Author Topic: Lowest profile ever?  (Read 1751 times)

Applesisapples

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3431
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #15 on: April 18, 2017, 11:51:10 AM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
Hypocrite

BennyCake

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4371
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #16 on: April 18, 2017, 01:06:33 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.

And 1916 was just a load of handbag swinging and hair pulling, was it?
I cant seem to remember Patrick Pearse taking a mother of ten and shooting her before burying her secretly. I fairly sure James Connolly didnt take a man from his family, strap explosives to his body and force him to drive to Dublin Castle.     G.S.

There was innocent people killed in 1916 and in the War of Independence too, not just the Troubles. People tend to look at 1916-22 through rose-tinted glasses. Connolly, Pearse etc are lauded as those who paved the way for Independence, ie. driving out the Brits from Ireland. Yet when the IRA tried to get rid of the Brits from the North, they're just terrorist/dirty/filthy scum, yet they were only trying to do the same thing

Anyone who thinks the War of Independence is seen through rose-tinted glasses in the south has very little idea about the south.

I didn't say that. The 1916 leaders, Collins etc are looked upon as (Rossfan said) "cool clean heroes", whereas those who did similar during the Troubles are terrorists. One only has to look at how Adams and McGuinness are/were treated by the Irish Government/RTE down through the years. But it's easy to shout from the other side of the fence, when it doesn't concern you anymore.

AZOffaly

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22676
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2017, 01:14:50 PM »
The 1916 leaders wouldn't be seen as contributing intentionally to civilian deaths though. Collins' and the WoI would be a different hue alright, and would be more in line with some of what went on in the north in relation to informers etc.

I still think a big difference in peoples eyes is events like Warrington, Omagh and other attacks on the civilian population. I don't think that would have been a tactical or strategic aim of the men of 1916 or even of the War of Independence.

Milltown Row2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14395
  • It was the Ref that did it!!
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2017, 04:52:37 PM »
The 1916 leaders wouldn't be seen as contributing intentionally to civilian deaths though. Collins' and the WoI would be a different hue alright, and would be more in line with some of what went on in the north in relation to informers etc.

I still think a big difference in peoples eyes is events like Warrington, Omagh and other attacks on the civilian population. I don't think that would have been a tactical or strategic aim of the men of 1916 or even of the War of Independence.

Nope but had the IRA lost the wAr before the treaty was signed (Collins himself said they were literally out on their feet) would the war been taken to a new level and brought across to the English on their own soil?
Anything I post is not the view of the County Board!! Nobody died in the making of this post ;-)

AZOffaly

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22676
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2017, 04:54:09 PM »
The 1916 leaders wouldn't be seen as contributing intentionally to civilian deaths though. Collins' and the WoI would be a different hue alright, and would be more in line with some of what went on in the north in relation to informers etc.

I still think a big difference in peoples eyes is events like Warrington, Omagh and other attacks on the civilian population. I don't think that would have been a tactical or strategic aim of the men of 1916 or even of the War of Independence.

Nope but had the IRA lost the wAr before the treaty was signed (Collins himself said they were literally out on their feet) would the war been taken to a new level and brought across to the English on their own soil?

Who knows? I wouldn't rule it out, certainly.

Avondhu star

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2017, 06:22:01 PM »
The 1916 leaders wouldn't be seen as contributing intentionally to civilian deaths though. Collins' and the WoI would be a different hue alright, and would be more in line with some of what went on in the north in relation to informers etc.

I still think a big difference in peoples eyes is events like Warrington, Omagh and other attacks on the civilian population. I don't think that would have been a tactical or strategic aim of the men of 1916 or even of the War of Independence.

Nope but had the IRA lost the wAr before the treaty was signed (Collins himself said they were literally out on their feet) would the war been taken to a new level and brought across to the English on their own soil?

Who knows? I wouldn't rule it out, certainly.
Michael Collins sent a squad to London to assasinate the British Cabinet. Cathal Brugha spent a number of days in the Visitors Gallery with two handguns in his pocket while several volunteers spent their days tracking British ministers around London
Warning. Don't try this at home unless in the company of a responsible adult

Avondhu star

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2017, 06:28:10 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite
Warning. Don't try this at home unless in the company of a responsible adult

Il Bomber Destro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2186
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2017, 06:39:50 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite

One word, Dunmanway.

Avondhu star

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #23 on: April 18, 2017, 07:15:17 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite

One word, Dunmanway.
Two words. Gob shite
Warning. Don't try this at home unless in the company of a responsible adult

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17004
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #24 on: April 18, 2017, 07:30:12 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite

One word, Dunmanway.
Two words. Gob shite
You don't know the history
Last of the choc-ices there now

Avondhu star

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #25 on: April 18, 2017, 08:43:44 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite

One word, Dunmanway.
Two words. Gob shite
You don't know the history
I know the history unlike a few here who have swallowed propaganda portrayed as history
Warning. Don't try this at home unless in the company of a responsible adult

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17004
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2017, 08:59:17 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite

One word, Dunmanway.
Two words. Gob shite
You don't know the history
I know the history unlike a few here who have swallowed propaganda portrayed as history
So why do you say 1916-21 was pure as the driven snow?
Last of the choc-ices there now

Avondhu star

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2017, 10:23:43 PM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite

One word, Dunmanway.
Two words. Gob shite
You don't know the history
I know the history unlike a few here who have swallowed propaganda portrayed as history
So why do you say 1916-21 was pure as the driven snow?
Show me where I said that
Warning. Don't try this at home unless in the company of a responsible adult

Applesisapples

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3431
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #28 on: April 19, 2017, 10:19:05 AM »
Theres no confusion in the minds of the vast majority who came out in their thousands to celebrate the centenary by taking the Rising back from the murder gang who besmirched true Republicanism for the last 40 years by their sectarian campaign.
No one pays much heed to the revisionists.
One word. Kingsmill.
Hypocrite
And do you know what precipitated Kingsmill?

Farrandeelin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8687
  • Hey buckaroo! How are you?
    • View Profile
Re: Lowest profile ever?
« Reply #29 on: April 19, 2017, 10:55:02 AM »
The 1916 leaders wouldn't be seen as contributing intentionally to civilian deaths though. Collins' and the WoI would be a different hue alright, and would be more in line with some of what went on in the north in relation to informers etc.

I still think a big difference in peoples eyes is events like Warrington, Omagh and other attacks on the civilian population. I don't think that would have been a tactical or strategic aim of the men of 1916 or even of the War of Independence.

Nope but had the IRA lost the wAr before the treaty was signed (Collins himself said they were literally out on their feet) would the war been taken to a new level and brought across to the English on their own soil?

Who knows? I wouldn't rule it out, certainly.
Neither would I. It wouldn't have been the first time either.
The woman in red has the car parked on the slope.