fer fecks sake.. MING!!!??

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

The IRA waged a campaign against the guards?

The Guards were legitimate targets, if you want to be precise

Who is doing yoir research for you?
IRA Vols were forbidden from engaging in any form of confrontation with the Guards and did not regard them as legitimate targets.

So when unarmed Guards died, that was just one of those things

It's a long way from the IRA "waging war" on the Gardaí isn't it though? And it's no more "one of those things" than unarmed victims of the Old IRA were "one of those things" when looked through the rose tinted glasses of the Mayo's of this world.

Does not legitimise it in one way, however that was the 1920's and this is 2011. You are not comparing like with like, not becasue of the activities of the Old or Provisional IRA (despite the Provos caused alot more civilian deaths) but due to the fact you would find it hard to find a FG or FF member who was involved in terrorism, I'm not so sure it would be as difficult with Sein Féin.

Also the Old IRA, Die Hards and National Army while committing heinous acts, their raison d'etre was defeat of the enemy as opposed to the Provos which seemed to be death, destruction and terror. The Provos claimed to fight for a cause, but to most people outside the rose tinted Provo family it came across as hate fueled mayhem.

But again, why are the people of the 26 counties accused by our northern cousins of living in the past, when it is clearly the people of the 6 who are obsessed about events that happened nearly a century ago. Of course I must be a Blueshirt facist because in the ever so recent 1930's  a tiny tiny tiny minority of one of the many groups that went on to form Fine Gael indulged in childish Roman salutes in an ex-army association set up to defend desenters against IRA mobs who attacked political rallies of those that dare disagree with them, while Dev used the National Army to protect his party followers and left the rest at the mercy of the RA.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Get over the past??

Northerners and NI SF'rs are all Free State this, Blueshirt that, who are the hypocrites, when you can get over blaming Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil for the 1920's & 1930's we will wait another 4-7 decades to stop blaming SF-IRA for the 1960's/70's/80's/90's/00's.

Fair enough. Hypocrites.

Civil War politics is only alive and well in the 6.

Hold on a second.  The reason that 'northerners' continue to mention this is because, unlike yourself, who has the luxury of living on the 'correct' side of the treaty divide, the fact that I pay my tax to the British exchequer means that Civil War politics is very much in the present to me.

So if it is important, and we are all part of the Irish nation, I can assume it is legitimate for FG, FF, and everyone else in the Republic to indulge in Civil War politics and therefore not legitimate for Sinn Féin or Gerry Adams to bitch on about it like a broken record.

(Personally I disagree that is important, but thanks for the get out of Gaol card for future reference)

[Nally Stand]

I think someone needs to lock this thread and let it float off into the ether...

It's all getting a bit repetitive isn't it.  I think there's a few lads on here who maybe think they're in some way furthering SF's cause or putting across SF's arguments, but they're not doing much of a job of converting hearts or minds. 

As for Luke, I wasn't a fan pre-election, but on hearing him several times since then, I think he's well worth having in there.  Hopefully he'll fulfill his potential, btw, I'd say he's close enough to SF on many policies too, of course some supporters can't see past his use of illegal substances, but that shouldn't be a bar to them talking to him.

I for one am not trying to further anything, but when bullshit like what deiseach has posted goes up about a war with the guards i will challenge it, which you still have anwered btw deiseach

I have answered. I clarified that Guards were legitimate targets. I do not accept statements that they were not because out in the real world unarmed Guards, who could not possibly represent a threat to an armed Volunteer on active service, were killed. To say otherwise is to engage in weasel words.

So do you believe that for the Old IRA; unarmed men, women and children were legitimate targets? They did deliberately kill a number of them after all. They didn't represent a threat. Can I deduce from this that you hold the Old IRA in equal distain as you hold the IRA of more recent times in?

*Note how I stated that they "Killed a number of them" rather than said they "waged war on them" as the PIRA apparently did on the Guards if your sensationalism was to have went unchecked.

[Nally Stand]

The IRA waged a campaign against the guards?

The Guards were legitimate targets, if you want to be precise

Who is doing yoir research for you?
IRA Vols were forbidden from engaging in any form of confrontation with the Guards and did not regard them as legitimate targets.

