Man found shot dead near Derry
A man has been found shot dead on the outskirts of Derry.
His body was discovered on Braehead Road, near the border on the road to Letterkenny, before midnight.
The area has been cordoned off by police and traffic is being diverted. Forensic officers are currently examining the area.
Foyle MLA Martina Anderson said community workers who arrived at the scene before her said what they had seen was "horrendous".
She added: "The vast majority of people in Derry would absolutely condemn what has happened here in their city this evening."
Sourced BBCi: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8535731.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8535731.stm)
Quiet thread this one
Latest news reports that: Was due to get married shortly and was known to police.
It's horrendous.
Has all the hallmarks of what used to be known as 'tout executions'. One of the news reports mentioned he was approached to be an informer before Christmas too, I am only speculating though.
Terrible murder and not supported by the overwhelming majority of people in the 6 counties.
Where are the usual gabshites?
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 25, 2010, 05:20:46 PM
Where are the usual gabshites?
Awaiting further direction from HQ.
Seems a nice fella on the released picture.
Irishtimes.com says he had links to 32 County Soverrignty Committee.
Wee Marty knew him personally.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8535731.stm
McGuinness has some nerve, he said he is outraged at the murder! I wonder how the family of Frank Hegarty feel about that. I wonder if wee Marty was outraged at that murder.
That's the thing really pisses me off about Shinners, in all the years they were criticised rightfully by others they always got self righteous and defended the most awful acts in terms of how it would promote 'the cause'
Now when it is someone else pulling the trigger or detonating a bomb, the shoe is on the other foot
Hypocritical fucks the lot of them
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Was it not the Brits?
ardmhachaabu has hit the nail on the head there (unwittingly it must be said). Who is standing in front of the cameras to explain this?
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
Quote from: Ulick on February 25, 2010, 07:19:06 PM
ardmhachaabu has hit the nail on the head there (unwittingly it must be said). Who is standing in front of the cameras to explain this?
Why, I outta... :D
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 25, 2010, 06:46:19 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8535731.stm
McGuinness has some nerve, he said he is outraged at the murder! I wonder how the family of Frank Hegarty feel about that. I wonder if wee Marty was outraged at that murder.
That's the thing really pisses me off about Shinners, in all the years they were criticised rightfully by others they always got self righteous and defended the most awful acts in terms of how it would promote 'the cause'
Now when it is someone else pulling the trigger or detonating a bomb, the shoe is on the other foot
Hypocritical f**ks the lot of them
Like the Free Staters after 1921, like Dev after 1926... there aren't many pacifists out there, it is always a question of whether the situation justifies violence at the time. McGuinness doesn't think the situation justifies violence any more, and I'd agree with him. He's entitled to condemn it.
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
Desperate stuff. Serious increase in attacks in the last year alone:-S
This whole business about the house they took half a million quid of cannabis plants out of last year in Donegal is strange. Someone mentioned that the house belonged to, or some connection to a republican who since killed himself such was his annoyance about it. Think it was Suzanne Breen. But the fella killed today was meant to be responsible for the house, maybe on behalf of the other man when the drugs were found.
Maybe they blamed him for it, or he had connections to drugs. Informer was the first thing came to mind.
Either way its savage and shouldn't happen. As for McGuinness, would you prefer he say nothing? Of course most of us have a voice in our heads when he condemns these things, thinking about his involvement in the past in similar incidents. But the OFMDFM is a joint office, both need to read from the same sheet, show unity and leadership. Their views represent the vast vast majority.
Derry Journal interview last Nov:
A Derry man has claimed that his company has been placed in jeopardy by MI5 who offered to make his business happen only if he works with them. Ciaran Doherty of Northern Lites Limited is currently trying to open premises for a cigarette manufacturing company and claims that four applications to HM Revenue and Customs have been turned down.
He said that on each occasionthey failed to outline any reasons or issue any formal notification of rejection. Mr. Doherty said he and his business partners have spent £500,000 on purchasing machinery for the plant. It is currently in storage. He believes the venture could create 350 jobs and £10-£15 million tax revenue annually.
He said that he was returning from a business trip last Tuesday evening when he was approached by MI5 as he attempted to board a flight at Luton airport.
Mr. Doherty said: "I was taken into a side room by a man calling himself 'Justin', who identified himself as MI5. He was able to tell me all about the history of my business and the troubles I've had with securing a licence for premises.
"We have applied on four separate occasions for a licence for premises - twice for Derry, one in Tyrone and one in Newry. Each time we have been rejected without reasons being given. At one meeting the Customs and Revenue representative advised us against even applying to open a site in Derry."
According to Mr Doherty, 'Justin' claimed he was seeking information on a Cypriot business contact Mr Doherty had just met for the first time.
"They told me he was the target of their investigation."
Mr Doherty said his business partner, who's also from Derry, was recently approached at Schipol airport, Amsterdam. He was asked to help security services target dissident republicans in Derry.
"This is placing my entire business in danger," said Mr. Doherty. "The deal we done on Tuesday has probably fallen through as I had to inform the Cypriot in London that MI5 were enquiring about him. I have to travel quite a bit sourcing materials - am I going to be stopped every time I do so?
"I am a legitimate businessman. I have notified HM Revenue and Customs every step of the way on this business venture - even Justin admitted that. However if I cannot get approval for premises I cannot trade, it is as simple as that."
When contacted by the Journal a spokesperson for HM Revenue and Customs said: "HMRC have requested further information in writing from (the applicant) in June and August 2009 but to date have received no reply to our request."
Mr. Doherty agreed that this was the case but argued: "We have spoken to Customs about the information they have requested. It concerns accounting systems and they agreed that this would follow at a later stage. This has only become an issue now, I think it is their get out clause. To be honest I believe the whole thing is a set-up in order to try and recruit informers," he claimed.
http://www.derryjournal.com/journal/39My-business-has-stalled-because.5790200.jp
QuoteMr. Doherty said he and his business partners have spent £500,000 on purchasing machinery for the plant. It is currently in storage. He believes the venture could create 350 jobs and £10-£15 million tax revenue annually.
No harm, but Republicans.... fags.... tax revenue :-X
Quote from: Rav67 on February 25, 2010, 07:23:01 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 25, 2010, 06:46:19 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8535731.stm
McGuinness has some nerve, he said he is outraged at the murder! I wonder how the family of Frank Hegarty feel about that. I wonder if wee Marty was outraged at that murder.
That's the thing really pisses me off about Shinners, in all the years they were criticised rightfully by others they always got self righteous and defended the most awful acts in terms of how it would promote 'the cause'
Now when it is someone else pulling the trigger or detonating a bomb, the shoe is on the other foot
Hypocritical f**ks the lot of them
Like the Free Staters after 1921, like Dev after 1926... there aren't many pacifists out there, it is always a question of whether the situation justifies violence at the time. McGuinness doesn't think the situation justifies violence any more, and I'd agree with him. He's entitled to condemn it.
