthy case and pick on one particular phrase or point and try to disprove it and by extension the entire post. Wonderful, wonderful. Only you could have picked a better comment to try and exploit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/heartsandminds/index.shtml
I know, I know, BBC - Brits, probably some bloody extremist Special Branch Securocrat Plant!!!
Theres a real media file showing the interview. Its about 10-15% way through the program, within 5 minutes of the start, after they initially discuss why people should believe Reid. The interviewer ask Reid directly
"So you believe that the IRA is whiter than white when it comes to criminality? (?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!)"
And Reid replies
"Yes"
Oh joy is me, instant credibility with someone I dont know....No wait, I predict straw grasping and back tracking.However, by associating him with others because it suits you, does not lend any credence to your assumptions.
BTW another interesting "slip" by Reid is when the interviewer asks if Reid feels its not the responsibility of those who control an organisation to stop members of that organisation from committing crime and Reid agrees of course "we'll stop them, we'll stop them". He associates himself, requires next to no work by me.0 -
Sand wrote:Ooooh well Id just love to have credibility with someone I dont even know!And someone who hasnt even bothered to watch the interview or read a transcript. And a wonderful example of debating style, go through a post thats making a lenthy case and pick on one particular phrase or point and try to disprove it and by extension the entire post. Wonderful, wonderful. Only you could have picked a better comment to try and exploit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/heartsandminds/index.shtml
I know, I know, BBC - Brits, probably some bloody extremist Special Branch Securocrat Plant!!!
Theres a real media file showing the interview. Its about 10-15% way through the program, within 5 minutes of the start, after they initially discuss why people should believe Reid. The interviewer ask Reid directly
"So you believe that the IRA is whiter than white when it comes to criminality? (?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!)"
And Reid replies
"Yes"
Oh joy is me, instant credibility with someone I dont know....No wait, I predict straw grasping and back tracking.
BTW another interesting "slip" by Reid is when the interviewer asks if Reid feels its not the responsibility of those who control an organisation to stop members of that organisation from committing crime and Reid agrees of course "we'll stop them, we'll stop them". He associates himself, requires next to no work by me.
The question is does he believe the IRA is whiter than white when it comes to criminality
Now here is the bit that you have to wrap your head around
You would view the whole IRA campaign as criminal and any actions such as fundraising ie bank robberies smuggling etc
However other people would see such activities as part of an armed campaign in which the participants in such robberies etc were not involved to make personal gain but to fund their military campaign and as such their actions are not criminal as a criminal is involved in illegal activity for personal enrichment
That is how people can rationalise statements about the IRA not being involved in criminality despite the fact that we all know that the IRA was involved in robberies smuggling etc etc
I dont believe for one minute that Fr Reid is unaware of the IRAs activities however as he knows on a personal level people who have been in charge of the IRA and who would have participated in such activities he knows that these people have not enriched themselves from such activities despite the fact that it would have been very easy for them to do so on that basis he can say the IRA is whiter than white when it comes to criminality
BTW Fr Reid is completely opposed to armed struggle to the extent that he believes that 1916 was wrong which would seperate him from republicans even in FF
And despite what Fr Reid said and wether you or I think it was right or wrong how does any of this undermine the decommissioning work he was not the only witness
T0 -
Sand wrote:SFIRA arent a broad social/political/ethnic community like protestant unionists whom Reid hurled his insult at.
But a broad social/political/ethnic community is just what Nazism was and you have just said that SF isn't that but Unionism is! I don't see how you can then use that definition to allow a description of SF as Nazi but reject a similar description of Unionism. Seems like you got things backwards.0 -
Ok things are getting circular here, yes it is, not it isnt etc etc ad nauseum.
Well what did you expect with an opinion peice that Paisly himself would be proud of. You should get a job with the DUP PR/Media department.
Only like minded people need apply..just like the 60's eh
when catolics were discriminated against.
Lets have a comparison.
If you think about it B Specials(An exclusively Prodestant organisation) burning catholics out of their home in the 60's e.g. Bombay street and like wise.
1938 kristallnacht, Storm troopers(An exclusively non-jewish German organisation) burning and ransacking jewish businesses and homes.
Erie isnt it?
Now everybody knows that the Unionists did'nt round up Cathoilcs for the sheer purpose of mass extermination in concentration camps(which is strangely a British invention!), but the treatment of unionits towards catholics had resembelances of 1930's Germany.
You can only push a man so far and sooner or later they will snap.
History has always shown that.
Nobody can excuse the actions of the PIRA but likewise the same applies to Unionists, not just in the 60's but for decades before that.
Moral of all this....Nothing comes out of a vacuum
PS interestingly Sand you dont have any opinion on the "Poor Ian Paisly Jnr " thread0 -
But that only holds if his purpose in attacking them is only because they oppose punishment beatings.Sand wrote:Yes, and I think its clear he went much farther than simply protecting his friendship with whatever Provo figures he has the ear of....Gerry Adams perhaps. While I feel he should be criticising SFIRA if only because no one else can, I can accept he might not want to. Fair enough, he should then restrain himself from attacking those who argue punishment beatings are unjustifiable. We can go round this roundabout as many times as you like, it comes down to the same thing.
