Sinn Fein vs Sieg Heil - Spot the Difference

[Myles Na G.]

It's ironic that the people on whingeing about attacks on orange halls (which I condemn, BTW) on another thread happily - (joyously in MnaG's case) - support the same sort of attacks on a statue in a Dublin park ... hypocrites indeed

In fact, I've made absolutely no comment at all on the attacks on Orange Halls, but you carry on posting shite. 

I'll have a very long way to go to equal the disgusting, unforgiveable shite you've posted this week ... and ending every one of your posts from now to eternity with that wee winking symbol you so love won't change that fact pal

Like I said, carry on posting shite. 

[carribbear]

Like I said, carry on posting shite. 

Are you planning on giving lessons?

[Main Street]

I think Paisleys rants were as close as you'd get to Hitlers

Havent time to draw a little moustache but you get my drift

Maybe they are as close as you would get to Hitler.

His speeches/rants are a direct rip off from KKK ideologues.

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

Shit article, has no-one ever told him that he has more chance of swaying peoples opinions if he were to give an unbiased, balanced, level headed investigative report!

You might have more chance of swaying peoples opinions if you were to give an unbiased, balanced and level-headed critique of his piece, rather than merely branding it a "shit article"...

Ah ffs EG even you can see this article as the rant it is - Omagh mentioned 3 times at least and lost count of the insults and crying anti-semetic references for the guilt aspect, he was clutching at straws.

[deiseach]

Hard to take being lectured from a man who can't control his calorie intake

So the fact that he's a fattie automatically means his opinions don't count, then?

That seems a pretty fatuous, if not fat-headed, comment to make..

No, I mean that Ian O'Doherty lectures everyone on everything in the most excoriating language possible, yet he can't even sort out his own life to the point where he is not obese. For all of the abuse hurled at politicians, at least they got off their arses and try to do something about the world's problems. Clearly he can't even get off his arse, full stop.

[mylestheslasher]

Ian O Doherty is a nasty little bollix that thinks everything in the world is black and white. Anyone who watched his self righteous performance on the late late show "debate" eon the senate would know that. Intestingly on that show he spoke at length about the uselessness of the senate (I'm not saying he was totally wrong) when it transpired later in the show that he never had been in the senate to observe its workings. That tells you a lot about what sort of journalist he is.

[Rossfan]

Those who can...do. Those who can't.... write (usually for Tony O'Reilly's Rags)

[GalwayBayBoy]

Ian O Doherty is a nasty little bollix that thinks everything in the world is black and white. Anyone who watched his self righteous performance on the late late show "debate" eon the senate would know that. Intestingly on that show he spoke at length about the uselessness of the senate (I'm not saying he was totally wrong) when it transpired later in the show that he never had been in the senate to observe its workings. That tells you a lot about what sort of journalist he is.

I would have Ian O'Doherty up there as the Irish version of Richard Littlejohn.

Basically a complete c**k with a laptop.

[MW]

Id be interested in hearing your response to Lar Naparka 's question myles

He posed more than one, but his final query: 'Was HMG acting in clear and deliberate breach of the accepted rules of war or was it not?' My answer to that would be a clear and unequivocal yes - I think the British acted outside the normally accepted rules of warfare. Contrary to the perceived wisdom on here, I am not an apologist either for British foreign policy, nor for the actions of the British armed forces. Having said that, I would go on to point out that it was not just the British who acted outside the rules at this particular time in Irish history. When the British had packed up and gone home, there was the Irish civil war. More people died in this conflict between erstwhile comrades than had been killed in the Tan War. Whats more, some of the brutality and the atrocities carried out by Irishmen on Irishmen made the Black and Tans look like the Boy Scouts. 

I've very little problem with your observations here, Myles. However, while you may have most of your facts right in the second part of your post that I'm quoting above; I don't see the relevance of this part at all.
In my original post I posed some queries alright but they were directed at the role played by British armed forces, with the full backing of their government, in a campaign that went on or a long period of time.
I had read some of MW's recent posts and I think it's fair to say that he has pointed out that international laws do exist and they outline the conditions under which the forces of a sovereign state may wage war against the forces of another sovereign state. I don't think that any country could start a war without the expectation that some of its people will kill others on the opposing side.
I've picked out some of his comments that I have selected randomly- I have only started reading this topic in the last few days and I haven't any desire to trawl back through the earlier posts. I read enough at a time when MW was very active to pose some questions.
I've no problem in saying that Constable Murphy was murdered and not killed under any convention of war.  However what happens when the roles are reversed? I'm referring to killings that were carried out by the armed forces of a sovereign state with the full knowledge of its government. The Tans/Auxies burned down the centre of Cork city. Now, the reason I'm told for this orgy of wanton destruction was that it was in response to actions by the IRA in the area.
But it was not directed at armed opponents.  Its aim was to cow the people of Cork and force IRA sympathisers in the locality to abandon their support for the 'boys.'
I doubt very much if my granny's ducks were wearing uniforms, bearing arms or involved n any sort of subversive activity when they were mowed down by a lorry load of drunken Tans. The Tans had the habit of careering at high seed through the rural roads of East Mayo, where I come from, deliberately ploughing through flocks of geese or ducks they encountered. My grandparents had the roof of their house destroyed by a burst from a Lewis gun on the same occasion.
I know that IRA atrocities certainly occurred but I'm not referring to them here.
They could well be the subject of another discussion but they were not covered by an article of the Geneva Convention or any other aspirational waffle anyone would care to mention.
The Tans on the other hand were.
My point is that I see eff all merit in referring to any sort of protocol when the signatories don't bother to abide by the rules. There have been numerous acts of illegal actions carried out by sovereign states around the world that broke any accepted protocol in existence. The Americans in Vietnam and later in Iraq come to mind, but I don't see any evidence that anything the Americans or indeed the British may have carried out elsewhere had the the official blessing of their respective governments.
I'm reproducing some of MW's comments here that set me thinking. I'm not in any way having a go at MW by doing this. It's just that he set me thinking...