Is it just for you and Marty to decide these things? If so, I think that's a bit unfair on the rest of us. If not, then who decides if the situation justifies violence? If it's okay for you and Marty (and probably Gerry too) to reach a decision and act on it, why not the dissidents? Personally, I think the dissidents are a bunch of wankers. I thought the same about Marty and Gerry when they were engaged upon their 'armed struggle'. While I'm glad they've given it up, I can't help but feeling a bit of an angry head coming on when I see any Shinner on pontificating about the futility of the dissidents' actions. Pot, kettle, black are the words that spring to mind.
Myles it's not for anyone to decide. Similarly it's not for you to decide if armed struggle is justified. The greatest influence is the circumstances of the time. A significant enough amount of people supported the IRA to partake in physical force, just like in the Tan War. Most people now accept that the circumstances don't exist now to justify it. Would you prefer if McGuinness and co said nothing? Just because some think armed struggle is justified in some cases does not mean they think so for all cases.
Yer woman Anderson almost made me laugh ( although it is not all funny ) wheh she was on the news this evening and she was saying " how dare" these people come in to Derry and do this". She repeated how dare they about 6 times and I couldn't help but think of the past actions of herself and her colleagues in SF.
Brass necks or what.
But fair play to them for getting away with it and carrying it off and mot impressively, keeping their faces straight.
Quote from: Minder on February 25, 2010, 05:32:55 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 25, 2010, 05:20:46 PM
Where are the usual gabshites?
Awaiting further direction from HQ.
You werent far off the mark there Minder boy.
Real IRA admits to border killing
Kieran Doherty, 31, was from the Brandywell area of Derry
The Real IRA has said it was responsible for the murder of a man in Londonderry on Wednesday.
In a statement to a local journalist, the organisation said it killed Kieran Doherty, 31, who was from the Brandywell area of the city.
His body was discovered, stripped and bound on Braehead Road, near the Irish border at about 2230 GMT.
Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness said the murder was a "dirty deed" and urged cooperation with the police.
He added that the political movement linked to the Real IRA, the 32 County Sovereignty Movement, should make a statement.
Police said Mr Doherty was last seen as he left home at about 2000 GMT on Wednesday night.
He was due to get married in three months and had a two-year-old daughter.
At a press conference the police said they were unable to confirm whether he had then been abducted, or whether he had been shot at the spot where his body was later discovered.
Detective Chief Inspector Ian Harrison said the people who murdered Mr Doherty were criminals, who had destroyed not only the victim's life, but those of his partner and his young family as well.
MI5
Mr Harrison confirmed that Kieran Doherty was "known to police" but would not give any more details.
In November 2009 Mr Doherty gave an interview to the Derry Journal newspaper in which he claimed he had been approached by the security service MI5 while trying to set up a cigarette manufacturing company.
According to the paper, he was repeatedly turned down for a licence by Revenue and Customs and was then approached by an MI5 agent.
Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness said he was outraged at the murder
"I think the whole thing is a set up in order to try and recruit informers," he told the newspaper.
In January this year, Mr Doherty again contacted the same newspaper after the PSNI searched his home. The search came after 500,000 euros worth of cannabis was found in a house in County Donegal.
Mr Doherty told the newspaper that he had no involvement with the drugs and that the house belonged to a Republican prisoner whom he had met in Portlaoise prison.
It is understood that Mr Doherty was jailed on a robbery charge.
Grief
Speaking on behalf of Mr Doherty's family, Sinn Féin Foyle MLA Martina Anderson requested that the family be allowed to grieve in private.
"Kieran's partner Mairead and his family are traumatised and in deep shock at the sudden and brutal death of Kieran.
"They wish to be left to plan his return and burial in private and in support of each other," the MLA added.
"The family have particularly asked that media do not congregate around the family home and they thank you for respecting their wishes
Mr Doherty's murder has been condemned by local politicians and community leaders.
The Catholic Bishop of Derry Seamus Hegarty described the killing as "brutal".
He added: "Our society has a tragic history of violence. Due to this history, we, more than many other societies, should appreciate that any attempt to drag us back to a bloody past is wrong.
"A peaceful society depends upon normal policing and justice. We have taken great strides in that direction."
Church of Ireland Bishop of Derry and Raphoe, the Rev Ken Good, said people in the town are in shock.
"Right across the community, there is a clear sense of revulsion that another brutal murder has been carried out in this city.
"The horrific manner in which the victim's body was left at the roadside by those who perpetrated the crime is a further cause for shock and outrage," he said.
Quote from: orangeman on February 25, 2010, 11:12:52 PM
Yer woman Anderson almost made me laugh ( although it is not all funny ) wheh she was on the news this evening and she was saying " how dare" these people come in to Derry and do this". She repeated how dare they about 6 times and I couldn't help but think of the past actions of herself and her colleagues in SF.
Brass necks or what.
But fair play to them for getting away with it and carrying it off and mot impressively, keeping their faces straight.
i felt the same
Partner and a 2 year old child.
I hope the bastards that pulled the trigger maybe think about that as they go home to their own children.
Quote from: Puckoon on February 25, 2010, 11:20:06 PM
Partner and a 2 year old child.
I hope the b**tards that pulled the trigger maybe think about that as they go home to their own children.
They'll hardly.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
How is he a hypocrite ::)if he had condemned the shooting when it was the PIRA doing it then he would be a hypocrite but he never has and never will so don't talk crap.He is condemning it now because he doesn't agree with it.As he said the war is over and thats what he believes.
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 25, 2010, 06:46:19 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8535731.stm
McGuinness has some nerve, he said he is outraged at the murder! I wonder how the family of Frank Hegarty feel about that. I wonder if wee Marty was outraged at that murder.
That's the thing really pisses me off about Shinners, in all the years they were criticised rightfully by others they always got self righteous and defended the most awful acts in terms of how it would promote 'the cause'
Now when it is someone else pulling the trigger or detonating a bomb, the shoe is on the other foot
Hypocritical f**ks the lot of them
Ah you would know Willie,away and chase the smugglers
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 11:32:04 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
How is he a hypocrite ::)if he had condemned the shooting when it was the PIRA doing it then he would be a hypocrite but he never has and never will so don't talk crap.He is condemning it now because he doesn't agree with it.As he said the war is over and thats what he believes.
Why dont you read my post again.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 26, 2010, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 11:32:04 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
How is he a hypocrite ::)if he had condemned the shooting when it was the PIRA doing it then he would be a hypocrite but he never has and never will so don't talk crap.He is condemning it now because he doesn't agree with it.As he said the war is over and thats what he believes.
Why dont you read my post again.
