The SDLP

[Snapchap]

It's not nonsense. If it's nonsense to say SF don't accept that IRA did not have the support of a majority nationalists then you show me an example where they have admitted it?

I asked you to point us towards a SF rep claiming that a majority of nationalists did support the IRA campaign. Did you have any luck with that?

[LCohen]

There is nobody in Irish politics trying to rewrite the troubles as much as SF. So if rewriting history irks you as you say you must be genuinely disgusted with SF.

Staggering ignorance.

Just yesterday we had a FF councillor on twitter claiming that the Provos carried out the Omagh bombing, and made the claim purely in an attempt to have a cheap pop at Sinn Féin. How's that for re-writing history? But sure, it was only the biggest atrocity of the conflict and sure it was all to take a pop at the shinners, so who cares eh?

But you're probably right. The state that went as far as introducing a law aimed at censoring what was reported about the conflict to the people of the south was probably not trying to subvert the truth of what was happening at all at all 

A FG TD claimed that the IRA committed the Dublin/Monaghan bombings (it was the UVF aided by arms of the British State) - an atrocity his party helped coverup and deny justice to the victims.

Another FG TD blamed Gerry Adams for loyalists coming into his constituency office and opening fire on unarmed civilians killing 3.

The narrative from FF/FG is that Northern nationalists deserved all they got and how dare them for fighting back.

The formation of the Provos was an inevitable reality during the troubles and it is the British and Free State Governments that have blood on their hands from their inaction.

Some outlandish claims there. The individuals making the claims are idiots.

The claim that FF/FG attitude to Northern nationalists was that deserved all they got is similarly idiotic. Where do get this shit.

You have never explained why, during the troubles, a majority of nationalists living in the prevailing condition NI never thought that the provos' actions were justified?

Outlandish claims are commonplace and happen on a daily basis down south from FF and FG.

We never had any sort of consensus whether the vast majority of nationalists supported the Provos or not. It's impossible to say because there is nothing to back up your assertion. The Provos could not operate as successfully as they did without the cooperation of local communities and certainly in the likes of South Armagh, East Tyrone and South Derry they would have had significant support in local areas as well as urban cities like Belfast and Derry.

Well that seems to be attitude of FF/FG. They consistently try to politicise the troubles, you and I both know about the role the British State played in many atrocities on innocent nationalist civilians and their dirty campaign north of the border and in the Dublin Monaghan bombings too. Yet where is the political pressure there from FF/FG? Why do they consistently ignore the vast majority of nationalist victims of the Troubles?

They have no problem trying to play political football with victims of the trouble but when they had the opportunity to assist the McAnespie family to get justice they actively thwarted the quest and refused to release what could be an invaluable report in doing so.

They operated with about 10% support of nationalist population until ceasefire

Care to substantiate this claim with any evidence? While you attempt to, I'll direct you this QUB study carried out in 2005, which found that "42 percent of Catholics expressed sympathy for republican paramilitary groups" and goes to to say "The opinion poll evidence in both societies about support for physical force tells a remarkably consistent—and shocking—story. As in previous research, (25) the results show that significant minorities within both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (as well as within each of their respective religious communities) support the use of violence for political ends" https://www.abdn.ac.uk/staffpages/uploads/soc207/polviolence.pdf

As you admit yourself that document does not suggest a majority but also critically it does not show any sympathy for the actions of the IRA. None

[Champion The Wonder Horse]

The academic survey quoted seems to have asked the following question:

thinking about the reasons why some Republican groups have used violence during the troubles, would you say that you have any sympathy with the reasons for violence, even if you don't condone the violence yourself?''

7.4% of Nationalist (Catholic) respondents said a lot of sympathy and 34.6% said a little sympathy.

The same cohort of Nationalist (Catholic) respondents were also asked:

Now thinking about the reasons why some Loyalist groups have used violence during the troubles, would you say that you have any sympathy with the reasons for violence, even if you don't condone the violence yourself?

1.9% of Nationalist (Catholic) respondents said a lot of sympathy and 28.9% said a little sympathy.

[LCohen]

There is nobody in Irish politics trying to rewrite the troubles as much as SF. So if rewriting history irks you as you say you must be genuinely disgusted with SF.

Staggering ignorance.

Just yesterday we had a FF councillor on twitter claiming that the Provos carried out the Omagh bombing, and made the claim purely in an attempt to have a cheap pop at Sinn Féin. How's that for re-writing history? But sure, it was only the biggest atrocity of the conflict and sure it was all to take a pop at the shinners, so who cares eh?

