Poll
Question:
Is Martin right to be ashamed of his antics
Option 1: Yes
votes: 3
Option 2: correct
votes: 2
Option 3: Absolutely
votes: 6
On the late late now. "I'm ashamed by the antics of the IRA" and other quotes such as "The IRA campaign did not do anything"
(http://finegael2011.com/finegael/fine-gael-blackberry.jpg)
Get his name right you plonker.
Whos this?
Tubridy is possibly a bigger tube than you peter, terrible line of questionning. How long will Rte persist with this attitude to SF? For rightly or wrongly things have moved on so much yet they still go for the 'Gay' ambush.
Why can`t nordies pronounce the word situation?
sheet-ye-a-shun
Quote from: hardstation on January 14, 2011, 10:34:12 PM
Turbridy is an awful cnut.
The very worst type of Fianna Failure.
Quote from: All of a Sludden on January 14, 2011, 10:32:47 PM
Why can`t nordies pronounce the word situation?
Hee Hee. TANKS for raising that question.
A visit from the Queen of Ireland? steady on Martin I know your heading up British administration in the north but we are not in Britiain yet!
(http://www.hoganstand.com/Common/ImageGallery/martinmchugh.jpg)
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQIMn_fmWXRW7JIkfWvcaa5eEistTvruewtYeclJsvlo8KNWsxv)
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:39:34 PM
A visit from the Queen of Ireland? steady on Martin I know your heading up British administration in the north but we are not in Britiain yet!
we've been in Britain for years ya Twat!!
(http://thecornerflag.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/MartinONeill-300x200.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Arthur_Guinness.jpg)
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on January 14, 2011, 10:45:01 PM
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:39:34 PM
A visit from the Queen of Ireland? steady on Martin I know your heading up British administration in the north but we are not in Britiain yet!
we've been in Britain for years ya t**t!!
Northern Ireland is British. I live in the Republic of Ireland, apologies I thought that was obvious.
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:46:38 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on January 14, 2011, 10:45:01 PM
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:39:34 PM
A visit from the Queen of Ireland? steady on Martin I know your heading up British administration in the north but we are not in Britiain yet!
we've been in Britain for years ya t**t!!
Northern Ireland is British. I live in the Republic of Ireland, apologies I thought that was obvious.
aye right enough, you tossers left us to fight for ourselves well you continued to blow each other up!!
Would love to see you take the piss out of Martin McGuinness to his face Pete.
The annonymous keyboard warrior. It's not big, it's not clever
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on January 14, 2011, 10:50:43 PM
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:46:38 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on January 14, 2011, 10:45:01 PM
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:39:34 PM
A visit from the Queen of Ireland? steady on Martin I know your heading up British administration in the north but we are not in Britiain yet!
we've been in Britain for years ya t**t!!
Northern Ireland is British. I live in the Republic of Ireland, apologies I thought that was obvious.
aye right enough, you t**sers left us to fight for ourselves well you continued to blow each other up!!
You did some job trying to win your "Freedom"
Quote from: sammymaguire on January 14, 2011, 10:50:53 PM
Would love to see you take the piss out of Martin McGuinness to his face Pete.
The annonymous keyboard warrior. It's not big, it's not clever
If he was on his own I would. However if he had his friend to back him up then I would stay well clear.
(http://cdn.wn.com/pd/03/d4/da949bffa8238c0c84875e9c815c_grande.jpg)
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 14, 2011, 10:27:43 PM
(http://finegael2011.com/finegael/fine-gael-blackberry.jpg)
Snake oil for sale, snake oil for sale, anyone?...
A WUM of the highest order & he gets us every time.
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
Enda Kenny!! What a man!!!!
There is no Mayo on planet Peter.
Peter Solan is a gaaboard hero.
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
Here comes the Castlebar insults from peter :-X
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:11:24 PM
Peter Solan is a gaaboard hero.
That's what he tells himself.
Quote from: muppet on January 14, 2011, 11:17:26 PM
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:11:24 PM
Peter Solan is a gaaboard hero.
That's what he tells himself.
Well, he nails you all every time. And I like that. You ignore a fool. He manages to bypass that. Class act.
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:39:27 PM
Quote from: muppet on January 14, 2011, 11:17:26 PM
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:11:24 PM
Peter Solan is a gaaboard hero.
That's what he tells himself.
Well, he nails you all every time. And I like that. You ignore a fool. He manages to bypass that. Class act.
Probably the most adept WMU on the board.
This guy is not from Mayo at all, he is a Nordie. He is a fool and a WUM
The South was handed freedom, we were never given that choice. Instead we (you) had to play the the cards that were dealt.
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:39:27 PM
Quote from: muppet on January 14, 2011, 11:17:26 PM
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:11:24 PM
Peter Solan is a gaaboard hero.
That's what he tells himself.
Well, he nails you all every time. And I like that. You ignore a fool. He manages to bypass that. Class act.
You forgot to ignore him though.
Quote from: muppet on January 14, 2011, 11:52:22 PM
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:39:27 PM
Quote from: muppet on January 14, 2011, 11:17:26 PM
Quote from: ONeill on January 14, 2011, 11:11:24 PM
Peter Solan is a gaaboard hero.
That's what he tells himself.
Well, he nails you all every time. And I like that. You ignore a fool. He manages to bypass that. Class act.
You forgot to ignore him though.
But I like him.
Peter, normally I don't take a blind bit of notice to your posts. You're a WUM and to be honest, it can be funny watching the same people fall for it time after time.
However, this week of all weeks. This night of all nights. Please give it a rest.
Was looking at the #latelate tag on Twitter while the show was on and was quite surprised by the amount of southerners who were (however begrudgingly) making complimentary comments. I suppose when you put a Bogside man with a semblance of integrity up against the gombeens of FF & FG there's no contest really. Make no mistake, it's the utter greed, selfishness, corruption and 'me fein'-ism of FF & FG that has brought the country to it's knees. McGuinness still lives in the Bogside despite the death threats, returns there every night after work in Belfast no matter the time of night, doesn't run about bullshitting about what they've done for the local pensioners/children/unemployed/three legged men etc... how many FF & FG TDs would do the same, how many of them would put their country before their wage slip?
Precious few.
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Castlebar the town that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Charlie Haughey.
Fixed that for you
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Quote from: ziggysego on January 15, 2011, 12:27:10 AM
Peter, normally I don't take a blind bit of notice to your posts. You're a WUM and to be honest, it can be funny watching the same people fall for it time after time.
However, this week of all weeks. This night of all nights. Please give it a rest.
Ignore him.
He's not from Mayo either, just to let ye know. That's what he said to me when I vented my spleen to the little hoor once.
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on December 11, 2010, 04:15:14 PM
Thats my point. Sure I have only ever stopped in Mayo for a day or two.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 15, 2011, 07:45:30 AM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
The Queen is permitted to make an apology if she wants. It's hardly sending them in to war. If she's big enough to hand them out medals then she should be big enough to take them back. THe figure head of a Country not allowed to get involved in apologising ::) f**k me that's some get out.
I'd have liked him to have been more confident in his answer about a Royal visit. Just like he said that he was in the IRA with confidence he should have said - No, I won't be happy if the Queen visits. She can f**k off.
No, she isn't. Fact.
Even if she was, I suspect that for people like you, it still wouldn't be enough. There'd always be something else for you to play the victim over.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 15, 2011, 12:35:40 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 12:17:16 PM
No, she isn't. Fact.
Even if she was, I suspect that for people like you, it still wouldn't be enough. There'd always be something else for you to play the victim over.
Wise up would ye. The Queen can say whatever she likes. She can't run into westminster and demand a withdrawel from Iraq but she can say sorry. What happens when she farts in public, does she phone David Cameron and ask him to make an apology? Fact!
As for it not being enough - it hasn't been anything yet.
Technically, you're right. She's an adult woman with no discernible disability, therefore she could stand up and tell a filthy joke if she liked. In terms of her constitutional repsonsibilities, however, she's not allowed to make political pronouncements. Her government takes charge of that end of things and, by everyone's account, David Cameron did a reasonably good job when apologising for the actions of British soldiers on Bloody Sunday. That was it. End of story. Except for those determined to hang on to their victim status, obviously.
