# No danger of the 'Ra taking power.



## WolfeTone (13 Feb 2020)

Im guessing that such a topic title was beyond even '_la-la-rainbow-unicorn land'_ when BB had the good foresight to establish AAM back 20yrs ago? or more??

In between then and now, why would it still be as thing today?




Duke of Marmalade said:


> I don’t see any danger of the ‘Ra getting any share of power down here.


----------



## Purple (13 Feb 2020)

The Shinners have TD's who have admitted IRA connections. They are likely to be in power. What else is there to say?


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> The Shinners have TD's who have admitted IRA connections. They are likely to be in power. What else is there to say?



Eh, that there _is_ a danger of the 'Ra taking power?


----------



## Purple (13 Feb 2020)

Well there will certainly be IRA people in power if the Shiners are in power. They haven't gone away you know.


----------



## Purple (13 Feb 2020)

Deirdre Hargey was in Magennis’s bar in Belfast the night a bunch of good republicans beat and stabbed Robert McCartney to death. She, along with everyone else there that night, saw nothing. She's now the Shinners communities Minister in Northern Ireland. That's the sort of person the Shinners appoint to high office.
Then there was "Stormontgate" when the Shinners were running an IRA spy ring in the NI Executive.
Then there's Ted Howell, the man Shinner NI ministers need permission from to sign off on major decisions.
I'm sure the list goes on.

Is there any reason to expect them to behave differently in this country?


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Feb 2020)

I cant speak for Deirdre Hargey and what she knows or doesn't know about the brutal murder of Robert McCartney, suffice to say the cover-up is despicable.

The "Stormont-gate" affair was clearly politically contrived. A mass raid to bring down the institutions as pressure on Unionists power-sharing with SF with an armed IRA mounted.
The charges were quietly dropped as "not in the public interest", really? Who gets to decide that IRA spies, that brought down the democratic institutions, should not be charged?
Would it have anything to do with the alleged 'spy-ring' involving a British spy, Denis Donaldson? Its clear to me that yes is the answer there.
I don't know of Ted Howell, suffice to say government ministers taking advice or direction from unelected advisors is not uncommon. If British media outlets are accurate in their reporting today, its clear that unelected advisors are wielding alot of influence on decision making of 10 Downing St.

But to answer your question directly, in consideration of the standing down and disarmament of IRA, with orders to engage in political activity - yes, I expect them to behave differently in this jurisdiction.


----------



## dereko1969 (13 Feb 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I cant speak for Deirdre Hargey and what she knows or doesn't know about the brutal murder of Robert McCartney, suffice to say the cover-up is despicable.
> 
> The "Stormont-gate" affair was clearly politically contrived. A mass raid to bring down the institutions as pressure on Unionists power-sharing with SF with an armed IRA mounted.
> The charges were quietly dropped as "not in the public interest", really? Who gets to decide that IRA spies, that brought down the democratic institutions, should not be charged?
> ...


Might be useful to inform yourself of Ted Howell. All Ministers have special advisors, they're paid for by the State, they have an official role, what the SF Minister did here was not "run something by" Ted Howell, he asked was it ok for him to make a decision. There's a big difference. It's all covered in Sam McBride's book "Burned" on the Cash for Ash.


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Feb 2020)

dereko1969 said:


> All Ministers have special advisors, they're paid for by the State, they have an official role, what the SF Minister did here was not "run something by" Ted Howell, he asked was it ok for him to make a decision. There's a big difference.



Yes, its not good enough. I assume that they will get this sorted and register any special advisors in accordance with regulations.


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Feb 2020)

FF open to talks with all parties except SF. This puts the ball into Leo's court. The coalition of FF/FG is finally emerging. 
Hope they get on with quickly. 
The _Duke _appears to have called this one correctly.


----------



## Sunny (13 Feb 2020)

FG won't enter Government with FF unless there is absolutely no choice i.e. another election and the same stalemate. There is nothing to be achieved by entering it. They will be decimated at the next election no matter what they do. Everything they do will be portrayed as some right wing evil plot. They could house every single person in a 4 bed house and they would be accused of being in league with rich developers. It would be a recruitment dream for SF and others. I can't listen to it anymore. Let the loonies form their Government without FF and FG even if it takes another election. As someone said, it is funny how before the election it was all about getting FF and FG out. Now they are being blamed for not wanting to be in.


----------



## Conan (13 Feb 2020)

As we have seen in NI, SF are much more comfortable being in opposition  criticising from the opposition benches.  The solution to any problem is obvious in opposition, but more complex in power. The Health Service in NI is nothing to write home about. The "failed state" is bailed out by Westminster. I think SF would be happier as the opposition in the Dail, allowing them to continue criticising and offering fairy tale solutions. Having the Ra in the Dept of Justice would likely result in pardons for Martin Ferris and the killers of Jerry McCabe. Criminal


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (13 Feb 2020)

Sunny said:


> FG won't enter Government with FF unless there is absolutely no choice i.e. another election and the same stalemate. There is nothing to be achieved by entering it. They will be decimated at the next election no matter what they do. Everything they do will be portrayed as some right wing evil plot. They could house every single person in a 4 bed house and they would be accused of being in league with rich developers. It would be a recruitment dream for SF and others. I can't listen to it anymore. Let the loonies form their Government without FF and FG even if it takes another election. As someone said, it is funny how before the election it was all about getting FF and FG out. Now they are being blamed for not wanting to be in.


I'm usually with you _Sunny_ but I am not sure here.  The disaffected/looney base is not much bigger than 30% and maybe at an apogee.  A stable centrist government for 5 years which might actually get things done compared to the zombie confidence trick and supply farce will not add to that 30%.  The big problem for FF/FG is maintaining their individual raison d'etre and is Leo prepared to be MM's Tan for 5 years? Leo might have to step aside.

FF/FG/Greens now 7/4 favourite with PP, looks like I won't get that Sunny pint after all.


----------



## Sunny (13 Feb 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I'm usually with you _Sunny_ but I am not sure here.  The disaffected/looney base is not much bigger than 30% and maybe at an apogee.  A stable centrist government for 5 years which might actually get things done compared to the zombie confidence trick and supply farce will not add to that 30%.  The big problem for FF/FG is maintaining their individual raison d'etre and is Leo prepared to be MM's Tan for 5 years? Leo might have to step aside.
> 
> FF/FG/Greens now 7/4 favourite with PP, looks like I won't get that Sunny pint after all.



Yeah I think FF have scuppered our great bet! You could well be right but can you imagine a Dail with a FF/FG/Green Government and an opposition of nearly 40 SF members, Left parties and useless independents like the Healy Raes. Whatever the Government achieved would be lost in the noise and I just couldn't see anything but a meltdown at the next election....I still think FG are happy to be in opposition at the moment after the election. Not sure what can entice them back in.  

I did see Gerry looking like a hippy attend their parliamentary party meeting today...And they wonder why people think unelected people might be the ones in charge.


----------



## Ceist Beag (13 Feb 2020)

As much as I'd be happy to have a stable government with responsible ministers, I have to agree with Sunny that this will mean even more finger pointing, blaming and general noise making from SF which will garner even more support for them, without them having to prove or back up any of their assertions.
It may postpone their rise to power but I would really fear that a FF/FG/Greens government now will result in a much stronger position for SF come the next election and that would really worry me.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (13 Feb 2020)

We're talking least worst option guys.  A lot can happen in 5 years.


----------



## Purple (14 Feb 2020)

I'm coming around to the idea of a centre left FF/FG/Greens coalition. The good work done by the current government, particularly in housing, is starting to bear fruit. The inevitable lag between rebuilding the economy and capital expenditure is closing. The Shinners in power will just do a Trump and take the credit for the heavy lifting done by the previous government, just like FG did for the good work done in the last year of the FF/Greens government.


----------



## Carnmore (14 Feb 2020)

Matt Carthy on RTE Radio 1's Late Debate this week didn't deny proclaiming "Up the RA" on occasion and did not in any way condemn David Cullinane's comments rather just tried to trivialise them and shift the focus.


----------



## Eireog007 (14 Feb 2020)

josh8267 said:


> in a down turn the centre government would fall asunder overnight not a hope of keeping it together,it wont take much for Mortgage defaults to kick in 188 per week on unemployment benefit after feeding your self  leaves very little to pay a rent /mortgage me think,
> only option left is state borrowing to assist or default on mortgages,
> We should be fowdard funding a downturn not ,


Are you implying that a left oriented govt would be much more stable in an economic downturn? Based on the internal Sinn Fein squabbles over the years and the fact that SPBP couldn’t agree on the colour of the sky I think it would take far less to collapse them.

Im not sure how much extra you think a left govt would be putting into unemployment benefit that a household would be capable of paying rent/mortgage and all other household expenses easily. If they are I might just change my mind about SF and happily go on the dole.


----------



## josh8267 (14 Feb 2020)

Eireog007 said:


> Are you implying that a left oriented govt would be much more stable in an economic downturn? Based on the internal Sinn Fein squabbles over the years and the fact that SPBP couldn’t agree on the colour of the sky I think it would take far less to collapse them.
> 
> Im not sure how much extra you think a left govt would be putting into unemployment benefit that a household would be capable of paying rent/mortgage and all other household expenses easily. If they are I might just change my mind about SF and happily go on the dole.


No  
I am talking about the failure of FF/FG to put in place a safety net for the people who get up early in the morning and going to work seeing at present close to 20% of payroll go in prsi/usc finding themselves out of work through no fault of there own ,
Finding out FF/FG have it already spent  it on people who never work in there life, so there is none left for people who paid into the system ,

PRSI stands for Pay Related Social Insurance , pay related my A$$ , ,


----------



## Purple (14 Feb 2020)

So who did you vote for??


----------



## Eireog007 (14 Feb 2020)

josh8267 said:


> No
> I am talking about the failure of FF/FG to put in place a safety net for the people who get up early in the morning and going to work seeing at present close to 20% of payroll go in prsi/usc finding themselves out of work through no fault of there own ,
> Finding out FF/FG have it already spent  it on people who never work in there life, so there is none left for people who paid into the system ,
> 
> PRSI stands for Pay Related Social Insurance , pay related my A$$ , ,



Ok so are you now implying that any of the other parties who are all further left than either of those two parties would somehow give less of that money to social welfare recipients?


----------



## Purple (14 Feb 2020)

Eireog007 said:


> Ok so are you now implying that any of the other parties who are all further left than either of those two parties would somehow give less of that money to social welfare recipients?


I've been asking him that question for days. Best of luck getting an answer.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (15 Feb 2020)

I think RTE have a learning point here for the next GE.  It should hold its debates at two o'clock in the morning so that we get to know what they really think.


----------



## Purple (1 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> But to answer your question directly, in consideration of the standing down and disarmament of IRA, with orders to engage in political activity - yes, I expect them to behave differently in this jurisdiction.


Were you happy to see the leader of Sinn Fein in this country and their leader in the UK at the funeral of the IRA enforcer, convicted terrorist and probobal bank robber Bobby Storey? Another "good Republican" who was a close friend of Gerry Adams, a man accused of being the head man in the IRA and of covering up the rape of his niece by his daughter. Storey was an active member of the IRA when they were murdering children in the UK. I think I'd rather see politicians at the Galway Races.


----------



## WolfeTone (1 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> Were you happy to see the leader of Sinn Fein in this country and their leader in the UK at the funeral of the IRA enforcer, convicted terrorist and probobal bank robber Bobby Storey?



?? I'm not sure what you mean. Why would I be 'happy'?


----------



## Purple (1 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> ?? Why would I be 'happy'?


I dunno, you seem to be a fan of theirs. Do you think it is appropriate that their leaders addend the funeral of a terrorist?


----------



## WolfeTone (1 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> I dunno, you seem to be a fan of theirs. Do you think it is appropriate that their leaders addend the funeral of a terrorist?



Oh, OK. Well first things first, I'm no fan of any political party. I may cast votes for a political party at any given time, but always, my vote is dependent on my political perceptions rather than any political ideology. 
To answer your question , absolutely it is appropriate that SF leaders attend the funeral the funerals of IRA members (save the apparent social distancing breakdown!). 
I can't imagine what purpose or benefit it would serve anyone if SF leaders stopped attending the funerals of IRA members.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (1 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I can't imagine what purpose or benefit it would serve anyone if SF leaders stopped attending the funerals of IRA members.



I thought the IRA was a terrorist organisation? Surely that would be one reason why members of a political party who are mad anxious to govern us would not attend?

Why is it that Sinn Féin keeps aligning itself to its darker past? With the shenanigins that FG and FF are up to I would be inclined to voting for SF but when I see SFs continued alignment with para militarism, it's turns me off them.

I did vote for a SF euro candidate at one point.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (1 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I'm usually with you _Sunny_ but I am not sure here.  The disaffected/looney base is not much bigger than 30% and maybe at an apogee.  A stable centrist government for 5 years which might actually get things done compared to the zombie confidence trick and supply farce will not add to that 30%.  The big problem for FF/FG is maintaining their individual raison d'etre and is Leo prepared to be MM's Tan for 5 years? Leo might have to step aside.
> 
> FF/FG/Greens now 7/4 favourite with PP, looks like I won't get that Sunny pint after all.


So it took 4 months for the bleeding obvious to happen


----------



## WolfeTone (1 Jul 2020)

PaddyBloggit said:


> Surely that would be one reason why members of a political party who are mad anxious to govern us would not attend?




Whatever your views on SF, disassociation from the IRA is not going to happen. The key issue for someone like myself is, is there a peaceful political path for SF, and everyone else, to pursue their objectives. If the answer is yes, then there is no need for a paramilitary wing.
I really don't care if the IRA exists or not, I care if they are armed or not. The evidence to me suggests they are not armed.



PaddyBloggit said:


> Why is it that Sinn Féin keeps aligning itself to its darker past?



