The Southern "Irish"

[nifan]

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

How can you call that indisputable? Your reasoning is unreal.
You say one minute that nobody knows the motivation of the people who carried out certain acts, then a post later you say that is was definitely not because of religion.

[lynchbhoy]

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

How can you call that indisputable? Your reasoning is unreal.
You say one minute that nobody knows the motivation of the people who carried out certain acts, then a post later you say that is was definitely not because of religion.

roll up roll up and all come in to 'have a go'

my reasoning is that from a republican viewpoint they never targetted protestants because of their religion, this has always been accepted within nationalist/republican (plus international investigative/human rights committees etc) peoples.
I would be fairly sure that folk from within that group would know better than the ethos.

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

this is a rather poor effort of 'equalising' even by your standards !

[nifan]

roll up roll up and all come in to 'have a go'

sorry i missed where the written invitations where given out. You and a few others "having a go" must have got one

I would be fairly sure that folk from within that group would know better than the ethos.

I can no more speak for all prods as any individual can speak for all republicans

(plus international investigative/human rights committees etc)

Show me where human rights committees have said republicans NEVER targeted anyone because of their religion

this is a rather poor effort of 'equalising' even by your standards !

Questioning your argument is "equalising"

As for your comments about people running away from your questions, forgive me for finding that ironic. When youve regularly run away from questions what was the phrase you used? No tugging the forelock.

[Maguire01]

But is this:

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

not contradicted by this:

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

?

[nifan]

removed response to lynchbhoys lie about my family.

[lynchbhoy]

But is this:

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

not contradicted by this:

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

?

if you had read a few threads up you would see this has been answered
The republican ethos was never about targetting protestants purely because of their religion.

however a few isolated incidents throughout the 35 years war cannot constitute whloesale change of attitude and mantra of the organisation
with even less known about the intent or planning of the actual acts themselves.
Do you know if any of the poor victims were in some way connected to unionist/loyalist death gangs - obv the official line was always 'never' (never never) but we all know that quite often these utterings from such spokespeople were not quite the truth !
Therefore we dont know what reasoning these guys were targetted. Simply sad and tragic loss of lives (as they all are).

comprendez?

[nifan]

i dont get it?
but bringing my family in to this is bad form - though i dont know anyone who has a problem with them

[Roger]

But is this:

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

not contradicted by this:

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

?

Don't be silly, it's more important to talk about Mantras, which that eejit probably thinks was made by Opel around the time of the Kingsmill massacre.  He'll write anything but deal with reality yet he knows what the motivation of everyone else but republicans was, yet he declares what he knows their motivation was.  Then he trots out the standard lets change the subject by asking opinions on what started what.  Complete joker.

[nifan]

Seriously, are you trying to imply something about my parents?

[Evil Genius]

Blah, blah blah... republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion...   blah, blah, blah

If Republicans never targeted Protestants because of their religion, how do you explain this eyewitness account by Alan Black, the only Protestant survivor of Kingsmill, in the Newsletter?



"The talk on the minibus that night was no different than normal. There had been talk earlier in the factory that day about the killing of the young Reavey brothers from Whitecross. It horrified us all. We passed through Whitecross village shortly after 5-30pm and when our minibus was stopped, a short distance up the road past Kingsmills crossroads, we thought it was the army.

"A group of about 12 armed men, who were unmasked but with their faces blackened and wearing combat jackets, surrounded the vehicle and ordered us all out onto the road. Even then few of us thought there was something amiss. One man, with a English accent, did all the talking and proceeded to ask each of us our religion. Our Roman Catholic works colleague was ordered to clear off and the shooting started.

"It was all over within a minute and after the initial screams there was silence. I was semi-conscious and passed out several times with the deadly pain and the cold. A man appeared on the scene. He was in a terrible state and was praying loudly as he passed along the rows of bodies. He must have heard my groans and came across to comfort me. I must have been lying at the roadside waiting on the ambulance for up to 30 minutes. It was like an eternity and I can remember someone moving my body from one side to the other to help ease the pain."

He added " I remained in the Bessbrook area for a time, but as I left my young daughter to school every morning I was confronted by the orphans of men murdered in the massacre. It brought it all back on a daily basis and I decided to move to Scotland. Two years in Scotland helped me to adjust but I knew I had to return home to Bessbrook.

Even now when I hear of a innocent person being killed the horror of the massacre all comes back and I can feel every bullet hitting me. Bessbrook lost its heart through that massacre. It was once a vibrant happy community full of life and enjoyment. What was done that night was a sheer waste, a futile exercise that advanced no cause."

When the funerals were held they took place in "Constant drizzle and a dank grey mist added to the almost tangible atmosphere of grief which enveloped the heart broken village. All shops closed today and the streets were almost deserted as the 2,000 villagers prepared to pay their final tribute to the men they had grown up with. Despair and sorrow were etched on the faces of the few villagers who ventured out of doors and many were red eyed from tears.

"Last night the nine coffins of the murdered men were carried from their homes through the village in an impressive public show of sorrow. They were taken at intervals along the village's broad main street. The coffins of the six Presbyterian victims lay beside each other in the Presbyterian church. The other three coffins lay in Christ Church Parish Church."