But you're probably right. The state that went as far as introducing a law aimed at censoring what was reported about the conflict to the people of the south was probably not trying to subvert the truth of what was happening at all at all 

A FG TD claimed that the IRA committed the Dublin/Monaghan bombings (it was the UVF aided by arms of the British State) - an atrocity his party helped coverup and deny justice to the victims.

Another FG TD blamed Gerry Adams for loyalists coming into his constituency office and opening fire on unarmed civilians killing 3.

The narrative from FF/FG is that Northern nationalists deserved all they got and how dare them for fighting back.

The formation of the Provos was an inevitable reality during the troubles and it is the British and Free State Governments that have blood on their hands from their inaction.

Some outlandish claims there. The individuals making the claims are idiots.

The claim that FF/FG attitude to Northern nationalists was that deserved all they got is similarly idiotic. Where do get this shit.

You have never explained why, during the troubles, a majority of nationalists living in the prevailing condition NI never thought that the provos' actions were justified?

Outlandish claims are commonplace and happen on a daily basis down south from FF and FG.

We never had any sort of consensus whether the vast majority of nationalists supported the Provos or not. It's impossible to say because there is nothing to back up your assertion. The Provos could not operate as successfully as they did without the cooperation of local communities and certainly in the likes of South Armagh, East Tyrone and South Derry they would have had significant support in local areas as well as urban cities like Belfast and Derry.

Well that seems to be attitude of FF/FG. They consistently try to politicise the troubles, you and I both know about the role the British State played in many atrocities on innocent nationalist civilians and their dirty campaign north of the border and in the Dublin Monaghan bombings too. Yet where is the political pressure there from FF/FG? Why do they consistently ignore the vast majority of nationalist victims of the Troubles?

They have no problem trying to play political football with victims of the trouble but when they had the opportunity to assist the McAnespie family to get justice they actively thwarted the quest and refused to release what could be an invaluable report in doing so.

They operated with about 10% support of nationalist population until ceasefire

Care to substantiate this claim with any evidence? While you attempt to, I'll direct you this QUB study carried out in 2005, which found that "42 percent of Catholics expressed sympathy for republican paramilitary groups" and goes to to say "The opinion poll evidence in both societies about support for physical force tells a remarkably consistent—and shocking—story. As in previous research, (25) the results show that significant minorities within both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (as well as within each of their respective religious communities) support the use of violence for political ends" https://www.abdn.ac.uk/staffpages/uploads/soc207/polviolence.pdf

Look at SF results until 1996.sure aye sympathy but active support naw sorry didn't happen

SF barely functioned in any meaningful way for the majority of the troubles ya dope.  If you are going to refute an academic study, you might want to up your game in terms of evidence.

They stood in elections in my area. All elections

[LCohen]

Max 20% across north .

I already linked to a study which fairly resoundly makes nonsense of your "max 20%" claim.

What are you saying about abstentionism. I'm lost. They always and still do have abstentionism policy at Westminster, even though they take full wage and London office

They don't.

You haven't posted any link to support for IRA actions

[LCohen]

You for real. They stood in every election from 81 onwards. What are you claiming. That people supported the Ra but voted SDLP instead. And please stop with the insults, that's a few times now.

And stood in a climate where their representatives were being targetted for execution by the state and where nationalists in many cases didn't engage in electoral politics. Does that sound like a level playing field by which a party's performance could be judged? Again, if you want to refute an academic study, you're going to have to put forward something a bit better than this.

I remember the republicans outside the polling station intimidating SDLP voters. I am against all those forms of intimidation

Anyway nobody is refuting an academic paper. Your interpretation of the paper is however being refuted

[Snapchap]

Omagh is a red herring here. Some asshole linked it to the ira and all parties here think they are an asshole. End of that debate

Indeed. And you yourself in your initial reply, attempted to tacitly link the perpetrators to the IRA.

I have never defended FF or FG on their quality of administration.

Not to vacal in your criticisms of them though, are you?

On fundraising. If by fundraising you mean for an armed campaign I have not alleged that.

Really? Cos...

Also the shenanigans that the IRA where up and in some places are still up to to fund their campaign. They need to come clean on that.

What I am alleging is that republicanism is still involved in serious crime for financial gain. Loyalists like wise. I am not posting evidence of either. My reasons for that are  twofold. Firstly the proof is not in a postable form. And secondly even if it was I would not do it. Do you really need to explain why.

So you're going to make an accusation, but you refuse to post your evidence. Forgive me for not taking you seriously on this one.