Then you live in a wierd fantasy world, because international law on war, including the Geneva Convention, does exist.
Shoot any enemy serviceman on the battlefield who isn't wounded, surrendering or a medic. In a nutshell, that's allowed under international law in a declared war. Pretty obvious to 99% of people out there..
Another stupid comment. Constable Murphy was a policeman, not a serviceman, his killers were not in the armed forces of any sovereign state, and they were neither uniformed nor openly bearing arms.

Will get back to you when I get a moment LN - plenty to discuss there!

[Evil Genius]

Shit article, has no-one ever told him that he has more chance of swaying peoples opinions if he were to give an unbiased, balanced, level headed investigative report!

You might have more chance of swaying peoples opinions if you were to give an unbiased, balanced and level-headed critique of his piece, rather than merely branding it a "shit article"...

Ah ffs EG even you can see this article as the rant it is - Omagh mentioned 3 times at least and lost count of the insults and crying anti-semetic references for the guilt aspect, he was clutching at straws.

Prominent amongst the supporters of this monument to a Nazi Collaborator are the "32 County Sovereignty Movement". Casual readers may not be aware of the fact that the 32CSM is the political wing of the Real IRA, most notorious for the slaughter at Omagh. Therefore O'Doherty is quite entitled to put them into their proper context as the sort of vermin we are dealing with.

Speaking of whom, here is just the latest example of what the 32CSM is getting up to, in their quest to create a 32 County Ireland which is fully inclusive and welcoming to all...

http://www.derryjournal.com/journal/39Reckless-dishonest-coattrailing-exercise39.5534175.jp
Published Date: 07 August 2009
By Ian Cullen

Dissident republican plans for an anti-internment rally which will clash with tomorrow's Apprentice Boys parade in Derry have been branded "reckless and irresponsible" by Bogside residents.
The 32 County Sovereignty Movement - the political wing of the Real IRA - is planning a rally for 2.30pm at Free Derry Corner at the the height of the Apprentice Boys march through Derry city centre.

The move has sparked fears among Bogside residents who say they're concerned about the potential for violent clashes.

Donncha Mac Niallais, spokesperson for the Bogside Residents Group (BRG), has urged the 32CSM to explain its reasons for choosing to hold the commemoration a day short of the anniversary of the introduction of internment on August 9, 1971.

"We can only conclude that it is deliberately timed to coincide with the Apprentice Boys march," said the former republican prisoner. "If that is the case, the timing is reckless, irresponsible and an exercise in coat-trailing. The stated purpose of the rally is dishonest," he added.

In a statement to the 'Journal', the 32CSM rejected criticism of their plans.

"The Sovereignty Movement has held numerous protests in the Bogside on Saturday afternoons and this one is designed to mark the anniversary of the introduction of internment and protest against its continued use. To suggest that we are causing problems is RUC propaganda.

"We are not going to change our plans to facilitate a sectarian hate march or a British security operation."

Meanwhile, police sources have revealed that 'spit barriers' are to be erected for tomorrow's Apprentice Boys parade in light of the violence which erupted towards the end of the 'Twelfth' demonstration in the city on July 13.

Acting Area Commander, Chief Inspector, John Burrows, has warned that all troublemakers will be arrested.

"Intelligence leads us to believe that a small group of people are intent on causing disruption. This will not be tolerated. Officers will respond quickly to incidents that have potential to cause disorder and anyone found behaving inappropriately will be dealt with robustly."

Mayor Paul Fleming has appealed for common sense to prevail. "I would appeal to those who are bringing large crowds into Derry this coming Saturday to ensure that our city centre does not become a focus for tension, intimidation or violence."

Residents living in Fahan Street, St Columb's Wells, Joseph Place, Long Tower Court and Alexander House have appealed to parents to ensure their children are not involved in any disorder.

Their statement read: "This area has suffered badly in recent years after disturbances in the city centre which ultimately ended up on our doorsteps. Our homes have been damaged, our cars have been damaged and residents, many of whom are elderly, have been left to live in fear and general daily life has been badly disrupted."

[Main Street]

 
What next will the transparent Evil Genius throw into the mix?
Spouting on about the 32 CSM does not add to your primitive "Indo like" analysis of the historical actions of Russell.
I and others, appraise Russell for what he was and what he did.

But that's not what you really want to write about is it?

[Evil Genius]

I and others, appraise Russell for what he was and what he did.

But that's not what you really want to write about is it?

Not entirely, no. You see, if you actually read my original post on this thread, I wasn't so concerned about the long-dead Russell and his "career" as all that. (I consider him to have been a Nazi-collaborating terrorist, others deny this, c'est la vie.)

Rather, I was much more interested in the antics of his modern-day apologists in Sinn Fein and the 32CSM etc, who seek to re-write the historical record, or even airbrush it entirely, as they happily venerate any old scoundrel with sound Brit-hating credentials.

That some of these groups (SF, at any rate), also make much of their own Left-Wing credentials etc, merely serves to make their hypocrisy even more nauseating.