I did,still don't see how he is a hypocrite if he was coming on condemning the PIRA for their past actions then I would agree with you,but he is not and never will.
Quote from: orangeman on February 25, 2010, 11:15:46 PM
The Real IRA has said it was responsible for the murder of a man in Londonderry on Wednesday.
I doubt they said THAT word anyway ::)
I wonder what moral justification these self appointed pricks have for "executing" people?
The traditional I R A reasoning was that as the Irish people had never voted to overturn the 1918 Election the IRA Army Council was the legitimate Government of Ireland. With the Irish people voting to accept the Good Friday Agreement that has now been superceded and ........eventually the Army Council closed shop.
Quote from: Rossfan on February 26, 2010, 03:28:20 PM
Quote from: orangeman on February 25, 2010, 11:15:46 PM
The Real IRA has said it was responsible for the murder of a man in Londonderry on Wednesday.
I doubt they said THAT word anyway ::)
Funny you should say that. When I first posted the news here, on the BBC it was Derry Derry Derry. I checked in 10 minutes later to see what updates there was. No updates, but a couple of the Derrys had changed to Londonderry....
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 12:04:05 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 25, 2010, 06:46:19 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8535731.stm
McGuinness has some nerve, he said he is outraged at the murder! I wonder how the family of Frank Hegarty feel about that. I wonder if wee Marty was outraged at that murder.
That's the thing really pisses me off about Shinners, in all the years they were criticised rightfully by others they always got self righteous and defended the most awful acts in terms of how it would promote 'the cause'
Now when it is someone else pulling the trigger or detonating a bomb, the shoe is on the other foot
Hypocritical f**ks the lot of them
Ah you would know Willie,away and chase the smugglers
Do you have any braincells in that head of yours?
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 02:42:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 26, 2010, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 11:32:04 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
How is he a hypocrite ::)if he had condemned the shooting when it was the PIRA doing it then he would be a hypocrite but he never has and never will so don't talk crap.He is condemning it now because he doesn't agree with it.As he said the war is over and thats what he believes.
Why dont you read my post again.
I did,still don't see how he is a hypocrite if he was coming on condemning the PIRA for their past actions then I would agree with you,but he is not and never will.
Right then, so explain to us all how one set of murderers are right and another set wrong. Care to also explain how wee Marty can say he is outraged by it yet he had his own considerable part to play in the torture and murder of Frank Hegarty?
I won't waste my time waiting on a sensible answer from you since you can only repeat SF bullshit
ardmhachaabu, considering that in all your contributions to this thread you have never once referred to the perpetrators or the victim, I think we can mark this down as a shameless exploitation of a tragic event for political point scoring. And you have the nerve to be calling others "hypocrites"...
They are all scum in my eyes. Happy now?
This whole thread is turning into a farce. Most lads don't seem to give a f**k about the victim or the perpetrators but just want to throw abuse at McGuinness. Most of these posters have blatantly refused to even acknowledge the argument that just because he felt the circumstances of the day justified armed force in the past doesn't mean he has to always support it even though circumstances have changed.
Quote from: Nally Stand on February 26, 2010, 09:15:25 PM
This whole thread is turning into a farce. Most lads don't seem to give a f**k about the victim or the perpetrators but just want to throw abuse at McGuinness. Most of these posters have blatantly refused to even acknowledge the argument that just because he felt the circumstances of the day justified armed force in the past doesn't mean he has to always support it even though circumstances have changed.
He doesnt have to support it but he could give it a rest with the "outraged" nonsense.
And why? Perhaps he is outraged? Is there not good reason to be? This attack combined with the others threatens to destabilise a peace process that has taken a good fifteen years to create (and how many years of trouble to create the circumstances for peace), and all at the hands of an organisation he opposes and an organisation that would likely kill him given the chance.
Quote from: Nally Stand on February 26, 2010, 09:51:00 PM
And why? Perhaps he is outraged? Is there not good reason to be? This attack combined with the others threatens to destabilise a peace process that has taken a good fifteen years to create (and how many years of trouble to create the circumstances for peace), and all at the hands of an organisation he opposes and an organisation that would likely kill him given the chance.
There is the same good reason to be outraged that existed when the provisionals he was in command of carried out similar acts of execution.
I think that is the point, would you agree?
This island is a different place than it was when the Provisionals were in their pomp. For those that can't see that, be glad that you can't, though some of us can never forget.
Fair dues to Mc Guinness.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on February 26, 2010, 10:13:08 PM
This island is a different place than it was when the Provisionals were in their pomp. For those that can't see that, be glad that you can't, though some of us can never forget.
Fair dues to Mc Guinness.
FoSB, do you think McGuinness was right in his actions that led to the torture and murder of Frank Hegarty?
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 26, 2010, 10:21:36 PM
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on February 26, 2010, 10:13:08 PM
This island is a different place than it was when the Provisionals were in their pomp. For those that can't see that, be glad that you can't, though some of us can never forget.
Fair dues to Mc Guinness.
FoSB, do you think McGuinness was right in his actions that led to the torture and murder of Frank Hegarty?
There's a time for war, and there's a time for peace. I've never known a war yet that hasn't produced the most repulsive of acts.
To listen to some here, you'd swear they wanted Mc Guinness to be doing now what he felt he had to do during the darkest days, just to be consistent like. Even Churchill, who was responsilble for far more deaths than the like of Mc Guinness could ever have been, recognised the value of jaw-jaw over war-war in certain circumstances.
FoSB, you avoided the question nicely. Would you give me an answer to it please?
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 26, 2010, 10:30:01 PM
FoSB, you avoided the question nicely. Would you give me an answer to it please?
Mc Guinness did what he believed he had to do in order to effectively prosecute his war.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on February 26, 2010, 10:45:01 PM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 26, 2010, 10:30:01 PM
FoSB, you avoided the question nicely. Would you give me an answer to it please?
Mc Guinness did what he believed he had to do in order to effectively prosecute his war.
I won't ask a third time :D
You could be a politician!
I don't like to talk about particular individuals on a public forum ardmhachaabu, and certainly not about those who are deceased.
Anyways, hope you're stuffed in your next game ;)
Way I see it McGuinness was wrong in what he did that led to Hegarty's torture and brutal murder.
If you lot get bate in your next match, youse are heading for Div 2 - that would be poetic justice :P
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 26, 2010, 10:54:44 PM
If you lot get bate in your next match, youse are heading for Div 2 - that would be pathetic injustice >:( :'(
Fixed that for you.
Puckoon my point is that McGuinness has not been a hypocrite. He has been consistent in his position. He was involved in a war then and he is not now and feels that the circumstances of today do not justify war.
The provos never had any justification for any armed struggle from the people on the island of Ireland so where do they get off in suddenly deciding that these dissidents have no support from the Irish people. It never stopped them so why would it stop anyone else?