More than anything else the queen is head of one of the most fucked up families in the world. Why anyone would want a representative of those mad b**tards visiting their country is beyond me.
Does Tubbridy want Pat the planks job on the Frontline now as well?
Didn't see it, what was the issue with his line of questioning?
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 03:14:15 PM
Didn't see it, what was the issue with his line of questioning?
it was the normal shite that many self righteous southerners like to throw out there. It could have been a carbon copy of his interview with Gerry a year or so ago. At that time Ryan, somewhat bafflingly failed to see the comparisons between his grandfather's IRA activities in the war of independence and the civil war with those of the IRA after that period.
He was cringeworthily bad last night, I was almost starting to feel sorry for him, but then he continued on pressing to the point of rudeness.
As for Martin he was alright, poor over the Queen, should just have said that as a republican (in the true sense of the word) he is largely indifferent to her.
Quote from: Bogball XV on January 15, 2011, 06:13:50 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 03:14:15 PM
Didn't see it, what was the issue with his line of questioning?
it was the normal shite that many self righteous southerners like to throw out there. It could have been a carbon copy of his interview with Gerry a year or so ago. At that time Ryan, somewhat bafflingly failed to see the comparisons between his grandfather's IRA activities in the war of independence and the civil war with those of the IRA after that period.
He was cringeworthily bad last night, I was almost starting to feel sorry for him, but then he continued on pressing to the point of rudeness.
As for Martin he was alright, poor over the Queen, should just have said that as a republican (in the true sense of the word) he is largely indifferent to her.
In my opinion he is 100% correct in grilling these boys about past misdemeanours. His tone and manner are usually off beam though and as you say he lapses into downright rudeness which I believe he feels is a tough Paxman-esque interview style.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 15, 2011, 01:59:22 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 01:25:57 PM
Technically, you're right. She's an adult woman with no discernible disability, therefore she could stand up and tell a filthy joke if she liked. In terms of her constitutional repsonsibilities, however, she's not allowed to make political pronouncements. Her government takes charge of that end of things and, by everyone's account, David Cameron did a reasonably good job when apologising for the actions of British soldiers on Bloody Sunday. That was it. End of story. Except for those determined to hang on to their victim status, obviously.
Technically nothing, I'm right full stop. She can make political statements. She is the head of state and on christmas day she was telling everyone to volunteer to help the economy. She can't legislate but she can say anything she wants political or not.
She was able to tell the soldiers who done the shooting 'thank you, you served your country well'. That's a political statement. It's along the same lines of saying to the murdered victims families, 'I'm sorry for your loss the soldiers didn't servre their country well'.
As regards to the apology from Cameron. As far as I know the apology was accepted and well recieved. Fair play to him. You're right that's the end of that. Next up is all the other innocent victims and an apology from the Queen. In fact a one size fits all apology from the queen would do me and then Cameron wouldn't have to either.
That would be the Christmas broadcast she has to run past Downing Street before recording, right? And those soldiers she decorates with medals, those would be the ones nominated by Downing Street, right? Okay. ::)
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
A county that also gave you Seán (Jack) McNeela, Michael Gaughan and Frank Stagg.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/35971
Quote from: Bogball XV on January 15, 2011, 06:13:50 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 03:14:15 PM
Didn't see it, what was the issue with his line of questioning?
it was the normal shite that many self righteous southerners like to throw out there. It could have been a carbon copy of his interview with Gerry a year or so ago. At that time Ryan, somewhat bafflingly failed to see the comparisons between his grandfather's IRA activities in the war of independence and the civil war with those of the IRA after that period.
He was cringeworthily bad last night, I was almost starting to feel sorry for him, but then he continued on pressing to the point of rudeness.
As for Martin he was alright, poor over the Queen, should just have said that as a republican (in the true sense of the word) he is largely indifferent to her.
Tubridy only mentioned Birmingham and Enniskillen. Was waiting for him to mention Bloody Friday, Guildford, La Mons, Darkley, Patsy Gallagher, Frank Hegarty, etc etc ad nauseam. The fact that he didn't, IMO, means that MMcG got off lightly in his attempt to pass himself off as a proper politician.
re-victom status. if i chased your unarmed friend and neighbour up the street and shot them and then shot them while they lay dying then made up a tale about them being a terrorist and then a gov stooge of a judge made up a further lie to say i was right and correct and then it took 30 years and millions of pounds to get someone else to apoligise for me. do you think you still be a bit sore about me? just a little?..
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 08:12:27 PM
Quote from: Bogball XV on January 15, 2011, 06:13:50 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 03:14:15 PM
Didn't see it, what was the issue with his line of questioning?
it was the normal shite that many self righteous southerners like to throw out there. It could have been a carbon copy of his interview with Gerry a year or so ago. At that time Ryan, somewhat bafflingly failed to see the comparisons between his grandfather's IRA activities in the war of independence and the civil war with those of the IRA after that period.
He was cringeworthily bad last night, I was almost starting to feel sorry for him, but then he continued on pressing to the point of rudeness.
As for Martin he was alright, poor over the Queen, should just have said that as a republican (in the true sense of the word) he is largely indifferent to her.
Tubridy only mentioned Birmingham and Enniskillen. Was waiting for him to mention Bloody Friday, Guildford, La Mons, "DARKLEY", Patsy Gallagher, Frank Hegarty, etc etc ad nauseam. The fact that he didn't, IMO, means that MMcG got off lightly in his attempt to pass himself off as a proper politician.
MYLES WHAT DID THE IRA DO IN DARKLEY? BUY EGGS?
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 08:17:22 PM
re-victom status. if i chased your unarmed friend and neighbour up the street and shot them and then shot them while they lay dying then made up a tale about them being a terrorist and then a gov stooge of a judge made up a further lie to say i was right and correct and then it took 30 years and millions of pounds to get someone else to apoligise for me. do you think you still be a bit sore about me? just a little?..
And if that was the only incident that ever happened, you might have a case. But given that thousands of people lost their lives / limbs / mental health in the course of the'troubles', why the fixation with one particular tragedy? Particularly now that the truth has been uncovered and an apology offered. Is it not time to move on from that one tragedy, or do we have to keep seeking an even better, more grovelling apology? The IRA killed and maimed more people than any other armed group, yet a few posters on here get uptight because Tubridy asked the former Chief of Staff of the IRA a couple of tough questions. FFS!
im gonna be vincent browne for a moment myles WHAT DID THE IRA DO IN DARKLEY? answer the question
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 08:40:54 PM
im gonna be vincent browne for a moment myles WHAT DID THE IRA DO IN DARKLEY? answer the question
Judaean Popular Front, Popular Front of Judaea...
What's your point?
Quote from: FL/MAYO on January 15, 2011, 08:09:27 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
A county that also gave you Seán (Jack) McNeela, Michael Gaughan and Frank Stagg.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/35971
pstg isn't from Mayo at all.
answer the que.... i'l do it for you
well myles you could simply admit you were wrong? the 'judaean front' you refer to are the same crowd who have issued death threats to guys like gerry adams and martin mcguiness. maybe in 30 years... you'd come clean
Quote from: Farrandeelin on January 15, 2011, 09:04:12 PM
Quote from: FL/MAYO on January 15, 2011, 08:09:27 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
A county that also gave you Seán (Jack) McNeela, Michael Gaughan and Frank Stagg.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/35971
pstg isn't from Mayo at all.
The point I am trying to make is in regard to Dougals post on Mayo politicians, we might have our fair share of bad corrupt politicians but we also have had our fair share of men that were prepared to die for their political beliefs, some in the not so distant past like Stagg and Gaughan.
PSTG is someone I prefer to ignore.