I can safely say it has nothing to do with that.
As I see it,thats an unrecognition of a sizeable mandate made by people who believe that the road gone down while not perfect is the best available.Sizeable electoral support for punishment beating was one result you mentioned alright.
Nonsense.Credit people with some inteligence.It's plain that they have it and are using it to encourage the story so far in recognition of the fact that theres some way to go yet.Damage is already done when opinion shapers tell the public that punishment beating isnt such a big deal. Tell people that sort stuff long enough and theyll believe it.
No you didnt answer my question at all and in fact Sand I'm surprised that you are claiming you did, given how plain it is to see that you didn't.Yes I did, he said there was no alternative. That is practically word for word endorsement of SFIRAs position that there is no acceptable police force.
Fr Reid was simply stating fact.Theres an awfull lot of people who donn't want to accept the PSNI yet especially in areas that these beatings are still more prevalent.Spinning that as him saying it is right, is just that-Spin.
I understand all those people are constantly saying its an issue.You're misinterpreting their actions.And again Reid and Co are telling them its not an issue. Blair is telling them its not an issue when he invites SFIRA to Chequers. Ahern is telling them its not an issue when he sings the praises of SFIRA. The Irish-American lobbies tell them its not a big deal when they arrange cosy publicity with Administration figures. Are you surprised that people think its not an issue?
I'll interpret them differently for you if you like, but I suspect you already are aware of this different interpretation...
Those guys(Blair etc) know the day you stop talking is the day you start going backwards.
It's a complete and mischievous misrepresentation.As above I said you were using the SFIRA support to justify Reids cheerleading SFIRA approach. Not punishment beatings themselves. Is that such a gross misrepresentation of what you said?
But I'm not worried as I'm entirely satisfied that what I've said and am saying could not be plainer and its certainly not what you say I'm saying.
What you are doing is spinning my words and worse adding to them.
So you accept that theres been progress then? I can accept that you think the price is too high for this.But I'll disagree in the knowledge that (a) In the eventual complete absense (though later for some in the North than us in the South) of a disagreement/conflict etc etc etc, most people will as they do in the south already see whatever party they vote for (including SF) as being associated with their own(the voters) values.I dont share the same pesimism as yourself that criminality will be a great attraction. and (b) The law is catching up with the law breakers and I've no doubt it will continue to do so.Not impervious, but is the price of turning those murders from several a week to several a year worth paying when it is democratic principles like all parties adhering to the law?
Nobody is saying that.Northern Ireland is already a deepl ill society, is telling them constantly that violence and politics are compatible if regrettable the way to go?
What most people are saying is that theres a transition to be done in what you term as an ill society.
NoAnd those several murders a year, if theyre carried out by party workers of the ruling administration, even in a "non-official" capacity will you be willing to look the other way whilst the matter becomes regrettably hushed up for the greater good?
I've already stated that thats what the law is there for.AFAIR, one of the McCartneys said after SFIRAs declaration in the summer that the real test was for SFIRA to do nothing (seriously anyway) illegal, forever. How many bank robberies will be carried out by dissidents and renegades who arent dissident or renegade enough to be informed on to the PSNI - unacceptable as they are to this faction of the ruling administration?
Indeed thats something you should credit most of the electorate to make their mind up on.
My position on it I shouldnt have to state here yet again...
However for the record,I'll restate this part, the likes of FR Reid and others closely associated with the background work that has brought us to the advanced stage we are now on the road that we are on, are performing a role.
Being labled as associates and apoligists of criminals is not a part of that role.
You may be so zealously opposed to the process that brought us to this point and you are entitled to be.
But I have my doubts ias to whether the we'll bin it immediately because some arent playing ball yet approach would be best practice.
Like I said I don't agree that it has decided to forget these things.It's just that it is an evolution, not a revolution.Which the peace proccess hasnt done - it has simply decided to forget about certain unimportant things we feel we can sacrifice so we can get the murders down from a few a week to a few a year.
Similar hyperbole as saying I'm cheerleading the IRA.Some progress if its undone by Reid not acting as the unofficial SFIRA press officer.
He apologised.SFIRA arent a broad social/political/ethnic community like protestant unionists whom Reid hurled his insult at.
I'm only here to discuss Fr Reid's position.I'm on record as you should know as saying I'm not a SF voter for several policy and other associated issues.SFIRA are ultra violent nationalist socialists with a paramilitary wing who hold themselves above the law and possessed an apparently recently decomissioned armoury. I dont know where people get the Nazi vibe from.