And when you've finished explaining that sectarian atrocity, you might then explain the motives of the "Catholic Action Force" when they murdered three civilians in a machine gun attack on the Gospel Hall at Darkley whilst a service was actually being conducted (20/11/83). Or the attack by the "South Armagh Republican Action Force" on a Lodge Meeting at Tullyvallen Orange Hall (01/09/75), which left five men dead - three of them OAP's?  

In case you've forgotten, you may look them up here - http://www.cain.ulst.ac.uk/  

[lynchbhoy]

But is this:

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

not contradicted by this:

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

?

Don't be silly, it's more important to talk about Mantras, which that eejit probably thinks was made by Opel around the time of the Kingsmill massacre.  He'll write anything but deal with reality yet he knows what the motivation of everyone else but republicans was, yet he declares what he knows their motivation was.  Then he trots out the standard lets change the subject by asking opinions on what started what.  Complete joker.

so yer back...couldnt stay away, obv getting tanned the last time got to you eventually !


ok
republicans ethos as a movement/organisation was as stated.
isolated incidents are not party to the overall ethos/mantra/mo etc etc of the republican movement.

how many times do you have to have this explained to you.

the only joke here is the amount of times you keep coming back with dumb and dumber questions asking the same thing and showing yourself up.
OK so it doesnt agree with your unionist/loyalist categorisation and villification, but you must understand the world does not revolve around you and quite a lot of things unionism/loyalism states isnt quite true.... eg the creationist principle
so like that you must realise there are other things your 'gospel' is incorrect about also !
Wake up  

[lynchbhoy]

If Republicans never targeted Protestants because of their religion, how do you explain this eyewitness account by Alan Black, the only Protestant survivor of Kingsmill, in the Newsletter?

In case you've forgotten, you may look them up here[/i] - http://www.cain.ulst.ac.uk/  

Jeez if we are quoting the cain research again , then your argument really is in the sihtehouse !

keep quoting a few isolated incidents , really threatens the overall principle - esp when it spanned 35years and more !

[Maguire01]

But is this:

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

not contradicted by this:

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

?

if you had read a few threads up you would see this has been answered
The republican ethos was never about targetting protestants purely because of their religion.

however a few isolated incidents throughout the 35 years war cannot constitute whloesale change of attitude and mantra of the organisation
with even less known about the intent or planning of the actual acts themselves.
Do you know if any of the poor victims were in some way connected to unionist/loyalist death gangs - obv the official line was always 'never' (never never) but we all know that quite often these utterings from such spokespeople were not quite the truth !
Therefore we dont know what reasoning these guys were targetted. Simply sad and tragic loss of lives (as they all are).

comprendez?

Yes indeed - i thought it had been answered. But your posts on this thread are a mess on contradictions.

All you had to say to answer was:
The republican ethos was/is XYZ, however, over the years, certain activities inconsistent with this ethos, such as killing on the basis of religion may have been carried out in the name of republicanism.
You could add extortion and punishment beatings to that list too, but that's beside the point. The issue is that the 'ethos' is not as relevant as the reality. Actions speak louder than words etc...

There's no need to qualify this by the 'whataboutery' (as you would call it) of who threw the first stone. Start another thread for that.

[lynchbhoy]

But is this:

republicanism never targeted protestants because of religion.

not contradicted by this:

However you are referring to the indivial number of acts cited - this is different as again who would know the 'motivation' for such.

?

if you had read a few threads up you would see this has been answered
The republican ethos was never about targetting protestants purely because of their religion.

however a few isolated incidents throughout the 35 years war cannot constitute whloesale change of attitude and mantra of the organisation
with even less known about the intent or planning of the actual acts themselves.
Do you know if any of the poor victims were in some way connected to unionist/loyalist death gangs - obv the official line was always 'never' (never never) but we all know that quite often these utterings from such spokespeople were not quite the truth !
Therefore we dont know what reasoning these guys were targetted. Simply sad and tragic loss of lives (as they all are).

comprendez?

Yes indeed - i thought it had been answered. But your posts on this thread are a mess on contradictions.

All you had to say to answer was:
The republican ethos was/is XYZ, however, over the years, certain activities inconsistent with this ethos, such as killing on the basis of religion may have been carried out in the name of republicanism.
You could add extortion and punishment beatings to that list too, but that's beside the point. The issue is that the 'ethos' is not as relevant as the reality. Actions speak louder than words etc...

There's no need to qualify this by the 'whataboutery' (as you would call it) of who threw the first stone. Start another thread for that.

Indeed I thought it was.

Part two - not really, you cant really discuss certain aspects as were highlighted here unless you are willing to bring in the bigger picture.
Its all part of the same lump of history . Bad and all as it was, you cant nit pick the entire sequence of events. Though some prefer to.
Such history and its constant review will hopefully stop us from repeating previous mistakes.
some prefer to try to re-write it though it seems !

[heganboy]

Lynchboy

please remove the references to another posters family or get reported and banned.

I appreciate that this is for you a very emotive subject but cut the crap.