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 09:11:11 PM
answer the que.... i'l do it for you
well myles you could simply admit you were wrong? the 'judaean front' you refer to are the same crowd who have issued death threats to guys like gerry adams and martin mcguiness. maybe in 30 years... you'd come clean
...have issued death threats to guys like gerry adams and martin mcguiness...
who, in their day, presided over feud against other republican groupings (Officiial IRA, INLA, IPLO). Popular Front of Judaea, Judaean Popular Front. What's your point?
by his own admission martin mcguiness was in the IRA. who had no involvement in the darkley church massacre yet you for some reason know more than the ruc, special branch, CID.. etc. are there any other crimes you know about perhaps you should phone crimestoppers. PS its anonymous as well
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 09:31:47 PM
by his own admission martin mcguiness was in the IRA. who had no involvement in the darkley church massacre yet you for some reason know more than the ruc, special branch, CID.. etc. are there any other crimes you know about perhaps you should phone crimestoppers. PS its anonymous as well
'Was waiting for him to mention Bloody Friday, Guildford, La Mons, Darkley, Patsy Gallagher, Frank Hegarty, etc etc ad nauseam.'
Care to comment on the other atrocities committed by the Popular Front of Judaea / Judaean Popular Front?
i suggest Myles that crime stoppers would put as much faith in your knowledge of past atrocities as NASA would put in your ability to fly the space shuttle. did anyone tell you about the peace process or the good Friday agreement. or even giving someone the benefit of the doubt. tubridys pathetic interview with a major politician on this island and on the world stage merely shows up HIS political bias and cowardice. he made no attempt to unravel or reveal mcguinness' views on any of the relevant issues that effect everyone on this island. instead he went for the queens visit a question to which anyone with half a once of intelligence or a PC would know the answer to and throwing mud. tubridy knows that he or any of his ilk couldn't engage martin mcguinness in a proper political debate because he'd get wiped out. tubs is a typical rte Fianna fail stooge lacking in imagination preferring to shout from the gallery its sad that a cretin like him is occupying a valueable slot like the late late and helping himself to a huge salary. he typifies everything that is wrong in the 26 counties
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 10:08:12 PM
i suggest Myles that crime stoppers would put as much faith in your knowledge of past atrocities as NASA would put in your ability to fly the space shuttle. did anyone tell you about the peace process or the good Friday agreement. or even giving someone the benefit of the doubt. tubridys pathetic interview with a major politician on this island and on the world stage merely shows up HIS political bias and cowardice. he made no attempt to unravel or reveal mcguinness' views on any of the relevant issues that effect everyone on this island. instead he went for the queens visit a question to which anyone with half a once of intelligence or a PC would know the answer to and throwing mud. tubridy knows that he or any of his ilk couldn't engage martin mcguinness in a proper political debate because he'd get wiped out. tubs is a typical rte Fianna fail stooge lacking in imagination preferring
to shout from the gallery its sad that a cretin like him is occupying a valueable slot like the late late and helping himself to a huge salary. he typifies everything that is wrong in the 26 counties
+1
Take a bow Lawnseed, great post.
Quote from: Doogie Browser on January 15, 2011, 10:16:27 PM
Take a bow Lawnseed, great post.
Na, typical Shinner shite, to be honest.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Funny how this would be your advice for McGuinness yet you're crying all day because he wasn't asked for the hundred millionth time about La Mon, Bloody Friday etc
lads if tubs wanted to interview martin mcguinness properly why didnt he ask him about what sinn fein plans were in relation to the mess the country is in, or where sinn fein would get the 17 billion they say they would invest in job creation were they to get a mandate especially now that the fainna FAILURES have handed the national pension reserve over to the w**ker bankers. this is a serious flaw in sinn feins manifesto jez theres millons of things this useless p***k could have asked martin mcguiness. we know as much now as we did know. what a waste.
myles now i see your name calling i feel sorry for you. you ought to get out more
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 10:31:51 PM
lads if tubs wanted to interview martin mcguinness properly why didnt he ask him about what sinn fein plans were in relation to the mess the country is in, or where sinn fein would get the 17 billion they say they would invest in job creation were they to get a mandate especially now that the fainna FAILURES have handed the national pension reserve over to the w**ker bankers. this is a serious flaw in sinn feins manifesto jez theres millons of things this useless p***k could have asked martin mcguiness. we know as much now as we did know. what a waste.
myles now i see your name calling i feel sorry for you. you ought to get out more
Why would he ask the deputy first minister of the British region of Northern Ireland those questions?
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 10:31:51 PM
...or where sinn fein would get the 17 billion they say they would invest in job creation were they to get a mandate especially now that the fainna FAILURES have handed the national pension reserve over to the w**ker bankers. this is a serious flaw in sinn feins manifesto
Not really lawnseed: the NPRF has been
earmarked to bail out the golden circle, but it has not yet been discharged -- the Financial Bill has not yet passed into 'law'.
SF have made it clear that they would not, retrospectively, guarantee the outstanding bets (bonds) on any of the banks. There's still plenty of room for manoeuvre, but the ECB and the IMF must be faced up to.
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 15, 2011, 10:33:18 PM
Quote from: lawnseed on January 15, 2011, 10:31:51 PM
lads if tubs wanted to interview martin mcguinness properly why didnt he ask him about what sinn fein plans were in relation to the mess the country is in, or where sinn fein would get the 17 billion they say they would invest in job creation were they to get a mandate especially now that the fainna FAILURES have handed the national pension reserve over to the w**ker bankers. this is a serious flaw in sinn feins manifesto jez theres millons of things this useless p***k could have asked martin mcguiness. we know as much now as we did know. what a waste.
myles now i see your name calling i feel sorry for you. you ought to get out more
Why would he ask the deputy first minister of the British region of Northern Ireland those questions?
Decent point even if it was made to wind people up.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 10:41:54 PM
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 15, 2011, 10:33:18 PM
Why would he ask the deputy first minister of the British region of Northern Ireland those questions?
Decent point even if it was made to wind people up.
Because it's about
Ireland... D'oh! ;)
If anyone had been paying even the slightest degree of attention to Mc Guinness's 'interview', they might already have discerned that he was involved in the decision to run Adams in
Louth -- shock, horror!
PSTG started a thread about some fictional republican individual, so how would he have any idea about where he has powers of administration, in fact?
do you think the financial bill wont go through? i'd say its like the sting a dead wasp would give you it will pass. as regards asking martin questions in relation to the 26 counties and economic policy it didnt stop rte laying into gerry adams before the last election. this was a lazy interview. compare it to interview eamon dunphys mcguiness interview no comparison
The way things are unravelling at the minute, nothing would surprise me. Regardless, whatever this shower of gangsters get away with before they're forcibly ejected, it can (and will) be unwound.
Did Tubs ask Guiness about Paul Butler packing it in?
Quote from: Farrandeelin on January 15, 2011, 09:04:12 PM
Quote from: FL/MAYO on January 15, 2011, 08:09:27 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
A county that also gave you Seán (Jack) McNeela, Michael Gaughan and Frank Stagg.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/35971
pstg isn't from Mayo at all.
You Mayo lads are too easy. I actually feel a bit sorry for you simple simon types. Serious question has anyone ever met a Mayo man that wasnt a bit touched?
these green fianna failers intend to stay aroung until they push through some bill that i hear the farmers going nuts about that will take a while could be april. i was out for a few with one of the staunchest fainna failer i know last night this lad defends them to the last breath normally he hadnt a word to say (for a change) all he could say was "fine gael might'nt be much better" :D no arguement there
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 07:57:03 PM
Quote from: Bogball XV on January 15, 2011, 06:13:50 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 15, 2011, 03:14:15 PM
Didn't see it, what was the issue with his line of questioning?
it was the normal shite that many self righteous southerners like to throw out there. It could have been a carbon copy of his interview with Gerry a year or so ago. At that time Ryan, somewhat bafflingly failed to see the comparisons between his grandfather's IRA activities in the war of independence and the civil war with those of the IRA after that period.
He was cringeworthily bad last night, I was almost starting to feel sorry for him, but then he continued on pressing to the point of rudeness.
As for Martin he was alright, poor over the Queen, should just have said that as a republican (in the true sense of the word) he is largely indifferent to her.
In my opinion he is 100% correct in grilling these boys about past misdemeanours. His tone and manner are usually off beam though and as you say he lapses into downright rudeness which I believe he feels is a tough Paxman-esque interview style.
I'm not a Shinner of any sort, but imo, it's time to move on. What's the point in trying to regurgitate the past, time after time, after time? If there are recent illegal events that have a perceived connection to SF, fair enough, but what's the point of this line of questioning?