I don't doubt that there are faults on all sides.I'm not one for labling all people in any fashion,I prefer to look at cases and decide on the idividuals/groups of individuals.If the likes of Reid can come on and say Catholics were treated like Jews, that Unionists are Nazis, that SFIRA is whiter than white in its campaign and never attacked the unionist community, and only fought because they were forced to then its not Loyalists/Unionists who need the history lesson/reality check though is it? Especially when posters come on here after and say "Yeah, hes right!"0 -
I'll say this only once jank: if you get personal with other posters you'll be posting outside the forum. If I choose to check whether I've already cautioned you for this and find that it's so you may find yourself in that situation anyway. Post like a big adult rather than doing what you're doing above, it casts a shadow of childishness on anything else you choose to post.jank wrote:You should get a job with the DUP PR/Media department.0 -
Sand wrote:Ooooh well Id just love to have credibility with someone I dont even know!And someone who hasnt even bothered to watch the interview or read a transcript. And a wonderful example of debating style, go through a post thats making a lenthy case and pick on one particular phrase or point and try to disprove it and by extension the entire post. Wonderful, wonderful. Only you could have picked a better comment to try and exploit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/heartsandminds/index.shtml
I know, I know, BBC - Brits, probably some bloody extremist Special Branch Securocrat Plant!!!
Theres a real media file showing the interview. Its about 10-15% way through the program, within 5 minutes of the start, after they initially discuss why people should believe Reid. The interviewer ask Reid directly
"So you believe that the IRA is whiter than white when it comes to criminality? (?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!)"
And Reid replies
"Yes"
Oh joy is me, instant credibility with someone I dont know....No wait, I predict straw grasping and back tracking.
BTW another interesting "slip" by Reid is when the interviewer asks if Reid feels its not the responsibility of those who control an organisation to stop members of that organisation from committing crime and Reid agrees of course "we'll stop them, we'll stop them". He associates himself, requires next to no work by me.
Blah blah blah - your link brings me to the "Hearts and Minds" page of BBC NI.
Where is the link where Reid says the IRA are whiter than white?.0 -
Advertisement
-
That is how people can rationalise statements about the IRA not being involved in criminality despite the fact that we all know that the IRA was involved in robberies smuggling etc etc
Then such actions would be considered "military" under Reids mindset. However, in 1994 SFIRA declared an end to all "military" operations. Including bank robberies you might have throught in the above mindset but which obviously wasnt the case. In the recent statement SFIRA declared an end to *all* activity, a basic admission that its activity included "military" and crinimality.
Im sure though Reid has some method of rationalising it, Id bet on massive the self-denial and wilful ignorance that typlifies your average Provo.And despite what Fr Reid said and wether you or I think it was right or wrong how does any of this undermine the decommissioning work he was not the only witness
Because the decommissioning work comes down to "Believe me, I cant tell you what I saw, where I saw it, when I saw it, or who told me to come and see it, but wow, let me tell you it happened". Do you know how many weapons were put beyond use? If you were on a jury would you convict a man of rape *purely* on hearsay? Because thats all we have, hearsay. Theres not a single verifiable scrap of evidence around the whole process because SFIRA were afraid of being humiliated. Well, grand for them, but whilst I cautiously accept that some sort of decommisioning occured due only to there being too much smoke for there to be no fire, I do not believe or trust SFIRA whatsoever - why should anyone, theyre pathological liars - and I have deep misgivings about a proccess they controlled from start to finish.
Hence, when one of the so-called independant witnessess is basically a provo with a pulpit whod believe the Provos if they said fire was wet it doesnt make me think, hmmm thats reassuring. And thats me, a Catholic born in the republic where kids are basically indoctrinated with at least a somewhat favourable attitude towards the Provos and their version of history. The damage is that the DUP can now have a field day. The ball was in their court previously, but now they can pass it right back and say why should we believe a man like this? And their support is generated from a massive Unionist distrust and disillusionment with the peace proccess. I cant see them getting any grassroots pressure to engage any time soon.But a broad social/political/ethnic community is just what Nazism was and you have just said that SF isn't that but Unionism is! I don't see how you can then use that definition to allow a description of SF as Nazi but reject a similar description of Unionism. Seems like you got things backwards.
The Nazis were a political "organisation" (Cant really call them a party when you consider the SA/SS) and SFIRA are a political "organisation" (Again, with the IRA). Like I said, I cant believe anyone could trace links in style and organisation between them. Protestant Unionism is not a party, nor even an organisation given the depths of the civil war it is embroiled in, and doesnt identify itself as nationalist socialist. It was/is however quite bigoted in general. Nazis>Bigotry. See, Nazis actually existed and did some pretty horrible stuff that went far beyond calling Catholics taigs and rearranging electoral borders, theyre not just a bad name to call people you dont like!If you think about it B Specials(An exclusively Prodestant organisation) burning catholics out of their home in the 60's e.g. Bombay street and like wise.
1938 kristallnacht, Storm troopers(An exclusively non-jewish German organisation) burning and ransacking jewish businesses and homes.