To you it's their darker past, to them its the past of brave volunteers who stood against internment, collusion, shoot-to-kill, censorship, while their communities came under attack and were abandoned by the authorities.
The tragic consequences of a prolonged dirty war which we all aware of.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> When you say "govern _us" _who are you talking about? The Irish people? Or some particular sect(s) within?



The Irish electorate (as a whole)



WolfeTone said:


> To you it's their darker past,



Yes but do Sinn Féin want to represent all of the people of Ireland?

My own great grandfather was shot by the Black and Tans. My grand uncle was a commander in the old IRA. History and the past has to be remembered and lessons learned from it but if the likes of SF want to govern they have to be seen as a party for all.

I'm uncomfortable when I see people who want to govern and say they want to do right by us marching and honouring IRA members.

SF may not be uncomfortable with it but I am and the only way I can deal with that discomfort is to not vote for SF in a general election.

Saying that, I haven't much time for FG or FF either. I'm beginning to think that we human beings are inherently built to cause mayhem and hurt to each other and that no amount of 'civilising' can eradicate that.

The lockdown and how people went cuckoo queuing at the shops was evidence of me, mé féin and myself.

Sinn Féin are no different. We all grapple to defend what we have by any means at our disposal.

Ms. Foster on her side of the woods in no different. She'll fight like cats and dogs to get her dogma across.

I'm just saying that it's a pity that SF can't appeal to the likes of me more.

Sometimes I think, it would be great to see a SF majority led government. Other times I say... that's mad Ted, they have no experience of running a country, they'll run it into the ground. They're in government in the North and I see how that's turned out. You can hear the echo of silence all around Stormont.

I'm all for an Ghaeilge agus tá Gaeilge agam agus labhraím í but I think SF could have picked a better time to have a battle with an Ghaeilge and stalling the governmental process in NI.

It's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.... 

Ní fheadar cathain a thiocfaidh an lá a mbeidh gach duine sásta maireachtaáil go sona sásta le chéile? B'fhéidir nach dtiocfaidh an lá in aon chor.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

PaddyBloggit said:


> Ní fheadar cathain a thiocfaidh an lá a mbeidh gach duine sásta maireachtaáil go sona sásta le chéile? B'fhéidir nach dtiocfaidh an lá in aon chor



Is fíor ráiteas é sin, ach is é de dhualgas orainn go léir iarrachtaí á dhéanamh arís is arís. 
Ever tried? Ever failed? Try again, fail better!


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

PaddyBloggit said:


> Yes but do Sinn Féin want to represent all of the people of Ireland?


I think that is a key point. The Shinners define themselves as being enemies of part of the population. They know nothing other than division. They talk about hard working families but they only mean hard working families on low and middle incomes. They frame their rhetoric in the old socialist presumption that there is a limited amount of potential wealth and so if one family is poor it is because another family is rich.

Their links to the Provisional IRA are there and they are real and to me that matters. My family was heavily involved in 1916, the War of Independence and the Civil War. I've family members who were in prison during all three events, one that was shot during all three (and twice in the Civil War) and another who is a famous founding member of SIPTU (back when they represented the poor and the vulnerable).
Many of us can call on our family history but we cannot be slaves to it and we should not excuse bank robbery, extortion rackets, licencing drug dealers, intimidation and blowing up pensioners and children on the grounds of a historical struggle when stems from the betrayal of the Catholic population of Northern Ireland by Arthur Griffith and Michael Collins.

The IRA murdered and intimidated people from their own community who engaged with the Protestant establishment. They saw the other side as an intractable enemy. That mindset is evident to see in their present political incarnation in this country. I consider the commitment to constitutional politics by their leadership (the artists formerly known as the Army Council) as nothing more than a veneer. That in my opinion, coupled with their populist pseudo-socialism,  make are utterly unsuitable for government.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

We are already aware that Mary Lou lied that if she had been in West Belfast she would have joined the IRA.  She couldn't dare say anything else.  It was risk a temporary pushback from the Southern chattering classes or an immediate call from Falls Road HQ to explain herself.
So no surprise to see Mary Lou at an IRA funeral in Belfast.  But Fierce Doherty  That was a shock.  I thought he represented the new respectable face of SF.  So he too shouts "Up the 'Ra" in the privacy of his own comrades.


----------



## Sunny (2 Jul 2020)

You don't even need to get into a discussion about Northern Ireland, civil rights and the IRA/SF. The IRA were a murdering criminal organisation who murdered innocent people who had nothing to do with the 'struggle' including members of the Gardai. They have robbed, they have stolen, smuggled, involved in drugs/guns and had entire communities to live in fear of gangsters. We have had SF, a so called political party meet Gardai killers out of prision. We have seen them involved in the cover up of he killing of Robert McCarthy. We have the disgusting murder of Paul Quinn and the subsequent attempt to say he was a criminal by sitting SF ministers. We have heard about the missing and contempt shown to the families. We have heard SF politicians on both side of the borders attempting to deny or justify criminal activities by the IRA as some sort of romantic armed struggle against oppression. Attending funerals like this of people who have blood on their hands and declaring him to be a hero is evidence that SF have no interest in the future or representing all people of Ireland. If they were so inclined, they could have shown their respects privately but no they had to be seen on the streets showing support to their fallen 'comrade'. At the same time, they have shown themselves to be once again a party stuck in past and full of IRA apologists and idiots. Let them stay in West Belfast if the people there want them but Mary Lou and Pierce have shown themselves to be still prisoners of their IRA masters.


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> So no surprise to see Mary Lou at an IRA funeral in Belfast. But Fierce Doherty That was a shock. I thought he represented the new respectable face of SF. So he too shouts "Up the 'Ra" in the privacy of his own comrades.


I thought it was the other way around. Fierce is too "Nordie" to gain mainstream support in "the saoth" whereas Mary-Lou used to be in FF and is only interested in helping the Wuuukers you know and has nothing to do with the IRA, no, she is the New Sinn Fein, with all the blood washed off.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> To you it's their darker past, to them its the past of brave volunteers who stood against internment, collusion, shoot-to-kill, censorship, while their communities came under attack and were abandoned by the authorities.


Get over yourself Theo.  A young Catholic in 1969 Belfast had far better prospects than his counterpart in, say, Ballymun.  I was that soldier.

You probably heard me at this before. I remember being questioned in a windowless room with bare electric light bulb (you know the scene, I was a tad intimidated) for about two hours by British soldiers during internment. The session opened up with them taking a photo of me in front of one of those height clapperboard thingees with my name and RC written on it. 
They asked me where my sympathies lay.  Naively I said with the Official IRA.  (See I have a heart, I too was once leftie, but I also have a brain- you know the rest).  It was of course helpful that the Stickies had declared a cease fire.  To cut a long story short, I was released without charge, without internment and without physical hurt.  But then unlike Mary Lou I was not inclined to join the Provos.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Interesting perspectives _Purple, _and I suppose it is out of all of this and our individual understandings of matters and perspectives emerge. 



Purple said:


> My family was heavily involved in 1916, the War of Independence and the Civil War.



My grandfather was involved in WoI and Civil War (pro-Treaty). As a child I admired his army uniform portrait in my grandmother's house. When I used to ask" did grandad fight a war" I was quickly dismissed  - it was not something that was spoke about.
Later, I discovered that there was allegation against my grandfather. Allegedly, he was part of a gang that abducted, tortured, murdered and disappeared an informer to the IRA (anti-treaty). 
I don't know how much of this is true, or even if the apparent victim was an informer, but I did some cursory research and yes, the practice of abducting, torturing, murdering and disappearing alleged informers did occur. 
The veneer of the "good ol'" IRA was smashed. 



Purple said:


> from the betrayal of the Catholic population of Northern Ireland by Arthur Griffith and Michael Collins.



I take this to mean the Treaty that brought partition? 
I go back a little further, to the usurpation of the Home Rule Act, 1914, at the behest of armed Ulster Volunteers and British Army mutineers. 
The fundamental principles of the democracy and law & order were usurped by the threat of violence - invoking the planning and execution of the 1916 Rising by IRB who now saw that as far as Ireland was concerned, Britain only answered to the gun. 



Purple said:


> The IRA murdered and intimidated people from their own community who engaged with the Protestant establishment.



As did the "good ol'" IRA, now revered by the political consensus as "brave volunteers". 
The IRA of Dé Valera and Collins engaged in a sectarian campaign of murder and intimidation against the Protestant community during WoI, particularly in Cork where some 13 Protestants were murdered. 



Purple said:


> I consider the commitment to constitutional politics by their leadership (the artists formerly known as the Army Council) as nothing more than a veneer.



Then I would have thought that the public presence of the SF leadership at the funeral of a prominent IRA leader a good thing? 
It shows the public who they are and what their genus is?


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Get over yourself Theo.



I beg your pardon? Please don't tell me we have another Trump/Solomani episode again where you accuse me of peddling conspiracy theories, only for me to explain that it isn't actually my view but the views of others?

I don't advocate the IRA, the sectarian, child killing, torturing, body disappearing, intimidating, murdering IRA - old, official, provo, or whatever.
I've been clear on this before - the IRA and ALL armed groupings including British Army and RUC have been a cancer on this island.
They all represent nothing more than a failure of constitutional democratic politics.

I'm don't peddle the "Catholic oppressed" line, SF does.

To be clear, any support I may give to SF now is wholly conditional on their participation in constitutional democratic politics.


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> To be clear, any support I may give to SF now is wholly conditional on their participation in constitutional democratic politics.


And do you believe that the Party, the organisation at a top level, is fully committed to constitutional democratic politics? For my part I don't think that are and, along with their politics of division and their populist pseudo-socialism I would never support them.


----------



## Sunny (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> To be clear, any support I may give to SF now is wholly conditional on their participation in constitutional democratic politics.



Including standing on the street behind the coffin of a IRA leader who was responsible for death, misery and criminality? That's what we consider partaking in constitutional democratic politics in the year 2020 is it? Good to see we have left the past behind us then. He might have been a hero to people in West Belfast and a couple of dimwits South of the border but if Mary Lou had been Taoiseach, we could have had the leader of my country paying respects to a child killer like she represented all of us. No thanks. SF still have no desire to represent all people in this Country. They are still a bunch of bigoted terrorist supporting idiots. I actually feel sorry for some very capable SF politicians who probably do want to move on from the past but keep getting dragged by back by their IRA puppet leadership. I am surprised at Doherty though. Thought he knew better.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I'm don't peddle the "Catholic oppressed" line, SF does.





			
				TheBigShort said:
			
		

> ...brave volunteers who stood against internment, collusion, shoot-to-kill, censorship, while their communities came under attack and were abandoned by the authorities.


Sounds like oppression to me.
It seems to me that black folk in the US are far more discriminated against than RCs in NI ever were.  I know that's not a great benchmark.
There is a big difference though.  The US majority population are not under existential threat from the 13% Black minority.  In West Belfast every Easter was a sea of flags of a foreign state and still is, a state whose constitution was dedicated to the removal of NI from the map and whose leading politicians fostered the Provos (cf Arms Trial).


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Sounds like oppression to me.





WolfeTone said:


> _to them_ its the past of brave volunteers...



You are taking my comments out of context, again.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

I see Arlene has asked Michelle to step aside.
I really don't understand why the DUP want devolved government in NI.  SF make it unworkable.  London rule OK.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> You are taking my comments out of context, again.


If you are telling me now that you personally reject that litany of "oppression" as being simply SF mythology,  then I withdraw my comments.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> And do you believe that the Party, the organisation at a top level, is fully committed to constitutional democratic politics?



Yes I do, insofar as the framework for that constitutional politics, namely GFA, is substantively adhered to. 
Of course, I could be shown to be wrong and if that occurs I will accept the errors of my way. But I would hope that should the British government diverge substantively from that framework that are called to account on it - otherwise it just feeds into the narrative that violent force is the only way. 

There are many things that shape all of our views. One such thing was an interview I read by Peter Taylor with then SF chairperson Mitchell McLaughlin circa 1995 - _before_ formal political negotiations had even been agreed, _before _IRA arms decommissioning. 
In this interview McLaughlin was quite explicit, that SF were pursuing a peaceful political path and it was their objective to see an end to the IRA. 
I thought this highly significant. Events unfolded since then, that within the republican movement, this view has won the day. 
SF leadership know, that the people that vote for them now carry far more weight and strength than any political violence does - assuming that the framework for such political mandate is recognised and respected, unlike the Home Rule Act, 1914.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

The greatest threat to the GFA is perfidy by either of the joint sponsors, the British and Irish governments respectively. Ostensibly the DUP leverage in the last UK parliament seemed to endanger that joint role of honest brokers but the UK never did play the Orange card as a result of that leverage.
It will be a whole different ball game with Mary Lou as Taoiseach.  The idea of Falls Road HQ being honest brokers is cloud cuckoo land.
Of course brandishing the GFA goes down well with a Southern electorate wallowing in Brexit Brit bashing.  But clearly the 25% who supported SF would be not in the least concerned for the integrity of the GFA should Mary Lou get the top job.  Indeed the threat to the GFA of SF participation in a Southern government was on nobody's agenda in the GE.  Because the anti Brexit commitment to the GFA was mere opportunism.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> If you are telling me now that you personally reject that litany of "oppression" as being simply SF mythology,  then I withdraw my comments.



I don't subscribe to every whim or tale SF put out there, no more than the tales of any other party.
But excluding the press offices of political parties, there was the small matter of the Civil Rights Movement, led in no small part by such esteemed folk as Hume and Currie, when the SF as we know it was nothing more than a twinkle in Adams eye.
What was that Civil Rights movement all about then?



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Sounds like oppression to me.



