"fifty Dead Men Walking"

[Minder]

Can we have a whipround for lynchbhoy not to use the word "apartheid" in every post about the troubles. Please.

Certainly, I only have 5 rand on me though.

[Tony Baloney]

Can we have a whipround for lynchbhoy not to use the word "apartheid" in every post about the troubles. Please.

Certainly, I only have 5 rand on me though.

I remember clearly sitting at the back of the bus on the way to the township.

[Myles Na G.]

The gospel according to Gerry Bradley 

As someone who was involved, he's entitled to his view and it carries more weight than the ramblings of the armchair generals, the wannabees and the sadly deluded who post on here on a regular basis.

You're another one that likes to ram his views down other people's throats, easy knowing you're a unionist.  As I said to MW not so long ago, you have your opinions, no one will change them, others will have theirs so there's no point in you trying to ram your views down someone's neck.  Quoting nonsense out of books just makes you look like a tit.

From the man with nearly 11,000 posts to his name! 

[Myles Na G.]

As someone with a vested interest in discrediting the IRA it carries absolutely no weight. You not suppose a private british army document which was leaked gives more insight? You think those who died or suffered in the H Blocks did so cos they just couldn't get a woman unless they were in the ra?! You think the approx one thousand people murdered by collusion had nothing to do with people joining? Bloody Sunday wasn't a motivation? RUC harassment? I'm debating with a moron.

I don't have to discredit the IRA -they did a good enough job of that themselves. 'the approx one thousand people murdered by collusion' - what's your source for that fairly impressive statistic? Do you have a source, or do you belong to the Lynchbhoy's 'make it up as you go along' school of debate? And does the collusion you refer to include the collusion of the countless republicans who acted as agents, informers, etc for the British state?

[pintsofguinness]

The gospel according to Gerry Bradley 

As someone who was involved, he's entitled to his view and it carries more weight than the ramblings of the armchair generals, the wannabees and the sadly deluded who post on here on a regular basis.

You're another one that likes to ram his views down other people's throats, easy knowing you're a unionist.  As I said to MW not so long ago, you have your opinions, no one will change them, others will have theirs so there's no point in you trying to ram your views down someone's neck.  Quoting nonsense out of books just makes you look like a tit.

From the man with nearly 11,000 posts to his name! 

Great argument 

[Nally Stand]

Firstly, you have completely ignored my question, and secondly, my source is An Fheirne and the Pat Finucane Centre who between them represent between 700 and 1000 families who were victims of collusion. Did these "countless" touts do that? And I'll ask again, do you not think that the events i stated could have possibly politicised those who decided to join the IRA? Or were they only, as you imply, disinterested in all that and were only interested in being a celeb and getting a woman? Sensible debate pls

[Myles Na G.]

The gospel according to Gerry Bradley 

As someone who was involved, he's entitled to his view and it carries more weight than the ramblings of the armchair generals, the wannabees and the sadly deluded who post on here on a regular basis.

You're another one that likes to ram his views down other people's throats, easy knowing you're a unionist.  As I said to MW not so long ago, you have your opinions, no one will change them, others will have theirs so there's no point in you trying to ram your views down someone's neck.  Quoting nonsense out of books just makes you look like a tit.

From the man with nearly 11,000 posts to his name! 

Great argument 

Thank you. I thought so too.

[Myles Na G.]

Firstly, you have completely ignored my question, and secondly, my source is An Fheirne and the Pat Finucane Centre who between them represent between 700 and 1000 families who were victims of collusion. Did these "countless" touts do that? And I'll ask again, do you not think that the events i stated could have possibly politicised those who decided to join the IRA? Or were they only, as you imply, disinterested in all that and were only interested in being a celeb and getting a woman? Sensible debate pls

I'm not even going to talk about An Fheirne, since it was launched by Gerry Adams and covered in great detail by An Phoblacht. I'm only interested in impartial sources, not propaganda crap from the Shinners. The Pat Finucane Centre lists details of 140 cases. It also links to independent legal reports which talk about 72 cases in the 70's. Those numbers are perhaps nearer the truth. (that said, it lists Bloody Sunday as one of the cases. State murder certainly, but where's the collusion there?) One case is too many, but when you start talking ridiculous figures taken straight from the Shinners publicity machine, then you weaken your own argument. You think the republican informants and agents weren't also responsible for the deaths of many people? You think the people in IRA internal security who were British agents weren't in a position to have people executed to cover their own backs and the backs of other agents too? Plenty of people were politicised by the events you cite, but they didn't all rush off to join an organisation which specialised in bombing civilian targets. 

[Nally Stand]

Sweet feck where to start. Firstly, the number of families which join An Fheirne is driven by the fact that the FAMILIES joined it. I don't care who set it up, the victims stand for what they stand for. Secondly, what of the british handlers who allowed people to be shot to protect their own men? Not important? Finally, the IRA "speciality" was not bombing civilian areas. That would suggest most IRA attacks were on civilian targets. Which is a lie Myles.

[Myles Na G.]