I await the usual bluster from wannabee provos
Quote from: Nally Stand on February 26, 2010, 11:10:16 PM
Puckoon my point is that McGuinness has not been a hypocrite. He has been consistent in his position. He was involved in a war then and he is not now and feels that the circumstances of today do not justify war.
It's just a pity about all the people who were in the way when he "felt" differently. I think you're a wee bit off message there Nally. Justifying the war based on the feelings of the provo leadership is not in the manual.
Meanwhile, there was a man shot dead in Derry.
Sinn Fein haven't been holding back across the board in scathing criticism.
Particularly in East Tyrone...
Was the deceased a drug dealer?
Quote from: Minder on February 27, 2010, 01:03:06 PM
Was the deceased a drug dealer?
Not sure, could be the case of Brit intel putting out that rumour to cover the fact that they were trying to recruit him as a tout.
This is one angle on it
Quote
REAL IRA activist Ciaran Doherty was shot dead by his fellow terrorists because they suspected he had supplied information which led to the garda seizure of a cannabis factory in Co Donegal last month.
Doherty (31) was shot in the head and chest and his semi-naked body, with his hands tied together, was left on the outskirts of Derry city, close to the border with Donegal.
The Real IRA leadership in the city decided to "execute" him after they had earlier interrogated him as a result of the garda raid which uncovered the cannabis factory at Carrigans.
Last night the Real IRA in Derry claimed responsibility for Mr Doherty's shooting in a call using a recognised code word.
The group said Mr Doherty was a senior member of their organisation, adding: "We executed him because he was involved with a criminal organisation with links to the drugs trade and was profiteering. He knew the risks involved in what he was doing."
Cannabis
The highly sophisticated cannabis manufacturing operation was based in a four-bedroomed house which had been rented at Kildrum Lower, near Carrigans.
The house was owned by senior RIRA member, Seamus McGreevy (56), whose body was found earlier this month at his home in Stamullen, Gormanston, Co Meath. Gardai investigated his death but foul play was not suspected.
There was no evidence to indicate that McGreevy was aware of the cannabis found but it was decided shortly after his death that Doherty should be interrogated about the find.
Two men were questioned by gardai about the seizure and released without charge. A file is being prepared for the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Doherty was never a member of the Provisional IRA but joined the dissidents after the ceasefire. He said he met McGreevy while serving a jail sentence at Portlaoise jail.
He was sentenced to six years' imprisonment by the Special Criminal Court in Dublin in April 2002 after he was found guilty of the armed robbery of a nightclub in a hotel in Inishowen, Co Donegal.
Doherty's body was found close to a Carmelite Retreat Centre on the Braehead Road in Derry at around 10.30pm on Wednesday. He lived less than a mile away at the Coshowen estate in Bishop Street, Derry.
He had left his home around 8pm to go to a local shop but made no further contact.
Last November he told the 'Derry Journal' newspaper that MI5 attempted to recruit him as an informer and that, together with the Customs Service, they had blocked his attempts to set up a cigarette manufacturing company, called Northern Lites.
In January he again contacted the newspaper after his house was searched by the PSNI following the cannabis find in Carrigans. He said he had no involvement in the drugs find and that the house belonged to a republican prisoner he had met in Portlaoise Prison.
Doherty, a father of one, was due to be married in three months' time.
- Tom Brady
Irish Independent
Hardy you are completely avoiding my point which is that whether you or I agree with McGuinness is irrelevant, but it's that McGuinness has not been hypocritical in his statements in the slightest. P.s. You ask about the poor people that suffered because of how people like him felt. How about the poor people who suffered which in turn made him and others feel this way. Like I keep saying, it comes down to the circumstances of the day. Like it or not.
Quote from: Nally Stand on February 27, 2010, 02:11:13 PM
Hardy you are completely avoiding my point which is that whether you or I agree with McGuinness is irrelevant, but it's that McGuinness has not been hypocritical in his statements in the slightest. P.s. You ask about the poor people that suffered because of how people like him felt. How about the poor people who suffered which in turn made him and others feel this way. Like I keep saying, it comes down to the circumstances of the day. Like it or not.
According to you it comes down to a person's personal opinion on whether a war is justified or not.
As I said I'd have no trouble with him condemning it but this "outraged" nonsense from him makes me want to puke.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 28, 2010, 07:48:31 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on February 27, 2010, 02:11:13 PM
Hardy you are completely avoiding my point which is that whether you or I agree with McGuinness is irrelevant, but it's that McGuinness has not been hypocritical in his statements in the slightest. P.s. You ask about the poor people that suffered because of how people like him felt. How about the poor people who suffered which in turn made him and others feel this way. Like I keep saying, it comes down to the circumstances of the day. Like it or not.
According to you it comes down to a person's personal opinion on whether a war is justified or not.
As I said I'd have no trouble with him condemning it but this "outraged" nonsense from him makes me want to puke.
[/b]
Join an ever increasingly large club !.
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 26, 2010, 05:54:09 PM
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 02:42:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 26, 2010, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 11:32:04 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
How is he a hypocrite ::)if he had condemned the shooting when it was the PIRA doing it then he would be a hypocrite but he never has and never will so don't talk crap.He is condemning it now because he doesn't agree with it.As he said the war is over and thats what he believes.
Why dont you read my post again.
I did,still don't see how he is a hypocrite if he was coming on condemning the PIRA for their past actions then I would agree with you,but he is not and never will.
Right then, so explain to us all how one set of murderers are right and another set wrong. Care to also explain how wee Marty can say he is outraged by it yet he had his own considerable part to play in the torture and murder of Frank Hegarty?
I won't waste my time waiting on a sensible answer from you since you can only repeat SF bullshit
Ah right Willie so not only do you know all about the RA in Armagh and Ardoyne you know all about them in Derry as well,you are some kid.Maybe your a pacifist I don't really know but as your aware with all your knowledge that Martin isn't so when the place he lived Derry and his community were being attacked in the late 60's by RUC and B specials he got up and went out to help defend his area,same happened when civil rights marches were being attacked he again defended his community when people like you {pacifists sat in the house]Martin and people like him continued to do this through the 70s and 80s during Bloody Sunday internment,the brutalisation of prisoners in the prisons,shoot to kill,etc etc when you were still sitting in the house criticising them for their actions.During all this time he was also looking for ways to bring it all to an end the IRA ceasefires of the 70s and secret talks with the British to get the conditions right for negotiations.Now things have changed,no RUC,B Specials UDR no soldiers on the streets no internment no shoot to kill power sharing government and many other things have improved for the people of Derry Belfast and right across the north,job not complete and defiantly not perfect but massive changes from the time that people like Martin got involve in Armed actions while you sat on the sofa.Now if you think that the conditions are the same today as they were then all I can say is you should get out more.Also as for the Sinn Fein bullshit well for all their bullshit the majority of Nationalists in the North listen to it and vote for them so please try and not be so arrogant as to think you are superior to all of them.I have no doubt that this explanation will not satisfy you but then thats all the time you spent sitting on the sofa with you pacifist friends.Sinn e
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 11:28:05 AM
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on February 26, 2010, 05:54:09 PM
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 02:42:31 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 26, 2010, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: glens abu on February 26, 2010, 11:32:04 AM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on February 25, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on February 25, 2010, 07:10:20 PM
McGuinness is starting to bug me, a hypocrite.