Indeed.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> In West Belfast every Easter was a sea of flags



Probably an (over) reaction to the time when the police could bust into your to home and forcibly remove the display of such flags on the whim a preachers calling.
Perhaps the lesson is, don't ban the display of recognised national countries in the first place?



Duke of Marmalade said:


> a state whose constitution was dedicated to the removal of NI from the map and whose leading politicians fostered the Provos (cf Arms Trial).



Indeed, it wasn't just the Shinners. There was a whole crew of them involved across the political spectrum. They perpetuated the territorial claim, they armed and sponsor the IRA (some of them had their own IRA) they provided refuge for on-the-runs.
And today they preach as if their parties  had no hand, act or part, in fostering and cementing the cycle of violence that poisoned this country for a generation.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Indeed, it wasn't just the Shinners. There was a whole crew of them involved across the political spectrum. They perpetuated the territorial claim, they armed and sponsor the IRA (some of them had their own IRA) they provided refuge for on-the-runs.
> And today they preach as if there parties  had no hand, act or part, in fostering and cementing the cycle of violence that poisoned this country for a generation.


We agree on something  I do think FF are being hypocritical though I think MM is the most honourable of the whole bunch.





			
				Wolfie said:
			
		

> Probably an (over) reaction to the time when the police could bust into your to home and forcibly remove the display of such flags on the whim a preachers calling.


Actually it was the election headquarters of The Republican Party, the political wing of the IRA. Strange how you exaggerate the "oppression" inherent in a symbolic act against a sectarian organisation dedicated to destroy the State by whatever means it deems fit. Dev himself knew how to deal with sedition and it wasn't to merely take down the Starry Plough.

That was 1963 and the said preacher was regarded as a looney by both sides. To be fair the IRA had little support either (_aside query, did the oppression of the Catholic comminity only occur after 1963?).    _Within time the preacher became a hero to a section of his community and the promoters of republican violence commanded the support of a substantial section of their community.  A complex rabbit hole as to who was responsible for this descent into barbarity.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Sunny said:


> we could have had the leader of my country paying respects to a child killer



I think he was convicted for possession of a firearm without a permit. 18yrs apparently, quite a savage sentence I would have thought. Still, a long way from being accused as a 'child killer'. 



Sunny said:


> I am surprised at Doherty though



With all respect , why would anyone be surprised at Doherty? 

The people leading SF today are members of SF because they honour the volunteers of the IRA, not in spite of them.


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I think he was convicted for possession of a firearm without a permit. 18yrs apparently, quite a savage sentence I would have thought. Still, a long way from being accused as a 'child killer'.


 He was a key member of a terrorist organisation which murdered children. 




WolfeTone said:


> With all respect , why would anyone be surprised at Doherty?
> 
> The people leading SF today are members of SF because they honour the volunteers of the IRA, not in spite of them.


 Good point; they are all supporters of, and apologists for, child killers.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Actually it was the election headquarters of The Republican Party, the political wing of the IRA.



That's true, my err. I'm sure you understand the point anyway? 



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Strange how you exaggerate the "oppression" inherent in a symbolic act



I'm not exaggerating anything. It was your good self that identified the good people of West Belfast that go all-in on the flag-waving at Easter Time. 
They are not alone though, flags and emblems profound symbols of identity, right across the divide. 

For my part I don't display flags, wear Easter Lilly or partake in the national anthem, save some small indulgences during sporting events. 
But when it comes to the political arena, I consider these things as likely to provoke ill as much as provoking the narrow vision of national pride. 
But I'm also not naive to think that they are not important, and that importance is not universally evident.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I think he was convicted for possession of a firearm without a permit. 18yrs apparently, quite a savage sentence I would have thought.





			
				Wiki said:
			
		

> *Prison*
> On his seventeenth birthday, he was interned and held in Long Kesh for two years. He had been arrested 20 times previous to this but was too young for internment. He was in the "Cages", as the Nissen huts used to house internees were called, in October 1974 when republican prisoners burnt them down. He was released in 1975 but in 1976 was arrested again, charged with blowing up the Skyways Hotel. Held on remand for thirteen months, he was released but was arrested on the day of his trial leaving the court house and charged with a shooting-related incident.[3]
> 
> As the authorities were unable to convict him, he was released in March 1977, but was arrested again that August, charged with the shooting of two British soldiers. The charges were dropped that December. Charged again in 1978 with shooting a soldier, he was placed on remand but was released in May 1979. Storey was later arrested in London and charged with conspiring to hijack a helicopter to help Brian Keenan escape from Brixton Prison, but was released in April 1981. That August, after a soldier was shot, he was arrested in possession of a rifle and sentenced to eighteen years' imprisonment.[3]
> ...


Imagine 18 years for possession without a permit. What us poor catholics had to put up with.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> He was a key member of a terrorist organisation which murdered children.



Yes, that's true. Is there any difference between that, and being a member of a 'lawful' organisation that murders children? 

I don't want to go down the rabbit-hole of 'whatabboutery' suffice to say that I don't consider one organisation that murdered children having any greater authority than any other organisation that murdered children. 
If we are to label one organisation as 'terrorist' then let's label them all as terrorist. 

But I'm also the realist, a conflict has ended. There is greater hope of a shared future, I'm all for everyone paying final respects to the dead - all sides. 

As a side, I'm somewhat curious as to the reaction in AAM (maybe I shouldn't be at this stage). While there is some commentary on the life and times of Bobby Storey in mainstream media, the overall general thrust of controversy is nothing to do with MLM and Doherty being present at an IRA funeral, but rather the apparent breakdown of social distancing! 
Doherty himself remarked that mourners were all wearing masks in the church. 
There was a time when mask-wearing Republicans would invoke the ire of the great and good, but nowadays its just a health and safety issue.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Imagine 18 years for possession without a permit. What us poor catholics had to put up with.



Still, it falls someway short of being labelled a child killer. 
It's funny now, the part about being "...but he was too young for internment." 
Was probably not funny for those actually interned, regardless of age. I'm sure you would agree?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Doherty himself remarked that mourners were all wearing masks in the church.
> There was a time when mask-wearing Republicans would invoke the ire of the great and good, but nowadays its just a health and safety issue.



Yes I too am amazed that the outrage in the North is about breaching COVID regs and not about celebrating a terrorist.  It seems to me that it is the DUP who have had to make the greater nose holding exercise in going for this power sharing mullarkey.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Still, it falls someway short of being labelled a child killer.


Agreed, although I am with _Purple's _sentiments 100%.


> It's funny now, the part about being "...but he was too young for internment."
> Was probably not funny for those actually interned, regardless of age. I'm sure you would agree?


I visited friends in Long Kesh.  Auschwitz it was not (apologies for Godwin's law).  They were allowed to socialise and wear own clothing.  It was to keep them from doing harm, it was not punitive.  Dev used it.  

That's why they were so upset when, later, Maggie scrapped special category status for convicted criminals (not internees).


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Agreed, although I am with _Purple's _sentiments 100%.



I would too, except, my sentiment does not distinguish between the child killers of one organisation and any other organisation. 
So ideally, if I had my way, justice would be served without fear or favour across the board. 
But I don't have my way. I have to listen to others. Namely, the Irish people and accept their will. They have voted to accept the two-state solution or to change it if they wish. They have voted to allow the British government govern in Ireland, in spite of their child killing terrorists. And they have voted for SF to participate in government in Stormont and to participate in increasing numbers in the Dáil. 
Over the next decade we are probably likely to see more such type funerals, across the divide. 
The conflict is over, not forgotten. The future is jaw-jaw, not war-war. 



Duke of Marmalade said:


> Auschwitz it was not



Who said it was? 



Duke of Marmalade said:


> They were allowed to socialise and wear own clothing.



Eh, they were allowed to socialise and wear own clothing outside internment camps too! 
At home, at work, pubs, much more desirable hangouts like that. 

I detect a sense from you that because someone was interned, that therefore they must have been guilty of something? 
I'm not 100% sure but as I do recall some statistic that showed the vast, vast majority of those interned in the 70's had no involvement in political or paramilitary activities before they were interned... 



Duke of Marmalade said:


> It was to keep them from doing harm,



.... but may subsequently had a different inclinations after being released. 
I think the overwhelming view is that internment was a bad idea.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I detect a sense from you that because someone was interned, that therefore they must have been guilty of something?
> I'm not 100% sure but as I do recall some statistic that showed the vast, vast majority of those interned in the 70's had no involvement in political or paramilitary activities before they were interned...


Please Google and find that source.  I don't really like playing the "I was there" card but I was there.  Certainly the friend (not friend*s) *that I visited in Long Kesh was in the IRA and proud of it (he tried to recruit me).
I recall my "interrogation"  by the Brits, mentioned earlier.  The uncomfortable bit was when they mentioned names to me and asked were they in the IRA.  Of course they were and proud to be, everyone in our neighbourhood would know.  At one stage they openly policed my area which was definitely No Go.  I even recall being ticked off by the IRA for speeding in the neighbourhood.
However, I didn't want the Brits recording that I agreed that the names were in the IRA so I just answered "well you have interned them so I suppose they must be". 
I never heard any complaints that the wrong people were being interned.  The complaint was mainly that it was being applied very one sidedly, which is of course true, but even that can be justified; loyalists were not a threat to the state.  And the Brits were subsequently found guilty by a European court of inhuman treatment though not torture, I don't think my friend suffered any of that.


> I think the overwhelming view is that internment was a bad idea.


Yes, it was a bad idea and one that totally backfired, ultimately leading to Bloody Sunday and the dismissal of the Unionist regime at Stormont.  It was very bad judgement by the security authorities who completely underestimated the fact that the escape valve to the safe haven of the Republic would make it impossible to isolate the IRA. The propaganda boost to recruitment meant that it was very easy to replace any internees. It needed an all Ireland security approach, a Dev in other words.


----------



## Sunny (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> As a side, I'm somewhat curious as to the reaction in AAM (maybe I shouldn't be at this stage).



I would say many on AAM would be somewhat curious to your reaction as well........ (Although maybe they shouldn't be at this stage)


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Please Google and find that source.



I appear to have been mistaken and my initial doubt has proven correct. Instead the statistic was that the vast, vast majority interned from Catholic/Nationalist side. 
That said, there is plenty of evidence that a significant number of people were interned for no good reason. The excellent CAIN website is a great resource tool for those interested.



			CAIN: Events: Internment: Summary of events
		


"_The policy proved however to be a disastrous mistake....The crucial intelligence on which the success of the operation depended was flawed and many of those arrested had to be subsequently released because they were not involved in any paramilitary activity."_



Duke of Marmalade said:


> The complaint was mainly that it was being applied very one sidedly, which is of course true, but even that can be justified; *loyalists were not a threat to the state*



I would have to respectfully disagree with that sentiment. Loyalists may not have been intent on threatening the NI state, but their actions certainly had the effect of destabilizing the very state that they were committed to upholding.


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> So ideally, if I had my way, justice would be served without fear or favour across the board.


So if you met a FF or FG activist and got into a discussion with them in a pub about their respective parties and spoke in a strongly negative way about their party and leadership would you be afraid that you or your property would be attacked afterwards?

Would you feel the same way about the same discussion with a Shinner activist?


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I would have to respectfully disagree with that sentiment. Loyalists may not have been intent on threatening the NI state, but their actions certainly had the effect of destabilizing the very state that they were committed to upholding.


I have to agree with you there and they were the first to threaten civil war in the late 60's.
I wouldn't vote for the DUP either though.


----------



## Purple (2 Jul 2020)

On a side note I find it strange that the leadership of the Shinners won't use the name of this country but still drape our flag over the coffins of men from an organisation which had no compunction about killing members of our police force while robbing banks and murdering people.


----------



## Drakon (2 Jul 2020)

The IRA were a means to an end for Sinn Fein.

My concern is that if SF did get elected to government, they’d invade NI. They wouldn’t need the IRA anymore, they’d just use our defence forces. And they would be bound to comply.
It sounds completely outrageous though, doesn’t it?
So did 9/11.
So did our economic crash in 2008. 
And so does the C19 lockdown and pandemic. 

My father died aged 75 in 2000.
He never lived 9/11 or The Great Recession or the Great Lockdown.
It’s twenty years since he died and already these three events have happened.


----------



## WolfeTone (2 Jul 2020)

Drakon said:


> My concern is that if SF did get elected to government, they’d invade NI



I think this very unlikely. SF will only get into government if the people vote for them. The increase in their mandate coincides with the demise of the IRA and the demise of violent insurrection for political aims. SF wouldn't last 5 mins if they tried to pull a stroke like that and they would be back on the fringes in no time.
If they did get into government, with a majority, I have no doubt they would invoke the border poll referendum as agreed to in the GFA. If levels of support in NI remain the same for them, the British government would be under pressure to facilitate a border poll too. Depending on the result of that, would bring about the test of commitment to constitutional democratic politics. Not just for SF, but for Ulster Unionism and the British Government also.


----------



## Drakon (2 Jul 2020)

If you think it’s unlikely, you’re on the same wavelength as me. But 9/11 etc were also unlikely. 

The invasion wouldn’t necessarily have to be the typical military invasion that we’re normally familiar with. No Blitzkrieg. 

It could be like The Green March, when Morocco captured what was then Spanish Morocco (now Western Sahara?).
In that case hundreds of thousands of civilians protected by tens of thousands of Moroccan troops just walked over the border and claimed the region. 
Something like that anyway. 
Granted, war ensued thereafter with Polisario. But I think the Spanish just handed it over. 

Not a very populous part of the world but the bauxite resources there are huge. 

(I’m sure there are plenty of holes in my knowledge of The Green March, but, it’s the concept rather than the detail. 
I could see SF organising it, but it would be as unlikely as guys hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings in the US).