Given the connection to serious and organised crime there is zero chance of any political party going into coalition with SF wherein SF have control over justice. If SF won an outright majority a different issue would arise. I have heard that such a scenario would lead to consternation amongst senior police, judicial and security officials. Significant resignations to ensue.

Only for not running enough candidates at the start of the year, SF would hold the justice ministry today. I know you're claiming to have "heard" things (presumably from the same inside lines that told you all about the IRA fundraising you can't tell us about), but again, what you "heard" won't change the outcome of any election where SF win a majority.

[Snapchap]

There is nobody in Irish politics trying to rewrite the troubles as much as SF. So if rewriting history irks you as you say you must be genuinely disgusted with SF.

Staggering ignorance.

Just yesterday we had a FF councillor on twitter claiming that the Provos carried out the Omagh bombing, and made the claim purely in an attempt to have a cheap pop at Sinn Féin. How's that for re-writing history? But sure, it was only the biggest atrocity of the conflict and sure it was all to take a pop at the shinners, so who cares eh?

But you're probably right. The state that went as far as introducing a law aimed at censoring what was reported about the conflict to the people of the south was probably not trying to subvert the truth of what was happening at all at all 

A FG TD claimed that the IRA committed the Dublin/Monaghan bombings (it was the UVF aided by arms of the British State) - an atrocity his party helped coverup and deny justice to the victims.

Another FG TD blamed Gerry Adams for loyalists coming into his constituency office and opening fire on unarmed civilians killing 3.

The narrative from FF/FG is that Northern nationalists deserved all they got and how dare them for fighting back.

The formation of the Provos was an inevitable reality during the troubles and it is the British and Free State Governments that have blood on their hands from their inaction.

Some outlandish claims there. The individuals making the claims are idiots.

The claim that FF/FG attitude to Northern nationalists was that deserved all they got is similarly idiotic. Where do get this shit.

You have never explained why, during the troubles, a majority of nationalists living in the prevailing condition NI never thought that the provos' actions were justified?

Outlandish claims are commonplace and happen on a daily basis down south from FF and FG.

We never had any sort of consensus whether the vast majority of nationalists supported the Provos or not. It's impossible to say because there is nothing to back up your assertion. The Provos could not operate as successfully as they did without the cooperation of local communities and certainly in the likes of South Armagh, East Tyrone and South Derry they would have had significant support in local areas as well as urban cities like Belfast and Derry.

Well that seems to be attitude of FF/FG. They consistently try to politicise the troubles, you and I both know about the role the British State played in many atrocities on innocent nationalist civilians and their dirty campaign north of the border and in the Dublin Monaghan bombings too. Yet where is the political pressure there from FF/FG? Why do they consistently ignore the vast majority of nationalist victims of the Troubles?

They have no problem trying to play political football with victims of the trouble but when they had the opportunity to assist the McAnespie family to get justice they actively thwarted the quest and refused to release what could be an invaluable report in doing so.

They operated with about 10% support of nationalist population until ceasefire

Care to substantiate this claim with any evidence? While you attempt to, I'll direct you this QUB study carried out in 2005, which found that "42 percent of Catholics expressed sympathy for republican paramilitary groups" and goes to to say "The opinion poll evidence in both societies about support for physical force tells a remarkably consistent—and shocking—story. As in previous research, (25) the results show that significant minorities within both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (as well as within each of their respective religious communities) support the use of violence for political ends" https://www.abdn.ac.uk/staffpages/uploads/soc207/polviolence.pdf

As you admit yourself that document does not suggest a majority but also critically it does not show any sympathy for the actions of the IRA. None

So a study which found that 42% of nationalists had some degree of sympathy for the armed republican campaign during the troubles doesn't actually contain evidence of any nationalist sympathy for the armed campaign? Hmmm.

[LCohen]

It's not nonsense. If it's nonsense to say SF don't accept that IRA did not have the support of a majority nationalists then you show me an example where they have admitted it?

It's not nonsense to suggest that SF have considerable knowledge of the IRA atrocities. It's not nonsense to say they are sitting on this

It's not nonsense to finger dissidents for the Omagh bomb.

Incredible that you labelled my post as nonsense.

I have no idea why you are asking me about the post civil war period. I have no skin in that game.

SF inability to touch a justice brief is their link in many locations to serious organised crime. There is no chance that SF will be allowed that brief in either jurisdiction.

As for the inquiries you mentioned I am all for inquiries. Let's get at all these cases. Prospects of conviction will be low but let's prepare files on all them and run the ones that stand a chance in front of a court.

How do you know whether the IRA did or did not have support of the nationalist community? There's no basis for proving or disproving this argument. It's the type of complete nonsense I've spoken about you engaging in.

