The Race for the ARAS.....

[muppet]

P.S. I suppose you will now retract your pathetically dishonest claim that I think I am the only one who has ever been inflicted with hurt?

Pathetically dishonest? If you are in the business of justifying some republican inflicted deaths and not others you should at least be able to deal with the question. Some of us find it hard to discern between one innocent victim and another, but we would view them all as innocent.

So to rephrase you, if I don't think ALL of the IRAs attacks were unjustified, it is perfectly reasonable to tell me that I think I am the only one who has had hurt inflicted upon? I have provided quotes which demonstrate how I acknowledge hurt on all sides so don't try to make excuses to defend your disgusting claim.

My claim was based on your pathetical and all too typical attack when faced with your own hypocrisy.

My own hypocricy? Do explain. Speaking of hypocricy, I assume you hold the Volunteers of the Tan War in the same disdain you hold the PIRA, saying as they all carried out a minority of attacks which can only be described as dispicable?

And speaking of pathetic, I find it pathetic that you cannot retract your statement even when faced with quotes which disprove what you said.

Your hypocrisy is dripping out of your own post. You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones. But we are not allowed mention other recent republican murders. It could hardly be more hypocritical.

[sheamy]

Is this thread not over? I only see 'stoops', 'weasels' and 'nordy auld feckers' recently (sounds like the same subject to me). The people of 3/4 of Ireland have spoken and they have said.......?

[Nally Stand]

P.S. I suppose you will now retract your pathetically dishonest claim that I think I am the only one who has ever been inflicted with hurt?

Pathetically dishonest? If you are in the business of justifying some republican inflicted deaths and not others you should at least be able to deal with the question. Some of us find it hard to discern between one innocent victim and another, but we would view them all as innocent.

So to rephrase you, if I don't think ALL of the IRAs attacks were unjustified, it is perfectly reasonable to tell me that I think I am the only one who has had hurt inflicted upon? I have provided quotes which demonstrate how I acknowledge hurt on all sides so don't try to make excuses to defend your disgusting claim.

My claim was based on your pathetical and all too typical attack when faced with your own hypocrisy.

My own hypocricy? Do explain. Speaking of hypocricy, I assume you hold the Volunteers of the Tan War in the same disdain you hold the PIRA, saying as they all carried out a minority of attacks which can only be described as dispicable?

And speaking of pathetic, I find it pathetic that you cannot retract your statement even when faced with quotes which disprove what you said.

Your hypocrisy is dripping out of your own post. You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones. But we are not allowed mention other recent republican murders. It could hardly be more hypocritical.

The difference Muppet, is that for the first time, there is an opportunity to achieve equality and a 32 county republic by peaceful means. This was not possible in the 1920's or in the 1970's. Again using the murder of my friend only a few months ago as a justification to call me a hypocrite demonstrates just how low you are prepared to stoop.

Any chance you could answer the points in my last post by the way?

[muppet]

P.S. I suppose you will now retract your pathetically dishonest claim that I think I am the only one who has ever been inflicted with hurt?

Pathetically dishonest? If you are in the business of justifying some republican inflicted deaths and not others you should at least be able to deal with the question. Some of us find it hard to discern between one innocent victim and another, but we would view them all as innocent.

So to rephrase you, if I don't think ALL of the IRAs attacks were unjustified, it is perfectly reasonable to tell me that I think I am the only one who has had hurt inflicted upon? I have provided quotes which demonstrate how I acknowledge hurt on all sides so don't try to make excuses to defend your disgusting claim.

My claim was based on your pathetical and all too typical attack when faced with your own hypocrisy.

My own hypocricy? Do explain. Speaking of hypocricy, I assume you hold the Volunteers of the Tan War in the same disdain you hold the PIRA, saying as they all carried out a minority of attacks which can only be described as dispicable?

And speaking of pathetic, I find it pathetic that you cannot retract your statement even when faced with quotes which disprove what you said.

Your hypocrisy is dripping out of your own post. You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones. But we are not allowed mention other recent republican murders. It could hardly be more hypocritical.

The difference Muppet, is that for the first time, there is an opportunity to achieve equality and a 32 county republic by peaceful means. This was not possible in the 1920's or in the 1970's. Again using the murder of my friend only a few months ago as a justification to call me a hypocrite demonstrates just how low you are prepared to stoop.

Any chance you could answer the points in my last post by the way?

Another U-turn. Southerners have been blamed on this thread for something that now turns out was not possible?

I have answered both questions but your blinkers won't allow you to see.

The Tan war was 90 years ago. It affected my family similar to probably most here, but it is ancient history.

Secondly you are the one who is justifying murder not me. I am happy to condemn them all and sympathize with all of their families and friends. But there is no hierarchy.

[sheamy]

You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones.

that, my friend, is what the 26 county state was founded on. If gaaboard.com was about then, they'd say the same thing. You won't agree but I want you to tell me why...

[Nally Stand]

P.S. I suppose you will now retract your pathetically dishonest claim that I think I am the only one who has ever been inflicted with hurt?