----------



## Drakon (2 Jul 2020)

I may as well declare my own feelings on a United Ireland. I’ve never been that pushed about it. I think it’s a great romantic notion. But it would be so financially crippling for the RoI. And I’d fear loyalist reprisals, akin to the IRA’s bombing campaign on mainland Britain. 

Brexit didn’t change my mind. 

But COVID-19 has. A united island would be a lot easier to manage in terms of this pandemic. And any further crises in the future.

United by consent, or even by a Green March. 
I’m in.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> If they did get into government, with a majority, I have no doubt they would invoke the border poll referendum as agreed to in the GFA. If levels of support in NI remain the same for them, the British government would be under pressure to facilitate a border poll too. Depending on the result of that, would bring about the test of commitment to constitutional democratic politics. Not just for SF, but for Ulster Unionism and the British Government also.


I think that is a misread of the GFA.  But you are right that a 50% +1 vote for a UI would be unlikely to be accepted by a shrug of the shoulders by our Unionist brethren.


----------



## Purple (3 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I think that is a misread of the GFA.  But you are right that a 50% +1 vote for a UI would be unlikely to be accepted by a shrug of the shoulders by our Unionist bethren.


The Unionists have long ago established their views on constitutional democracy; as long as they have the majority they are all for it but when the threat of a popular vote going against them is on the horizon they will bomb and shoot as well as anyone.


----------



## Purple (3 Jul 2020)

Drakon said:


> I may as well declare my own feelings on a United Ireland. I’ve never been that pushed about it. I think it’s a great romantic notion. But it would be so financially crippling for the RoI. And I’d fear loyalist reprisals, akin to the IRA’s bombing campaign on mainland Britain.
> 
> Brexit didn’t change my mind.
> 
> ...


I agree with you right up to Covid19 changing my mind. As well as the economic destruction of taking on what is a failed economic entity, their rubbish education system and the potential for terrorism what really turns me off the idea is the levels of racism, homophobia and general bigotry amongst the Unionist and Nationalist tribes. I like the fact that we live in a liberal inclusive country, generally freed from the cancer of religion. I fear that influence in my country again.


----------



## Peanuts20 (3 Jul 2020)

Let's be clear about something, a United Ireland will result in many people dying and anyone who thinks otherwise is a naive deluded fool. The unionists are not going to go "grand so". There will be violence on a scale not seen on this island since the early 70's and probably much worse. And it will be our soldiers and Gardai being transferred to Belfast who will be expected to keep the peace.

Secondly, we can't afford it. NI is bank rolled by their Government in London, who will pay for it- we will have to

As for SF, how many people here have heard one of their bombs go off? I have, twice, my windows shook when Canary Wharf went off and I was once one street over when a litter bin bomb went off down the West End one night on my way to a show. The day they repudiate the IRA, apolgise for trying to kill me and for blowing my employers head office to bits in Bishopsgate, then I might take them seriously. Until then, they are just skangers in suits


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Peanuts20 said:


> United Ireland will result in many people dying and anyone who thinks otherwise is a naive deluded fool. The unionists are not going to go "grand so". There will be violence on a scale not seen on this island since the early 70's and probably much worse.



Why? Are you suggesting that Unionists are not Democrats? Are you suggesting they are in fact terrorists?

As it stands, a UI can only come about through peaceful, democratic activity. In other words, a majority of people in NI.
Now assuming such a vote didn't produce a contentious 50%+1 return, but rather a substantive, say, 55% in favour of UI, what makes you think people will die?



Peanuts20 said:


> Secondly, we can't afford it. NI is bank rolled by their Government in London, who will pay for it- we will have to



This is all theoretical.
The prospect for increased investment in a peaceful reunited Ireland, which would benefit the whole country is huge in my opinion.


----------



## cremeegg (3 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> The Shinners define themselves as being enemies of part of the population.



They most certainly do not. Their founding purpose is to 'unite Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter in the common name of Irishman'.

That they have failed to do so is obvious, that much of their past activity hindered this objective is clear. But you are simply wrong to say that they define themselves as enemies of part of the population.

Their more recent rhetoric on equality and respect provides an outlet in NI for political views on gay rights and abortion that unites people from surprising backgrounds.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Jul 2020)

A fascinating piece in today's IT on the life of Bobby Storey.  Undoubtedly a larger than life character in the Bonnie & Clyde mode, surely to be made the subject of a film.  Northern Bank raid, Maze prison escape, Castlereagh security breach and many more, including well after the GFA. And of course a real hard man to boot, though I  presume not a child killer.  For Northern republicans to wallow in their heroes is one thing and maybe even understandable but what we have to be very, very concerned about is the contamination of our own body politic in the Republic.

Mary Lou excuses her attendance at the funeral on the grounds that Bobby Storey was a "friend".  That seems even worse than the real reason which is that Falls Road HQ would demand her presence.
Stephen Collins in the same IT highlights the threat to our democracy.  Apparently Falls Road HQ including Bobby Storey have been a fixture in Leinster House over the last few years.  How many of the 25%, many young, would be aware of this?  How many of these believe the propaganda that Bobby Storey got 18 years for being a Catholic with a rifle for hunting rabbits without a permit?  Stephen Collins sums up the danger in his final sentence:


			
				Stephen Collins said:
			
		

> ...the country may well find itself being ruled by the IRA army council after the next election.


----------



## cremeegg (3 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> He was a key member of a terrorist organisation which murdered children.



We know, you remind us every chance you get. And Dermot Martin is a key member of an organisation 10% of whose clergy raped children. We still let them run our schools.


----------



## Purple (3 Jul 2020)

cremeegg said:


> They most certainly do not. Their founding purpose is to 'unite Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter in the common name of Irishman'.
> 
> That they have failed to do so is obvious, that much of their past activity hindered this objective is clear. But you are simply wrong to say that they define themselves as enemies of part of the population.
> 
> Their more recent rhetoric on equality and respect provides an outlet in NI for political views on gay rights and abortion that unites people from surprising backgrounds.



That can say anything they like but their history and their current actions in relation to racist and homophobic elected members speaks much louder.


----------



## Purple (3 Jul 2020)

cremeegg said:


> And Dermot Martin is a key member of an organisation 10% of whose clergy raped children.


Is he running for elected office? Does he have aspirations to run the country?
Does he go to the funerals of paedophile priests and describe them as good men and close friends?

As far as I'm concerned the State should seize the assets of the RC church, including every school and hospital they own. In my view religion is a cancer. You'll not see me defending it just as you'll not see me defending the child killers, and their apologists, in Sinn Fein.


----------



## cremeegg (3 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> You'll not see me defending it just as you'll not see me defending the child killers, and their apologists, in Sinn Fein.



I understand that.

What I do see is you seeking to create division between SF supporters and the rest of society.

Most Catholics dont support the church because it rapes children, but despite that. Most SF supporters dont support SF because it killed people.


----------



## Peanuts20 (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Why? Are you suggesting that Unionists are not Democrats? Are you suggesting they are in fact terrorists?
> 
> As it stands, a UI can only come about through peaceful, democratic activity. In other words, a majority of people in NI.
> Now assuming such a vote didn't produce a contentious 50%+1 return, but rather a substantive, say, 55% in favour of UI, what makes you think people will die?



Are you seriously suggesting that the UVF, Red Hand Commando's and whatever other organisations exist or would exist in the future are going to organise a petition or stand outside the Dail going "down with that sort of thing, Careful now!" regardless of what % of the population in NI vote for a uinited Ireland.? They will in their.........  They'll pick up guns and shoot people and to think otherwise is naive and reckless beyond belief. 55% is not substantive, it would need to be 80-90% + as a minimum


----------



## Firefly (3 Jul 2020)

Peanuts20 said:


> Let's be clear about something, a United Ireland ..
> 
> Secondly, we can't afford it.



Absolutely!!


----------



## Purple (3 Jul 2020)

cremeegg said:


> I understand that.
> 
> What I do see is you seeking to create division between SF supporters and the rest of society.
> 
> Most Catholics dont support the church because it rapes children, but despite that. Most SF supporters dont support SF because it killed people.


No, I'm pointing out that SF is run from Northern Ireland by unelected people who are unapologetic about their terrorist past and who still control a criminal organisation. SF is a political front for that organisation. 
That doesn't mean every voter or member or every elected representative is in favour of terrorists being the real power behind the party but it does mean they are complicit in it. They may choose to be willfully ignorant of the truth but that doesn't change the truth.

The leadership of the RC Church condemns the rape of children. There are no known child rapists running the RC Church. If the rapists ran the show and proudly proclaimed the fact that they used to rape children but don't anymore I don't think as many Catholics would support them.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Jul 2020)

cremeegg said:


> I understand that.
> 
> What I do see is you seeking to create division between SF supporters and the rest of society.
> 
> Most Catholics dont support the church because it rapes children, but despite that. Most SF supporters dont support SF because it killed people.


_Purple _has already pointed out the falsity in this analogy.
I agree, indeed I hope, that the 25% SF support in the Republic especially amongst the young is despite their association with terrorism.
The Catholic Church have been doing their best to root out the depravity at their core.  By contrast Sinn Féin have merely recognised that the ballot box was more effective than the bomb and the bullet, so they switched tack but rather than disown that murderous campaign they glorify it.

Anyway, parking the mortality aspect which I agree carries a sprinkling of double standards esp. with FF.  But it is clear that SF are in thrall to the hard men (& women?) of IRA Army Council based in West Belfast.  Do the 25% who voted SF fully appreciate this?  If so would they care?  Would they be happy for our Taoiseach to similarly be in thrall to that esteemed body?  Would the broader Irish electorate be happy with that?

Stephen Collins is no Eoghan Harris.  His opinion piece, highlighted in an earlier post,  brought it home to me in the most explicit terms the connection between SF and the IRA Army Council.   I sort of half believed it but had an element of doubt but this opinion piece on top of Mary Lou's expression of credo in the IRA and the attendance at her "friend's"  funeral testifies to how intolerable it would be to have SF sharing power.
Maybe FG/FF should tone down the morality narrative and focus on the true focus of power in SF/IRA.


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Peanuts20 said:


> They'll pick up guns and shoot people and to think otherwise is naive and reckless beyond belief. 55% is not substantive, it would need to be 80-90% + as a minimum



A couple of points

1. DUP are already on record championing how a 52/48% result in Brexit had to honoured in the interests of democracy, apparently such a narrow margin is substantive. 

2. Inherent in your comment is a view that the democratic will of the people for a UI (should it ever be expressed)  not be afforded to the people due to the threat, real or perceived, of terrorist violence! 

The British government succumbed to the threat of Ulster volunteer violence and democracy was usurped. What followed was a century littered with violent insurrection, Civil war, sectarian murder. 

It was the disenfranchisement of the Irish people to parliament of its own, as fought for and won, through exclusively peaceful and democratic means, that spawned the IRA in the first place. 

Denying Irish people their fundamental right to determine their own political, economic and cultural lives, as provided for by the Constitution in Ireland, and under the terms of the GFA in NI, is recipe for resurging the IRA.


----------



## TarfHead (3 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> _Purple _has already pointed out the falsity in this analogy.



When ..
- priests finish their sermon with a rallying cry of "_Up the rapists_"
- the porches of churches have stalls selling pins and badges proclaiming the glories of the rapists
- the Primate of All Ireland attends the funeral of someone like Brendan Smyth

.. then the analogy holds.  Until then ..


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Apparently Falls Road HQ including Bobby Storey have been a fixture in Leinster House over the last few years



What odds? 
This whole "IRA Army Council" is the stuff of yesteryear. If an AC exists, what matters is its activities. I personally do not care, they can call themselves an AC all they want, but if their raison d'etre was to make cuddly bears for deprived children in Africa, would it matter? 
What commentators in this topic need to point out is, what subversive activity, if any, is at play? 
To all intents and purposes, every security report from PSNI and Garda suggests that while an AC exists in some form, it does not exist in any form other than legitimate political activity. 



Purple said:


> Is he running for elected office? Does he have aspirations to run the country?



The inference here is that members of SF running for office, or elected to office, are pedophiles or, covering up for same? 
These are of course outlandish, unsubstantiated allegations of a very serious nature. The information you hold should be passed onto the authorities lest you become complicit in the alleged cover up yourself. Can you substantiate these allegations and have you provided the information to the authorities? 
For my part, if I knew anybody who was running for office was engaged in cover up or worse, I certainly wouldn't vote for them. 



Purple said:


> SF is run from Northern Ireland by unelected people who are unapologetic about their terrorist past and who still control a criminal organisation.



The IRA issued a public apologised for death and injury of all non-combatants as a result of its actions. 
Make of that what you will, but it is factually wrong to say they are unapologetic.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> What odds?
> This whole "IRA Army Council" is the stuff of yesteryear. If an AC exists, what matters is its activities. I personally do not care, they can call themselves an AC all they want, but if their raison d'etre was to make cuddly bears for deprived children in Africa, would it matter?


A truly breathtaking position, which I doubt you really hold.  So you have no problem with Mary Lou as Taoiseach being answerable to an Army Council of reconstructed terrorists in West Belfast?  What can I say?  So we have sham interviews with our Taoiseach when all the while she is answerable to unaccountable figures in a foreign state.  If that is your idea of a healthy democracy, do you think it is shared by the 25% who voted for SF?


----------



## Leo (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> This whole "IRA Army Council" is the stuff of yesteryear. If an AC exists, what matters is its activities. I personally do not care, they can call themselves an AC all they want, but if their raison d'etre was to make cuddly bears for deprived children in Africa, would it matter?



Cuddly bears are a long way off the punishment beatings that are still regularly carried out in their name. Upset some of their leaders's children you end up like Paul Quinn.


----------



## Peanuts20 (3 Jul 2020)

There are 2 versions of Tayto's on this island, if we can't even agree as to the best version of crisps, what chance do we ha?ve on agreeing anything else?