You are once again going off on a SF tangent. You contested a claim I made about the policies of FF and FG to the north and when I addressed this, rather than keep discussing this because you didn't like how it showed the up, you have now gone on a tangent on SF based on complete and utter unqualifiable conjecture.

FF/FG have actively thwarted a reconciliation process across the board. They have actively sought to deny the McAnespie family in their quest for justice early.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43144010

What do dissidents relate to SF? It's like blaming FF for any Provo action.

You came in here bald-headed trying to defend FF/FG and their attitude and policy to northern matters and their quest to politicise the troubles and use victims as political football. That was your entry in those debate and all you have offered since then is a tirade on SF based on absolute nonsense you have failed to qualify, post after post after post.

Address the issue and if you're going to try and smear SF then at least have something substantive to support it.

I'm not going off on tangents. I am being consistent. I criticise all parties for their actions in thwarting inquiries. All parties. Can you say the same?

I have never blamed the IRA for Omagh. Where do you get the impression that I have?

I am critical of FG and FF action/inaction on inquires. I do however recognise their broader stance on the principle of consent and not agitating.

[Snapchap]

I remember the republicans outside the polling station intimidating SDLP voters. I am against all those forms of intimidation

Anyway nobody is refuting an academic paper. Your interpretation of the paper is however being refuted

You're against all forms of intimidation, but only single out an instance where SF are the supposed guilty party? I can confirm for your benefit that I recall an election in my own area where the SDLP staffers around the polling station attempted to intimidate voters en masse by objecting to as many people as possible, purey to slow down the numbers voting in what is a republican stronghold. I hope that puts your mind at ease about intimidation, and that the next time the topic arises, you'll single out the SDLP for criticism too.

[LCohen]

There is nobody in Irish politics trying to rewrite the troubles as much as SF. So if rewriting history irks you as you say you must be genuinely disgusted with SF.

Staggering ignorance.

Just yesterday we had a FF councillor on twitter claiming that the Provos carried out the Omagh bombing, and made the claim purely in an attempt to have a cheap pop at Sinn Féin. How's that for re-writing history? But sure, it was only the biggest atrocity of the conflict and sure it was all to take a pop at the shinners, so who cares eh?

But you're probably right. The state that went as far as introducing a law aimed at censoring what was reported about the conflict to the people of the south was probably not trying to subvert the truth of what was happening at all at all 

A FG TD claimed that the IRA committed the Dublin/Monaghan bombings (it was the UVF aided by arms of the British State) - an atrocity his party helped coverup and deny justice to the victims.

Another FG TD blamed Gerry Adams for loyalists coming into his constituency office and opening fire on unarmed civilians killing 3.

The narrative from FF/FG is that Northern nationalists deserved all they got and how dare them for fighting back.

The formation of the Provos was an inevitable reality during the troubles and it is the British and Free State Governments that have blood on their hands from their inaction.

Some outlandish claims there. The individuals making the claims are idiots.

The claim that FF/FG attitude to Northern nationalists was that deserved all they got is similarly idiotic. Where do get this shit.

You have never explained why, during the troubles, a majority of nationalists living in the prevailing condition NI never thought that the provos' actions were justified?

Outlandish claims are commonplace and happen on a daily basis down south from FF and FG.

We never had any sort of consensus whether the vast majority of nationalists supported the Provos or not. It's impossible to say because there is nothing to back up your assertion. The Provos could not operate as successfully as they did without the cooperation of local communities and certainly in the likes of South Armagh, East Tyrone and South Derry they would have had significant support in local areas as well as urban cities like Belfast and Derry.

Well that seems to be attitude of FF/FG. They consistently try to politicise the troubles, you and I both know about the role the British State played in many atrocities on innocent nationalist civilians and their dirty campaign north of the border and in the Dublin Monaghan bombings too. Yet where is the political pressure there from FF/FG? Why do they consistently ignore the vast majority of nationalist victims of the Troubles?

They have no problem trying to play political football with victims of the trouble but when they had the opportunity to assist the McAnespie family to get justice they actively thwarted the quest and refused to release what could be an invaluable report in doing so.

And on and on you go. I am not arguing with you about the need to investigate those. Investigate them all. Hold everyone to account including republicanism. I am not favouring one side over another. Get at them all.

SF did participate in elections. And were roundly seen off. The support was never there .

What a ridiculous contention.

You are making ridiculous claims that have absolutely zero basis to support them. We never had a consensus on whether nationalist community support the Provos or not. What is evident though is that the Provos would not have existed and been so effective during the troubles without sizable support in their communities.