Is that not like saying a british soldier who killed someone in Iraq has no right to condemn a murder in his hometown?
Like it or not, the political process has essentially legitimised the IRA and what it did. Any war will have atrocities. Is Gordon Brown a hypocrite when he condemns murders, given that he oversees Britains actions in Iraq and elsewhere?
I found it very interesting that while listening to the BBC national (i.e. across the UK) news report on the bomb in Newry, the (english) correspondent drew a distinction between the dissidents and the PIRA by saying 'However, unlike the PIRA, the dissidents have little support in the community...'. An unexpected admission by the beeb, and perhaps history being rewritten before our eyes...
McGuinness is a hypocrite because he never had a problem when the PIRA were killing touts. If he came on and condemned it and said there was no room for violence any more or whatever then fine but this "outraged" nonsense sticks in the throat.
How is he a hypocrite ::)if he had condemned the shooting when it was the PIRA doing it then he would be a hypocrite but he never has and never will so don't talk crap.He is condemning it now because he doesn't agree with it.As he said the war is over and thats what he believes.
Why dont you read my post again.
I did,still don't see how he is a hypocrite if he was coming on condemning the PIRA for their past actions then I would agree with you,but he is not and never will.
Right then, so explain to us all how one set of murderers are right and another set wrong. Care to also explain how wee Marty can say he is outraged by it yet he had his own considerable part to play in the torture and murder of Frank Hegarty?
I won't waste my time waiting on a sensible answer from you since you can only repeat SF bullshit
Ah right Willie so not only do you know all about the RA in Armagh and Ardoyne you know all about them in Derry as well,you are some kid.Maybe your a pacifist I don't really know but as your aware with all your knowledge that Martin isn't so when the place he lived Derry and his community were being attacked in the late 60's by RUC and B specials he got up and went out to help defend his area,same happened when civil rights marches were being attacked he again defended his community when people like you {pacifists sat in the house]Martin and people like him continued to do this through the 70s and 80s during Bloody Sunday internment,the brutalisation of prisoners in the prisons,shoot to kill,etc etc when you were still sitting in the house criticising them for their actions.During all this time he was also looking for ways to bring it all to an end the IRA ceasefires of the 70s and secret talks with the British to get the conditions right for negotiations.Now things have changed,no RUC,B Specials UDR no soldiers on the streets no internment no shoot to kill power sharing government and many other things have improved for the people of Derry Belfast and right across the north,job not complete and defiantly not perfect but massive changes from the time that people like Martin got involve in Armed actions while you sat on the sofa.Now if you think that the conditions are the same today as they were then all I can say is you should get out more.Also as for the Sinn Fein bullshit well for all their bullshit the majority of Nationalists in the North listen to it and vote for them so please try and not be so arrogant as to think you are superior to all of them.I have no doubt that this explanation will not satisfy you but then thats all the time you spent sitting on the sofa with you pacifist friends.Sinn e
As a fellow 'wannabe provo' I have to say well said to all of that.
Unfortunately back in the 60's,70's, 80's and even parts of the 90's violence was needed. It is not now.
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 12:50:49 PM
Unfortunately back in the 60's,70's, 80's and even parts of the 90's violence was needed.
Who decided that?
QuoteIt is not now.
Who decided that?
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 12:54:16 PM
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 12:50:49 PM
Unfortunately back in the 60's,70's, 80's and even parts of the 90's violence was needed.
Who decided that?
QuoteIt is not now.
Who decided that?
its about your conscience Hardy, Martin McGuinness believed that it was necessary then and is no longer required today with the conditions that now prevail,and I and the majority of Republicans in the North agree with that even the majority of Republicans who disagree with the Sinn Fein strategy think the time is no longer right for armed conflict
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 01:58:24 PM
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 12:54:16 PM
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 12:50:49 PM
Unfortunately back in the 60's,70's, 80's and even parts of the 90's violence was needed.
Who decided that?
QuoteIt is not now.
Who decided that?
Martin McGuinness believed that it was necessary then ... and I and the majority of Republicans in the North agree with that
The majority of people in the North and the majority of people in the country didn't and don't agree with you and Martin McGuinness.
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 02:01:04 PM
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 01:58:24 PM
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 12:54:16 PM
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 12:50:49 PM
Unfortunately back in the 60's,70's, 80's and even parts of the 90's violence was needed.
Who decided that?
QuoteIt is not now.
Who decided that?
Martin McGuinness believed that it was necessary then ... and I and the majority of Republicans in the North agree with that
The majority of people in the North and the majority of people in the country didn't and don't agree with you and Martin McGuinness.
Of course not I never said they did you would hardly expect the oppressor to support the oppressed
What? In what way did the majority of Irish people oppress you? Or even the majority of nationalist people in the North?
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 02:16:33 PM
What? In what way did the majority of Irish people oppress you? Or even the majority of nationalist people in the North?
Are you now trying to tell me the nationalist people of the North were not oppressed?I think they were and have already stated the reasons I think so in an earlier answer to ardmhachaabu.Therefore the majority of the people in the North are Unionist and made up the vast majority of the oppressors[RUC,UDR,etc;} so wouldnt expect them to support the oppressed.The Irish Government at all times supported the British and also collaborated with them [internment,extradition,and censorship etc;] and it is only when Adams,Hume started to move they began to take up a more neutral position
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 02:29:14 PM
Are you now trying to tell me the nationalist people of the North were not oppressed?
No. That's a perverse interpretation of my questions. They were clear enough. Read them again and you can't fail to understand what I'm asking.
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 02:32:54 PM
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 02:29:14 PM
Are you now trying to tell me the nationalist people of the North were not oppressed?
No. That's a perverse interpretation of my questions. They were clear enough. Read them again and you can't fail to understand what I'm asking.
no it is not I have explained how Nationalists in the North were oppressed and the Unionist people acquiesced in that oppression and also how the Irish Government did likewise with the support of the majority of the Irish people.Think that should clear that up for you.
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 12:54:16 PM
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 12:50:49 PM
Unfortunately back in the 60's,70's, 80's and even parts of the 90's violence was needed.
Who decided that?
QuoteIt is not now.
Who decided that?