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> So you have no problem with Mary Lou as Taoiseach being answerable to an Army Council of reconstructed terrorists in West Belfast?



But you have made the leap that MLM _is _answerable to an AC. 
There is no evidence of this other than what you interpret legitimate political activity to mean. 
To suggest MLM is being directed by subvervises, that she is not a capable and free-thinking politician in her own right is preposterous. It feeds into to political mud-slinging for sure, but has no basis in truth. 
It is notable that all this 'bogey IRA' stuff re-emerges around election time. And now that they are the main opposition, I suspect it will be re-gurgitated on a more regular basis purely for political posturing. 

All political parties have their bases where collective policy is formed and devised, including the input from unelected members. It is naive not think so. 

Jaysus, we even have a government party today that was reliant on the votes of its unelected members from NI to participate in government. Look at controversy they caused - well, outside AAM, none actually. 

We even allow the government of the reconstructed British Army terrorists to govern in this country. Notwithstanding their continuing cover-ups by members of its terrorists of mass slaughter of innocents, Miami Showband, Dublin/Monaghan, Ballymurphy, Loughlinisland, Pat Finucane, et al

But we could spend the rest of our lives on the whataboutery, or we can accept that while what is going on is unpalatable in various quarters from various perspectives, we voted as nation for this. We voted for prisoner releases, voted for the recognition of a partitioned Island, voted for continued British governance despite the continued cover-ups of murder and voted for the disarmenant of paramilitaries and the pursuit of exclusively democratic and peaceful means. 

If members of SF are engaged in criminality, or the cover up of Paul Quinn muder, or any other subversive activities they need to be held to account, no different to members of the British State who perpetuate the cover-up of criminality or murders. 
But to make the jump that it all amounts to some secret cabal controlling the views of MLM is Wizard of Oz stuff.


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

Haven't gone through the thread but with a SF Taoiseach are we going to be going down the road of lauding Volunteer X & Y, celebrating Narrow Water, mourning Loughall and all the rest of it? Mary Lou has recently confirmed to the Sindo that she has drank all the Coolaid, and are the people of the 26 now to be doused in it, willing or not. I'm not sure how many of the 25% are really on board with all the slaughter, so by any rational judgement ML should have just moved on quietly, a few sympathetic 'we're all victims' & "different times" platitudes.... but no, not until she's rammed the legitimacy of the RA down your throat will she rest. So on that basis I have absolutely no problem with the will of the people* being "subverted" by other political parties clubbing together to freeze out SF.

*25% of them


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> are we going to be going down the road of lauding Volunteer X & Y, celebrating Narrow Water, mourning Loughall and all the rest of it?



We are already long on the path to all that. 

Constable James O'Brien of the Dublin Metropolitan Police was on duty at gates of Dublin Castle on Easter morning 1916 when members of James Connollys Irish Citizen Army marched up to the gates. O'Brien was unarmed. When the ICA tried to enter the Castle, O'Brien doing his duty as a police officer refused entry. 
Without warning, the ICA blew his brains out. He was married with three children. 
Every year, the Irish Labour Party commemorate the memory of Connolly and the 'heroics' of the ICA. No mention of war crimes, no apology. The Labour Party have been in government here. 
Countess Markiewicz, revered to this day amongst FF, is also alleged to have carried out the execution of an unarmed police officer. 

These are war criminals. 

I support the ideology of a united peaceful Ireland. I also acknowledge the right of a people to use force to defend their community and where their fundamental rights to exercise political democratic autonomy has been usurped by violent means. 

But I'm not afraid to acknowledge that the pursuit of political aims to establish a independent Ireland by force comes with the baggage of war crimes, sectarian murders, the murder of children, the torture, murder and disappearance of informers. 
Carried out in the name of the Irish Republic, led by Connolly, Pearse, Dé Valera, Collins, Markiewicz et al, whose portraits adorn the highest offices of this State at any given time. 

We have reached a point in this country, for the first time in over a century, where constitutional democrat politics has taken the ascendency over subversive activities of paramilitaries and the British State. 
I hope it continues to embed itself and that the remnants of the violent past fade away permanently - just as the war crimes of Connolly, Collins, Dev et al appeared to have faded away from the memories of their supporters.


----------



## Firefly (3 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> I'm not sure how many of the 25% are really on board with all the slaughter, so by any rational judgement





Duke of Marmalade said:


> I agree, indeed I hope, that the 25% SF support in the Republic especially amongst the young is despite their association with terrorism.



SF focused on cheaper housing. The 25% bought it. Incidentally, I have no doubt housing would be a lot cheaper with SF in government, a handy by-product having wrecked the economy.


----------



## Firefly (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Every year, the Irish Labour Party commemorate the memory of Connolly and the 'heroics' of the ICA. No mention of war crimes, no apology. The Labour Party have been in government here.
> 
> These are war criminals.



Well holy God!!


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Firefly said:


> Incidentally, I have no doubt housing would be a lot cheaper with SF in government, a handy by-product having wrecked the economy.



Just to add to this, and my earlier views, I'm not advocating for anyone to vote for SF. If their policies on housing, health, education etc are not agreeable, then I certainly won't be voting for them. 
My staunch defence of SF is in answer to implied accusations that in casting my vote I am somehow complicit in a series of despicable crimes. 
Thatcher et al tried this tatic and failed. She used the slogan "a vote for SF is a vote for the IRA". 
Personally, I consider my vote for SF to have been a vote for an end to the IRA. My vote has done more to remove guns from Irish politics than all the crooks of the British security apparatus ever did.


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Every year, the Irish Labour Party....



This is absolutely the SF narrative, all nations are born in bloodshed type This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language. My considered take on the Troubles is 20+ years longer than justified (post Sunningdale). That's a lot of unnecessary death for the slow learners & its for that they get the blame.

While 1916 was a suicide mission, the 1918 election was clear indication that the Irish as a resounding majority demanded self-determination. When that was resisted by force then force was justified - Yes I know the IRA fired the first shots... So the War of Independence had an attainable goal, which was duly attained, albeit imperfectly on many many fronts.

Ulster was not so simple, and this is the one sticking point in the "Its all one Sinn Fein and its all one IRA". Unless the Protestants of the NE were to be driven into the sea there was never going to be neat solution. 50 years of misrule later, its all kicks off down the Vic (so to speak) and while the *P*IRA might have started out as justified defenderism, it became a long war death cult, never going to win, never to fully lose. A futile waste of life, an unhealthy dose of sectarianism thrown in. 

So while the ancestors of the Labour Party, or whoever, may have killed, unjustifiably, at least it was not on a large and protracted scale as part of a wholly unviable venture. 

Long story short I don't see the Irish State signing up to the deeds of the *P*IRA and the quicker SF get that into their heads the better.


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> My staunch defence of SF is in answer to implied accusations that in casting my vote I am somehow complicit in a series of despicable crimes.


Ah bless, I don't doubt your sincerity but isn't it obvious that SF can't leave it behind, they absolutely must sew together all the threads of Irish Republicanism or they are relegated to raggle taggle provo terrorists. If I "just" thought they were going to ruin us financially I could live with that (....I've voted FF at one point after all) but the gaslighting SF are and would/will try to do is just too much for me to stomach.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> But you have made the leap that MLM _is _answerable to an AC.
> There is no evidence of this other than what you interpret legitimate political activity to mean.
> To suggest MLM is being directed by subvervises, that she is not a capable and free-thinking politician in her own right is preposterous. It feeds into to political mud-slinging for sure, but has no basis in truth.
> It is notable that all this 'bogey IRA' stuff re-emerges around election time. And now that they are the main opposition, I suspect it will be re-gurgitated on a more regular basis purely for political posturing.
> ...


_Wolfie _I accept that SF are not alone in being answerable to unelected backroom figures.  The British Tory Party is notorious for its "men in grey suits".  And of course today the Real Taoiseach of the UK is Dominic Cummings.  So my revulsion is not so much that Mary Lou keeps company but with the company that she keeps.

On a side issue you seem to buy into Gerry Adams' mantra that there is parity of disteem between republican atrocities and those perpetrated by British forces.  One atrocity alone, the killing in cold blood of 10 Protestant workmen, shows that the IRA were in a different league.  I acknowledge that the Brits did not always show the kind of restraint they showed in NI in other theatres, but that is not relevant to this thread.


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> While 1916 was a suicide mission



Are you comfortable the highest office's of this State commemorating suicide missions as gallant actions? What message does that send to future generations of idealistic youth? 



Betsy Og said:


> the 1918 election was clear indication that the Irish as a resounding majority demanded self-determination



BTW, I have no quarrel with the principle motives of 1916 and WoI. The democratically achieved Irish Home Rule parliament had been usurped by the threat of violence from a minority. 
I'm just not going to whitewash or ignore the crimes that were attributable to the IRB and Volunteers like most political parties, and their supporters do. 



Betsy Og said:


> which was duly attained



Arguably, the subsequent Civil War suggests the goal, in the eyes some, were not attained. 
The subsequent introduction of Bunreacht na hÉireann by FF and the territorial claim within, is testament to that view. 



Betsy Og said:


> at least it was not on a large and protracted scale as part of a wholly unviable venture.



I'm reading the Proclamation now, clearly it outlines how this "unviable venture" of Irish independence had already spanned several centuries.


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Are you comfortable the highest office's of this State commemorating suicide missions as gallant actions? What message does that send to future generations of idealistic youth?
> 
> *It happened. It was the start of something. We've seen what it spawned e.g. pointless border campaign of the 50s.*
> 
> ...


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> So my revulsion is not so much that Mary Lou keeps company but with the company that she keeps.



And the aforementioned Bobby Storey no doubt had the blood of many victims, civilian and combatant, on his hands. 
Storey, as we have mentioned, was sentenced to prison and subsequently released on license under the GFA. 
The agreement, which political representatives of majority of main political parties in Ireland and Britain sat down with the political representatives of SF to negotiate and agree his release before serving his sentence. 
Not only that, supported by the highest office of the USA, the British and Irish governments put this negotiation was put to all the people of Ireland who resoundingly endorsed it. 
To cry foul now, because 22yrs later, MLM attends a funeral of Storey is nothing but political bluster. 
I'm with the mainstream media and overall political thrust here, the apparent breakdown of social distancing being the main issue. 






Duke of Marmalade said:


> One atrocity alone, the killing in cold blood of 10 Protestant workmen, shows that the IRA were in a different league.



The Kingsmill massacre was a dreadful atrocity. You won't find me excusing or apologising these war crimes. 
You are aware no doubt of overall blood-letting of the time, I think some 30 Catholics had been slaughtered in the weeks and months prior to Kingsmill? The Glenanne gang, consisting of members of British security forces. 
I'm not condoning any of it, but to look at atrocities inflicted by any one side in isolation serves little to any purpose. 

Either hang all the perpetrators of these crimes, or don't hang any. 
We have chosen, North and South, not to hang.


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Yeh I get all that @Betsy Og, but the point is, knowing what we now know, isn't it time our political leaders took down the portraits of Dev, Collins and Connolly?
Instead they perpetute the "gallant rebel" myth whilst knowing that they were engaged in war crimes.


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Yeh I get all that @Betsy Og, but the point is, knowing what we now know, isn't it time our political leaders took down the portraits of Dev, Collins and Connolly?
> Instead they perpetute the "gallant rebel" myth whilst knowing that they were engaged in war crimes.



They were the formation of our State....even Dev.... so they will always be historical figures, but yes we should be able to make a critical appraisal of what they did or did not do. The pictures on the wall are not a real issue, these were people in government in Ireland.  If Mary Lou, as Taoiseach, were to put a picture of Thomas Begley on the wall, well it might be drawing connections between the Irish State and a campaign that the State (and the vast majority of its people) did not subscribe to. So its not about Collins or Dev or whoever being a saint, its to give over with the SF quest for equivalence between the PIRA volunteers and people who fought 100 years ago.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> To cry foul now, because 22yrs later, MLM attends a funeral of Storey is nothing but political bluster.


I am just saying that I would not like my Taoiseach to keep the sort of company or friends that Mary Loy keeps.  Not trying to rewrite the GFA.


> I'm with the mainstream media and overall political thrust here, the apparent breakdown of social distancing being the main issue.


I have to say that I am really puzzled by this aspect.  I agree with the following:





			
				Stephen Collins in the Irish Times today said:
			
		

> The manner in which SF leaders flouted social distancing has attracted widespread criticism, but the more sinister feature of the event was the paramilitary trappings that put the true nature of the republican movement on open display.


Even Arlene restricts her criticism to COVID. She realises that this one will be temporary.  To criticise glorifying IRA terrorists would lead to a recurring and potentially terminal rift.  Is she so desperate to hold on to power?


> The Kingsmill massacre was a dreadful atrocity. You won't find me excusing or apologising these war crimes.
> You are aware no doubt of overall blood-letting of the time, I think some 30 Catholics had been slaughtered in the weeks and months prior to Kingsmill?


Gerry Adams is not looking for parity with loyalists which would be way beneath republicans but he sees a parity between the IRA and the British Army.  I for one believe that parity is a rare thing and that there is a spectrum of barbarity.  I actually put the loyalist murder gangs, the Shankill romper room psychopaths at the very lowest point of the spectrum.  The Provisional IRA are actually a distance better than that but it is SF fantasy that they are on a parity with the official security forces.  The plain fact is that when the IRA called a ceasefire the fire ceased - it was they who kept the whole thing going for at least 25 years too long (the demise of the old Stormont regime was probably worth fighting for, achieved in 1973)


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

Maybe its the fact that the South has fully reopened, but I have to congratulate Arlene for having a neck like a jockeys........ Considering her presiding over cash for ash and not stepping aside, its a bit much to look for her counterpart to resign over social distancing breaches. Sure even the de facto head of her beloved UK government abandoned the rules long ago at a much more critical stage. #crocodiletears


----------



## Conan (3 Jul 2020)

We also need to bear in mind that the (new) IRA also carried out murders in the Republic (with whom they were not at war). And SF continually dodged the bullet (pardon the pun) when it came to the killing of Sgt. McCabe and others. And when the killers of McCabe were released, who collected them at the gates of the prison? None other than a SF TD. The hypocrisy of SF knows no bounds.