Fintan O Toole ( hes a moron tbh, but even stopped clocks get it right twice a day) did another comparison. Most prisoners in the Maze left via the door. Most prisoners in Autzwitch left via the chimney. He also noted how ashamed he would have been to try and discuss the moronic comparisons made in Ireland between Unionists and Nazis with any of the locals of a city that had actually experiend the Nazis rule. Much like you turning up a refugee camp in Darfur for the free grub. Sure your Irish, arent we the Most Oppressed People Ever!PS interestingly Sand you dont have any opinion on the "Poor Ian Paisly Jnr " thread
A member of the Paisley clan bigoted? Stop the press!As I see it,thats an unrecognition of a sizeable mandate made by people who believe that the road gone down while not perfect is the best available.
Nope its an acceptance of punishment beating. SFIRA are not the only nationalist option for a voter. They arent an option for someone who doesnt accept punishment beatings with a shrug "Shura, it keeps the kids off the streets". Its amusing that people are up in arms about Charlie Haughey being financially corrupt without actually murdering anyone, and yet are so understanding about SFIRA being morally corrupt and actually murdering people.Nonsense.Credit people with some inteligence.It's plain that they have it and are using it to encourage the story so far in recognition of the fact that theres some way to go yet.
Individuals can be intelligent. People in groups are morons. Pure democracy would be an orwellian nightmare, a chaotic attention deficit suffering badly run nightmare but one all the same. Bismark was never a democrat, but he support extending the vote because he knew people could be manipulated with appeals to their base hatreds and nationalism. Why do you think politics is continously dumbed down for mass consumption? Why do you think people are given many, many options to review important treaties theyll be voting on and still say they havent a breeze what its all about? People ask to be told what to think, and who to vote for based on one line slogans and gut felt tribalism. SFIRA and the DUP havent crushed the middle ground in Northern Ireland by appealing to the intelligence of their voters.Fr Reid was simply stating fact.
Are you saying that its a fact there is no alternative to punishment beatings? That there is no police force or law enforcement in Northern Ireland?
Reid stated an opinion, straight from the SFIRA playbook - he endorsed their position on punishment beatings and used his influence to attack those who might disagree. Can you see too many people standing up and saying "There is no justification whatsoever for punishment beatings, there is a police force there and we need to work with it so we can have an accountable police force for everyone" without getting it thrown back that Fr Reid, hero of the peace proccess, beloved by all, moderate and much respected, disagrees and claims there is no alternative?I understand all those people are constantly saying its an issue.You're misinterpreting their actions.
I'll interpret them differently for you if you like, but I suspect you already are aware of this different interpretation...
Those guys(Blair etc) know the day you stop talking is the day you start going backwards.
Im not misinterpreting their actions at all. Theyve made the most extreme and violent groups the stars of the proccess, refused to find anything they do unacceptable - sending a direct message to the electorate - and treated the peaceful lawful moderate parties that actually forged the peace proccess, the SDLP and the UUP, like red headed step children. Now they cant understand why the DUP ( A collection of lunatic fringe bigots not too long ago) and SFIRA ( ultra violent terrorists ) are "the middle ground". You say SFIRA are being raised to meet democratic standards, it looks more to me that democratic standards are being pushed down to meet SFIRA, who have never and probably never will accept that they have no right to murder people.It's a complete and mischievous misrepresentation.
No its not, if anything you misrepresented me and proceeded to take the high moral ground claiming I said you supported punishment beatings when I said nothing of the sort.No
Cmon now, dont be a perfectionist. Nobody is saying that murder isnt wrong.
What most people are saying is that theres a transition to be done in what you term as an ill society. It's just that it is an evolution, not a revolution. I have my doubts ias to whether the we'll bin it immediately because some arent playing ball yet approach would be best practice.
Seriously, what would happen if somehow Stormont was restarted, and then a few months later some off duty SFIRA "election workers" murder a man in a bar full of SFIRA politicians. Yeah, I know. Itd never happen. The police operation is met with stonewalling, the suspects seem remarkably well informed on what the police are doing and witnessess are intimidated. SFIRA attacks the police for its heavy handed investigation, claiming its all a anti-agreement Securocrat plot. What do you reckon should be done? Collapse Stormont? Carry on as normal? Whether you like or not you are going to have to look the other way if you want to keep the whole thing on the road, indeed, itll be an immense battle to stop the DUP from pulling out.Blah blah blah - your link brings me to the "Hearts and Minds" page of BBC NI.
Where is the link where Reid says the IRA are whiter than white?.
That wouldnt be the BBC Hearts and Minds page that carried out the interview and carried the media file containing the program would it? If you cant be bothered watching the interview or reading a transcript then dont come crying to me. Your non-informed position is your problem, not mine.0 -
C'mon now Sand you must know,I'm saying its a fact that some people don't like the PSNI (yet) just as much as its a fact that you don't like that fact.Sand wrote:Are you saying that its a fact there is no alternative to punishment beatings? That there is no police force or law enforcement in Northern Ireland?