As MMG pointed out, then why are other guests not subjected to similar grillings? Arguably most politicians with power have a certain amount of blood on their hands, would they receive the same questioning? If Bill Clinton came on, what would Tubs do, would he ask him about operations he ordered? If JFK somehow appeared on the Late Late, would Tubs ask him about his military service, about his father's organised crime connections etc? What about Nelson Mandela, would he focus on ANC activities, Winnie? To me, there's a certain amount of hypocrisy there.
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 15, 2011, 10:57:06 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on January 15, 2011, 09:04:12 PM
Quote from: FL/MAYO on January 15, 2011, 08:09:27 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
A county that also gave you Seán (Jack) McNeela, Michael Gaughan and Frank Stagg.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/35971
pstg isn't from Mayo at all.
You Mayo lads are too easy. I actually feel a bit sorry for you simple simon types. Serious question has anyone ever met a Mayo man that wasnt a bit touched?
So, what's your gripe with us Mayomen then? I would love to know what we have done to you?
Quote from: Farrandeelin on January 16, 2011, 02:06:38 PM
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 15, 2011, 10:57:06 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on January 15, 2011, 09:04:12 PM
Quote from: FL/MAYO on January 15, 2011, 08:09:27 PM
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on January 14, 2011, 11:06:19 PM
I'm not sure that I'd take seriously any political comment coming from anyone from Mayo the county that gave us Pee Fllynn and his daughter Beverley and Michael Ring
A county that also gave you Seán (Jack) McNeela, Michael Gaughan and Frank Stagg.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/35971
pstg isn't from Mayo at all.
You Mayo lads are too easy. I actually feel a bit sorry for you simple simon types. Serious question has anyone ever met a Mayo man that wasnt a bit touched?
So, what's your gripe with us Mayomen then? I would love to know what we have done to you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8T0Q03oJSc&feature=related
(http://photos3.media.pix.ie/C4/80/C480A0E4A024451895000AC37498FB7F-0000340876-0002126399-00500L-BA4F873ED7604BC9B214194386469315.jpg)
Quote from: Minder on January 15, 2011, 10:56:28 PM
Did Tubs ask Guiness about Paul Butler packing it in?
I'd say 90% of people in the North couldn't pick him out of a line-up, nevermind those in the South.
Just watched the interview and can't believe any Shinners would get excited about that - I thought he got a pretty handy time of it.
Quote from: Maguire01 on January 16, 2011, 02:59:15 PM
Just watched the interview and can't believe any Shinners would get excited about that - I thought he got a pretty handy time of it.
Completely agree. He got a very easy ride. Love the bit where he was "shocked & horified" about Birmingham and Enniskillen.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 15, 2011, 10:28:51 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Funny how this would be your advice for McGuinness yet you're crying all day because he wasn't asked for the hundred millionth time about La Mon, Bloody Friday etc
Not for the first time, you've completely missed the point. My original post was about McGuinness' refusal to let go of the past and his demand for another apology from the British to put with the other fairly comprehensive apology they've already made. A few Shinners jumped in and started complaining about what a hard time poor Martin was given, how that nasty Mr Tubridy had the temerity to ask an international statesman and cricket fan about his involvement with the mob that outkilled any other armed group in the course of the troubles. I was simply pointing out that McGuinness had, in fact, being given an easy ride, that Tubridy could've raised any number of killings and deaths and atrocities and asked for a comment on these. St Marty, apparently, is allowed to keep on crying about a tragedy for which the British have apologised and for which they shelled out millions in order to uncover the truth, but if anyone asks him about the IRA and all its murders, it's bad form.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 16, 2011, 07:53:07 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 15, 2011, 10:28:51 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Funny how this would be your advice for McGuinness yet you're crying all day because he wasn't asked for the hundred millionth time about La Mon, Bloody Friday etc
Not for the first time, you've completely missed the point. My original post was about McGuinness' refusal to let go of the past and his demand for another apology from the British to put with the other fairly comprehensive apology they've already made. A few Shinners jumped in and started complaining about what a hard time poor Martin was given, how that nasty Mr Tubridy had the temerity to ask an international statesman and cricket fan about his involvement with the mob that outkilled any other armed group in the course of the troubles. I was simply pointing out that McGuinness had, in fact, being given an easy ride, that Tubridy could've raised any number of killings and deaths and atrocities and asked for a comment on these. St Marty, apparently, is allowed to keep on crying about a tragedy for which the British have apologised and for which they shelled out millions in order to uncover the truth, but if anyone asks him about the IRA and all its murders, it's bad form.
So you would prefer if McGuinness wasn't asked about IRA actions 30/40 years ago and the interviewer concentrated on the future?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 16, 2011, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 16, 2011, 07:53:07 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 15, 2011, 10:28:51 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Funny how this would be your advice for McGuinness yet you're crying all day because he wasn't asked for the hundred millionth time about La Mon, Bloody Friday etc
Not for the first time, you've completely missed the point. My original post was about McGuinness' refusal to let go of the past and his demand for another apology from the British to put with the other fairly comprehensive apology they've already made. A few Shinners jumped in and started complaining about what a hard time poor Martin was given, how that nasty Mr Tubridy had the temerity to ask an international statesman and cricket fan about his involvement with the mob that outkilled any other armed group in the course of the troubles. I was simply pointing out that McGuinness had, in fact, being given an easy ride, that Tubridy could've raised any number of killings and deaths and atrocities and asked for a comment on these. St Marty, apparently, is allowed to keep on crying about a tragedy for which the British have apologised and for which they shelled out millions in order to uncover the truth, but if anyone asks him about the IRA and all its murders, it's bad form.
So you would prefer if McGuinness wasn't asked about IRA actions 30/40 years ago and the interviewer concentrated on the future?
Tubridy did ask about the future i.e a possible visit of the Queen of England. McGuinness answered it by linking it to an event which happened nearly 40 years ago. If he's going to cling on to the past, then neither he nor his followers can cry when others ask him about his involvement in murder and mayhem from the same period.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 16, 2011, 08:08:17 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 16, 2011, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 16, 2011, 07:53:07 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 15, 2011, 10:28:51 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Funny how this would be your advice for McGuinness yet you're crying all day because he wasn't asked for the hundred millionth time about La Mon, Bloody Friday etc
Not for the first time, you've completely missed the point. My original post was about McGuinness' refusal to let go of the past and his demand for another apology from the British to put with the other fairly comprehensive apology they've already made. A few Shinners jumped in and started complaining about what a hard time poor Martin was given, how that nasty Mr Tubridy had the temerity to ask an international statesman and cricket fan about his involvement with the mob that outkilled any other armed group in the course of the troubles. I was simply pointing out that McGuinness had, in fact, being given an easy ride, that Tubridy could've raised any number of killings and deaths and atrocities and asked for a comment on these. St Marty, apparently, is allowed to keep on crying about a tragedy for which the British have apologised and for which they shelled out millions in order to uncover the truth, but if anyone asks him about the IRA and all its murders, it's bad form.
So you would prefer if McGuinness wasn't asked about IRA actions 30/40 years ago and the interviewer concentrated on the future?
Tubridy did ask about the future i.e a possible visit of the Queen of England. McGuinness answered it by linking it to an event which happened nearly 40 years ago. If he's going to cling on to the past, then neither he nor his followers can cry when others ask him about his involvement in murder and mayhem from the same period.
That's not answering my question, I'll state again:
Would prefer if McGuinness wasn't asked about IRA actions 30/40 years ago and the interviewer concentrated on the future?
and as you well know there is a world of difference between bloody sunday and Guilford, Birmingham etc.
Quote from: ross matt on January 16, 2011, 07:26:23 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on January 16, 2011, 02:59:15 PM
Just watched the interview and can't believe any Shinners would get excited about that - I thought he got a pretty handy time of it.
Completely agree. He got a very easy ride. Love the bit where he was "shocked & horified" about Birmingham and Enniskillen.