Its my opinion.I totally believe that this country would not be partially free from British rule without the use of violence. I also totally believe that Nationalists would still be oppressed in the North without the use of violence. Like it or not but fire had to be met with fire because it was the only way the Brits knew.
The overwhelming majority of people in the North have decided that violence is no longer needed.That was not the case 20 years ago.
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 02:41:05 PM
no it is not I have explained how Nationalists in the North were oppressed and the Unionist people acquiesced in that oppression and also how the Irish Government did likewise with the support of the majority of the Irish people.Think that should clear that up for you.
That's great, but nothing at all to do with what I asked you, which questions were prompted by your observation that you would hardly expect the oppressor to support the oppressed. So, again - in what way did the majority of Irish people oppress you? Or even the majority of nationalist people in the North?
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 02:48:40 PM
Its my opinion.I totally believe that this country would not be partially free from British rule without the use of violence. I also totally believe that Nationalists would still be oppressed in the North without the use of violence. Like it or not but fire had to be met with fire because it was the only way the Brits knew.
The overwhelming majority of people in the North have decided that violence is no longer needed.That was not the case 20 years ago.
Fair enough - the forum is about opinions. But one of your opinions is absolutely wrong - that the overwhelming majority of people in the North believed twenty years ago that violence was needed. (If I'm interpreting you correctly).
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 03:05:49 PM
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 02:41:05 PM
no it is not I have explained how Nationalists in the North were oppressed and the Unionist people acquiesced in that oppression and also how the Irish Government did likewise with the support of the majority of the Irish people.Think that should clear that up for you.
That's great, but nothing at all to do with what I asked you, which questions were prompted by your observation that you would hardly expect the oppressor to support the oppressed. So, again - in what way did the majority of Irish people oppress you? Or even the majority of nationalist people in the North?
The majority of the Irish people supported their Government who in turn supported the British in their oppression by internment, extradition,censorship etc;{starting to repeat myself here].You don't always have to be the gunman to be responsible for murder
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 02:48:40 PM
Its my opinion.I totally believe that this country would not be partially free from British rule without the use of violence. I also totally believe that Nationalists would still be oppressed in the North without the use of violence. Like it or not but fire had to be met with fire because it was the only way the Brits knew.
The overwhelming majority of people in the North have decided that violence is no longer needed.That was not the case 20 years ago.
Fair enough - the forum is about opinions. But one of your opinions is absolutely wrong - that the overwhelming majority of people in the North believed twenty years ago that violence was needed. (If I'm interpreting you correctly).
I'm completely lost. My questions were prompted by your assertion that you and "the majority of Republicans in the North" agree with Martin McGuinness that violence was necessary. Since you seem to be asserting that the opinion of the majority is sufficient justification, I'm asking how you factor in the opinion of the majority of the nationalist community in the North, never mind the rest of the country, who rejected the violence. Where does their opinion come into it as against that of the "majority of Republicans". And how did you measure this "majority of Republicans"? Isn't it a self-selecting majority, given that the definition of republicanism that I think you're using is the one that was invented by capital-R "Republicans" to mean those who supported the campaign of violence and exclude all others?
And are you seriously suggesting that all members of your own community who disagreed with the murder campaign were conspiring in your oppression?
Violence is one of those things that is only ever justifiable retrospectively.
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on February 26, 2010, 10:13:08 PM
This island is a different place than it was when the Provisionals were in their pomp. For those that can't see that, be glad that you can't, though some of us can never forget.
Fair dues to Mc Guinness.
Well said. Some people have short memories, or would imply that the troubles arose in a vacuum, but when we as nationalists turned to violence we new what it would mean, and if any level of equality had been forthcoming this would not have been necessary. Unfortunately it wasn't, and the British Government is to blame for all of it.
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 03:05:49 PM
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 02:41:05 PM
no it is not I have explained how Nationalists in the North were oppressed and the Unionist people acquiesced in that oppression and also how the Irish Government did likewise with the support of the majority of the Irish people.Think that should clear that up for you.
That's great, but nothing at all to do with what I asked you, which questions were prompted by your observation that you would hardly expect the oppressor to support the oppressed. So, again - in what way did the majority of Irish people oppress you? Or even the majority of nationalist people in the North?
Quote from: boojangles on March 01, 2010, 02:48:40 PM
Its my opinion.I totally believe that this country would not be partially free from British rule without the use of violence. I also totally believe that Nationalists would still be oppressed in the North without the use of violence. Like it or not but fire had to be met with fire because it was the only way the Brits knew.
The overwhelming majority of people in the North have decided that violence is no longer needed.That was not the case 20 years ago.
Fair enough - the forum is about opinions. But one of your opinions is absolutely wrong - that the overwhelming majority of people in the North believed twenty years ago that violence was needed. (If I'm interpreting you correctly).
Maybe not 20 years ago but there would still have been alot of support for the provos during the height of the troubles.Obviously not the 90's or most of the 80's, but my point is that its only in recent times when there have been institutions put in place and power-sharing has begun etc have an overwhelming majority of people really seen that violence is no longer necessary. Until these moves had been made it was hard to see what the alternatives to violence were.
For curiosity sakes, can anyone put up the votes for the SDLP and Sinn Fein from the 1980s onwards to see when exactly the nationnalists started to move away from SDLP towards SF ?
Was it the hunger strike that would have been the real catalyst for this change ?
And do you think that in the future, there might be a move away from Sinn Fein BACK to the SDLP ?.
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 11:28:05 AM
Ah right Willie so not only do you know all about the RA in Armagh and Ardoyne you know all about them in Derry as well,you are some kid.Maybe your a pacifist I don't really know but as your aware with all your knowledge that Martin isn't so when the place he lived Derry and his community were being attacked in the late 60's by RUC and B specials he got up and went out to help defend his area,same happened when civil rights marches were being attacked he again defended his community when people like you {pacifists sat in the house]Martin and people like him continued to do this through the 70s and 80s during Bloody Sunday internment,the brutalisation of prisoners in the prisons,shoot to kill,etc etc when you were still sitting in the house criticising them for their actions.During all this time he was also looking for ways to bring it all to an end the IRA ceasefires of the 70s and secret talks with the British to get the conditions right for negotiations.Now things have changed,no RUC,B Specials UDR no soldiers on the streets no internment no shoot to kill power sharing government and many other things have improved for the people of Derry Belfast and right across the north,job not complete and defiantly not perfect but massive changes from the time that people like Martin got involve in Armed actions while you sat on the sofa.Now if you think that the conditions are the same today as they were then all I can say is you should get out more.Also as for the Sinn Fein bullshit well for all their bullshit the majority of Nationalists in the North listen to it and vote for them so please try and not be so arrogant as to think you are superior to all of them.I have no doubt that this explanation will not satisfy you but then thats all the time you spent sitting on the sofa with you pacifist friends.Sinn e
This post and most of your other posts on politics just show that you are good at repeating what you are told to say by people who have short-term memory loss
Wee Marty and Gerry never had any moral justification for armed struggle, neither do the dimwits in all the different dissident organisations.
