Messages

I am posting (almost) anonymously on here. Certainly, you have no idea who I am, so does it really matter.

Because I say so.

Skull, just because you read through a few of my posts don't presume that you really know anything about me or my views.

Should I change my name to WhiteTransitVanMan.

you wont be demonising him he has already done that himself by getting a dying man to become a tout.

What would you call someone who calls on people to inform on republicans to the PSNI.

Gerrys moving South to Munster!

f**k off we have enough ex-IRA hiding out down here already.

They are not hiding anymore.

But Gerry wasn't in the RA.

Sure I know boys like you love to tell us your great adventures in the Ra,some just say nothing.

And some just tell lies.

Ah ffs leave your chum McIntyre out if this

No desire to bring anyone else into it or demonise any republican.

Gerrys moving South to Munster!

f**k off we have enough ex-IRA hiding out down here already.

They are not hiding anymore.

But Gerry wasn't in the RA.

Sure I know boys like you love to tell us your great adventures in the Ra,some just say nothing.

And some just tell lies.

Aoise, yes L'derry short for Londonderry, UK City of Culture as endorsed by McGuiness. Sarcasm is obviously lost on you.

So it's was OK to resist, with violence, the institutions in 1973 but embrace them less than 20 years later, and have the gall to demonise those who would oppose the institutions now.

As I have said on here previously, unity has always been a key republican demand. SF entered into 'negotiations' full in the knowledge that strategic theatre was already set.  They were to be encouraged into constitutional politics while facing no limits on their political growth in the North, so long as every concession ceded by the British was ring fenced in by the consent principle, long described by SF as the 'unionist veto '.

For this they were prepared to jettison the republicanism which they had used as a vehicle on their short trip into constitutional politics, and cast aside the demand which defined republicanism, unity.

Gerrys moving South to Munster!

f**k off we have enough ex-IRA hiding out down here already.

They are not hiding anymore.

But Gerry wasn't in the RA.

[what was sought was "Equality and better social and economic conditions"]

no offense tvm - but the republicans I know that were 'on active service' were not out to unify the country. Thats a solution that would have obtained the requirements sought by people but
what was sought was "Equality and better social and economic conditions" - but more than that also - the stopping of attacks and pogams on 'our' side of the divide, the stopping of the persecution, oppression and systematic targetting by the establishment, its crown forces and the hoods they used when even dirtier work had to be done.

I understand what you are saying, but I at least dont agree with that.
Also I am not a sf supporter. A republican and so on, but sf only covers some of the republican peoples current ethos. For now thats good enough as the alternative - well there are no alternatives really..

Full circle again Lynchboy.  If that's all that was necessary then why not support the Stormont of 1973, rather than be the dissidents.  Surely we didn't have to go through the intervening years and the suffering, death and destruction when, as Aoise would have us believe, the Republican Movement had the support of the people. 

Aoise, I do not advocate a return to war or violence anywhere in my posts.  Those with a republican outlook opposed to SFs current political position are viewed as dissident or one of the "others".

Equality and better social and economic conditions, though welcomed by all, are not why PIRA fought a war.  It was a war for unity, independence as all Irish rebel uprisings have been.  If not why did republicans boycott a return to Stormont in 1973. We could have been spared much of the slaughter.

I was going to ignore you last paragragh but it is so indicative of the attitude of the elite, super Irish/ Republican attitude of the current flock of sheep that I cannot. Of course you are Irish, if you were born here how could you be anything else.  But I am no less Irish, nor is McGeough or McIntyre. I thought you were against demonisation but it seems only when it suits your purpose.

TVM I accept the fact you are not happy with the status quo, I also accept the fact that you feel that SF have sold out and are selling us all a pup.  You say that we are buying this 'lie' just because we follow the line that 'I'm alright Jack'!  But here's how I see it...

Current dissident representatives (whoever they are but when they do speak) portray nothing but empty dogma - no suggestions, just mindless actions that are pissing off their own community more than they are the Brits.

I have already stated that not all so called dissidents/ detractors are in favour of an armed response/ violence. Have you ever listened to/ read Anthony McIntyre, Gerry McGeough, Laurence O'Neill etc. Alternative analysis is out there for those who wish to take their heads out of the sand.

We are a politically mature nation, no-one is ignorant of political reality and if you ask me, that is where dissidents can never be credible.  To simply say we are believing a lie is not only patronising to the extreme but also ignores the fact that Irish people are able to analyse and evaluate political argument for themselves.

I am not speaking of a nation, I am referring to SF supporters.  The same sheep who Martin McGuiness referred to when he asserted that their support base was the "most sophisticated in Western Europe". He would later claim that the electoral process of registration was too complicated for these political geniuses.

What is 'Ireland'?  In my opinion, Ireland is a nation of people who come from many backgrounds, just as it was in 1798, the Republic was foreseen to be inclusive of all and the sovereignty of its people was to take cogniscence of that.  It is not for a small group of people to feel that they have ultimate power over the will of the people because not only is it removing that sovereignty from them it also removes what Republicanism should truly stand for - The people make a nation, not how many yards of soil is in it.  The IRA had the support of its own people which in turn gave them sovereignty to protect them - dissidents don't!.

So are you saying that the dissidents don't have the support of their own people.  Who were the PIRAs own people, who are the RIRAs, CIRAs, ONHs, INLAs, OIRAs own people.

History tells us that support for armed campaigns has always been poor in the early stages of the campaign.  Sometimes it increases eg 1969 and sometimes if doesn't eg 1956.

How can you speak of sovereignty yet back political institutions and a process which fail to tackle the issue of Irish Sovereignty. A process which guarantees a Unionist veto, ensures an internal Six-county settlement and prohibits the probability of an end to partition

A United Ireland will happen, of that I am sure.  But there are many in our society who are choosing not to see the bigger picture and are just ploughing ahead with mindless attacks that the British can ignore and just continue to remove the rights of their own people.  Young children, who cannot articulate political maturity because they themselves are not mature enough to analyse it, are the footmen of those who should know better.

It is virtually impossible to find anybody outside Sinn Fein itself willing to claim that a united Ireland is on the cards. The rhetoric of a united Ireland 'always in the process' does not gel with SFs endorsement of British state strategies for the management of Northern Ireland. Adams and McGuinness, should they live unti they are 80, will die British citizens in a British run Northern Ireland.

You are right RF, but it's always been gold for the shinners.

Yes Milltown, you were stopped because of the area you were living in and a perception on behalf of the RUC/Brits that you were a threat.  It didn't mean you were a threat, and if you weren't, your basic human rights were being violated.  Do the rights of those being stopped today not matter, are these erstwhile comrades ("others") lesser beings because they do not agree with your political viewpoint.

With regard to the UVF/UDA, they have always been controlled by the Brits.  Why would the Brits want them to start a campaign when they have already secured the defeat of the republican movement.

As long as poeple feel they are occupied??? What the hell does that mean?  Are we supposd to pretend that there are no Brit soldiers here anymore, no MI5, no collusion, harassment, internment (in whatever guise) etc etc?

There are riots when West Ham play Milwall, Inter play AC and so on.  There will always be hooligans who join up behind the colours but you can't paint everone with the same brush.  There is life outside Belfast you know.

I'm hardly evading the point. Lynchboy, I already know from previous encounters with you, that like SF you are prepared to settle for less (far less) than what was sought at the outset.

The reality is that what used to happen is still happening to many republicans today.

You too fit into the "as long as I'm OK" category.