Shocked and horrified that more innocent people didn't die.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 16, 2011, 08:11:02 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 16, 2011, 08:08:17 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 16, 2011, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 16, 2011, 07:53:07 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 15, 2011, 10:28:51 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Thought MMcG's opposition to a state visit to Ireland by Liz was fairly poor stuff. He cited the fact that the the Prince of Wales is the Commander in Chief of the Parachute Regiment, and that no apology had ever been made by the Royal family for Bloody Sunday. He knows rightly - or should do - that the British royal family isn't permited to get involved in politics. They are figureheads only. The British government does the politics for them and in that context, David Cameron made a fairly decent apology for Bloody Sunday last year, to the extent that the Bloody Sunday families themselves are making this year's commemorative march the final one. They see the matter as closed. Move on, Martin.
Funny how this would be your advice for McGuinness yet you're crying all day because he wasn't asked for the hundred millionth time about La Mon, Bloody Friday etc
Not for the first time, you've completely missed the point. My original post was about McGuinness' refusal to let go of the past and his demand for another apology from the British to put with the other fairly comprehensive apology they've already made. A few Shinners jumped in and started complaining about what a hard time poor Martin was given, how that nasty Mr Tubridy had the temerity to ask an international statesman and cricket fan about his involvement with the mob that outkilled any other armed group in the course of the troubles. I was simply pointing out that McGuinness had, in fact, being given an easy ride, that Tubridy could've raised any number of killings and deaths and atrocities and asked for a comment on these. St Marty, apparently, is allowed to keep on crying about a tragedy for which the British have apologised and for which they shelled out millions in order to uncover the truth, but if anyone asks him about the IRA and all its murders, it's bad form.
So you would prefer if McGuinness wasn't asked about IRA actions 30/40 years ago and the interviewer concentrated on the future?
Tubridy did ask about the future i.e a possible visit of the Queen of England. McGuinness answered it by linking it to an event which happened nearly 40 years ago. If he's going to cling on to the past, then neither he nor his followers can cry when others ask him about his involvement in murder and mayhem from the same period.
That's not answering my question, I'll state again:
Would prefer if McGuinness wasn't asked about IRA actions 30/40 years ago and the interviewer concentrated on the future?
and as you well know there is a world of difference between bloody sunday and Guilford, Birmingham etc.
If people like McGuinness are going to make decisions about the future by referencing the past, then they must expect to be questioned about the past. And not just the British Army's past, but their own too. The day that McGuinness and Adams welcome the proposed visit of a British monarch to Ireland on the grounds that it's time to forget the past and move on - that'll be the day I think its time to stop asking them about IRA actions.
QuoteIf people like McGuinness are going to make decisions about the future by referencing the past, then they must expect to be questioned about the past. And not just the British Army's past, but their own too. The day that McGuinness and Adams welcome the proposed visit of a British monarch to Ireland on the grounds that it's time to forget the past and move on - that'll be the day I think its time to stop asking them about IRA actions.
Why though, McGuinness past has been done to death. There were investigations held at the time in the IRA actions you listed, the IRA apologised for civilian victims years ago. I don't know what other line of questioning anyone would have for the likes of Adams and McGuinness that hasn't already been done hundreds of times.
On the other hand the Brits have only admitted the truth about bloody sunday recently and they got a man, who was about 3 years old at the time, to apologise when it would have been more appropriate for the sitting monarch at the time to apologise. They know who done the shooting that day but where are the criminal proceedings? These boys probably living it up with their army pensions and medals handed to them. and that's not even to talk about the other innocent victims of British forces whose families are still waiting on apologises!
Even you can see the difference.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 16, 2011, 09:40:58 PM
Even you can see the difference.
Don't bet your savings on it Pints.
So you think Gerry Adams has been truthful about his past? Odd. Last I heard, he was still claiming not to have been a member of the IRA. Do you think we should just accept that? And you talk as if investigations into IRA activities are done and dusted. While no criminal prosecutions resulted from Saville, at least the guilty soldiers had to come forward and be questioned about their actions. Have those who bombed Birmingham ever been held to account in that way? What about Bloody Friday? Adams should know a bit about that. Oh, right. He wasn't a member. Republicans insist that the past should be an open book when ever it involves British soldiers. When it comes to their own actions, they become surprisingly coy and start crying that we should all move on.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 16, 2011, 11:51:26 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 08:07:09 PM
That would be the Christmas broadcast she has to run past Downing Street before recording, right? And those soldiers she decorates with medals, those would be the ones nominated by Downing Street, right? Okay. ::)
What's your point? It doesn't make it any less political. Fine by me if Downing street tell her to apologies. I'll accpept that and you can still claim it isn't a political act.
If Downing street told her to say sorry to the innocent victims on behalf of her country and she did it would you then tell me that's not political?
EDIT
I think you're talking shyte. This is the level it has come to excuse an apology, i can't believe we are even debating this crap. The Queen of England is a political figure. ANyone that says otherwise is stupid. Me spending time explaining how the Queen is a political figure is a stupid waste of my time. If you can't agree with that then you either are unable to understand it or just don't want to. Either way I'm wasting my time.
Always a clincher, that one.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 16, 2011, 11:51:26 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 15, 2011, 08:07:09 PM
That would be the Christmas broadcast she has to run past Downing Street before recording, right? And those soldiers she decorates with medals, those would be the ones nominated by Downing Street, right? Okay. ::)
What's your point? It doesn't make it any less political. Fine by me if Downing street tell her to apologies. I'll accpept that and you can still claim it isn't a political act.
If Downing street told her to say sorry to the innocent victims on behalf of her country and she did it would you then tell me that's not political?
EDIT
I think you're talking shyte. This is the level it has come to excuse an apology, i can't believe we are even debating this crap. The Queen of England is a political figure. ANyone that says otherwise is stupid. Me spending time explaining how the Queen is a political figure is a stupid waste of my time. If you can't agree with that then you either are unable to understand it or just don't want to. Either way I'm wasting my time.
By calling on the Queen to apologise for Bloody Sunday etc, you completely fail to understand the British Constitution, in two ways.
First, it is incompatible with her position as Head of State for her to express (partisan) political opinions, since those could conflict with the policies of the Government of the day, or a future government.
Second, the quid pro quo of this is that when Cameron apologised in the Commons, as her First Minister who was invited by her to form a Government, he was apologising on her behalf.
As such, his apology was no different from eg when she makes her speech at the State opening of Parliament, outlining the programme of legislation
her Government intends to introduce in the forthcoming session.
The British state has already apologised for it. By the looks of things you nordie savages want every single person in Britain to file past past Northern Ireland and apologise for 800 years of rape murder and oppression.
Didn't knoe where to post this but the following heartened me greatly.
RIP Micheala
DUP leader Peter Robinson has visited the wake along with three senior colleagues, Stormont Ministers Nelson McCausland and Arlene Foster, and Lord [Maurice] Morrow.
Quote from: Peter Solan the Great on January 17, 2011, 03:12:27 PM
The British state has already apologised for it. By the looks of things you nordie savages want every single person in Britain to file past past Northern Ireland and apologise for 800 years of rape murder and oppression.
They've only had 400 years in the North ;)
Quote from: Zapatista on January 17, 2011, 03:10:00 PMFirst thing is I don't care how the British Constitution works (in regard to this issue). I'm speaking from an independent and sovereign nation here. If the Queen comes to Dublin she will respect the Irish constitution. The British Constitution has no authority here. We will treat her with the same respect anyother visitor would be treated with but it will be on Irish terms. If she wishes to be received by the State then she must abide by the conditions attached. If one of them Conditions is an apology for British Soldiers murdering Irish citizens then so be it. If McAleese goes to London she should expect the same. Obviously an agreement can be reached between Britain and Ireland but it definitely shouldn't be unconditional due to out of date monarchy laws. If an agreement can't be reached then she shouldn't be invited.
That's grand if Cameron was apologising on her behalf as her First Minister. i welcome that. It's not enough though. If I sent my PA to say sorry on my behalf it would rightly be seen as a cop out.
You see the difference in our views in you last point. She is the top dog. If the British want to promote the Queen as head of State and as leader of the armed forces don't hide behind stupid excuses when the world treat her as it.
Disingenuous (though I suspect you know that).