Murdering people will never unite them, that's the issue at the core of the present political process here. SF caught on to that way too late, various elements involved in the various dissident organisations will never catch on to that. SF are liars and hypocrites, wee Marty was at least partly responsible for the Hegarty murder yet he says he is outraged at this latest killing ::)
As for all your petty insults, for a provo wannabee you haven't got the first clue when it comes to debating, like I said, all you can do is repeat what the Shinners have told you to say, it's pathetic that you can't think outside of their party line though I never expected anything else form you
Run along now, I am done with you and won't be replying to any more of your SF fuelled rhetoric
Maybe it shows that he has his own opinion and is perfectly entitled to it. You remind me of Trevor Hill, ardmhaca. I.E. anyone with a republican view in any way similar to that of Sinn Fein, (even though it is Ireland's third largest party) is clearly incapable of understanding the issues and is a programmed robot incapable of independent thought and who's views are therefor not as valid or indeed as important as yours. Reeks of arrogance.
"Run along i'm done talking with you." I've heard that before. You're an awful man for thinking you're too good to debate. Get your self righteous head out of your ass, you'll smother up there.
Quote from: Hardy on March 01, 2010, 03:28:29 PM
I'm completely lost. My questions were prompted by your assertion that you and "the majority of Republicans in the North" agree with Martin McGuinness that violence was necessary. Since you seem to be asserting that the opinion of the majority is sufficient justification, I'm asking how you factor in the opinion of the majority of the nationalist community in the North, never mind the rest of the country, who rejected the violence. Where does their opinion come into it as against that of the "majority of Republicans". And how did you measure this "majority of Republicans"? Isn't it a self-selecting majority, given that the definition of republicanism that I think you're using is the one that was invented by capital-R "Republicans" to mean those who supported the campaign of violence and exclude all others?
And are you seriously suggesting that all members of your own community who disagreed with the murder campaign were conspiring in your oppression?
Hardy I never said that all Republicans agreed with Martin when he supported the armed struggle although the IRA had massive support from within the areas they operated and if they hadn't had that support there is no way they could have carried on their fight for so long.I did say the majority of all Republicans agreed with Martin that the actions of the RIRA etc; is unjustified.No I don't think that those in my own community who disagreed with the struggle were helping the oppressor although some may have.I said the majority community in the North ie; the Unionists, supported the oppressor and the Irish Government backed the British at every opportunity until Hume-Adams.Finnally I don't think it is necessary for a majority to support armed action if that was the case I would have to condemn the men of 1916 but I do think if there is another way it should be explored and that is why I support the present agreement in the North,and disagree with all action of the dissident groups.
Quote from: ardmhachaabu on March 01, 2010, 07:13:46 PM
Quote from: glens abu on March 01, 2010, 11:28:05 AM
Ah right Willie so not only do you know all about the RA in Armagh and Ardoyne you know all about them in Derry as well,you are some kid.Maybe your a pacifist I don't really know but as your aware with all your knowledge that Martin isn't so when the place he lived Derry and his community were being attacked in the late 60's by RUC and B specials he got up and went out to help defend his area,same happened when civil rights marches were being attacked he again defended his community when people like you {pacifists sat in the house]Martin and people like him continued to do this through the 70s and 80s during Bloody Sunday internment,the brutalisation of prisoners in the prisons,shoot to kill,etc etc when you were still sitting in the house criticising them for their actions.During all this time he was also looking for ways to bring it all to an end the IRA ceasefires of the 70s and secret talks with the British to get the conditions right for negotiations.Now things have changed,no RUC,B Specials UDR no soldiers on the streets no internment no shoot to kill power sharing government and many other things have improved for the people of Derry Belfast and right across the north,job not complete and defiantly not perfect but massive changes from the time that people like Martin got involve in Armed actions while you sat on the sofa.Now if you think that the conditions are the same today as they were then all I can say is you should get out more.Also as for the Sinn Fein bullshit well for all their bullshit the majority of Nationalists in the North listen to it and vote for them so please try and not be so arrogant as to think you are superior to all of them.I have no doubt that this explanation will not satisfy you but then thats all the time you spent sitting on the sofa with you pacifist friends.Sinn e
This post and most of your other posts on politics just show that you are good at repeating what you are told to say by people who have short-term memory loss
Wee Marty and Gerry never had any moral justification for armed struggle, neither do the dimwits in all the different dissident organisations.
Murdering people will never unite them, that's the issue at the core of the present political process here. SF caught on to that way too late, various elements involved in the various dissident organisations will never catch on to that. SF are liars and hypocrites, wee Marty was at least partly responsible for the Hegarty murder yet he says he is outraged at this latest killing ::)
As for all your petty insults, for a provo wannabee you haven't got the first clue when it comes to debating, like I said, all you can do is repeat what the Shinners have told you to say, it's pathetic that you can't think outside of their party line though I never expected anything else form you
Run along now, I am done with you and won't be replying to any more of your SF fuelled rhetoric
Very good Willie I always knew you were the running away type so from this provo wannabee to the Willie Frazer wannabee over and out ;D
I bet glens abu and Nally would be the same boys to criticise those in the south who honour the men of 1916 or the war of independence and condemn the provos and they'd still fail to see the irony.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on March 02, 2010, 12:03:23 PM
I bet glens abu and Nally would be the same boys to criticise those in the south who honour the men of 1916 or the war of independence and condemn the provos and they'd still fail to see the irony.
I'd say you are right. You and I may not ever agree on the use of violence to achieve political aims yet we both know when someone (SF) is trying to fill us full of the proverbial
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
...but who decides when an alternative is viable? :o Sinn Féin?... just wondering
Quote from: longrunsthefox on March 02, 2010, 08:08:08 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
...but who decides when an alternative is viable? :o Sinn Féin?... just wondering
Obviously they are the only ones who can decide such things, the thoughts of the 95% of the island don't even come into their consideration. Do they even have 5% of the entire vote on the island?
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
Do you have any statistics for that claim?
Quote from: Puckoon on March 02, 2010, 08:23:18 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
Do you have any statistics for that claim?
he asks knowing full well the answer is "no".
