Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[lynchbhoy]

It's been a while since I read it so I maybe wrong but were you not promoting/running a website campaign for justice for some IRA members shot dead?

Was that not just something that happens in war?

/Jim

I was Jim, the families were looking an inquest and disclosure as to what happened  when they were killed. The McConvilles deserve the same - and I believe some of their family members were given some disclosure of events (however limited).

I actually wouldn't be actively persuing these inquests on either side as imo it is pointless. Maybe not to the families immediately concerned and connected, but what good will come of any inquest. Those dead are dead. Practically all evidence is too difficult to collect and cases impossible to prove.
This was war. Terrible things happened on both sides, nothing trumps death. Instigators or retaliators - does it matter now.
People are coming out of the woodwork to whinge and moan about it all. It's done. It's over. Slow progression is still being made. Where we have gotten to would never have been possible without the intervention of militant republicans - sadly. By the same token the modern British governments have accepted that previous policy in the six counties was wrong and without their modern day help, peace was a long way off.
I'm just happy the bad old days are gone. It's not perfect now and the six counties is just an economic backwater and sihthole like many other backwards places in the world. That's the reality. I know many won't agree, but for many others who had their fill of and enough of the bad old days - it's time to move on and consign history to the books.

I'm sure you felt the same about Bloody Sunday, yes?

Actually yes

I didn't think they would have gotten anywhere , especially after so long and especially since it was so cut and dried obvious as to what happened with evidence everywhere.

But look at the effort it took to get to that point and how long. That's just not practical for the rest of the cases for both sides of the war.

So yes, I did feel that way about Bloody Sunday.
Maybe it was apathy. I'm also delighted for the families that they got their apology. For me that apology extended to the wider nationalist/irish/catholic /working class people for the centuries of torment etc endured.

I think it's pointless persuing more though .

Sorry if that response fecks up your argument.

[muppet]

You can't have it both ways lads. The McConville family say Adams has information on her because Brendan Hughes and Dolores Price said that as a senior member of the IRA in Belfast he would have be aware of what's going on. However the same two people also said she was shot for being an informer after previously being warned. So either they're right, she was an informer and yes in a war situation any side would have to do the same and execute her, or they're wrong, and the family have no evidence to be connecting Adams to this.

Well no actually, it's quite possible that they could be right on one count and wrong on the other. And either way, if it was a war, it's still a war crime, is it not?

Shooting an informer/spy during a war is a 'war crime'? No I wouldn't consider that a war crime.

You would no doubt accept all casualties caused by British and Loyalist forces as well?

[trileacman]

You can't have it both ways lads. The McConville family say Adams has information on her because Brendan Hughes and Dolores Price said that as a senior member of the IRA in Belfast he would have be aware of what's going on. However the same two people also said she was shot for being an informer after previously being warned. So either they're right, she was an informer and yes in a war situation any side would have to do the same and execute her, or they're wrong, and the family have no evidence to be connecting Adams to this.

Well no actually, it's quite possible that they could be right on one count and wrong on the other. And either way, if it was a war, it's still a war crime, is it not?

Shooting an informer/spy during a war is a 'war crime'? No I wouldn't consider that a war crime.

So do you chalk down the death of the hunger strikers as "something that happens in war"?

[lynchbhoy]

You can't have it both ways lads. The McConville family say Adams has information on her because Brendan Hughes and Dolores Price said that as a senior member of the IRA in Belfast he would have be aware of what's going on. However the same two people also said she was shot for being an informer after previously being warned. So either they're right, she was an informer and yes in a war situation any side would have to do the same and execute her, or they're wrong, and the family have no evidence to be connecting Adams to this.

Well no actually, it's quite possible that they could be right on one count and wrong on the other. And either way, if it was a war, it's still a war crime, is it not?

Shooting an informer/spy during a war is a 'war crime'? No I wouldn't consider that a war crime.

So do you chalk down the death of the hunger strikers as "something that happens in war"?

Why
Would you not?

[deiseach]

Actually yes

I didn't think they would have gotten anywhere , especially after so long and especially since it was so cut and dried obvious as to what happened with evidence everywhere.

But look at the effort it took to get to that point and how long. That's just not practical for the rest of the cases for both sides of the war.

So yes, I did feel that way about Bloody Sunday.
Maybe it was apathy. I'm also delighted for the families that they got their apology. For me that apology extended to the wider nationalist/irish/catholic /working class people for the centuries of torment etc endured.

I think it's pointless persuing more though .

Sorry if that response fecks up your argument.

Liar.

[deiseach]

Christ's sake, the more I think about it . . . will the Shinner need to gloss over the IRA's atrocities now mean that the victims of Bloody Sunday and Aidan McAnespie and Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson and Majella O'Hare and God knows how many others will have to be written off as casualties of war? Screw you, Shinner scum, and the horse you rode in on.

[lynchbhoy]

Actually yes

I didn't think they would have gotten anywhere , especially after so long and especially since it was so cut and dried obvious as to what happened with evidence everywhere.