Or are you claiming that Martin McGuinness, who has no function, position or role in the Irish government, and doesn't even reside and pay his taxes etc there, should be allowed to dictate the terms by which the Irish Government may, or may not, issue invitations to visit the Republic?
The simple fact is that the Irish Government may impose whatever conditions it likes, and the Queen may accede, or demur, just as when invited to visit any other country.
As to whether the Irish Government make an apology by her for Bloody Sunday one of the conditions, they are quite entitled to do so, but somehow I doubt they will, not least because she already has apologised, to the satisfaction of the dead peoples families, in the House of Commons (via her First Minister).
Myles
QuoteSo you think Gerry Adams has been truthful about his past?
Probably not
Quote
Odd. Last I heard, he was still claiming not to have been a member of the IRA. Do you think we should just accept that?
No, I think we should ask him ten times when he rises out of bed in the morning and ten times before he goes back to bed just to see will his answer change from the last hundred million times he was asked.
Quote
And you talk as if investigations into IRA activities are done and dusted. While no criminal prosecutions resulted from Saville, at least the guilty soldiers had to come forward and be questioned about their actions. Have those who bombed Birmingham ever been held to account in that way? What about Bloody Friday?
Oh that's alright then, they got away with murder, back to their army pensions and medals.
The guilty parties didn't serve time for the Birmingham bombing because the cops were too busy framing the wrong men. What about bloody Friday? The culprits won't be brought to justice in every incident but at least those who were victims of the IRA, for the most part, had investigations in to their killings. Compare that with victims of state violence who had their names tarnished, lies told about them and no such investigations. Only 14 of them got apologises, what about the rest?
Do you think the rest deserve apologies? Do you think they deserve proper investigations in to their murders?
Quote from: Zapatista on January 17, 2011, 03:10:00 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on January 17, 2011, 12:35:23 PM
By calling on the Queen to apologise for Bloody Sunday etc, you completely fail to understand the British Constitution, in two ways.
First, it is incompatible with her position as Head of State for her to express (partisan) political opinions, since those could conflict with the policies of the Government of the day, or a future government.
Second, the quid pro quo of this is that when Cameron apologised in the Commons, as her First Minister who was invited by her to form a Government, he was apologising on her behalf.
As such, his apology was no different from eg when she makes her speech at the State opening of Parliament, outlining the programme of legislation her Government intends to introduce in the forthcoming session.
First thing is I don't care how the British Constitution works (in regard to this issue). I'm speaking from an independent and sovereign nation here. If the Queen comes to Dublin she will respect the Irish constitution. The British Constitution has no authority here. We will treat her with the same respect anyother visitor would be treated with but it will be on Irish terms. If she wishes to be received by the State then she must abide by the conditions attached. If one of them Conditions is an apology for British Soldiers murdering Irish citizens then so be it. If McAleese goes to London she should expect the same. Obviously an agreement can be reached between Britain and Ireland but it definitely shouldn't be unconditional due to out of date monarchy laws. If an agreement can't be reached then she shouldn't be invited.
I'm a bit lost with this one. How would/could the Queen disrespect the Irish constitution during a visit? Also, who would impose conditions on her visit? What would conditions normally be for a Head of State? I'd be pretty sure than no-one who would have the power to invite her would be demanding any such pre-conditions.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 17, 2011, 03:10:00 PM
That's grand if Cameron was apologising on her behalf as her First Minister. i welcome that. It's not enough though. If I sent my PA to say sorry on my behalf it would rightly be seen as a cop out.
You see the difference in our views in you last point. She is the top dog. If the British want to promote the Queen as head of State and as leader of the armed forces don't hide behind stupid excuses when the world treat her as it.
I think it's a bit disingenuous to call the PM the Queen's PA. Her Head of State role is largely ceremonial, in ways similar to that of our own President. Should Mary McAleese apologise to the people of Ireland for the decisions taken by Ahern/Cowen that have left the country in such a mess?
For the vast majority of people, the Queen's visit will be an irrelevance. Some people will be looking for a reason to get annoyed.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 06:01:13 PM
Myles
QuoteSo you think Gerry Adams has been truthful about his past?
Probably not
Quote
Odd. Last I heard, he was still claiming not to have been a member of the IRA. Do you think we should just accept that?
No, I think we should ask him ten times when he rises out of bed in the morning and ten times before he goes back to bed just to see will his answer change from the last hundred million times he was asked.
Quote
And you think that's acceptable? Because Adams and SF have been fairly persistent over the years in their calls for enquiries into Bloody Sunday, the Ballymurphy shootings, and so forth. They have refused to accept the response that soldiers acted properly, professionally, etc. So why should we listen to Adams' demands for the truths from the British, yet have to put up with his lies and denials? That's called hypocrisy. Your response that he's refused to answer so many times we should just stop asking is pathetic. And, for the record, I believe that all victims of violence deserve justice. If I am critical of MMcG's call for an apology, it is simply because the apology has already been offered and accepted. Republicans' refusal to acknowldege this is just more evidence that they are so steeped in their sense of victimhood, that they can't move forward.
QuoteBecause Adams and SF have been fairly persistent over the years in their calls for enquiries into Bloody Sunday, the Ballymurphy shootings, and so forth. They have refused to accept the response that soldiers acted properly, professionally, etc. So why should we listen to Adams' demands for the truths from the British, yet have to put up with his lies and denials?
Why does it matter who's calling for the investigations/truth etc. That should not be an obstacle to it.
It doesn't matter what I think is acceptable or not - Adams has been quizzed thousands of times about his IRA involvement, had investigations in to him etc. Those who murdered innocent people while wearing the uniform of a British soldier, RUC member etc didn't and haven't faced anything.
Quote from: Doogie Browser on January 14, 2011, 10:31:14 PM
Tubridy is possibly a bigger tube than you peter, terrible line of questionning. How long will Rte persist with this attitude to SF? For rightly or wrongly things have moved on so much yet they still go for the 'Gay' ambush
this is the best summing up of tubridys interview.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 07:14:13 PM
QuoteBecause Adams and SF have been fairly persistent over the years in their calls for enquiries into Bloody Sunday, the Ballymurphy shootings, and so forth. They have refused to accept the response that soldiers acted properly, professionally, etc. So why should we listen to Adams' demands for the truths from the British, yet have to put up with his lies and denials?
Why does it matter who's calling for the investigations/truth etc. That should not be an obstacle to it.
It doesn't matter what I think is acceptable or not - Adams has been quizzed thousands of times about his IRA involvement, had investigations in to him etc. Those who murdered innocent people while wearing the uniform of a British soldier, RUC member etc didn't and haven't faced anything.
And throughout, he has steadfastly refused to tell the truth. So tell me why I should listen to him or the party he leads when he calls for 'the truth' about anything? Why should I listen to his deputy when he calls for apologies, when he refuses (and he refused again on Tubridy) to call on his boss to tell the truth? Why should I listen anytime SF tries to climb on to the moral high ground and condemn the British for this, that and the other, when they themselves demonstrate time and again that they are economical with the truth?
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
the sdlp also call for investigations into british 'security' force murders myles what would you like them to admit to.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:00:56 PM
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
Agreed.
Disagree with the rest. I'm in favour of some sort of truth commission, if it could be arranged and if everyone signed up to it. I don't agree that, in the meantime, we should stop normal relations with our closest neighbour until they own up to everything their soldiers ever did here, particularly since those who were killing their soldiers and their civilian population (together with anyone else who got in the way) refuse to do the same.
Quote from: lawnseed on January 17, 2011, 09:13:49 PM
the sdlp also call for investigations into british 'security' force murders myles what would you like them to admit to.
That they're shite?
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:29:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:00:56 PM
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
Agreed.
Disagree with the rest. I'm in favour of some sort of truth commission, if it could be arranged and if everyone signed up to it. I don't agree that, in the meantime, we should stop normal relations with our closest neighbour until they own up to everything their soldiers ever did here, particularly since those who were killing their soldiers and their civilian population (together with anyone else who got in the way) refuse to do the same.
You say you want justice for the victims of state violence yet you wouldn't support investigations (proper investigations) in to those crimes? Well, maybe, if Gerry Adams admitted to being in the IRA or some shite.