So when unarmed Guards died, that was just one of those things

It's a long way from the IRA "waging war" on the Gardaí isn't it though? And it's no more "one of those things" than unarmed victims of the Old IRA were "one of those things" when looked through the rose tinted glasses of the Mayo's of this world.

Does not legitimise it in one way, however that was the 1920's and this is 2011. You are not comparing like with like, not becasue of the activities of the Old or Provisional IRA (despite the Provos caused alot more civilian deaths) but due to the fact you would find it hard to find a FG or FF member who was involved in terrorism, I'm not so sure it would be as difficult with Sein Féin.

Also the Old IRA, Die Hards and National Army while committing heinous acts, their raison d'etre was defeat of the enemy as opposed to the Provos which seemed to be death, destruction and terror. They claimed to fight for a cause, but to most people outside the rose tinted Provo family it came across as hate fueled mayhem.

But again, why are the people of the 26 counties accused by our northern cousins of living in the past, when it is clearly the people of the 6 who are obsessed about events that happened nearly a century ago. Of course I must be a Blueshirt facist because in the ever so recent 1930's  a tiny tiny tiny minority of one of the many groups that went on to form Fine Gael indulged in childish Roman salutes in an ex-army association set up to defend desenters against IRA mobs who attacked political rallies of those that dare disagree with them, while Dev used the National Army to protect his party followers and left the rest at the mercy of the RA.

The majority of IRA attacks were on British security forces Mayo but its hard to beat sensationalism isn't it?
While I have you here, could you maybe tell me who it was who said that the IRA didn't do any wrong, and maybe a quote to back up your claim? Thanks.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Can this threads name be changed to, Well we where going to talk about Luke Flanagan but Sinn Féin wanted to make it all about themselves again.

You would think they won 100 Dáil seats in the GE, talk about the hype 

[Nally Stand]

Can this threads name be changed to, Well we where going to talk about Luke Flanagan but Sinn Féin wanted to make it all about themselves again.

You would think they won 100 Dáil seats in the GE, talk about the hype 

Or maybe the "How many times must Mayo be asked to back up a claim he makes before he actually does so Thread"

[deiseach]

So do you believe that for the Old IRA; unarmed men, women and children were legitimate targets? They did deliberately kill a number of them after all. They didn't represent a threat. Can I deduce from this that you hold the Old IRA in equal distain as you hold the IRA of more recent times in?

*Note how I stated that they "Killed a number of them" rather than said they "waged war on them" as the PIRA apparently did on the Guards if your sensationalism was to have went unchecked.

I've outlined a substantive difference between the Old IRA and the Provos. Even if all other things were equal, I think I can use that to explain why I am less disdainful of the Old IRA than the Provos

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

The IRA waged a campaign against the guards?

The Guards were legitimate targets, if you want to be precise

Who is doing yoir research for you?
IRA Vols were forbidden from engaging in any form of confrontation with the Guards and did not regard them as legitimate targets.

So when unarmed Guards died, that was just one of those things

It's a long way from the IRA "waging war" on the Gardaí isn't it though? And it's no more "one of those things" than unarmed victims of the Old IRA were "one of those things" when looked through the rose tinted glasses of the Mayo's of this world.

Does not legitimise it in one way, however that was the 1920's and this is 2011. You are not comparing like with like, not becasue of the activities of the Old or Provisional IRA (despite the Provos caused alot more civilian deaths) but due to the fact you would find it hard to find a FG or FF member who was involved in terrorism, I'm not so sure it would be as difficult with Sein Féin.

Also the Old IRA, Die Hards and National Army while committing heinous acts, their raison d'etre was defeat of the enemy as opposed to the Provos which seemed to be death, destruction and terror. They claimed to fight for a cause, but to most people outside the rose tinted Provo family it came across as hate fueled mayhem.

But again, why are the people of the 26 counties accused by our northern cousins of living in the past, when it is clearly the people of the 6 who are obsessed about events that happened nearly a century ago. Of course I must be a Blueshirt facist because in the ever so recent 1930's  a tiny tiny tiny minority of one of the many groups that went on to form Fine Gael indulged in childish Roman salutes in an ex-army association set up to defend desenters against IRA mobs who attacked political rallies of those that dare disagree with them, while Dev used the National Army to protect his party followers and left the rest at the mercy of the RA.