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> They were the formation of our State....even Dev....



We already had a State. It was part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain _and _Ireland. Representing ably the majority of Irish people in Westminster by many democratic leaders such as Parnell and Redmond. 
And the viable quest for a parliament for Ireland, within the UK was attained through exclusively democratic and peaceful means. 
Until that is, the gunmen of Ulster Volunteers arrived and hijacked the will of the Kings parliament. 

The irony is that it was Redmond who pledged to stand by Britain by pledging support for the war effort in Europe. Unionism offered civil war in Ireland at Britain's time of need. Britain succumbed to the threat of Unionist violence, spawning a century littered with insurrection, civil and sectarian war. 
As for Dev, he also fought against the establishment of the State. 



Betsy Og said:


> The pictures on the wall are not a real issue, these were people in government in Ireland.



Pearse, Connolly were never in Government but they have adorned the walls of officialdom depending who was in power. 

Somehow I dont think Tomás Begley would feature highly on MLM office wall, but perhaps Martin McGuinness would... after all McGuinness was in government too. 



Betsy Og said:


> If Mary Lou, as Taoiseach, were to put a picture of Thomas Begley on the wall,



That would be a real issue for you? Presumably because of his hand in the slaughter of innocent Protestants. But Collins, who led an organisation that also saw the slaughtering of Protestant civilians, is not an issue? 

I don't really need you to answer those questions, Ive heard all the excuses and revisionism before, "different time", "they fought for _our _freedom". 

They were engaged in torture and sectarian murder of civilians and their memories are revered to this day by a political establishment that has whitewashed their crimes for political expediency 



Betsy Og said:


> give over with the SF quest for equivalence between the PIRA volunteers and people who fought 100 years ago.



Tell me the difference between - abduction, torture, murder and disappearance of alleged informers, the sectarian murder of Protestant civilians, the murder of children, the recruitment of children to the ranks - 100yrs ago and today, and I will drop the equivalence.


----------



## Betsy Og (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Tell me the difference between - abduction, torture, murder and disappearance of alleged informers, the sectarian murder of Protestant civilians, the murder of children, the recruitment of children to the ranks - 100yrs ago and today, and I will drop the equivalence.


McGuinness was not in the govenment of Ireland.

I've already given you the difference. One was a widely supported brief conflict that had the prospect of success and achieved a lot of it in the short term (and more in the longer term). 

The other was a protracted campaign (30 years), utterly without prospect of "success" with little popular support, and mostly civilian casualties. Including no warning bombs in shopping areas, incinerating folk at a hotel, chaining a cook to a car bomb etc. etc. etc.

Bar a few very isolated cases the protestants of the 26 were not the target of the War of Independence. You'll have to spell out a bit more about the child murder and child soldier thing. Nor were the men of 1916 to '21 known for their paedophilia and cover up of same...

So, not buying it in the slightest.


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I am just saying that I would not like my Taoiseach to keep the sort of company or friends that Mary Loy keeps.



That's someway short of inferring that the Irish State is in danger of being run by the Provisionals.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> I have to say that I am really puzzled by this aspect. I agree with the following:



I have to say, I'm somewhat puzzled by the referencing to 'paramilitary trappings'. Yes, there was an obvious Republican guard of honor, but no masks, no weapons, no beret and gloves, no military paraphernalia. This does not signify anything sinister to me.




Duke of Marmalade said:


> The plain fact is that when the IRA called a ceasefire the fire ceased - it was they who kept the whole thing going for at least 25 years too long



Somewhat a simplified version of events. You are aware of the collapse of previous ceasefires and ultimately the non-existent element of trust between the protagonists?

I agree it could have ended earlier, and I'm sure we all wished it would have. In the words of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
"_With the benefit of historical hindsight we can all see things which we would wish had been done differently or not at all." _

As regards parity between IRA and BA, it depends on where you place authority. Authority is derives from complying with law & order. If the BA are not answerable for their crimes then they have lost all authority.
The despicable and brutal murder of Jean McConville is etched into the mind of most in my generation, rightly so.
But the murder of Joan Connolly and the continuing cover-up is no less a despicable act. The perpetrators of the murder and those who cover up have no authority. They are equivalent to the perpetrators of the Jean McConville murder.
You may hold a different perspective and that is fine, but I cannot imagine you don't at least understand my perspective?

*_And with that, having defended my conscience in choosing to vote SF should I wish by exposing the demons of our patriot dead and relying on the words of the British monarch, I think I will call it a day on this topic!  _


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> That's someway short of inferring that the Irish State is in danger of being run by the Provisionals.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ok I don't think you are a wicked guy even though your sympathies seem to lie with folk that I would so categorise, but we obviously have different perspectives.


----------



## cremeegg (3 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> To cry foul now, because 22yrs later, MLM attends a funeral of Storey is nothing but political bluster.



that surely is the  point.


----------



## WolfeTone (3 Jul 2020)

*_Last one! _



Betsy Og said:


> McGuinness was not in the govenment of Ireland.



He was in government in NI, a recognised authority across the world, and more importantly amongst the people of Ireland, unlike the Provisional Government of 1916.



Betsy Og said:


> One was a widely supported brief conflict that had the prospect of success



1916 had no mandate, no popular support, no prospect of success, save the _retrospective _mandate, support and success attributed to it now.
The same type of retrospective success some are concerned SF will attribute to the Provos.



Betsy Og said:


> The other was a protracted campaign (30 years), utterly without prospect of "success" with little popular support, and mostly civilian casualties. Including no warning bombs in shopping areas, incinerating folk at a hotel, chaining a cook to a car bomb etc. etc. etc.



The greatest casualty grouping throughout the conflicts were innocent civilians.
Some 260 Irish civilians killed in a week including some 40 children.
For this our President parades? The slaughter of innocent Irish civilians!



Betsy Og said:


> Bar a few very isolated cases the protestants of the 26 were not the target of the War of Independence.



The point is not how many, the point is the intent. We can't do anything about the intent now, but we can stop pretending that our gallant hero's are not without the blood of innocents.If we did then I could comfortably stand finger pointing at MLM and her tribute to Storey.
But to me it is glaring hypocrisy in our political class.



Betsy Og said:


> Nor were the men of 1916 to '21 known for their paedophilia and cover up of same...



_Well... _Pádraig Pearse? Maybe? It's just speculation.... let's finish with a poem from Pearse, make of it what you will.

*LITTLE LAD OF THE TRICKS

by Padraig Pearse.


Little lad of the tricks,
Full well I know
That you have been in mischief
Confess your fault truly.

I forgive you, child
Of the soft red mouth
I will not condemn anyone
For a sin not understood.

Raise your comely head
Till I kiss your mouth:
If either of us is the better of that
I am the better of it.

There is a fragrance in your kiss
That I have not found yet
In the kisses of women
Or in the honey of their bodies.

Lad of the grey eyes,
That flush in thy cheek
Would be white with dread of me
Could you read my secrets.

He who has my secrets
Is not fit to touch you:
Is not that a pitiful thing,
Little lad of the tricks ?*


----------



## Betsy Og (4 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> He was in government in NI, a recognised authority across the world, and more importantly amongst the people of Ireland, unlike the Provisional Government of 1916.


The occupied 6 county area is not Ireland or the State, McGuinness was not in the government of Ireland. Fact.



WolfeTone said:


> 1916 had no mandate, no popular support, no prospect of success, save the _retrospective _mandate, support and success attributed to it now.
> The same type of retrospective success some are concerned SF will attribute to the Provos.



I've already described it as a suicide mission. The War of Independence clearly had a mandate (1918 election before war 1919 to 1921). There is no such thing as a retrospective mandate. It the Brits hadn't handled the aftermath so badly then 1916 would not have been the event it became, but if Home Rule was not delivered there would always have been a justifiable war.




WolfeTone said:


> The greatest casualty grouping throughout the conflicts were innocent civilians.
> Some 260 Irish civilians killed in a week including some 40 children.
> For this our President parades? The slaughter of innocent Irish civilians!



We'll have to ring Joe (Duffy) on this one (he wrote the book on it). I'm fairly sure most of the civilians were killed by the Brits. What the men of 1916 did not do was plant bombs in civilian areas, often crowded shopping areas, sometimes with no warning or sometimes at such a scale or intensity there would have to be lots of civilan casualties (Bloody Friday). Or sometimes they blew up young and old at a commemoration (Enniskillen). Or sometimes they blew up lads on the way to a building job (Teebane), or machine gunned a church (Darkley) and handpicked the 10 protestants to execute them (Kingsmill). So it is an absolute insult to those of 1916 to 1921 to equate them with the Provo bombers and sectarian murderers.



WolfeTone said:


> The point is not how many, the point is the intent.



Indeed. You have a 30 year sectarian campaign versus 3 or 4 isolated incidents (West Cork & maybe 1 in the midlands). So the numbers do matters. When Gerry Adams says "Show me a conflict without civilian casualties." He's right, there were always be some, the bit he leaves out that when you bomb recklessly you are knowingly the author of those deaths.

Pearse as I've said was a strange character, he didn't strap a bomb to himself but death was always on the agenda. He wrote some strange poetry, but that of itself is not a crime.


----------



## WolfeTone (4 Jul 2020)

*_it's a new day, I'm refreshed again! _



Betsy Og said:


> The occupied 6 county area is not Ireland or the State, McGuinness was not in the government of Ireland. Fact.



He was a member of a government recognised by the Irish people as legitimate is the point. 
The leaders of 1916 had no mandate from the Irish people to act as they did. 
The portraits of these people who triggered an insurrection in which hundreds of Irish civilians would die violently, adorn the walls of the highest offices of this State. I'm suggesting, given that the political class is now opposed to such type of unsanctioned, unauthorised military actions, it is time to take down the portraits and stop commemorating them in gallant form? 



Betsy Og said:


> The War of Independence clearly had a mandate (1918 election before war 1919 to 1921).



Again, factually incorrect. The 1918 election was not a vote to go to war, it was a Westminster election in which the SF _proposed _to use 'any means necessary' to establish an independent Ireland. 'Any means necessary' could mean anything. It could mean war, or it could mean agitating for international recognition, as De Valera sought to do in US, as is actually in the SF manifesto - war is not explicitly referred, albeit it is implied. 
Nevertheless there was no vote, no authorisation given to go to war as a means to attaining Irish independence by the First Dáil. The war commenced when rebels, acting on their own authority (and presumably interpretation of the SF manifesto) took up arms by themselves. 



Betsy Og said:


> There is no such thing as a retrospective mandate. It the Brits hadn't handled the aftermath so badly then 1916 would not have been the event it became,



If it had no mandate, it was illegal? That is my point. People in government who commemorate illegal suicide missions leading to the deaths of hundreds of Irish civilians are in no position to lecture others on their illegal violent insurrections. 
Unless of course, they _retrospectively _legitimise the actions of 1916? 
This i believe, is a concern of yours and others with regard to SF today? 
That if they get into power that they will retrospectively legitimise the Provos just as the rest of our political class has retrospectively legitimised 1916 and WoI for their own political expediency. 



Betsy Og said:


> but if Home Rule was not delivered there would always have been a justifiable war.



The Home Rule Parliament of 1914, as passed by Houses of Parliament has never been delivered. It was usurped by the threat of Unionist violence. 
Until 1998, this State never recognised the authority of British rule in any part of Ireland. This State deemed it an illegal occupation. 
Relative to previous insurrections, the justification to wage war against Britain has always been there, until 1998.



Betsy Og said:


> I'm fairly sure most of the civilians were killed by the Brits.



I know, you don't have to remind me of their atrocities. It's the atrocities of our own side that I don't gloss over. 



Betsy Og said:


> What the men of 1916 did not do was plant bombs in civilian areas, often crowded shopping areas, sometimes with no warning or sometimes at such a scale or intensity there would have to be lots of civilan casualties (Bloody Friday).



No, they didn't. But innocent people they did kill. Without no authority other than their own self-imposed authority to murder innocent unarmed people as they went about their livelihoods. If you can legitimise that, and not recognise the crimes committed you have no moral authority over those who try to legitimise the atrocities you outline. 



Betsy Og said:


> and handpicked the 10 protestants to execute them (Kingsmill)



This atrocity has been referenced earlier. It was a despicable criminal act. I took sometime to remind myself of events. This massacre followed a massacre of six Catholics the night before. The perpetrators were made up of British army and security personnel. The same British army which this State recognised as an illegal occupation, just as they did in 1916 and 1918.

We could spend all day selectively point scoring atrocities. It is futile. 

In 1998 the people of Ireland, *collectively,*(Sunningdale was indeed for slow learners, even the Loyalists saw through the politics of exclusion inherent in it) expressed their will to take a different path in the interests of resolving our difficulties in a peaceful path. 
There are many unpalatable aspects of this agreement. The release of murderers of Gerry McCabe for instance and SF waiting at the gates. But it wasn't SF who authorised their release in the first place. You have to thank Irish and British governments for that, as mandated by the people of Ireland. 
Equally unpalatable is the continued cover-up by the PSNI of information relating to Miami Showband massacre. The implications of law & order authorities engaging in the cover up of murder is undoubtedly unpalatable to most . I know this because I know the how unpalatable the continued cover up of Robert McCartney murder by members of SF is. 
The cover up of information pertaining to a murder investigation is unpalatable in one instance, it surely is in all instances? Yet, unpalatable as it is, I have to accept that PSNI are a lawful authority in this country. 