He actually stated a fact.Reid stated an opinion,
you keep saying that yet fail to show one single statement where he has said punishment beatings are right-I need to see this to say you are right here-why arent you showing me this? Would it be because you cant?straight from the SFIRA playbook - he endorsed their position on punishment beatings and used his influence to attack those who might disagree.
I can recognise that It's good to work towards that end yes.However,to paralell your concerns,not at the price of overturning the ship thats yet to arrive at land having sailed so long-especially when there are quite a few seagulls appearing.Can you see too many people standing up and saying "There is no justification whatsoever for punishment beatings, there is a police force there and we need to work with it so we can have an accountable police force for everyone"
you seem to be the one using the hyperbole in some so far unreasoned anti FR Reid rant.All Fr Reid is doing is diagnosing the problem.He's not said the problem is right.without getting it thrown back that Fr Reid, hero of the peace proccess, beloved by all, moderate and much respected, disagrees and claims there is no alternative?
Thats all an opinion Sand,I dont have to agree with it and so far you've far from convinced me-even down to the simplest request I've asked , like where Fr Reid has said punishment beatings are right.Im not misinterpreting their actions at all. Theyve made the most extreme and violent groups the stars of the proccess, refused to find anything they do unacceptable - sending a direct message to the electorate - and treated the peaceful lawful moderate parties that actually forged the peace proccess, the SDLP and the UUP, like red headed step children. Now they cant understand why the DUP ( A collection of lunatic fringe bigots not too long ago) and SFIRA ( ultra violent terrorists ) are "the middle ground".
Everytime I ask that, you spin me an opinion instead of a factual utterance from Fr Reid stating that they are right.
Sand would you quit saying things blatantly that I have not said.You say SFIRA are being raised to meet democratic standards, it looks more to me that democratic standards are being pushed down to meet SFIRA,
I said that voters usually vote for parties who share their values and that by and large we've reached that stage in the South but not yet in the North.
I'm not here to argue regarding SF's opinions on murder but If you think Fr Reid agree's with murder and criminality , and you obviously do-then I suggest you take it up with Rome and campaign to have him defrocked rather than annoying me with what I regard as an unconvincing rant about it.who have never and probably never will accept that they have no right to murder people.
Please quit saying I said things that I didnt say.No its not, if anything you misrepresented me and proceeded to take the high moral ground claiming I said you supported punishment beatings when I said nothing of the sort.
I refuted your allegations that I was cheerleading for the IRA by my participation in this thread.
Like a card carrying member of FG,if he did the same thing I'd expect him to be subject to the full rigour of the lawSeriously, what would happen if somehow Stormont was restarted, and then a few months later some off duty SFIRA "election workers" murder a man in a bar full of SFIRA politicians. Yeah, I know. Itd never happen. The police operation is met with stonewalling, the suspects seem remarkably well informed on what the police are doing and witnessess are intimidated. SFIRA attacks the police for its heavy handed investigation, claiming its all a anti-agreement Securocrat plot. What do you reckon should be done? Collapse Stormont? Carry on as normal? Whether you like or not you are going to have to look the other way if you want to keep the whole thing on the road, indeed, itll be an immense battle to stop the DUP from pulling out.0 -
Sand wrote:Then such actions would be considered "military" under Reids mindset. However, in 1994 SFIRA declared an end to all "military" operations. Including bank robberies you might have throught in the above mindset but which obviously wasnt the case. In the recent statement SFIRA declared an end to *all* activity, a basic admission that its activity included "military" and crinimality.
Im sure though Reid has some method of rationalising it, Id bet on massive the self-denial and wilful ignorance that typlifies your average Provo.
Well for a start I do not know of any organisation calling itself SFIRA or that such an organisation released any statements I was refering to the group styling itself the IRA and commonly known as the Provisional IRA
OK now get yourself into the provisional republican mindset if that is possible they consider the PIRA to be an army or to have been an army in the past pre decommissioning If an army calls a ceasefire and halts military operations it does not cease to be an army it still marches and trains and procures weapons in case it will need them at some time in the future those actions are all military operations however they would not constitute a breach of a ceasefire nor would they be criminal acts
The use of the words all activity are meant to encompass all the various activities that the IRA engaged in and not just the offensive military operations that would include training procuring funds and arms and I would not see as an admission that it had been involved in criminality
BTW you are being very unfair on Alec Reid who has worked so hard to get us to the point were the IRA have decommissioned something that has never happened in this country before
Alec Reid has campaigned tirelessly against the use of violence and played a large part in convincing the Provisional IRA that there is another way if you think that could have been achieved by the likes of dennis Faul you are sorely mistaken
He is a good man and a Republican who does not believe in the use of violence there are a lot of them aroundSand wrote:
Because the decommissioning work comes down to "Believe me, I cant tell you what I saw, where I saw it, when I saw it, or who told me to come and see it, but wow, let me tell you it happened". Do you know how many weapons were put beyond use? If you were on a jury would you convict a man of rape *purely* on hearsay? Because thats all we have, hearsay. Theres not a single verifiable scrap of evidence around the whole process because SFIRA were afraid of being humiliated. Well, grand for them, but whilst I cautiously accept that some sort of decommisioning occured due only to there being too much smoke for there to be no fire, I do not believe or trust SFIRA whatsoever - why should anyone, theyre pathological liars - and I have deep misgivings about a proccess they controlled from start to finish.