1. The majority of IRA attacks were on British security forces Mayo but its hard to beat sensationalism isn't it?

2. While I have you here, could you maybe tell me who it was who said that the IRA didn't do any wrong, and maybe a quote to back up your claim? Thanks.

1.



2.

What exactly are you blaming on SF or the IRA in the 60s/70s/80s/90s/00s?

I for one would love an answer to hardstations question

Comes across like denial to me, but sure maybe I took them up wrong, I wonder am I the only one who would take this up as implied denial.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Is it ok if I go have my dinner now?

[Nally Stand]

So do you believe that for the Old IRA; unarmed men, women and children were legitimate targets? They did deliberately kill a number of them after all. They didn't represent a threat. Can I deduce from this that you hold the Old IRA in equal distain as you hold the IRA of more recent times in?

*Note how I stated that they "Killed a number of them" rather than said they "waged war on them" as the PIRA apparently did on the Guards if your sensationalism was to have went unchecked.

I've outlined a substantive difference between the Old IRA and the Provos. Even if all other things were equal, I think I can use that to explain why I am less disdainful of the Old IRA than the Provos

Right so the PIRA having killed i think 6 Guards. And this is how you distinguish the two campaigns? So then the life of a gaurd is more precious than an unarmed civilian? The Old IRA killed more civilians than the PIRA did Guards.

[Nally Stand]

The IRA waged a campaign against the guards?

The Guards were legitimate targets, if you want to be precise

Who is doing yoir research for you?
IRA Vols were forbidden from engaging in any form of confrontation with the Guards and did not regard them as legitimate targets.

So when unarmed Guards died, that was just one of those things

It's a long way from the IRA "waging war" on the Gardaí isn't it though? And it's no more "one of those things" than unarmed victims of the Old IRA were "one of those things" when looked through the rose tinted glasses of the Mayo's of this world.

Does not legitimise it in one way, however that was the 1920's and this is 2011. You are not comparing like with like, not becasue of the activities of the Old or Provisional IRA (despite the Provos caused alot more civilian deaths) but due to the fact you would find it hard to find a FG or FF member who was involved in terrorism, I'm not so sure it would be as difficult with Sein Féin.

Also the Old IRA, Die Hards and National Army while committing heinous acts, their raison d'etre was defeat of the enemy as opposed to the Provos which seemed to be death, destruction and terror. They claimed to fight for a cause, but to most people outside the rose tinted Provo family it came across as hate fueled mayhem.

But again, why are the people of the 26 counties accused by our northern cousins of living in the past, when it is clearly the people of the 6 who are obsessed about events that happened nearly a century ago. Of course I must be a Blueshirt facist because in the ever so recent 1930's  a tiny tiny tiny minority of one of the many groups that went on to form Fine Gael indulged in childish Roman salutes in an ex-army association set up to defend desenters against IRA mobs who attacked political rallies of those that dare disagree with them, while Dev used the National Army to protect his party followers and left the rest at the mercy of the RA.

1. The majority of IRA attacks were on British security forces Mayo but its hard to beat sensationalism isn't it?

2. While I have you here, could you maybe tell me who it was who said that the IRA didn't do any wrong, and maybe a quote to back up your claim? Thanks.

1.



2.

What exactly are you blaming on SF or the IRA in the 60s/70s/80s/90s/00s?

I for one would love an answer to hardstations question

Comes across like denial to me, but sure maybe I took them up wrong, I wonder am I the only one who would take this up as implied denial.

So posting three photos of immoral IRA attacks is supposed to refute my claim that most attacks were on british security forces then? Have you nothing other than sensationalism and generalisations to offer??

And did Hardstation say the IRA never did anything wrong?? I would appreciate a direct quote, not something you think implies something somehow.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Holy Shit on a stick Nally Stand you are harder work than a brick wall.

[Nally Stand]

Holy Shit on a stick Nally Stand you are harder work than a brick wall.

And you, my question dodging friend, are as stubborn as one!

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Manchester 1996, legitimate target?

[Nally Stand]

Manchester 1996, legitimate target?

Might I once again ask you, have you anything other than pictures of specific acts or do you rely on sensationalist generalisations? The IRA carried out thousands of attacks. The vast majority of which were on british security forces. Do your four photos disprove this?