That doesn't make much sense unless of course you're not bothered about the victims of state violence getting justice at all.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:35:25 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:29:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:00:56 PM
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
Agreed.
Disagree with the rest. I'm in favour of some sort of truth commission, if it could be arranged and if everyone signed up to it. I don't agree that, in the meantime, we should stop normal relations with our closest neighbour until they own up to everything their soldiers ever did here, particularly since those who were killing their soldiers and their civilian population (together with anyone else who got in the way) refuse to do the same.
You say you want justice for the victims of state violence yet you wouldn't support investigations (proper investigations) in to those crimes? Well, maybe, if Gerry Adams admitted to being in the IRA or some shite.
That doesn't make much sense unless of course you're not bothered about the victims of state violence getting justice at all.
Proper investigations like Saville? Sorry, we can't afford it. Like the HET? They're not having a huge amount of success, if you haven't noticed. They're under resourced, too much time has passed in many cases, witnesses have died, etc. Really the HET is just a comfort blanket for those who never got justice at the proper time. You either have a truth commission which everyone buys into, or you accept that things happened which are never going to be properly unravelled. I don't agree with the one sided approach advocated by people like Adams and Mcguinness, whereby the British force their soldiers to come forward and answer questions about their deeds, while the IRA issue a vague expression of regret for all their misdeeds, then tell everyone to move on and forget the past.
it must be very annoying for you myles to see the shinners increase their share of the vote each time theres an election, and the two that are coming up will be no exception. voters want a caring society that puts people before cronies and banks.
I cant see that there will ever be a truth commission, Gerry Adams has said he would be in favour of one. Course he would..........
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:52:51 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:35:25 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:29:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:00:56 PM
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
Agreed.
Disagree with the rest. I'm in favour of some sort of truth commission, if it could be arranged and if everyone signed up to it. I don't agree that, in the meantime, we should stop normal relations with our closest neighbour until they own up to everything their soldiers ever did here, particularly since those who were killing their soldiers and their civilian population (together with anyone else who got in the way) refuse to do the same.
You say you want justice for the victims of state violence yet you wouldn't support investigations (proper investigations) in to those crimes? Well, maybe, if Gerry Adams admitted to being in the IRA or some shite.
That doesn't make much sense unless of course you're not bothered about the victims of state violence getting justice at all.
Proper investigations like Saville? Sorry, we can't afford it. Like the HET? They're not having a huge amount of success, if you haven't noticed. They're under resourced, too much time has passed in many cases, witnesses have died, etc. Really the HET is just a comfort blanket for those who never got justice at the proper time. You either have a truth commission which everyone buys into, or you accept that things happened which are never going to be properly unravelled. I don't agree with the one sided approach advocated by people like Adams and Mcguinness, whereby the British force their soldiers to come forward and answer questions about their deeds, while the IRA issue a vague expression of regret for all their misdeeds, then tell everyone to move on and forget the past.
Excuses excuses excuses.
Where else would any victim's family be told that there will be no murder investigation as "we can't afford it".
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 10:02:39 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:52:51 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:35:25 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:29:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:00:56 PM
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
Agreed.
Disagree with the rest. I'm in favour of some sort of truth commission, if it could be arranged and if everyone signed up to it. I don't agree that, in the meantime, we should stop normal relations with our closest neighbour until they own up to everything their soldiers ever did here, particularly since those who were killing their soldiers and their civilian population (together with anyone else who got in the way) refuse to do the same.
You say you want justice for the victims of state violence yet you wouldn't support investigations (proper investigations) in to those crimes? Well, maybe, if Gerry Adams admitted to being in the IRA or some shite.
That doesn't make much sense unless of course you're not bothered about the victims of state violence getting justice at all.
Proper investigations like Saville? Sorry, we can't afford it. Like the HET? They're not having a huge amount of success, if you haven't noticed. They're under resourced, too much time has passed in many cases, witnesses have died, etc. Really the HET is just a comfort blanket for those who never got justice at the proper time. You either have a truth commission which everyone buys into, or you accept that things happened which are never going to be properly unravelled. I don't agree with the one sided approach advocated by people like Adams and Mcguinness, whereby the British force their soldiers to come forward and answer questions about their deeds, while the IRA issue a vague expression of regret for all their misdeeds, then tell everyone to move on and forget the past.
Excuses excuses excuses.
Where else would any victim's family be told that there will be no murder investigation as "we can't afford it".
Saville wasn't a murder enquiry, it was a public enquiry. A simple murder enquiry is not sufficient to get to the bottom of events like Bloody Sunday, Ballymurphy, Birmingham, Enniskillen, etc. Unfortunately, the cost of such enquiries is astonomical. We can't afford them, simple as that.
Myles
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him? A truth commission wouldn't matter a shite if people have something in their heads that they refuse to change their mind on, and I have a feeling you think Gerry was in the IRA, no matter what anyone says.
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:16:14 PM
Myles
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him? A truth commission wouldn't matter a shite if people have something in their heads that they refuse to change their mind on, and I have a feeling you think Gerry was in the IRA, no matter what anyone says.
I think someone asking Gerry Adams if he was in the IRA would be the least of his problems if a truth commission was established.
darkley? or have you made up your mind ;)
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 10:09:57 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 10:02:39 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:52:51 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:35:25 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 09:29:49 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 09:00:56 PM
I couldn't give a f**k if you listen to them or not - I know I don't.
Just because Sinn Fein call for investigations in to the murders by British Forces doesn't mean that those victims don't deserve justice. Until the Brits are a lot more forthcoming I agree that we should not be welcoming their head of state to the 26 counties.
Agreed.
Disagree with the rest. I'm in favour of some sort of truth commission, if it could be arranged and if everyone signed up to it. I don't agree that, in the meantime, we should stop normal relations with our closest neighbour until they own up to everything their soldiers ever did here, particularly since those who were killing their soldiers and their civilian population (together with anyone else who got in the way) refuse to do the same.
You say you want justice for the victims of state violence yet you wouldn't support investigations (proper investigations) in to those crimes? Well, maybe, if Gerry Adams admitted to being in the IRA or some shite.
That doesn't make much sense unless of course you're not bothered about the victims of state violence getting justice at all.
Proper investigations like Saville? Sorry, we can't afford it. Like the HET? They're not having a huge amount of success, if you haven't noticed. They're under resourced, too much time has passed in many cases, witnesses have died, etc. Really the HET is just a comfort blanket for those who never got justice at the proper time. You either have a truth commission which everyone buys into, or you accept that things happened which are never going to be properly unravelled. I don't agree with the one sided approach advocated by people like Adams and Mcguinness, whereby the British force their soldiers to come forward and answer questions about their deeds, while the IRA issue a vague expression of regret for all their misdeeds, then tell everyone to move on and forget the past.
Excuses excuses excuses.
Where else would any victim's family be told that there will be no murder investigation as "we can't afford it".
Saville wasn't a murder enquiry, it was a public enquiry. A simple murder enquiry is not sufficient to get to the bottom of events like Bloody Sunday, Ballymurphy, Birmingham, Enniskillen, etc. Unfortunately, the cost of such enquiries is astonomical. We can't afford them, simple as that.
Murder enquiry, public enquiry, whatever you want to call it - lets have them - hiding behind this "we can't afford them" is a great excuse. I'd say a lot of them could be solved with the Brits opening up their records and telling the truth.
Why would we want further enquiries in to Birmingham or Enniskillen? There were enquiries (proper ones) at the time, the government didn't spend their time rubbishing the good names of the victims with lies, brushing things under the carpet and covering their own backs. Don't you see the difference or don't you want to?
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:16:14 PM
Myles
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him? A truth commission wouldn't matter a shite if people have something in their heads that they refuse to change their mind on, and I have a feeling you think Gerry was in the IRA, no matter what anyone says.
Do you think he wasn't?
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 10:29:15 PM
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:16:14 PM
Myles
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him? A truth commission wouldn't matter a shite if people have something in their heads that they refuse to change their mind on, and I have a feeling you think Gerry was in the IRA, no matter what anyone says.
Do you think he wasn't?
