Shoot to Kill 1982

[Donagh]

5000 or 50000, the number is irrelevant, but what is clear is that some posters here clearly believe they all deserve to be put to death without trial or jury. And to think their fellow travellers on OWC have the nerve to compare the GAA to Nazis.

[Fiodoir Ard Mhacha]

it is an internationally recognised region of the UK. Country, region, state, statelet, province, call it whatever you like - it exists and, in some shape or form, always will, I daresay it will outlive all of us and whatever becomes of it, none of us will take it with us.

God, the poor wee place doesn't know what to call itself.

PS Just got my new telephone book - it describes Co Armagh as "Northern Ireland - South West".....

[SammyG]

5000 or 50000, the number is irrelevant, but what is clear is that some posters here clearly believe they all deserve to be put to death without trial or jury.

Where has anybody said anything even remotely connected to that post?

And to think their fellow travellers on OWC have the nerve to compare the GAA to Nazis.

Another themmuns are all the same post from Donagh, it's getting a bit boring big lad.

[Chrisowc]

it is an internationally recognised region of the UK. Country, region, state, statelet, province, call it whatever you like - it exists and, in some shape or form, always will, I daresay it will outlive all of us and whatever becomes of it, none of us will take it with us.

God, the poor wee place doesn't know what to call itself.

PS Just got my new telephone book - it describes Co Armagh as "Northern Ireland - South West".....

Sorted then

[Fiodoir Ard Mhacha]

 ha ha.

Sorted insofar as I haven't removed the phone book from its cellophane wrapper, like most punters, and will probably never look at it. Blody useless book anyhow, doesn't even give post codes or half the numbers.

Oh aye, then there's the post code system that puts Crossmaglen in Co Down, Gilford in Co Armagh and Belfast, Antrim and some place called LONDONderry in no counties at all.

sorted? I don't think so, chris. Still eating Irish beef and associated meat products?

End of current rant - and apologies for being diversionary from the thread.

[Stay goalside of your man]

Good enough for them

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6934300.stm

[Chrisowc]

ha ha.

Sorted insofar as I haven't removed the phone book from its cellophane wrapper, like most punters, and will probably never look at it. Blody useless book anyhow, doesn't even give post codes or half the numbers.

Oh aye, then there's the post code system that puts Crossmaglen in Co Down, Gilford in Co Armagh and Belfast, Antrim and some place called LONDONderry in no counties at all.

sorted? I don't think so, chris. Still eating Irish beef and associated meat products?
End of current rant - and apologies for being diversionary from the thread.

Why wouldn't I?

[Fiodoir Ard Mhacha]

good stuff 

[MW]

MW let me get this straight. You are claiming that these men deserved to be murdered because the organisation to which they belonged also murdered people. Does this view extend to the deaths of RUC personnel i.e. I take it you also believe that they got what they deserved as the organisation to which they belonged also murdered people, as they did in this case?

You've picked me up wrong, obviously. Anyone who belonged to a terrorist group, whose very raison d'etre from day to day was murder, and advocated going round dishing out cold-blooded killings to anyone they deemed it was 'legitimate' to, and furthermore actually carried out such cold-blooded killings - if they ended up being shot dead, then it was nothing less than they deserved. And in their worldview, and that of their supporters,  it can surely have been nothing less than legitimate. Unlike them, of course, I take a different view of such killings.

It's estimated that over 50k people served as members of the IRA over 30 years – do they all deserve to be murdered also?

Anyone who joined an illegal paramilitary group and actively participated in carrying out cold-blooded killings of police officers, soldiers and civilians as part of the very fabric and raison d'etre of their 'active' involvement in said terrorist groups, (anyone who was "an extremely active Volunteer", or "a dedicated Volunteer who was always on the lookout for operations", for example...) and met his death at the point of a gun, whether he be Sean Burns, Brian Robinson or Billy Wright, deserved such a fate. I reiterate however that I would certainly not advocate the actions they did.

[MW]

5000 or 50000, the number is irrelevant, but what is clear is that some posters here clearly believe they all deserve to be put to death without trial or jury. And to think their fellow travellers on OWC have the nerve to compare the GAA to Nazis.

Donagh, you still seem to be misunderstanding me.

My view is that the five IRA and INLA members, as with all from the INLA, IRA, UVF, UFF etc (unless caught in the act of carrying out a terrorist attack) should have been arrested and tried as terrorist criminals.

Their view was that they had the right to go round killing people, whoever they designated to be a 'legitimate target', and claimed their was a 'war' on. Therefore in their view their fate was legitimate and no more than they would have expected of anyone else.

What is your view?

[MW]

MW, despite your eloquent protestations to the contrary and your support by Sammy, I am still bothered by your position, which is still in essence doublethink.

Even though you state that you oppose the Shoot-to-Kill actions of the RUC, you applaud the outcome of their actions, which in effect is to support those very actions.  In the Mussolini example, you say that he "richly deserved" his treatment by the partisans, but there is a fundamental difference between the doings of inflamed anti-Fascist partisans and the actions of those charged with upholding justice.  The RUC ought not to be acting like a mob.  Whatever the guilt of Grew, Carroll, Toman, etc., it ought to be determined in a court and not on the street, and whatever your loathing of those three, you ought simply to be castigating the real outlaws in this scenario, the RUC vigilantes. Your criticism of Grew, Carroll and Toman should come after a TRIAL (presupposing it is a fair one and they are found guilty).