But look at the effort it took to get to that point and how long. That's just not practical for the rest of the cases for both sides of the war.

So yes, I did feel that way about Bloody Sunday.
Maybe it was apathy. I'm also delighted for the families that they got their apology. For me that apology extended to the wider nationalist/irish/catholic /working class people for the centuries of torment etc endured.

I think it's pointless persuing more though .

Sorry if that response fecks up your argument.

Liar.

you are a bit of a w***r then I see.

the post contains my accurate sentiment.

but your powers of debating and comprehension demonstrate exactly what you are.

well done!

[lynchbhoy]

Christ's sake, the more I think about it . . . will the Shinner need to gloss over the IRA's atrocities now mean that the victims of Bloody Sunday and Aidan McAnespie and Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson and Majella O'Hare and God knows how many others will have to be written off as casualties of war? Screw you, Shinner scum, and the horse you rode in on.

fcuk all to do with sf

some of these were killings that the IRA were involved with. some should not have happened.
but that's war. you wouldn't understand. you've shown your levels of (mis)comprehension already.

stick to whinging about soccer.

[foxcommander]

Christ's sake, the more I think about it . . . will the Shinner need to gloss over the IRA's atrocities now mean that the victims of Bloody Sunday and Aidan McAnespie and Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson and Majella O'Hare and God knows how many others will have to be written off as casualties of war? Screw you, Shinner scum, and the horse you rode in on.

I love how free staters give lessons on the north...it's amazing what they seem to learn by watching a couple of Prime Time documentaries.

[trileacman]

You can't have it both ways lads. The McConville family say Adams has information on her because Brendan Hughes and Dolores Price said that as a senior member of the IRA in Belfast he would have be aware of what's going on. However the same two people also said she was shot for being an informer after previously being warned. So either they're right, she was an informer and yes in a war situation any side would have to do the same and execute her, or they're wrong, and the family have no evidence to be connecting Adams to this.

Well no actually, it's quite possible that they could be right on one count and wrong on the other. And either way, if it was a war, it's still a war crime, is it not?

Shooting an informer/spy during a war is a 'war crime'? No I wouldn't consider that a war crime.

So do you chalk down the death of the hunger strikers as "something that happens in war"?

Why
Would you not?

No. I wouldn't deem their deaths as an acceptable action by a ruling government.

[lynchbhoy]

You can't have it both ways lads. The McConville family say Adams has information on her because Brendan Hughes and Dolores Price said that as a senior member of the IRA in Belfast he would have be aware of what's going on. However the same two people also said she was shot for being an informer after previously being warned. So either they're right, she was an informer and yes in a war situation any side would have to do the same and execute her, or they're wrong, and the family have no evidence to be connecting Adams to this.

Well no actually, it's quite possible that they could be right on one count and wrong on the other. And either way, if it was a war, it's still a war crime, is it not?

Shooting an informer/spy during a war is a 'war crime'? No I wouldn't consider that a war crime.

So do you chalk down the death of the hunger strikers as "something that happens in war"?

Why
Would you not?

No. I wouldn't deem their deaths as an acceptable action.

Fair enough.
They volunteered for the hunger strike and had their reasons- war and the heightened tensions being a significant contributory factor.
So in that regard Id say their deaths highly regrettable -but not so much unacceptable.

I think their deaths had a positive influence in the following years imo.

But that's just one opinion. Id expect the polar opposite and more exist.

[trileacman]

You can't have it both ways lads. The McConville family say Adams has information on her because Brendan Hughes and Dolores Price said that as a senior member of the IRA in Belfast he would have be aware of what's going on. However the same two people also said she was shot for being an informer after previously being warned. So either they're right, she was an informer and yes in a war situation any side would have to do the same and execute her, or they're wrong, and the family have no evidence to be connecting Adams to this.

Well no actually, it's quite possible that they could be right on one count and wrong on the other. And either way, if it was a war, it's still a war crime, is it not?

Shooting an informer/spy during a war is a 'war crime'? No I wouldn't consider that a war crime.

So do you chalk down the death of the hunger strikers as "something that happens in war"?

Why
Would you not?

No. I wouldn't deem their deaths as an acceptable action.

Fair enough.
They volunteered for the hunger strike and had their reasons- war and the heightened tensions being a significant contributory factor.
So in that regard Id say their deaths highly regrettable -but not so much unacceptable.

I think their deaths had a positive influence in the following years imo.

But that's just one opinion. Id expect the polar opposite and more exist.

Without trawling through all the events of the troubles here but would it be fair to say you consider the death of Pat Finucane and those men on Bloody Sunday as "regrettable but not unacceptable".

I'm not WUMing here, I'm just interested where you draw the line.

[Ulick]

Looks like Jude has been pondering this as well.