I think there is a fairly good chance he was although that doesn't prove anything, i.e whether he was or not and
IF he was what part he played in the things he is accused of. You didn't answer my question
'Why would we want further enquiries in to Birmingham or Enniskillen? '
er...to find out who planted the bombs? To find out who ordered the planting of the bombs? What about an enquiry into the hunger strikes? Let's find out what deal was on the table and at what point. Lets uncover how many young men died needlessly without knowing that their demands had been met. What about an enquiry into the disappeared? Let's find out exactly what part Gerry Adams played in the abduction and murder of a mother of 10. What about an enquiry into the human bomb tactic? Let's find out if this was local innovation or whether it was approved at HQ by leading Shinners.
You want enquiries? Fine. But they can't all be one way.
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:32:57 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 10:29:15 PM
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:16:14 PM
Myles
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him? A truth commission wouldn't matter a shite if people have something in their heads that they refuse to change their mind on, and I have a feeling you think Gerry was in the IRA, no matter what anyone says.
Do you think he wasn't?
I think there is a fairly good chance he was although that doesn't prove anything, i.e whether he was or not and IF he was what part he played in the things he is accused of. You didn't answer my question
I think Gerry Adams was in the IRA
because of what people say, people like Dolores Price and Brendan Hughes, people like Gerry Adams himself, in his writings as 'brownie' in Republican News. I think he was in the IRA because he was part of a high powered IRA delegation flown to London to negotiate with the British in the 70s. I think he was in the IRA because he was photographed in IRA uniform carrying an IRA volunteer's coffin.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 10:36:38 PM
'Why would we want further enquiries in to Birmingham or Enniskillen? '
er...to find out who planted the bombs? To find out who ordered the planting of the bombs? What about an enquiry into the hunger strikes? Let's find out what deal was on the table and at what point. Lets uncover how many young men died needlessly without knowing that their demands had been met. What about an enquiry into the disappeared? Let's find out exactly what part Gerry Adams played in the abduction and murder of a mother of 10. What about an enquiry into the human bomb tactic? Let's find out if this was local innovation or whether it was approved at HQ by leading Shinners.
You want enquiries? Fine. But they can't all be one way.
What do you mean all the one way? This shouldn't be about one side or the other.
Innocent people were gunned down, set up and murdered by members of the British forces, those people who were suppose to uphold law and order and you're only interested in engaging in whataboutery. That speaks volumes about you. As I said, there have already been investigations in to incidents like Enniskillen and Birmingham.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on January 17, 2011, 10:52:11 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on January 17, 2011, 10:36:38 PM
'Why would we want further enquiries in to Birmingham or Enniskillen? '
er...to find out who planted the bombs? To find out who ordered the planting of the bombs? What about an enquiry into the hunger strikes? Let's find out what deal was on the table and at what point. Lets uncover how many young men died needlessly without knowing that their demands had been met. What about an enquiry into the disappeared? Let's find out exactly what part Gerry Adams played in the abduction and murder of a mother of 10. What about an enquiry into the human bomb tactic? Let's find out if this was local innovation or whether it was approved at HQ by leading Shinners.
You want enquiries? Fine. But they can't all be one way.
What do you mean all the one way? This shouldn't be about one side or the other.
Innocent people were gunned down, set up and murdered by members of the British forces, those people who were suppose to uphold law and order and you're only interested in engaging in whataboutery. That speaks volumes about you. As I said, there have already been investigations in to incidents like Enniskillen and Birmingham.
Are you satisfied with the standard of justice the victims of those events received?
No, by all means follow up should new evidence become available etc like police would with any other unsolved case. However I do think we should give priority to those victims who had never any investigation in to their deaths, just whitewash.
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:16:14 PM
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him?
Seriously, would anyone?
Quote from: Zapatista on January 17, 2011, 11:45:49 PM
QuoteFor the vast majority of people, the Queen's visit will be an irrelevance. Some people will be looking for a reason to get annoyed.
Wrong. For the vast majority of people the visit will be very important regardless of their views but they will probably not notice. Kind of like Lisbon and Nice etc. In this case attempting to rewrite history is important to everyone.
Who would be rewriting history? People are just moving on. You sound like the doom merchants when GSTQ was to be played at Croke Park. Did the sky fall in? Did it rewrite the history of Croke Park?
Quote from: Zapatista on January 18, 2011, 08:30:01 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on January 18, 2011, 08:04:39 AM
Who would be rewriting history? People are just moving on. You sound like the doom merchants when GSTQ was to be played at Croke Park. Did the sky fall in? Did it rewrite the history of Croke Park?
Don't try to connect me to that, it's a cheap shot. I easily ignored that. This State are rewriting history. When Cowen announced this he said 'there is now no obstacle to a Royal visit'. That's the official record and it is wrong. When this is looked back on it will be a mark of history that incorrectly protrays it's time.
I'm not connecting you to anything; i'm drawing a parallel. Some people thought that there were still obstacles there; some didn't.
I'd imagine most people would either welcome the visit or (I suspect the majority) be indifferent to it, as with most state visits; for most people, there would be no obstacle. In that respect, a visit would be an accurate reflection of its time. The level of protest and opposition to any visit would also portray the mood. Cowen's stance (or whoever is in post at the time) will only be one part of the story and the history.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 18, 2011, 08:30:01 AM
Quote from: Maguire01 on January 18, 2011, 08:04:39 AM
Who would be rewriting history? People are just moving on. You sound like the doom merchants when GSTQ was to be played at Croke Park. Did the sky fall in? Did it rewrite the history of Croke Park?
Don't try to connect me to that, it's a cheap shot. I easily ignored that. This State are rewriting history. When Cowen announced this he said 'there is now no obstacle to a Royal visit'. That's the official record and it is wrong. When this is looked back on it will be a mark of history that incorrectly protrays it's time.
Who will be looking at the record books? I'd say the visit (if it happens) will be a non-event for the vast majority of people.
Quote from: Maguire01 on January 17, 2011, 11:27:47 PM
Quote from: andoireabu on January 17, 2011, 10:16:14 PM
If there was a truth commission set up, and everyone signed up and someone asked Gerry was he in the IRA and he said no would you believe him?
Seriously, would anyone?
Kind of what I was getting at. People tend to make judgements whether they know the truth or just think they do so a "truth commission" would be nothing but a waste of money. It might sound bad but inquiries into the past are similar. The victims families believe their loved ones to be innocent and their view is unlikely to change because some judge says so.
Quote from: Zapatista on January 18, 2011, 10:55:17 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on January 18, 2011, 04:40:22 PM
Who will be looking at the record books? I'd say the visit (if it happens) will be a non-event for the vast majority of people.
Really? Most people I relay my position to seem very forcefull against me. It seems like they do care. It's not in the best interests of the State to welcome a visit.
The record books aren't important. What is important is that it will send Ireland in a direction without giving proper thought to the consequences. As a sovereign Republic we should show some balls and maturity and demand that the history of this island is addressed properly by all the contributing factions. Britain played an equal part in it. Now we have the engine of the State along with the the moral authority and right to demand to have our history recorded as it happened and for that to happen we will need the full cooperation of all the people of Ireland and every level of the British State. To ignore that now and to call for people to move on by setting an example at the highest level is a disservice to the current republic and any future republic there may or may not be. We will have learnt nothing. I'm all for forgivness but i'm more in favour of the respect of equality between the two states. Unaccountability leads to history repeating itself. It needxs to be nipped in the bud.
As some wise people once wished - Ireland should take her place amoung the nations not in a certain order of nations.
I can't see how it will make any difference to what direction Ireland is going. Especially given that British PMs and other Royals have made numerous visits already.
What actual difference will it make? How will it affect the lives of Irish people? How will it affect Ireland's perception on the world stage?
(http://i648.photobucket.com/albums/uu206/Hardyarse/whatdidyoujustsay.png)
what about the 80 billion liz gave us.. sorry, i mean our beloved bankers. the brits are the best friends we have, they buy all our stuff, give us soccer, x factor, maggy thatcher, the list is endless. they employ tens of thousands of our emmigrants and dont cry about it. seriously if they'd just give us back our 4th green field we'd be the best of mates.
"What have the brits ever given us?..................."LOB