PSNI files delay



Betsy Og said:


> You have a 30 year sectarian campaign versus 3 or 4 isolated incidents (West Cork & maybe 1 in the midlands)



In the interests of common sense, it wrong to describe the IRA campaign as a 30yr sectarian campaign. Yes, undoubtedly there were far more sectarian atrocities, but it wasn't waged by one side over another. The British State also participated and colluded in sectarian murders throughout the period. 
It is the tragedy of the whole affair. 
But for a sectarian campaign, the Provos were woeful as I think they actually killed more Catholics than Protestants. 



Betsy Og said:


> He's right, there were always be some, the bit he leaves out that when we bomb recklessly you are knowingly the author of those deaths.



Reckless bombing, reckless shooting, is there an order of merit in how one should die in a conflict? 
Do you think perhaps had the IRB got access to explosives they would have used it? Considering their abject disregard for the ordinary citizens of Dublin that week I think it highly likely. Not to mention, Tomás Clarke who had previously participated in an bombing campaign in Britain that included indiscriminate targets such as public bridges, train stations and London underground. 
Clarke is revered amongst our political class. There are bridges, monuments named after him. His portrait adorns the walls of public institutions such as the National Library of Ireland. 
By any measure today, he was surely a terrorist? 
The actions of our political class in commemorating Clarke would suggest they think otherwise. 



Betsy Og said:


> Pearse as I've said was a strange character, he didn't strap a bomb to himself but death was always on the agenda. He wrote some strange poetry, but that of itself is not a crime.



Indeed it is not, it is only speculation. 
MLM attended the funeral of Bobby Storey, he too was not a paedophile nor  an apologist for paedophilia.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (4 Jul 2020)

Theo are you sure you are not a Jesuit? You have done an excellent job in rubbishing the heroes of 1916 including outing PP as a pedo  (what a poem?  did Oscar Wilde not do time for less?).  

Yet this republican demolition job seems to be in justification of your sympathies with the current SF.


----------



## WolfeTone (4 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Theo are you sure you are not a Jesuit? You have done an excellent job in rubbishing the heroes of 1916 including outing PP as a pedo  (what a poem?  did Oscar Wilde not do time for less?).
> 
> Yet this republican demolition job seems to be in justification of your sympathies with the current SF.




It's not so much a republican demolition job as I stand steadfastly with the principles of an Irish Republic as expressed in the Proclaimtion, including the right to use force where fundamental principles of democracy are usurped by force, or threat of (see Home Rule Act, 1914)

That said, anyone who takes it upon themselves to use force better be prepared for the consequences. The reality is, every armed campaign in the name of an Irish Republic is pocketed with acts of indiscriminate savergy against civilian populations and sectarian murder. There is no getting away from this albeit the political classes have done a mighty job in doing so in many respects when it comes to their own particular brand of freedom fighting.

I'm an All-Ireland man. I consider the unification of Ireland (in whatever form that takes) will be brought about through the economic and social orders of the day. For  voting, I'm limited in choice with SF, Green and PBP.
If FF or FG ever get their act together in an All Ireland sense, I will consider voting for them based on policy.
Heck if the DUP were to open a branch in my constituency I'd have no hesitation in welcoming them aboard!


----------



## Sunny (4 Jul 2020)

This is turning into the long goodbye again......


----------



## WolfeTone (4 Jul 2020)

Sunny said:


> This is turning into the long goodbye again......



I've edited this comment, as I understand your comment now. Yes, my bad for calling time on my input and subsequently adding more comments.
My propensity to limit myself is weak I admit. I do try, honestly, but sometimes it is hard.


----------



## Purple (6 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> The inference here is that members of SF running for office, or elected to office, are pedophiles or, covering up for same?
> These are of course outlandish, unsubstantiated allegations of a very serious nature. The information you hold should be passed onto the authorities lest you become complicit in the alleged cover up yourself. Can you substantiate these allegations and have you provided the information to the authorities?
> For my part, if I knew anybody who was running for office was engaged in cover up or worse, I certainly wouldn't vote for them.


That's a total misrepresentation of what I said and you know it.
You keep grasping for straw-men to throw in front of the argument and constructing false equivalence. Your replies are just a long list of whataboutism.


----------



## Purple (6 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I've edited this comment, as I understand your comment now. Yes, my bad for calling time on my input and subsequently adding more comments.
> My propensity to limit myself is weak I admit. I do try, honestly, but sometimes it is hard.


I admire your endurance!


----------



## WolfeTone (6 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> That's a total misrepresentation



If I've misrepresented then I retract.


----------



## Betsy Og (6 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> He was a member of a government recognised by the Irish people as legitimate is the point.



Never said he wasn't. Donald Trump (God help us) is the President of the USA, Nicola Sturgeon is the First Minister of Scotland, both recognised by the Irish people as legimate. I could go on. McGuinness was never a member of government of Ireland/the State/Eire. I see you are having difficulty accepting this fact, its not really a big deal one way or the other which is why I wondering why you're chosing this hill to ....argue. In terms of pictures on walls in government buildings, most people think of Collins and Dev, both were in government in Ireland/the State/Eire, so whether we agree with them or not it is hardly incongruous that they are there.



WolfeTone said:


> The leaders of 1916 had no mandate from the Irish people to act as they did.



Agreed, but Collins and Dev get a pass due to being in government (voted for by the people guv).




WolfeTone said:


> Again, factually incorrect. The 1918 election was not a vote to go to war,.... - war is not explicitly referred, albeit it is implied.



Kevin Myers levels of revisionism here. In all the books I've read, which is a few over the years, I've never heard it argued that the War of Independence was the abuse of the 1918 mandate. 



WolfeTone said:


> If it had no mandate, it was illegal? That is my point. People in government who commemorate illegal suicide missions leading to the deaths of hundreds of Irish civilians are in no position to lecture others on their illegal violent insurrections.


The baddies rarely make it legal to overthrow them, so legality or otherwise is a moot point. Was it morally justifiable? - a matter of opinion of course, but 1916 was a suicide mission, given meaning by British bungling. The War of Indepence was morally justifiable as the will of the great majority of the people, as expressed in 1918, was being denied by an imperialist power, and there was the prospect of some measure of success.



WolfeTone said:


> Unless of course, they _retrospectively _legitimise the actions of 1916?
> This i believe, is a concern of yours and others with regard to SF today?
> That if they get into power that they will retrospectively legitimise the Provos just as the rest of our political class has retrospectively legitimised 1916 and WoI for their own political expediency.



Well if we're dumb enough it buy it then absolutely they will, but sure a few of us at least will argue the points. You seems to think that if there's civilian casualties on both sides then all bets are all, they're both as bad as the other, end of story. So the Brits in WWII, not my favourite bunch mind, were they as bad as the Nazis?, I mean they both killed civilians so lets just leave it there then shall we.......





WolfeTone said:


> The Home Rule Parliament of 1914, as passed by Houses of Parliament has never been delivered. It was usurped by the threat of Unionist violence.



I think the outbreak of WWI was the main reason it wasn't enacted. Anyway, yes, the Ulster Volunteers had formed.... quite a sticky wicket you might say for the 32 county venture. These people were there for 300+ years at the time, so if they didn't want to join a United Ireland, with their fears of Rome Rule (possibly irrational at the time, but later borne out when CC had free rein), wasn't that a legitimate position? Unless you wanted a Rwandan style ethnic cleansing there was no getting away from this inconvenience. Of course they might have, and hopefully might yet be accomodated in a secular united Ireland, maybe in our lifetime we'll see it. 



WolfeTone said:


> No, they didn't. But innocent people they did kill. Without no authority other than their own self-imposed authority to murder innocent unarmed people as they went about their livelihoods. If you can legitimise that, and not recognise the crimes committed you have no moral authority over those who try to legitimise the atrocities you outline.



See above re Brits and Nazis in WWII.




WolfeTone said:


> (Sunningdale was indeed for slow learners, even the Loyalists saw through the politics of exclusion inherent in it)



Eh??, the RA were boming the **** out of everything that moved (this was not a 32 county socialist republic after all), Paisley was in his pomp, SF did not exist electorally. But go on, tell us how powersharing was the "politics of exclusion"? This will be good.....


[QUOTE="WolfeTone, post: 1670002, member: 108000"Reckless bombing, reckless shooting, is there an order of merit in how one should die in a conflict? [/QUOTE]
Well if you bomb civilians areas relentless you know what you are going to get....asssuming you think bombing civilians is a bad thing...

[QUOTE="WolfeTone, post: 1670002, member: 108000" Do you think perhaps had the IRB got access to explosives they would have used it? [/QUOTE] 

I think perhaps if my Aunt had different anatomy she might be uncle.....although nowadays who knows.....  Point is they did not embark on a 30 years bombing campaign, because in the WOI they were in a conflict with popular support and an achievable outcome. 

So maybe we should take down all the portraits, wouldn't bother me, that of course would be wholly unsatisfactory for SF because they absolutely need to see those portraits there in an effort to whitewash decades of pointless death and misery.


----------



## Purple (6 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> *_it's a new day, I'm refreshed again! _
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I always thought Pearce was a weirdo and Connolly's brand of extremist socialism would have ruined the country (another brit coming over here to wreck the place ). I have no doubt that Pearse being executed was 100% the best result for Ireland as his death was a catalyst for our freedom and if he'd lived and ended up in power there's no telling what kind of strange things he would have done. 
We, like most countries, make heroes of those who were active around the time of the foundation of our State. Especially if they died. If Dev had died and Collins lived then Collins would probably be the bad guy.


----------



## Peanuts20 (6 Jul 2020)

I see SF are still selling t shirts and posters on their online  site "remembering" the actions of former Provo's and in one case, an ex INLA guy. For me to even countenance them ever getting into a Govt in the Republic, I'd expect them to at least stop fund raising on the blood of the many people the Provos killed.

I


----------



## WolfeTone (6 Jul 2020)

@Betsy Og I specifically referenced Pearse and Connolly, who were never in government, save their own self-proclaimed government (sure we could all do that, couldn't we? - the Provos did) 

Pearse portrait

But if portraits are no longer an issue, as you suggest, then I assume your concern over the prospect of Tomás Begley hanging in Taoiseachs office has abated? 

I'm not disputing the legitimacy of 1916 or WoI, I'm simply not prepared to take the high moral ground and point fingers at Bobby Storey and those who commemorate him whilst simultaneously holding aloft the memory of others, who also perpetrated atrocities or defened the atrocities of their comrades, and commemorate their "gallant bravery". 

War is a dirty business I'm sure you would agree. It is the ultimate degenerative outcome of failed politics. That Irish people over many generations, felt compelled to use force, often against each other, in order to pursue their political aims is a mark of that failure. 
That such failure should degenerate into savage acts of brutality against civilians is not untypical in war, and Ireland in 1916-23 was certainly no exception. 



Betsy Og said:


> You seems to think that if there's civilian casualties on both sides then all bets are all, they're both as bad as the other, end of story. So the Brits in WWII, not my favourite bunch mind, were they as bad as the Nazis?,



I'm not going to entertain these glib comparisons, suffice to say that the indiscriminate deliberate targeting of civilians by both German and Allied bombing raids were despicable. 
That the Nazi's undertook a deliberate program of mass ethnic cleansing is something, thankfully, is not attributable to the British in that period. 



Betsy Og said:


> Point is they did not embark on a 30 years bombing campaign,



Tomás Clarke activities of bombing and shooting span a period greater than 30yrs. He bombed bridges and train stations. Our political class have, perversely, named bridges and train stations after him. 
I'm not sure what the timeframe qualification has to do with anything? The Proclamation itself references six periods of armed insurrection over a period of 300yrs. The Proclamation did not offer a time limit on when independence was to be achieved through arms - "_Until our arms have brought the opportune moment for the establishment of a permanent National Government representative of the whole people of Ireland and elected by the suffrages of all her men and women, the Provisional Government, hereby constituted, will administer the civil and military affairs of the Republic in trust for the people". _

It is clear to my mind that this was a proclamation for the entire country and the period to attain it indefinite. One that the offices of An Taoiseach and An Uachtaráin commemorate annually. There is no mention of a partitioned island. 

The Anglo Irish Treaty, Sunningdale, Anglo-Irish Agreement, were all subversions of the Proclamation, insofar as they were either unauthorised by the Dáil (Anglo-Irish Treaty) or politically contrived between governments without the support of significant portions of the population (Sunningdale and AIA - both invoked the ire Ulster loyalism). 

Not until 1998, did the people of Ireland, collectively, endorse agreement amongst themselves that establishes new political frameworks and institutions and clearly sets out the principle of consent through peaceful and democractic means. 
This is the first time, in hundreds of years, that the right to use physical force to obtain Irish freedom has been consigned to the past (officially).


----------



## Peanuts20 (6 Jul 2020)

And now it seems the Storey family got a "special" dispensation to hold a service at the crematorium when 8 other families on that day were not able to. One law for some.................

I can smell the hypocrisy from here


----------



## Betsy Og (6 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> @Betsy Og I specifically referenced Pearse and Connolly, who were never in government, save their own self-proclaimed government (sure we could all do that, couldn't we? - the Provos did)



I referenced Dev & Collins, the only ones I've seen hung up in recent times.



WolfeTone said:


> But if portraits are no longer an issue, as you suggest, then I assume your concern over the prospect of Tomás Begley hanging in Taoiseachs office has abated?



No, I said we should outlaw them if we must, but that would not be to SF's satisfaction, or do you disagree?



WolfeTone said:


> I'm not going to entertain these glib comparisons, suffice to say that the indiscriminate deliberate targeting of civilians by both German and Allied bombing raids were despicable. That the Nazi's undertook a deliberate program of mass ethnic cleansing is something, thankfully, is not attributable to the British in that period.