Hence, when one of the so-called independant witnessess is basically a provo with a pulpit whod believe the Provos if they said fire was wet it doesnt make me think, hmmm thats reassuring. And thats me, a Catholic born in the republic where kids are basically indoctrinated with at least a somewhat favourable attitude towards the Provos and their version of history. The damage is that the DUP can now have a field day. The ball was in their court previously, but now they can pass it right back and say why should we believe a man like this? And their support is generated from a massive Unionist distrust and disillusionment with the peace proccess. I cant see them getting any grassroots pressure to engage any time soon.
The big problem with your point is that Fr Reid was just one witness and he was the witness from the Catholic/Nationalist side of the fence so shock horror he is a Nationalist what did you expect a catholic priest who was a member of the Orange Order
Trying to discredit the process because the Nationalist witness is a nationalist is nonsense and it completely ignores the Rev Goode and the International decommissioning Body
The simple fact of the matter is that this decommissioning is a big embarrassment to you and people of your mindset for years you have been telling us that the IRA are not committed to peace and that they would never decommission. Now they have and you are stumped so you are clutching at straws trying to convince people that it is not real or that there may be something wrong with it so you dont have to face the fact that you were the wrong the IRA have decommissioned it is done finished over with.
It can not be done again I understand people like yourself and the DUP who long for the good old days when you knew where you stood and things were certain and you were convinced that you were right about everything well Iam afraid that you and the DUP are just going to have to get over it the PIRA have gone away.
BTW I heard a rumour that the other so called independent witness was a unionist am I supposed to take the word of a unionist that the IRA have decommissioned we all know what the Unionists think about the IRA
On your rape conviction point if I was on a jury I would convict if a Catholic and a protestan clergyman and a group of foreign observers were eyewitnesses and they seen it with their own eyes what would you do let him go in case the catholic priest was a liar
T0 -
Sand wrote:That wouldnt be the BBC Hearts and Minds page that carried out the interview and carried the media file containing the program would it? If you cant be bothered watching the interview or reading a transcript then dont come crying to me. Your non-informed position is your problem, not mine.
I watched the link that was there, and funnily enough, Alex Reid did not feature. There was an interview with Reg Empey, a bit about Ian Paisley's wife and a further part on the Mayo Gas Pipeline. Perhaps the file is not there anymore, but I still have not received the link I asked for. By the way, I'm not coming crying to you, I'm just asking for something that will lend some credibility to what you've said. You've still not provided this.0 -
It is so obvious that those who oppose peace can only try to discredit the Nationalist witness because he is a Nationalist while continuing to ignore the fact that the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning gave the report with 2 witnesses as an extra. Those 2 witnesses included a Nationalist witness and a Unionist witness and low and behold people are shocked that the Nationalist witness is in fact a Nationalist and the Unionist witness is in fact a Unionist.
Tune in tomorrow for the next installment of stating the obvious to hide behind the blind hatred of the peace process0 -
A Dub in Glasgo wrote:It is so obvious that those who oppose peace can only try to discredit the Nationalist witness because he is a Nationalist while continuing to ignore the fact that the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning gave the report with 2 witnesses as an extra. Those 2 witnesses included a Nationalist witness and a Unionist witness and low and behold people are shocked that the Nationalist witness is in fact a Nationalist and the Unionist witness is in fact a Unionist.
Tune in tomorrow for the next installment of stating the obvious to hide behind the blind hatred of the peace process
In another shocking developement I believe that the International decommissioning body are foreigners this just gets worse and worse0 -
C'mon now Sand you must know,I'm saying its a fact that some people don't like the PSNI (yet) just as much as its a fact that you don't like that fact.
Earthman, did you read/watch the same interview as I did? You claim he stated a fact. What he stated was "There is an absence of a police force". He did not state "Some people think there is an absence of a police force", nor did he state "There is an absence of a police force in the opinion of some people". He did not state a fact, he stated an opinion. I see though you managed to find a way to claim he was stating a fact (in your next point) without it actually be factual enough for you to state yourself.
Now please, seeing as you go on to repeatedly attack me for apparently inventing your comments please, please, do not play silly buggers and start reinventing what Reid stated.you keep saying that yet fail to show one single statement where he has said punishment beatings are right-I need to see this to say you are right here-why arent you showing me this? Would it be because you cant?
He said he didnt agree with them, but that they occured because there was no police force. Some might state they dont agree with them, and there *is* a police force. Are you saying you see no difference in those positions?