SF up until the ceasefire was an ancillary branch to its militant arm. The political part of the republican movement took 2nd place. SF had an abstentionist policy and many nationalists rejected electoral politics in the O6.

The whole premise of your argument is not based on anything other than your own subjectiveness.

Well can we both agree that all parties should support all inquiries and be roundly condemned if they fail to do so? That should be uncontentious

SF stood in elections. They campaigned in elections. Whilst the IRA were active SF had very little support

[LCohen]

Given the connection to serious and organised crime there is zero chance of any political party going into coalition with SF wherein SF have control over justice. If SF won an outright majority a different issue would arise. I have heard that such a scenario would lead to consternation amongst senior police, judicial and security officials. Significant resignations to ensue.

What qualifies as serious and organised crime?

In my area racketeering and until recently fuel laundering. In others drug dealing, livestock and machinery theft with onward networks for processing

[LCohen]

It's not nonsense. If it's nonsense to say SF don't accept that IRA did not have the support of a majority nationalists then you show me an example where they have admitted it?

I asked you to point us towards a SF rep claiming that a majority of nationalists did support the IRA campaign. Did you have any luck with that?

I'll look out for one. What do you want a clip of them saying "we had majority support" or a claim that they were necessary because the people needed them to take action and it was for the people that they acted?

[Angelo]

It's not nonsense. If it's nonsense to say SF don't accept that IRA did not have the support of a majority nationalists then you show me an example where they have admitted it?

It's not nonsense to suggest that SF have considerable knowledge of the IRA atrocities. It's not nonsense to say they are sitting on this

It's not nonsense to finger dissidents for the Omagh bomb.

Incredible that you labelled my post as nonsense.

I have no idea why you are asking me about the post civil war period. I have no skin in that game.

SF inability to touch a justice brief is their link in many locations to serious organised crime. There is no chance that SF will be allowed that brief in either jurisdiction.

As for the inquiries you mentioned I am all for inquiries. Let's get at all these cases. Prospects of conviction will be low but let's prepare files on all them and run the ones that stand a chance in front of a court.

How do you know whether the IRA did or did not have support of the nationalist community? There's no basis for proving or disproving this argument. It's the type of complete nonsense I've spoken about you engaging in.

You are once again going off on a SF tangent. You contested a claim I made about the policies of FF and FG to the north and when I addressed this, rather than keep discussing this because you didn't like how it showed the up, you have now gone on a tangent on SF based on complete and utter unqualifiable conjecture.

FF/FG have actively thwarted a reconciliation process across the board. They have actively sought to deny the McAnespie family in their quest for justice early.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43144010

What do dissidents relate to SF? It's like blaming FF for any Provo action.

You came in here bald-headed trying to defend FF/FG and their attitude and policy to northern matters and their quest to politicise the troubles and use victims as political football. That was your entry in those debate and all you have offered since then is a tirade on SF based on absolute nonsense you have failed to qualify, post after post after post.

Address the issue and if you're going to try and smear SF then at least have something substantive to support it.

I'm not going off on tangents. I am being consistent. I criticise all parties for their actions in thwarting inquiries. All parties. Can you say the same?

I have never blamed the IRA for Omagh. Where do you get the impression that I have?

I am critical of FG and FF action/inaction on inquires. I do however recognise their broader stance on the principle of consent and not agitating.

Your entry into this thread was to contend what I said about FF/FG and trying to politicise the troubles and use victims of it as political footballs.

You're saying one thing about being critical of all parties but that's simply not true, it's a blatant lie in fact and the audit trail in this thread will show your offerings on this thread was to instantly defend FF/FG and go on the attack at SF.

FF/FG's sole interest in the legacy issues of the north is to use it as a political football, they have shown complete and utter contempt and disinterest in victims of British State Terrorism. The only look to politicise the troubles. Your entry in to this thread was to contest that and then you have the sheer brass neck to say you criticise all parties literally, it's absolutely risibile what you're claiming, risible.

Any northern nationalist should be utterly appalled at the FF/FG stance on the troubles and the callous way they use it for political purposes.

[Angelo]

It's not nonsense. If it's nonsense to say SF don't accept that IRA did not have the support of a majority nationalists then you show me an example where they have admitted it?

I asked you to point us towards a SF rep claiming that a majority of nationalists did support the IRA campaign. Did you have any luck with that?

I'll look out for one. What do you want a clip of them saying "we had majority support" or a claim that they were necessary because the people needed them to take action and it was for the people that they acted?

I think what people want is for you to stand over your claims with something other than your own subjective bias.