TV & radio appearances


Books


Photos


Contact


Politics-free Zone


Return to Content






Five things I learnt inside twenty minutes

By Jude Collins on April 8, 2015  18

I'm fresh (??) off the Nolan Show on BBC Radio Ulster/Raidio Uladh. I'd say I was on for twenty minutes roughly; but it's amazing what you can learn in a short time. I learned five things.

1. Quite a few politicians and commentators who express compassion for the lonely death of Jean McConville are shedding crocodile tears. I say this because when I raised the killing of Joan Connolly a year earlier –  a British paratrooper  blew half of her face away – it was ignored. How could anyone feeling genuine sympathy for Jean McConville not have sympathy for Joan Connolly too? Jean McConville left ten motherless children behind her, Joan Connolly left eight. Why have we not heard more about the death of Joan Connolly and her children, especially since she was killed by a man whose salary we paid?

2. Listening to my verbal opponent Ruth Dudley Edwards, it became clearer than ever that she didn't have Jean McConville and her family in mind. She had  in mind the use of Jean McConville and her family as a political weapon for use against the hated Gerry Adams and Sinn Féin.

3. People here are obsessed with language. Was the Troubles a period of war or a period of conflict? Was the death of Jean McConville murder or can we call it something else?  This obsession with semantics has nothing to do with compassion for victims or even interest in language and everything to do with 'It-was-all-youse-uns-fault'.

4. People pretend not to hear what is inconvenient. When I said that republicans were politically motivated in the violence they carried out and that ten men had died on hunger strike in support of that notion, it was as if I'd said "I'd like a cup of tea". In fact if I had said "I'd like a cup of tea" it almost certainly would have received more attention.

5. I used to  believe that what-aboutery was a diversionary tactic; now I'm  less sure. In Ruth Dudley Edwards's eyes, to raise the death of Joan Connolly as a parallel to the death of Jean McConville was to engage, she said,  in what-aboutery. My view was that raising of Joan Connolly's death and its instant dismissal by those on the programme showed how selective is the moral wrath that cries "Horror!" in the face of a mother's death but cannot bear for that death to be set in a wider context.

If I wasn't so dense I'd have learnt these lessons long ago. In conservative/establishment politics, lies are truth and distortion is a straight line. If you doubt that, think of the emerging Kincora-Westminster sexual abuse scandal and the line/lies we've been fed about it for years

[Kidder81]

I would say Jude is pondering what he is told to ponder

[muppet]

Looks like Jude has been pondering this as well.



TV & radio appearances


Books


Photos


Contact


Politics-free Zone


Return to Content






Five things I learnt inside twenty minutes

By Jude Collins on April 8, 2015  18

I'm fresh (??) off the Nolan Show on BBC Radio Ulster/Raidio Uladh. I'd say I was on for twenty minutes roughly; but it's amazing what you can learn in a short time. I learned five things.

1. Quite a few politicians and commentators who express compassion for the lonely death of Jean McConville are shedding crocodile tears. I say this because when I raised the killing of Joan Connolly a year earlier –  a British paratrooper  blew half of her face away – it was ignored. How could anyone feeling genuine sympathy for Jean McConville not have sympathy for Joan Connolly too? Jean McConville left ten motherless children behind her, Joan Connolly left eight. Why have we not heard more about the death of Joan Connolly and her children, especially since she was killed by a man whose salary we paid?

2. Listening to my verbal opponent Ruth Dudley Edwards, it became clearer than ever that she didn't have Jean McConville and her family in mind. She had  in mind the use of Jean McConville and her family as a political weapon for use against the hated Gerry Adams and Sinn Féin.

3. People here are obsessed with language. Was the Troubles a period of war or a period of conflict? Was the death of Jean McConville murder or can we call it something else?  This obsession with semantics has nothing to do with compassion for victims or even interest in language and everything to do with 'It-was-all-youse-uns-fault'.

4. People pretend not to hear what is inconvenient. When I said that republicans were politically motivated in the violence they carried out and that ten men had died on hunger strike in support of that notion, it was as if I'd said "I'd like a cup of tea". In fact if I had said "I'd like a cup of tea" it almost certainly would have received more attention.

5. I used to  believe that what-aboutery was a diversionary tactic; now I'm  less sure. In Ruth Dudley Edwards's eyes, to raise the death of Joan Connolly as a parallel to the death of Jean McConville was to engage, she said,  in what-aboutery. My view was that raising of Joan Connolly's death and its instant dismissal by those on the programme showed how selective is the moral wrath that cries "Horror!" in the face of a mother's death but cannot bear for that death to be set in a wider context.

If I wasn't so dense I'd have learnt these lessons long ago. In conservative/establishment politics, lies are truth and distortion is a straight line. If you doubt that, think of the emerging Kincora-Westminster sexual abuse scandal and the line/lies we've been fed about it for years

Pointing to another victim of another atrocity is merely highlighting another atrocity.

But it is not an argument to justify the last one.

Why an otherwise intelligent poster like yourself seems to think it is amazes me. The only conclusion I can draw is that this is the official line and everyone must stick to it. No matter how absurd it looks.