Reid took the SFIRA stated position, that theyre forced by some community responsibility to carry out punishment attacks. They carry out these punishment attacks. Reid endorsed the reasoning used to justify punishment attacks, and by default used his influence to quash dissent from those who might disagree.Sand would you quit saying things blatantly that I have not said.
Right, so what are you offended at now? That I said its your postion that SFIRA are being raised to democratic standards? Is that inaccurate? Are you saying theyre not?I'm not here to argue regarding SF's opinions on murder but If you think Fr Reid agree's with murder and criminality
He feels they are whiter than white regarding criminality, hence they never committed a murder. How could he agree with SFIRA committing murder when he refuses to accept that they ever did?Please quit saying I said things that I didnt say.
Oh so you didnt attack me and claimed I said you were using SFIRAs support to justify punishment beatings? Hmmm, Im pretty sure you did. Quick copy and paste exercise surely.Quite frankly Sand your post is now descending into the realms of Bull****.
Nowhere ever have I condoned IRA criminality or any criminality on this board and I'm not doing so now.
You are misrepresenting my position here wholesale.Credit me with some inteligence please.
And again...I'd ask you not to misrepresent that position of mine as a condoning of punishment beatings when clearly it is not.
Youre right, clearly you werent attacking me for an imagined misrepresentation.Like a card carrying member of FG,if he did the same thing I'd expect him to be subject to the full rigour of the law
What if pushing this guy to the full rigour of the law leads to the collapse of the peace proccess, your proverbial ship overturning within sight of land? Is it not worth it for systematic intimidation and beatings, but for a chance bar room brawl youd pull the rug on it all?He is a good man and a Republican who does not believe in the use of violence there are a lot of them around
No, he simply justifies it. The Nazi outburst justified SFIRAs murderous campaign, and his non recognition of the police force in Northern Ireland justified punishment beatings.The big problem with your point is that Fr Reid was just one witness and he was the witness from the Catholic/Nationalist side of the fence so shock horror he is a Nationalist what did you expect a catholic priest who was a member of the Orange Order
Verification, independant witnesses. I got two witnessess both selected by SFIRA and a panel who wont tell us anything that can be checked independantly, because theyve been ordered not to by SFIRA, who theyre supposed to be reviewing. Oh youre right, the proccess is fantastic.On your rape conviction point if I was on a jury I would convict if a Catholic and a protestan clergyman and a group of foreign observers were eyewitnesses and they seen it with their own eyes what would you do let him go in case the catholic priest was a liar
So youd convict purely on hearsay? Interesting case recently in China. They got a confession out of a man that he murdered his wife. No body though. No evidence. Just the confession. They executed him. His wife turned up safe and sound a few years later.
You need independant verification that anyone can check. We dont have that.I watched the link that was there, and funnily enough, Alex Reid did not feature. There was an interview with Reg Empey, a bit about Ian Paisley's wife and a further part on the Mayo Gas Pipeline. Perhaps the file is not there anymore, but I still have not received the link I asked for. By the way, I'm not coming crying to you, I'm just asking for something that will lend some credibility to what you've said. You've still not provided this.
Ive told you where I got the comment from. Thats all I need to do actually. If I got a quote from a book, I dont have to buy you the book. If I got it from a paper, I dont have to buy it for you. If I saw it on a TV interview, I dont have to make sure you watched it. I gave you the link to the interview, if they recycle the shows on a weekly basis thats frankly not my problem. All your admitting is that youre commenting on something you didnt watch or read up on. That is again, your problem.Those 2 witnesses included a Nationalist witness and a Unionist witness and low and behold people are shocked that the Nationalist witness is in fact a Nationalist and the Unionist witness is in fact a Unionist.
Actually Unionists didnt select either, they were both selected by SFIRA though the witnesses are not allowed to admit that.In another shocking developement I believe that the International decommissioning body are foreigners this just gets worse and worse
Oh you mean the crowd who wont tell us anything? That takes its PR cues from SFIRA?
Transparent, independant proccess? Yeah, right.0 -
Actually Unionists didnt select either, they were both selected by SFIRA though the witnesses are not allowed to admit that.
You are now trying to discredit Rev Hood?
Who would be acceptable to you? Not forgetting, of course, that witnesses are not actually required and any democrat should be taking the word of the body that was legally and democratically agreed by the majority... the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning.
I can only assume you exercised your democratic vote and were part of the 6% who voted against the Belfast Agreement?0 -
Sand wrote:Ive told you where I got the comment from. Thats all I need to do actually. If I got a quote from a book, I dont have to buy you the book. If I got it from a paper, I dont have to buy it for you. If I saw it on a TV interview, I dont have to make sure you watched it. I gave you the link to the interview, if they recycle the shows on a weekly basis thats frankly not my problem. All your admitting is that youre commenting on something you didnt watch or read up on. That is again, your problem.
well, to be fair, I check BBC NI daily (and usually the "what the papers say" section) and also read the Irish Times online Daily, and funnily enough, there was no mention of this comment in what I read. I would have expected some of the usual indignation from the relevant quarters, however I've only seen this from you.