Pathetically dishonest? If you are in the business of justifying some republican inflicted deaths and not others you should at least be able to deal with the question. Some of us find it hard to discern between one innocent victim and another, but we would view them all as innocent.

So to rephrase you, if I don't think ALL of the IRAs attacks were unjustified, it is perfectly reasonable to tell me that I think I am the only one who has had hurt inflicted upon? I have provided quotes which demonstrate how I acknowledge hurt on all sides so don't try to make excuses to defend your disgusting claim.

My claim was based on your pathetical and all too typical attack when faced with your own hypocrisy.

My own hypocricy? Do explain. Speaking of hypocricy, I assume you hold the Volunteers of the Tan War in the same disdain you hold the PIRA, saying as they all carried out a minority of attacks which can only be described as dispicable?

And speaking of pathetic, I find it pathetic that you cannot retract your statement even when faced with quotes which disprove what you said.

Your hypocrisy is dripping out of your own post. You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones. But we are not allowed mention other recent republican murders. It could hardly be more hypocritical.

The difference Muppet, is that for the first time, there is an opportunity to achieve equality and a 32 county republic by peaceful means. This was not possible in the 1920's or in the 1970's. Again using the murder of my friend only a few months ago as a justification to call me a hypocrite demonstrates just how low you are prepared to stoop.

Any chance you could answer the points in my last post by the way?

Another U-turn. Southerners have been blamed on this thread for something that now turns out was not possible?

I have answered both questions but your blinkers won't allow you to see.

The Tan war was 90 years ago. It affected my family similar to probably most here, but it is ancient history.

Secondly you are the one who is justifying murder not me. I am happy to condemn them all and sympathize with all of their families and friends. But there is no hierarchy.

The Tan war was 90 years ago indeed. Does that make it irrelevant? That would make a convenient cop-out. It won the freedom you enjoy today, so I'd say it is still relevant. I am asking a simple question, if you regard the PIRA as murderers based on a generalisation, do you also regard the Old IRA as murderers?

Also, bearing in mind I provided quotes where I outline my acknowledgement of hurt on all sides, I'd still love to know why you won't retract your claim that I think I'm the only one who has been hurt.

[Trout]

I would say Provo Nally thought events like Kingsmill and Enniskillen were great jobs, I can just imagine him cheering as it came on the news. Of course now the mealy mouthed routine is it was "wrong" and " shouldn't have happened".

[Nally Stand]

 

[muppet]

You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones.

that, my friend, is what the 26 county state was founded on. If gaaboard.com was about then, they'd say the same thing. You won't agree but I want you to tell me why...

That was a part of what the 26 county state was founded on. Sadly it is what some people think was the only reason the 26 became independent. Part of that was because of what followed. The men with the guns then turned on each other and the winners took power and as usual wrote the history.

The War of Independence is estimated to have cost around 1,400 lives. While obviously tragic it must be obvious that such a relatively small loss of life was hardly enough to drive the Brits out of the 26 on its own.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Is this thread not over? I only see 'stoops', 'weasels' and 'nordy auld feckers' recently (sounds like the same subject to me). The people of 3/4 of Ireland have spoken and they have said.......?

4/5

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

I get the same feeling everytime you post. 

[sheamy]

You justify recent republican murders on the basis of ancient ones.

that, my friend, is what the 26 county state was founded on. If gaaboard.com was about then, they'd say the same thing. You won't agree but I want you to tell me why...

That was a part of what the 26 county state was founded on. Sadly it is what some people think was the only reason the 26 became independent. Part of that was because of what followed. The men with the guns then turned on each other and the winners took power and as usual wrote the history.

The War of Independence is estimated to have cost around 1,400 lives. While obviously tragic it must be obvious that such a relatively small loss of life was hardly enough to drive the Brits out of the 26 on its own.

ok, we've now established the 26 county state was founded on murder but the sell by date has since passed...as for 'While obviously tragic it must be obvious that such a relatively small (insert:1,400) loss of life was hardly enough to drive the Brits out of the 26 on its own', can you explain that a little more to me?

[Malvinas]

Sean Gallagher and Four Wheel Drives

I've got back into the habit of listening to the Matt Cooper's excellent drive time show on Today FM. Last Monday, as I drove home from work through torrential rain, I tuned in expecting a further update on the race for the Aras. Instead, Matt was discussing the biblical weather we'd been having with a driving expert, who was explaining the best way to deal with on road flooding. The night before, on a back road in the wilds of West Tyrone, I'd taken a chance on a puddle which turned out to be a bit more of a puddle than I'd thought. With an MOT test set for later in the week I was still worried that I'd done untold damage to the car and so Matt's expert had my attention.

As you'd expect the expert told us listeners that if in any doubt, we shouldn't even attempt to drive through a flooded stretch of road in the first place. Then, maybe recognising that when most of us do get stuck on a back road in the back arse of nowhere that we're more likely to take the plunge than turn back, Matt asked him what the maximum depth was that a car could survive unscathed from. The expert said that anything above door level was a no no. However, if you were driving a standard four wheel drive, and you hit the floodwater hard and fast and with sufficient skill, you could get through a far higher depth unscathed. In this case a pocket of air forms between the vehicle and the water to sufficiently protect it for long enough to get through. However, the expert stressed that such a manoeuvre was only really for the skilled professional, and if attempted by normal drivers like ourselves would leave us in the ditch.

I was reminded of the discussion when watching Sean Gallagher's implosion later on that night on RTE's Frontline programme. Up until then, the majority of Sean's rivals had found themselves skidding off the rails at one time or another throughout the campaign. While Mary Davis may have envisaged a Penelope Pitstop run to the park, the press laughed at her posters and christened her Quango Queen. Meanwhile, Dana was submerged by citizenship issues and family scandals. With the notorious clemency letters David Norris' run had been sunk before it started. Most agreed that the election had really caught fire with the entrance of Martin McGuinness, but had then got bogged down by a debate not necessarily about McGuinness' own past or suitability for the presidency, but on the northern troubles and the IRA's role in them. Meanwhile, Gay Mitchell had been so concerned with McGuinness that he had taken his eye off his own steering wheel. And while Michael D Higgins had managed to stay on the right track, he'd kept the head down so much he hadn't realised that Gallagher had crept up on his inside and overtaken him.

Backed by a shrewd campaign team which included ex Fianna Fail and SDLP strategists, Sean Gallagher had managed to avoid the early pile ups which had put paid to the Davis and Dana campaigns. Once things had started to get murky he had been able to time his surge, shuttling forward in the polls as the rest either stalled or drifted backwards. A protective film engulfed his run, and any negativity concerning his previous businesses or Fianna Fail links just bounced off.

Not that there was much negativity aimed in the direction of Sean Gallagher by the southern media. Once McGuinness had entered the fray, they had been caught like the proverbial rabbit in the headlights, transfixed by the apocalyptic prospect of a future seven years if he were to prosper. Any diversion from McGuinness was filled by David Norris' love life or Dana's blowout. Gallagher took full advantage.

That was until the last Monday's Frontline debate. With the heavens opening and the floodwaters rising outside, the electorate were settling down in preparation for the final TV debate. From a partially flooded hotel on the outskirts of Dublin, with just ninety minutes before the cameras were to start rolling, Martin McGuinness was taking a telephone call, and if not a piece of Kryptonite, it was enough to break the air pocket around Sean Gallagher. Indeed under normal circumstances what McGuinness had was has fairly insignificant. The idea of political fundraisers promising access to party leaders in exchange for hefty donations is fairly commonplace. It was Gallagher's reaction that sunk him.

Following the eight long minutes in which he had to compose a response he denied all knowledge of cheque, photo or who Martin was talking about, stressing that he "had never been involved in that culture." McGuinness warned prophetically that he was "in deep deep trouble."

It was Pat Kenny who brought the matter up again after a commercial break some 47 minutes later. Like the child given the chance to come clean, Kenny informed Gallagher that given the possibility that the cheque donee was prepared to come forward, did he wish to change his story. Gallagher told us that he had, "always tried to stay above negative campaigning", which is a fairly understandable tactic from someone with a fair amount of skeletons in his closet.

By this stage Sean's memory had somehow improved. His team had received a query during the week and had sent details back to the newspaper in response. The individual in question was a convicted smuggler who had rented a room to Gerry Adams for the last election, a typical associate for the Shinners. But Pat Kenny was not finished. Why then, he asked, had Gallagher attended the house of such a character and invited him to a Fianna Fail do. Raising the ghost of the 1990 election, Gallagher said that he had "no recollection" of these events. Then he mentioned the dreaded 'E' word. The rest, as they say, is history.

Some commentators have asked why Sean Gallagher did not respond in kind to Martin McGuinness. Why did he not ask him about the army council, the arms dumps, the Northern Bank? This misses the point completely. It should not have been left to McGuinness to establish Gallagher's links to Fianna Fail. It should not have been left to the man in the audience to establish that of the 100 jobs created by Gallagher that only 20 remain. It should not have been left to the woman in the audience to question the leader of the polls in the last week of a presidential election on company malpractice.

In an election held in the era of 24 hour coverage the Irish media fell asleep at the wheel. Gallagher said himself that a newspaper had made enquiries concerning Hugh Morgan's cheque in the week before the TV debate but no action had been taken. Details of his Company accounts and staff history were freely available, yet seemingly unchecked.

From Miriam O'Callaghan to Vincent Browne, from the Irish Times to the Indo, there had been a concerted campaign to derail the run of a candidate who never realistically had any hope of winning and who ended up in third place. Meanwhile, a failed property tycoon and bagman for the party who had brought the country's economy to its knees came within touching distance of the Aras.

That Sean Gallagher ended up in the ditch after the Frontline programme was not Martin McGuinness' fault.

Nor was it Pat Kenny's.

The fact is that he should have been there a lot sooner.


http://cowped.blogspot.com/

[Evil Genius]

If the puddle on the road was that deep, how come Michael D negotiated it safely?

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

If the puddle on the road was that deep, how come Michael D negotiated it safely?

He must have been driving a citroen.