In short, I suppose what troubles me most about your stance is that I do not hear an unequivocal out-and-out denunciation of the RUC's conduct, full stop.  All criticism is tempered with an ex post facto justification, a Machiavellian ends justifying the means stance.  No doubt you will fire back that your two positions are mutually exclusive, which I don't think they are.  You can't simply criticize and celebrate at the same time.

The bottom line is, no one deserves summary execution, especially when they can be arrested and tried, particularly in a society which purports to uphold the law—not Seamus Grew, not Saddam Hussein, not even Osama bin Laden, if he can be apprehended and put on trial.

I don't hear you adequately condemning the real wrongdoers in this case.

If you want me to illustrate further: I believe Saddam Hussein deserved to be put to death. However, I'm an opponent of the death penalty, so I believe that ought not to have happened - I believe he should have been sentenced to life imprisonment. Tajke another example - after WWII, Churchill was in favour of simply summarily shooting the leading Nazis as outlaws. Woud you agree with me that they deserved such a fate, but choosing this rather than the wart crimes trial would have been wrong?

I've said John Bingham, a UVF member killed by the IRA, also deserved his fate - what do you think this means in regard to my position. Do I "support those actions"?

By the way you say I "celebrate". I do not.

[MW]

BTW Donagh what do you mean by "the natives" in your first post in the thread?

I find your attitude to non-nationalists most bizarre and confusing.

One minute you're referring to the IRA/INLA as "the natives", in contrast to the police. Suggesting that police officers born and brought up in Northern Ireland, serving in Northern Ireland, were not "natives".

Yet on a previous thread last week, you referred to UK citizens born and brought up in Northern Ireland, part of the UK, and serving in the UK army, as "quislings" and "Irish mercenaries".

This suggests to me two things:

1 - You don't accept the right of the British people from Northern Ireland to participate in their own country, and join their own national army - those that do are "quislings" and "mercenaries". This says to me that you don't accept the British identity of the majority in Northern Ireland. (and the only identity you will ascribe is part of "the Irish nation", as in "bringing disgrace to the nation")

2 - People from Northern Ireland who aren't nationalist/republican, who support the Union and participated in their own state, are somehow not "natives".

Both views are offensive and alarming on their own, but it's hard to see how one man's brain can accomodate both at the same time

[Donagh]

You've picked me up wrong, obviously. Anyone who belonged to a terrorist group, whose very raison d'etre from day to day was murder, and advocated going round dishing out cold-blooded killings to anyone they deemed it was 'legitimate' to, and furthermore actually carried out such cold-blooded killings - if they ended up being shot dead, then it was nothing less than they deserved. And in their worldview, and that of their supporters,  it can surely have been nothing less than legitimate. Unlike them, of course, I take a different view of such killings.

Let me get this clear now, in case I have picked you up wrong. Now you're not saying all IRA volunteers deserve to die, but only IRA volunteers that went around advocating killing legitimate targets, deserve to die? So taking into account your new prerequisite for death sentence, where does that leave the 6 men in 1982? Did they go around advocating and dishing out killings, or is membership of the IRA enough for you to assume they fulfilled your prerequisite. If so, how have I picked you up wrong?
Incidentally, who are you to presume that everyone who joins such a group, their families, and supporters have a single "worldview" – are you that arrogant to presume you have such an intimate knowledge and understanding of the republican community? I have not picked you up wrong. You have been very clear. Nationalists who joined the IRA deserved to die, without trial or jury if necessary. Unionists who joined the other main terrorist groups i.e. the RUC (a view as valid as yours and one shared by a large section of the community) do not deserve the same treatment.

Anyone who joined an illegal paramilitary group and actively participated in carrying out cold-blooded killings of police officers, soldiers and civilians as part of the very fabric and raison d'etre of their 'active' involvement in said terrorist groups, (anyone who was "an extremely active Volunteer", or "a dedicated Volunteer who was always on the lookout for operations", for example...) and met his death at the point of a gun, whether he be Sean Burns, Brian Robinson or Billy Wright, deserved such a fate. I reiterate however that I would certainly not advocate the actions they did.

More of the same nonsensical rubbish again. What's your view of the RUC personnel that carried out these murders? They actively participated in carrying out the cold-blooded killing of these men. They were members of a paramilitary organization and organized loyalist murder gangs. Obviously they meet your prerequisite for capital punishment, so I assume they also deserve to be put to death without trial? Or is it simply a case of state paramilitaries being 'legal' in your view and the IRA were 'illegal'? Unionist right, republican wrong, Unionist killing legal, republican killing wrong? Change the record ffs...

[Donagh]

What is your view?

I've understood you quite well. You've stated twice that IRA members deserve to die whereas the RUC terrorists presumably deserve a higher standard of justice.

My view is the six men were murdered by the state. Even though I am closer to the thinking of the six men than you will ever be, I am not so arrogant to presume to know what their views were or to understand the hurt of the families that saw their loved ones put to death without trial.

[SammyG]

Donagh

Are you having trouble reading or our you being deliberately awkward? MW has explained himself 3 or 4 times and each time you keep mis-quoting him and making up conspiracy theories.