You gave me a link to something that's no longer there - and you still expect me to believe you, in the same thread that you're arguing about transparency elsewhere?.0 -
Advertisement
-
Sand I don't expect you to understand this but to the constuency that FR Reid is from ie Republicanism-for most there is no police force and that is a fact.Sand wrote:Earthman, did you read/watch the same interview as I did? You claim he stated a fact. What he stated was "There is an absence of a police force". He did not state "Some people think there is an absence of a police force", nor did he state "There is an absence of a police force in the opinion of some people". He did not state a fact, he stated an opinion
It might not be the factual situation as you or I understand it but it is a fact for those involved and theres an awfull lot of them.
To be fair, I just have to conclude that you either don't want to understand the NI situation or you just cannot.I see though you managed to find a way to claim he was stating a fact (in your next point) without it actually be factual enough for you to state yourself.
As for Fr Reid,I have seen several interviews with him and the Video footage of the debate where he used the nazi jibe.
Don't be so hostile,I just repeatedly asked you not to put words in my mouth or spin what I'm saying.Now please, seeing as you go on to repeatedly attack me for apparently inventing your comments please, please, do not play silly buggers and start reinventing what Reid stated.
Already explained above.He said he didnt agree with them, but that they occured because there was no police force. Some might state they dont agree with them, and there *is* a police force. Are you saying you see no difference in those positions?
Nope he just stated the reality of the situation.Reid took the SFIRA stated position, that theyre forced by some community responsibility to carry out punishment attacks. They carry out these punishment attacks. Reid endorsed the reasoning used to justify punishment attacks,
Thats your spin again,you're entitled to your opinion.and by default used his influence to quash dissent from those who might disagree.
What I said was that people generally vote for parties that agree with their values and that we here in the South had reached that stage.It's going to take a while longer given whats been going on in the recent past for the NI electorate to do the same to the same degree.Right, so what are you offended at now? That I said its your postion that SFIRA are being raised to democratic standards? Is that inaccurate? Are you saying theyre not?
Spinning that as some statement by me that SF or the IRA are being raised is misrepresenting me,even when what I said seems clear and not in need of clarification.
Where has he said that?He feels they are whiter than white regarding criminality, hence they never committed a murder.
Ah now you go ask Fr Reid that and show me the reply.How could he agree with SFIRA committing murder when he refuses to accept that they ever did?
Show me his denial that Republicans have shot killed and maimed for 30 years and show me where he has said this was alright.
Or point me to anywhere he has said this,bearing in mind his role.
You seem to be conjecting a lot but then such is the nature of spin.
You accused me of justifying the cheerleading of the IRA.Oh so you didnt attack me and claimed I said you were using SFIRAs support to justify punishment beatings? Hmmm, Im pretty sure you did. Quick copy and paste exercise surely.
That was a complete misrepresentation and worse an addition to what I' had actually said.
I've repeated over and over again what I thought Fr Reid was doing, what his role is, and the floor of broken glass that he has to walk across to continue that role.
The misrepresentations know know bounds it seems, but I'm not bitter.Youre right, clearly you werent attacking me for an imagined misrepresentation.
You're very fond of bringing up the McCartney situation.What if pushing this guy to the full rigour of the law leads to the collapse of the peace proccess, your proverbial ship overturning within sight of land? Is it not worth it for systematic intimidation and beatings, but for a chance bar room brawl youd pull the rug on it all?
Fact of the matter is that ,in todays society, that was a lesson learned for the political associates of those involved.It's not getting any easier for them.
He apologised.If you or I were to hear things expressed about ourselves that are usually hidden except in the heat of the moment, then there might be a lot of people we wouldnt talk to.No, he simply justifies it. The Nazi outburst justified SFIRAs murderous campaign, and his non recognition of the police force in Northern Ireland justified punishment beatings.
Talking is the only final solution up north, if you pardon the pun.
Fr Reid does not have the polish that SF have in those circumstances.He'll know better the next time.
Ian Paisley on the other hand will continue to speak his mind as the objective there is to slow down or stop this process alltogether.
Theres no need in his case for caution.
Consider that comment from yourself bookmarked for future reference, the next time I see you diss someones sources.Ive told you where I got the comment from. Thats all I need to do actually. If I got a quote from a book, I dont have to buy you the book. If I got it from a paper, I dont have to buy it for you. If I saw it on a TV interview, I dont have to make sure you watched it. I gave you the link to the interview, if they recycle the shows on a weekly basis thats frankly not my problem. All your admitting is that youre commenting on something you didnt watch or read up on. That is again, your problem.
For the record,I dont doubt what you heard and the opinion you drew from it.Thats because I read most of your posts.
But It's difficult/impossible to please anyone with regard to providing a different view on an opinion formed on a source thats no longer easily available.
The best that can be done in that case is to offer another perspective and back that up and thats whats being done.
Theres no obligation on either party for to accept each others positions.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement