Free Staters and their hypocrisy on their violent, bloody past

[sid waddell]

Police killed before 1921 were members of the Crown forces.
Those killed after the setting up of An Gárda Síochána were serving an Irish State and Government.
Fianna Fáil broke away and forsook violence 1926 and were elected to Government 6 years later.
Again what did 25 years of War from 1973 to 1998 achieve that wasn't already there in 1973?

1973?
Oh, at a quess, the right to vote in a local council election even if you didn't pay rates or own a business, Fair employment legislation for starters.

It's posts like this that demonstrates how ignorant some southern posters are of what went on up here.

How would it demonstrate ignorance?

All this stuff is well known, there are any number of books, historical documentaries, podcasts etc. which can tell you the history

It most certainly does not amount to a justification for slaughtering civilians for a quarter of a century

The only reason to claim ignorance on the part of others is to claim justification for that slaughter

Otherwise the reference of supposed ignorance makes no sense

[Angelo]

Police killed before 1921 were members of the Crown forces.
Those killed after the setting up of An Gárda Síochána were serving an Irish State and Government.
Fianna Fáil broke away and forsook violence 1926 and were elected to Government 6 years later.
Again what did 25 years of War from 1973 to 1998 achieve that wasn't already there in 1973?

1973?
Oh, at a quess, the right to vote in a local council election even if you didn't pay rates or own a business, Fair employment legislation for starters.

It's posts like this that demonstrates how ignorant some southern posters are of what went on up here.

How would it demonstrate ignorance?

All this stuff is well known, there are any number of books, historical documentaries, podcasts etc. which can tell you the history

It most certainly does not amount to a justification for slaughtering civilians for a quarter of a century

The only reason to claim ignorance on the part of others is to claim justification for that slaughter

Otherwise the reference of supposed ignorance makes no sense

Yet you did all the above.

Numerous examples of it but apparently your past views warrant no scrutinty.

Just like Eoghan Harris did not want any comment on his former Worker Party past.

[Franko]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

100000 (yes, one hundred thousand) people turned up at Bobby Sands' funeral.

Between 15 and 20% of the entire nationalist population of the north.

"Very little support" says yer man.

[sid waddell]

Sad to see a poster having a breakdown in real time

It's nice to be living rent free in his head though!

Lots and lots of space in there

[sid waddell]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

100000 (yes, one hundred thousand) people turned up at Bobby Sands' funeral.

Between 15 and 20% of the entire nationalist population of the north.

"Very little support" says yer man.

That tends to happen with martyrs

A short burst of anger-driven emotional enthusiasm followed by a rapid drop off

A bit like the Manchester United protests against the Glazers

That short burst of emotional enthusiasm wasn't enough to retain the Fermanagh/South Tyrone seat at the following General Election, when it returned to Unionist control, as it stayed for the next 18 years

[Franko]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

100000 (yes, one hundred thousand) people turned up at Bobby Sands' funeral.

Between 15 and 20% of the entire nationalist population of the north.

"Very little support" says yer man.

That tends to happen with martyrs

A short burst of anger-driven emotional enthusiasm followed by a rapid drop off

A bit like the Manchester United protests against the Glazers

That short burst of emotional enthusiasm wasn't enough to retain the Fermanagh/South Tyrone seat at the following General Election, when it returned to Unionist control, as it stayed for the next 18 years

Largely irrelevant.  Those people didn't just 'lose' that sympathy.  The passage of time meant that they may just have lost the urge to physically act on it.

The other problem with this argument is that British actions topped up the nationalist "anger driven emotional enthusiasm" tank at very regular intervals.

[sid waddell]

Again what did 25 years of War from 1973 to 1998 achieve that wasn't already there in 1973?

Another two and a half thousand funerals and a quarter of a century of heartache and extra mutual hatred

[trailer]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

I agree you are talking all of the above. It is a fact that at no stage would Unionism or the British have moved without the troubles to say otherwise shows a total bias and lack of understanding. I in no way ever supported the PIRA nor agreed with violence.However they had a lot of support in the communities from which they sprung. The conflict in  NI was complicated and dirty and the nationalist community was much more nuanced in its view of the IRA than you suggest. To make the claims you are making displays at best ignorance and at worst trolling.

Bollocks. Sure Unionism signed up to Sunningdale FFS. They couldn't carry their base.
This shite that we would'nt be where we are only for PIRA is complete nonsense. Everything achieved in the GFA was agreed almost 30 years earlier. No other concessions were achieved around rights or equality.
The RA just enjoyed the murder so they on doing it... even after the GFA.

[sid waddell]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

100000 (yes, one hundred thousand) people turned up at Bobby Sands' funeral.

Between 15 and 20% of the entire nationalist population of the north.

"Very little support" says yer man.

That tends to happen with martyrs

A short burst of anger-driven emotional enthusiasm followed by a rapid drop off

A bit like the Manchester United protests against the Glazers

That short burst of emotional enthusiasm wasn't enough to retain the Fermanagh/South Tyrone seat at the following General Election, when it returned to Unionist control, as it stayed for the next 18 years

Largely irrelevant.  Those people didn't just 'lose' that sympathy.  The passage of time meant that they may just have lost the urge to physically act on it.

The other problem with this argument is that British actions topped up the nationalist "anger driven emotional enthusiasm" tank at very regular intervals.

They had sympathy for somebody who died on hunger strike

It's a fairly natural human emotion

Which did not amount to supporting the Ra

Sands became a folk hero like Che Guevara, but again that doesn't amount to support for the Ra

I doubt most of those who went to his funeral could name the other nine who died

The short burst of enthusiasm in 1981 was frittered away by atrocity after atrocity

The INLA were active around this time too and it often puzzles me how the INLA's reputation has never been rehabilitated, given that they did the exact same things the Ra did

That's branding for ya, or lack of it

[Itchy]

Did a bomb go off close to your head Sid to turn you from a hard-core violence supporting Sinn Feiner to a little Fine Gael west brit inside 7 years. 7 years in peace times I might add.

[Franko]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

100000 (yes, one hundred thousand) people turned up at Bobby Sands' funeral.

Between 15 and 20% of the entire nationalist population of the north.

"Very little support" says yer man.

That tends to happen with martyrs

A short burst of anger-driven emotional enthusiasm followed by a rapid drop off

A bit like the Manchester United protests against the Glazers

That short burst of emotional enthusiasm wasn't enough to retain the Fermanagh/South Tyrone seat at the following General Election, when it returned to Unionist control, as it stayed for the next 18 years

Largely irrelevant.  Those people didn't just 'lose' that sympathy.  The passage of time meant that they may just have lost the urge to physically act on it.

The other problem with this argument is that British actions topped up the nationalist "anger driven emotional enthusiasm" tank at very regular intervals.

They had sympathy for somebody who died on hunger strike

It's a fairly natural human emotion

Which did not amount to supporting the Ra

Sands became a folk hero like Che Guevara, but again that doesn't amount to support for the Ra

I doubt most of those who went to his funeral could name the other nine who died

The short burst of enthusiasm in 1981 was frittered away by atrocity after atrocity

The INLA were active around this time too and it often puzzles me how the INLA's reputation has never been rehabilitated, given that they did the exact same things the Ra did

That's branding for ya, or lack of it

Bollocks.

People don't sympathise with a martyr unless they also sympathise with his cause.

Were there many unionists in attendance?

[sid waddell]

Did a bomb go off close to your head Sid to turn you from a hard-core violence supporting Sinn Feiner to a little Fine Gael west brit inside 7 years. 7 years in peace times I might add.

West Brit is such a great argument, isn't it

When stuck for something to say, just fire out a witless insult, very persuasive

TFK is mainly a performative banter forum

The Ra thing became quite the in joke, half the forum at one point or another claimed to be in the Ra, a bit like the Rubberbandits do

I never supported atrocities against civilians

I used to think there was a logic to targetting Loyalists or Brits and RUC etc, possibly even certain hardline Unionist/Tory politicians, in that you are at least bringing the fight to those who are directly oppressing you

Some part of me probably still thinks that

But it was pointless, because you could never win

Why? Because the people never supported the Ra, simple as

And when the people don't support you, when you have no mandate, when you have no chance of winning, when your demands are totally unrealistic, any plausible moral case falls away

Atrocities against civilians were an indivisible part of the Ra's campaign, a primary modus operandi

You can't support a party that claims to campaign for social justice, but which has as its central ideology the idea that you must defend an armed campaign of which utterly pointless and civilian murder for 27 years was an integral part

I expect that will become an issue for quite a few SF supporters down South during the coming years

I mean, it's a bit rich to call out Boris Johnson for making horrible racist comments and comments which were prejudiced against gay people back in 2002, while at the same time defending the people who did Kingsmills

[Rossfan]

Police killed before 1921 were members of the Crown forces.
Those killed after the setting up of An Gárda Síochána were serving an Irish State and Government.
Fianna Fáil broke away and forsook violence 1926 and were elected to Government 6 years later.
Again what did 25 years of War from 1973 to 1998 achieve that wasn't already there in 1973?

Your last line doesn't really help the argument that people in the south are informed

Sunningdale Agreement, Power sharing and all that.
A ceasefire and going into politics by the Provos would have taken the fig leaf of "terrorism" away from Unionists to hide behind.
Terrible thing to say but if Thatcher was in charge of the British Government in 1974 she'd have given Paisley and his strike short shrift.
She fairly by passed the Unionist veto with the AI agreement in 85.

[sid waddell]

Most of us know well that Nationalists in the North had a terrible time of it, oppression, discrimination etc, beaten off the Streets by Michaelg's RUC pals etc etc.
The PIRA was an inevitable outcome.
However what did they achieve by continuing their War past 1973/4? *
They lost any sympathy in the 26 when they decided to engage in their war this side of the border too, killing Gardai etc, sectarian murder of a Protestant Senator and so on.

As for the title of the thread ...events of 100 years ago are irrelevant to most "freestaters" (sic) just as events of 1968- 98 are irrelevant to those younger voters who voted SF in the 2020 GE.

* They enabled the Brits to turn the situation from being an Irish/British political thing into a Police v Criminals matter and "those Irish fighting each other about religion"
There was definitely no justification for carrying on a war after the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement.

The title of the thread is typical of Angelo and IMO insulting. However your comments are un-informed. With out the PIRA activity reprehensible as it might have been, there would never have been any of the change in NI which led to the GFA. Unionism is intransigent and then some. The point which Angelo makes and which is totally lost because of his approach is basically the actions that formed the original Irish State were every bit as reprehensible and this is not mitigated by an extra 50 years. So call one out call all out. It is also the case that these actions were no more popular with the general population of that time. An yes the killing of the Gardai and Senator lost them support but similar atrocities occurred in the '10/'20's. So be consistent in your condemnation.

Nonsense, lies, bollocks and bullshit. Only when the PIRA fucked off could peace be achieved. PIRA had very little support within the Nationalist community. And they did far more damage to their own community than years of British oppression.

100000 (yes, one hundred thousand) people turned up at Bobby Sands' funeral.

Between 15 and 20% of the entire nationalist population of the north.

"Very little support" says yer man.

That tends to happen with martyrs

A short burst of anger-driven emotional enthusiasm followed by a rapid drop off

A bit like the Manchester United protests against the Glazers

That short burst of emotional enthusiasm wasn't enough to retain the Fermanagh/South Tyrone seat at the following General Election, when it returned to Unionist control, as it stayed for the next 18 years

Largely irrelevant.  Those people didn't just 'lose' that sympathy.  The passage of time meant that they may just have lost the urge to physically act on it.

The other problem with this argument is that British actions topped up the nationalist "anger driven emotional enthusiasm" tank at very regular intervals.

They had sympathy for somebody who died on hunger strike

It's a fairly natural human emotion

Which did not amount to supporting the Ra

Sands became a folk hero like Che Guevara, but again that doesn't amount to support for the Ra

I doubt most of those who went to his funeral could name the other nine who died

The short burst of enthusiasm in 1981 was frittered away by atrocity after atrocity

The INLA were active around this time too and it often puzzles me how the INLA's reputation has never been rehabilitated, given that they did the exact same things the Ra did

That's branding for ya, or lack of it

Bollocks.

People don't sympathise with a martyr unless they also sympathise with his cause.

Were there many unionists in attendance?

The 1916 Rising had little enough real support among the population at the time

It was only when the rebels were executed that the game changed

When the 1916 rebels were executed the Brits were now seen to be murderers and the same people that were variously thought of as hopelessly naive, fools or even wreckers a couple of weeks previously suddenly became heroes

Why? Basic human sympathy, and also because the rebels were essentially on broadly the same side of a population which wanted Home Rule, they already wanted greater autonomy from Britain, just that the Rebels were more extreme

Quite similar to the way a lot of SDLP supporters would have had sympathy for the hunger strikers because they, like the hunger strikers, were Northern Catholics

A lot of Northern Catholics in 1981 would have had a lot of sympathy for the particular demands of the hunger strikers, ie. political status

Again, that's not the same as supporting the Ra, and the proof is in SF's wide electoral failure in the decades afterwards

Most Northern Catholics understood that the Provos' campaign was unwinnable and indefensible

Can you tell me why the INLA haven't been rehabilitated like the Provos have been, you didn't answer that

Maybe they didn't have a sexy enough name or didn't dress in sharp enough suits?

[trueblue1234]

Police killed before 1921 were members of the Crown forces.
Those killed after the setting up of An Gárda Síochána were serving an Irish State and Government.
Fianna Fáil broke away and forsook violence 1926 and were elected to Government 6 years later.
Again what did 25 years of War from 1973 to 1998 achieve that wasn't already there in 1973?

1973?
Oh, at a quess, the right to vote in a local council election even if you didn't pay rates or own a business, Fair employment legislation for starters.

It's posts like this that demonstrates how ignorant some southern posters are of what went on up here.

How would it demonstrate ignorance?

All this stuff is well known, there are any number of books, historical documentaries, podcasts etc. which can tell you the history

It most certainly does not amount to a justification for slaughtering civilians for a quarter of a century

The only reason to claim ignorance on the part of others is to claim justification for that slaughter

Otherwise the reference of supposed ignorance makes no sense

Do you think there was no difference between NI from 73-98?