Quote from: longrunsthefox on March 02, 2010, 08:08:08 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
...but who decides when an alternative is viable? :o Sinn Féin?... just wondering
Another thing I forgot to say is that that decision was taken by a small number of people within SF who them proceeded to foist their views and political direction on the rest of the party. Those who questioned this were ostracised from the party, those who were once comrades became dissidents, the process took time but not that long in most cases. Some of them are being demonised by SF to this day for no good reason other than they questioned the direction that the party was going politically
When I say an alternative wasn't viable, I'm going by events. The IRA sent secret delegations to talk peace with the british gov a number of times to no avail. Ceasefires fell when the british gov didn't live up to agreements. Most notably in the case of Canary Wharf. There was no armed resistance (bar a short border campaign) from partition to 1969 and things only got worse for nationalists. As I say, I'm going by events not opinions. If you supported the Old IRA, who decided they then were justified?
Quote from: longrunsthefox on March 02, 2010, 08:08:08 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:06:43 PM
Well as someone who feels that those who fought in the Rising and the Tan War were fighting for the same thing in similar circumstances I think you're absolutely right. I see no reason to support one and not the other. The reason I don't support the dissidents is because they are using force when for the first time, an alternative is viable. So considering more innocents were killed by the Old IRA than the PIRA, where does that leave your moral high ground?
...but who decides when an alternative is viable? :o Sinn Féin?... just wondering
Clearly.
Nally, in your opinion there is an alternative.
During the 1916 rising people believed the alternative was to support the brits in the war and fight for home rule at the beginning of the provos campaign many felt the sunningdale agreement was an alternative.
Sinn Fein have no right to decide when a violent campaign is necessary or not - they can have their beliefs and opinions about the best way forward but they've a brass neck to dictate to anyone else about the use of violence.
Well maybe I should use the term viable alternative. Which sunningdale was not. It fell because britain was still at war in Ireland and unionists were outspoken in their absolute opposition to power sharing. Look at the struggle the assembly has had to keep afloat in a peace process. You seriously think it would have thrived while british troops were colluding in mass murder while the IRA went on ceasefire?
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 09:15:39 PM
Well maybe I should use the term viable alternative. Which sunningdale was not. It fell because britain was still at war in Ireland and unionists were outspoken in their absolute opposition to power sharing. Look at the struggle the assembly has had to keep afloat in a peace process. You seriously think it would have thrived while british troops were colluding in mass murder while the IRA went on ceasefire?
In your opinion.
And I'd agree with you btw, I supported the PIRA campaign and make no apology for it - I also think the time for armed conflict has passed but what I'm trying to get you to understand is that we have no right to dictate to others on the use of violence when we supported it ourselves not so long ago. Yes, we can argue the time has passed and an alternative way may be the way forward - but when we call them "traitors" or pretend to be "outraged" at the death of an alleged informer then we make ourselves look like a dick, a hypocrite and a unionist arse licker.
And that's fair enough but a point I made at the start was that while I supported the PIRA campaign. On a personal level I don't have any time at all for the RIRA. And on a personal level therefor, I would feel in no way a hypocrite for being "outraged" by a killing such as this as I personally feel it was senseless based on my interpretation on the event and the climate it took place in.
I have to say that I almost to a point agree with what Nally is saying. We must have read the same History books. It might be easy for me to have that point of view having not lived through a lot of the Troubles but I would base most of my opinions on events that happened the reactions to these events.
I can see POGs point too and would wonder about McGuinness' use of words, especially when even in the time we live in I would still find it hard to be outraged about anything that happens in the North. And even more so if I had a past like Martins.
Quote from: Nally Stand on March 02, 2010, 08:36:31 PM
When I say an alternative wasn't viable, I'm going by events. The IRA sent secret delegations to talk peace with the british gov a number of times to no avail. Ceasefires fell when the british gov didn't live up to agreements. Most notably in the case of Canary Wharf. There was no armed resistance (bar a short border campaign) from partition to 1969 and things only got worse for nationalists. As I say, I'm going by events not opinions. If you supported the Old IRA, who decided they then were justified?
Nally you must remember when debating with a lot of these guys to remember the word CONFUSED.
Adams and McGuinness after coming to an agreement with Unionists and the Irish and British Governments have no right to call for Dissidents to end violence.Micheal Collins came back from London after agreeing the great partition deal and said "Right boys the war is over".Then Dev said hold on a minute I don't like this and I want to be a Statesman and President of Ireland so lets keep fighting,as a matter of fact lets have a Civil war and kill thousands of my fellow Irishmen and former comrades,then I can form a party that the Irish people will vote for forever no matter what way we run the country. CONFUSED
Then we have our great heroes of the time Pearse,Connelly,Collins,Brugha,Boland they were great they fought the Brits,but I hate those other bad IRA men Sands,Hughes,Lynch,Farrell,Lynagh,sure they fought the Brits. CONFUSED
What about that bad RUC I hate them for, shoot to kill,plastic bullet deaths,collusion with Loyalist in the killing of hundreds of Catholics,but I don't mind voting for a party or a Government that supports them.As for that bad IRA I hate them as well for their bombings, shootings,and killings but I could never vote for a party who supported them, anyway they only talk bullshit and might try and brainwash me.
CONFUSED
Then we have the best of all.I hated that bitch Margaret Thatcher she destroyed mining communities in England And Wales,she supported Pinochet in Chile,she said Mandela was a terrorist she even went to war in the Malinvas and said it was right to sink the Belgrano killing over 300 because it was not sailing away fast enough.Then again she might not be that bad sure she faced down that bad IRA,she degraded Women prisoners in Armagh,brutalised those bad IRA prisoners in Long Kesh for 5 years even letting 10 of them die on Hunger strike just to prove us right that they were not Political Prisoners but were criminals all along.God I love that women but will have to keep it quiet when I am cheering Christy at his next concert as he sings about her and calls her an auld whore.CONFUSED
So the next time you debate with them Nally remember that a lot of them have arses full of splinters with all the years they have been sitting on the fence.
what are you rambling about glens
Quote from: pintsofguinness on March 03, 2010, 11:00:15 AM
what are you rambling about glens
Pints was not really getting at you as I see in your post you say you supported the Armed struggle but do you really think that Martin and Gerry sould say nothing now when people are being murdered,they have been involved in bringing about this present agreement so they must give 100% support to it and to a peaceful future.Also most of the dissident actions and rhetoric have been aimed at discrediting Sinn Fein.
I dont expect them to say nothing - they can say they condemn it, they don't think it's the way forward etc etc.
When they call those people "traitors" or say they're "outraged" then they're making themselves out to be tits.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on March 03, 2010, 11:34:06 AM
I dont expect them to say nothing - they can say they condemn it, they don't think it's the way forward etc etc.
When they call those people "traitors" or say they're "outraged" then they're making themselves out to be tits.
thats fine if thats what you think pints,I just think they have to tell it like it is these guys have been calling Gerry and Martin "traitors" for years as you will see if you ever read any of their literature, their main agenda is to discredit the Sinn Fein leadership and party,you just have to read the letters page in the Irish News to see this.Christ I couldn't believe how low some of them will stoop reading Dolours Price's article last week was beyond belief