Its not glib, your notion is that all war is equal, "let him who is without sin.....". My point is that it is demonstrably not all equal. Doesn't mean that the 'good' side has to be angelic, but there can be those on the wrong side of a conflict.



WolfeTone said:


> I'm not sure what the timeframe qualification has to do with anything?



I'll put you right so. The point is that the RA undertook a "Long War" with no prospect of success. It put generations through unnecessary conflict. There was justification from 1969-1974 but after that they just kept the problem going. As Duke says it ended when they stopped.



WolfeTone said:


> The Proclamation itself references six periods of armed insurrection over a period of 300yrs. The Proclamation did not offer a time limit on when independence was to be achieved through arms - "_Until our arms have brought the opportune moment for the establishment of a permanent National Government representative of the whole people of Ireland and elected by the suffrages of all her men and women, the Provisional Government, hereby constituted, will administer the civil and military affairs of the Republic in trust for the people". _
> 
> It is clear to my mind that this was a proclamation for the entire country and the period to attain it indefinite. One that the offices of An Taoiseach and An Uachtaráin commemorate annually. There is no mention of a partitioned island.



TBH I couldn't give a flying proverbial what the proclomation says or doesn't say. I don't believe any generation should be enslaved to past generations.



WolfeTone said:


> The Anglo Irish Treaty, Sunningdale, Anglo-Irish Agreement, were all subversions of the Proclamation, insofar as they were either unauthorised by the Dáil (Anglo-Irish Treaty) or politically contrived between governments without the support of significant portions of the population (Sunningdale and AIA - both invoked the ire Ulster loyalism).
> 
> Not until 1998, did the people of Ireland, collectively, endorse agreement amongst themselves that establishes new political frameworks and institutions and clearly sets out the principle of consent through peaceful and democractic means.
> This is the first time, in hundreds of years, that the right to use physical force to obtain Irish freedom has been consigned to the past (officially).



Unless your telling me Moses had the proclomation in his This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language pocket when he can down with the tablets of stone I don't give it any more authority than words on a page. The DUP opposed the GFA, I suppose you'd have left it at that? Sunningdale offered power sharing, that's what you eventually got, that's all there could ever be, its just that by 1998 the RA were either so riddled with informers or battle weary, or the penny had eventually dropped that they went for it. It's a pity they hadn't come to "the light" in 1974, that's my central point. I'm still waiting about how Sunningdale was "the politics of exclusion" btw, I'm thinking you've imbibed more of the Coolaid than you're letting on (pragmatic floating voter that you are)......


----------



## WolfeTone (6 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> I referenced Dev & Collins, the only ones I've seen hung up in recent times.



I referenced Pearse and Connolly. The earlier reference to Tomás Begley is not to be found. 



Betsy Og said:


> No, I said we should outlaw them if we must, but that would not be to SF's satisfaction, or do you disagree?



??? I have no issue with the portraits. I'm just curious would those with an issue over a Tomás Begley portrait in government buildings have the same issue with Pearse and Connolly? 



Betsy Og said:


> your notion is that all war is equal



Never said that. But abducting, torturing, murdering and disappearing in 1972 didn't change much from abducting, torturing, murdering and disappearing in 1920.
Not for me anyway. 



Betsy Og said:


> I don't give it any more authority than words on a page.



Neither do I, but seeing as our Parliament, the office of our Taoiseach and our President do (representing the people of Ireland) then I do feel we should take its contents on board in trying to understand all our particular perspectives. 



Betsy Og said:


> Sunningdale offered power sharing, that's what you eventually got,



I don't give it any more authority than words on a page. Ulster loyalism thought so too I'd say.


----------



## Betsy Og (6 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I don't give it any more authority than words on a page. Ulster loyalism thought so too I'd say.


You do know that it actually sat don't you? You'd have to be fairly blind not to see that that was the missed opportunity, and that the long war was all for nought, or if not what extra did it achieve and did it justify the cost?


----------



## WolfeTone (6 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> You do know that it actually sat don't you? You'd have to be fairly blind not to see that that was the missed opportunity, and that the long war was all for nought, or if not what extra did it achieve and did it justify the cost?



Who brought it down? Anyone can sit wherever they want, if the people they intend to govern don't abide by it, it had no more authority than the paper it was written on.


----------



## Betsy Og (6 Jul 2020)

Because the solutions were there in 1974. Why would loyalists agree to it when the RA was ragin?? The RA could have auctioned their ceasefire then if they'd any sense.

Yep, finished a book on Dublin Monaghan only a week ago. A disgrace on many levels. 

Anyway, post Sunningdale gains versus costs..... Was the post '74 Long War justified?, is the charge that SF & the RA need to answer in my book.


----------



## WolfeTone (6 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> Because the solutions were there in 1974. Why would loyalists agree to it when the RA was ragin??



?? You make it sound like the violence came from one side. 
The collapse of Sunningdale was brought about through loyalist violence and the workers strike, and ultimately the rejection of UUP citing a 'Council of Ireland' as being unacceptable. 
The Provos called ceasefire in 1972 and 1975, neither of which the political establishment were able to capitalise on. 
The Provos position for a British declaration to withdraw was obviously flawed, in hindsight, nevertheless, given the levels of violence inflicted on the nationalist community in Ireland the Provos were as likely to end their campaign as the British were to announcing a withdrawal. 
It may not suit your narrative, but internment, Ballymurphy, Derry, Dublin, Monaghan et al were open wounds, just as Bloody Friday was for loyalism that could not be glossed over for sake of hindsight some 40yrs later. 



Betsy Og said:


> Yep, finished a book on Dublin Monaghan only a week ago. A disgrace on many levels.



It might not suit your narrative, but such atrocities may have the effect of prolonging conflicts rather than ending them. 
But nevermind, let's move along now... 



Betsy Og said:


> Anyway, post Sunningdale gains versus costs..... Was the post '74 Long War justified?, is the charge that SF & the RA need to answer in my book.



Ergo the whole conundrum, was any of it justified? 1798, 1803, 1848, 1916, 1919-23, 1969-1998

Each to their own, you have chosen 1974 as a cut off point, albeit it is peculiarity to me, and without any apparent reasoning other than an agreement which few outside British and Irish governments supported, collapsed. 

I choose 1998 for reasons outlined before, that is, no justification for physical force against British military and its proxies, as distinct to any deliberate savagery against civilians which has always been unjustified throughout the ages but nevertheless such savagery is deeply associated and embedded in the campaigns of all the main protagonists throughout history. 

I don't think there is going to be any change of mind, so I'm offering a truce


----------



## Betsy Og (6 Jul 2020)

A debate is no harm, I consider a truce unnecesary but value the sentiment.  The reasoning for 1974 is that that's where we ended up in 1998. The "open wounds" thing is obv relevant, sure Bernadette Sands McKevitt had her open wounds to keep going even after the GFA, doesn't make it right. Of course it's easy talk from a place of safety. Anyway, Repubicans can have their narrative, doesn't mean we need to accept it, but I'm afraid with SF's outlook on life it can't be left as a private matter and, depending on future elections, we may have to return to this fight to ensure we (currently the 75%) are not being signed up to that which we did not sign up for at the time and do not want to sign up for in the future.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (12 Jul 2020)

I see Arlene is drawing parallels between the Twelfth night bonfires and the IRA funeral, which is fair comment.  But it is a strange form of tit-for-tat that says "if your crowd can endanger their health then so can we"


----------



## Purple (13 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I see Arlene is drawing parallels between the Twelfth night bonfires and the IRA funeral, which is fair comment.  But it is a strange form of tit-for-tat that says "if your crowd can endanger their health then so can we"


When the border of the 6 counties is the edge of the world that that Covid bother (to paraphrase Paddy Kavanagh) is of little importance.


----------



## Betsy Og (13 Jul 2020)

Could she at least try to tackle the raw sectarian KAT, tricolour & election posters type stuff. That is an annual problem. In fairness it is hard to social distance after a few bottles of Bucky. #nosurrender5daybender


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> Could she at least try to tackle the raw sectarian KAT, tricolour & election posters type stuff.



Agreed. Is this flag-burning, sectarian sloganeering tolerated anywhere else in Europe?

And with regard to KAT, I've just been reminded of the murder of the three Quinn brothers, Richard 11, Mark 9, and Jason 7, 22yrs ago yesterday. Simply because they were Catholic.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (13 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Agreed. Is this flag-burning, sectarian sloganeering tolerated anywhere else in Europe?


25 year anniversary of the Srevenica sectarian massacre of muslims.  Nearly 3 times as many killed in 2 weeks as died in 30 years of the Troubles.  But maybe everything is sweetness and light in those parts these days.


----------



## Purple (13 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> 25 year anniversary of the Srevenica sectarian massacre of muslims.  Nearly 3 times as many killed in 2 weeks as died in 30 years of the Troubles.  But maybe everything is sweetness and light in those parts these days.


Yes, worst mass murder in Europe since the Second World War. Most of the world signed the UN Genocide Convention in late 1948 ("Never Again") but look at how many times it has happened again since then. In 2005 the member States committed to a doctrine of "the responsibility to protect”. The only thing all member states have done in the 74 years since it was signed is to consistently fail to live up to their commitments. A few months before Bill Clinton was using his office (literally and metaphorically) to have a grossly inappropriate sexual relationship with a very young intern he was finding a way to avoid stopping the worst genocide since the Second World War; the rate of killing in Rwanda exceeded the speed of killing at the height of the Nazi genocide. 
In the context of what has happened around the world since the Troubles started in the late 60's Northern Ireland is a minor issue which should have been sorted out decades ago. It's a testament to the resilience of the tribalism which is so deep seated in both tribes in the North that they can manage to keep hating each other.


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> 25 year anniversary of the Srevenica sectarian massacre of muslims.  Nearly 3 times as many killed in 2 weeks as died in 30 years of the Troubles.  But maybe everything is sweetness and light in those parts these days.



I wouldn't think so. Not after such atrocities. 

 Is there flag-burning and slogan threats of sectarian genocide against the neighbouring population, or was NATO successful in wiping out the bigots?


----------



## Purple (13 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I wouldn't think so. Not after such atrocities.
> 
> Is there flag-burning and slogan threats of sectarian genocide against the neighbouring population, or was NATO successful in wiping out the bigots?


NATO were very good at blowing things up but not so good at stopping bigots. They did do a great job of acting as human shields to facilitate the mass murder of civilians though.


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> In the context of what has happened around the world since the Troubles started in the late 60's Northern Ireland is a minor issue which should have been sorted out decades ago. It's a testament to the resilience of the tribalism which is so deep seated in both tribes in the North that they can manage to keep hating each other.



_'the old heart of the earth needed to be warmed by the red wine of the battlefield’ - Pearse. _

Perhaps the blood-letting was not sufficient for some. The perseverance of battle lines drawn from two sides of the same Christian coin is testament to the abject failure of religious and political leadership in these parts.


----------



## Purple (13 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> _'the old heart of the earth needed to be warmed by the red wine of the battlefield’ - Pearse. _
> 
> Perhaps the blood-letting was not sufficient for some.


The utter excrement spouted by Pearse and his ilk didn't help either. Misty-eyed nationalism never heals division.  



WolfeTone said:


> The perseverance of battle lines drawn from two sides of the same Christian coin is testament to the abject failure of religious and political leadership in these parts.


I agree; religion is a curse. Other than John Hume it's hard to think of any major political leader worth admiring. Women like Mairead Maguire and Betty Williams were fantastic people but made little impact.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (13 Jul 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> I wouldn't think so. Not after such atrocities.
> 
> Is there flag-burning and slogan threats of sectarian genocide against the neighbouring population, or was NATO successful in wiping out the bigots?


I don't really get your point Theo.  Your original comment gave an impression that you believed the bigotry on the Shankill Road is unparalleled in Europe.  I am surmising without proof that is probably an overstatement, but it is consistent with your mantra.


----------



## Betsy Og (13 Jul 2020)

Purple said:


> Other than John Hume it's hard to think of any major political leader worth admiring.



I preferred Seamus Mallon to Hume, & not just saying that because Mallon has passed away. Mallon always struck me as being a bit more practical, believeable. Hume was a vision man, and I'm not knocking him, you need that too, but just on personal taste I prefer more straight talkers.


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Jul 2020)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Your original comment gave an impression that you believed the bigotry on the Shankill Road is unparalleled in Europe.



Ah, ok. Crossed wires so. I was asking the question, genuinely trying to think of somewhere that could equate to outward displays of sectarianism. 
You correctly pointed out Srebrenica as an example of a sectarian hotspot.


----------



## WolfeTone (13 Jul 2020)

Betsy Og said:


> Mallon always struck me as being a bit more practical, believeable.



Im an admirer of Mallon too, a speaker of truth. Unfortunately, while he took the righteous ground and it was hard not to agree with him, his input was diminished by not accepting that if the violence was to stop you need to engage those prepared to engage in violence. He steadfastly refused to do this - honourable in its own way, but also insufficient. It was comparable to the Unionist position of refusing to talk to SF - a stalemate that prolonged the conflict. 
That's what Hume did. Hume understood that those carrying out the violence were his constituents too. He understood that as abhorrent as the violence was, it emanated from a place other than mindless sadistic thuggery. He sought, and succeeded imo, to challenge the thought processes of Irish militant republicanism. He brought them into the process and in doing so the political objectives of SF would take ascendancy over the military objectives of the IRA.


----------



## Betsy Og (13 Jul 2020)

I could be wrong but I don't think he was against engaging with them, but wanted them to stop first - which is not unreasonable but I know what you mean. There's the great line from Blair (about the SDLP)- "the trouble with you guys is that you don't have any guns" - which kinda sums up the whole dance around the 'RA and ending the conflict. Anyway, I won't enumerate old themes.... as Yeats might say.


----------