Sweet feck where to start. Firstly, the number of families which join An Fheirne is driven by the fact that the FAMILIES joined it. I don't care who set it up, the victims stand for what they stand for. Secondly, what of the british handlers who allowed people to be shot to protect their own men? Not important? Finally, the IRA "speciality" was not bombing civilian areas. That would suggest most IRA attacks were on civilian targets. Which is a lie Myles.

Pubs, restaurants, shops, bus stations, hotels ... you don't class those as civilian targets? 

[Nally Stand]

Did you not read my post? I said that to say attacking civilian areas was the IRA "speciality" is implying that most IRA targets were civilian which is a LIE. In fact almost 80% of IRA victims according to Lost Lives were willing participants in the conflict. That is a percentage which would rate higher than the vast majority of world conflicts.

[lynchbhoy]

Can we have a whipround for lynchbhoy not to use the word "apartheid" in every post about the troubles. Please.

well forgive me for telling it how it was !
by the way its not just me who associates the noth of Ireland statelet with the spectre of its own brand of apartheid
even this piece posted the other day moots how the north of Ireland soccer fans were guilty of it

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/columnists/brian-mcnally/Why-the-talent-drain-to-the-Republic-shows-Northern-Ireland-are-still-paying-the-price-for-abuse-dished-out-to-Neil-Lennon-The-Brian-McNally-Column-article344981.html

"As is the implication that they can dragoon unwilling Catholics into a set-up that a decade ago had vocal sections demanding religious apartheid."

the north of Ireland version of apartheid had people from Irish/catholic/nationalist communities instead of 'Blacks'.
Otherwise the same hindering of work, life, religious freedom and freedom of movement etc was par for the course. Also 'taigs' were not 'allowed' join certain clubs/institutions or into certain places.
how is that 'apartheid'.
Lest we forget - though you obv have !

[lynchbhoy]

Firstly, you have completely ignored my question, and secondly, my source is An Fheirne and the Pat Finucane Centre who between them represent between 700 and 1000 families who were victims of collusion. Did these "countless" touts do that? And I'll ask again, do you not think that the events i stated could have possibly politicised those who decided to join the IRA? Or were they only, as you imply, disinterested in all that and were only interested in being a celeb and getting a woman? Sensible debate pls

I'm not even going to talk about An Fheirne, since it was launched by Gerry Adams and covered in great detail by An Phoblacht. I'm only interested in impartial sources, not propaganda crap from the Shinners. The Pat Finucane Centre lists details of 140 cases. It also links to independent legal reports which talk about 72 cases in the 70's. Those numbers are perhaps nearer the truth. (that said, it lists Bloody Sunday as one of the cases. State murder certainly, but where's the collusion there?) One case is too many, but when you start talking ridiculous figures taken straight from the Shinners publicity machine, then you weaken your own argument. You think the republican informants and agents weren't also responsible for the deaths of many people? You think the people in IRA internal security who were British agents weren't in a position to have people executed to cover their own backs and the backs of other agents too? Plenty of people were politicised by the events you cite, but they didn't all rush off to join an organisation which specialised in bombing civilian targets.

do you have a point in any of these idiotic rants?
what point are you (badly) attempting to make ?

[Myles Na G.]

Did you not read my post? I said that to say attacking civilian areas was the IRA "speciality" is implying that most IRA targets were civilian which is a LIE. In fact almost 80% of IRA victims according to Lost Lives were willing participants in the conflict. That is a percentage which would rate higher than the vast majority of world conflicts.

You obviously didn't read my post - I said civilian targets, not civilian areas. Do you class pubs, hotels, etc as civilian targets or not? And what exactly is a 'willing participant' in a conflict? Leaving aside professional soldiers, do you mean construction workers doing work on a police station? Do you mean government employees handing out census forms? Former soldiers and policemen? Alleged informants (some uncovered by British agents)? Just because the IRA defines someone as a combatant doesn't make it so.

[Myles Na G.]

Can we have a whipround for lynchbhoy not to use the word "apartheid" in every post about the troubles. Please.

well forgive me for telling it how it was !
by the way its not just me who associates the noth of Ireland statelet with the spectre of its own brand of apartheid
even this piece posted the other day moots how the north of Ireland soccer fans were guilty of it

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/columnists/brian-mcnally/Why-the-talent-drain-to-the-Republic-shows-Northern-Ireland-are-still-paying-the-price-for-abuse-dished-out-to-Neil-Lennon-The-Brian-McNally-Column-article344981.html

"As is the implication that they can dragoon unwilling Catholics into a set-up that a decade ago had vocal sections demanding religious apartheid."

the north of Ireland version of apartheid had people from Irish/catholic/nationalist communities instead of 'Blacks'.
Otherwise the same hindering of work, life, religious freedom and freedom of movement etc was par for the course. Also 'taigs' were not 'allowed' join certain clubs/institutions or into certain places.
how is that 'apartheid'.
Lest we forget - though you obv have !

That is just such a pile of steaming keek that it doesn't even merit any kind of considered response. Well up to your usual standards, LB.