Sinn Fein vs Sieg Heil - Spot the Difference

[red hander]

So neither of you can tell the difference between a declared war between the armed services of sovereign states, like the First World War, and committing murder. Says a lot for your addled outlooks.

As for hardstation's attempt to label Henry Allingham, one of the last remaining First World War veterans when he passed away last week, as a murderer - what a lowlife action. Plumbing new depths again, well done.

But it's fine for you to call Joe Cahill a murderer, a lowlife action.  

Joe Cahill was convicted of the murder of a policeman - he went out with an IRA murder gang to murder a police officer.

Pretty far removed from the uniformed servicemen of the First World War.

Joe Cahill was a murderer, that's simply a fact, and that's without even getting into his subseqent terrorist "career" leading the PIRA death squads.

Convicted of "murder" by a government/judiciary who kept it's hold on Ireland, a country it has no right to be near, by murdering.  

The government and judiciary were from Ireland. And Constable Murphy, Cahill's victim, was Irish, too.

Where the poles, french etc who fought back against Nazi Germany after their country was invaded murderers too?

No, they weren't. They were fighting in the Second World War. You remember the whole "World War" thing, covered above?

[The fact that you say he was a murderer doesnt make it so, no matter how many times you can squeeze in the word.

Correct. The fact he participated in the murder of a policeman, and was convicted of this crime, makes it so.

And he is recognised as such under the law of this country today (the law of which is itself recognised by among others, the Irish Government, the EU, the United Nations and for that matter your erstwhile ideological allies in Sinn Féin)

Do yourself a favour, you and hardstation both - if you want to try to defend Cahill, feel free. But it doesn't do your case much good to try to besmirch and slur a recently-deceased First World War veteran.

Classic British logic which if carried through makes George Washington a terrorist ... Irish resistance fighters have just as much right to fight for Irish freedom as French resistance fighters had to fight for French freedom... what's more, if the Nazis had invaded England in 1940, English freedom fighters would have had the right to fight the invaders for English freedom

[Rossfan]

I cannot remeber the Brits decalring "war" on the people of Afghanistan or Iraq.
Does that mean by MW's logic that all the deaths there are murder?
When will be heaving the trials?

[EC Unique]

One mans hero = another mans murderer.

You will find this fits most conflicts throughout the world and down through history.

[Evil Genius]

This particular tangent has seen comparisons made between WWI veteran Henry Allingham and Joe Cahill.

I don't suppose too many people (in the ROI, at least) know much about Allingham, but he was exceptional not just for his longevity, but for his humanity and compassion in seeing that the sacrifice of his fellow veterans (and enemy combatants too, btw) were never forgotten by succeeding generations. In doing so, he never showed any bitterness or hatred, merely sadness, and if he ever felt guilt, it was only in that he had survived whilst so many others perished.

Of course, I would expect that more people on here know about Joe Cahill, but going by the lack of objection to the reverence certain posters are according him, it seems that they may not.

Cahill first came to public attention in 1942, when he was part of a gang which murdered a working class, Catholic father of nine from the Falls Road, Patrick Murphy, for the sole "crime" of becoming a policeman.  

Throughout his subsequent "career", Cahill was notable for his consistently adhering to the hardest of lines, always scorning, indeed violently opposing, those Republicans who were less extreme than he. By 1970, he had become Belfast leader of the (Provisional) IRA, a period which saw many of their most grisly crimes, such as the Abercorn bombing*, right through to his suspected ordering of the bombing campaign in England which included the Warrington Bomb**.

Perhaps most notable of all was his involvement in, and reaction to, Bloody Friday***, when over 20 bombs were planted in Belfast, many with no warning, resulting in the murders of nine innocent civilians and injury to nearly 150 others, many of them horribly mutilated. As this extract from Cahill's Obituary in the Guardian records:

"Another peace initiative, this time involving Northern Ireland Secretary William Whitelaw, foundered in July 1972. An Irish MP met Cahill at a house in Dublin in a last-ditch bid to save a further ceasefire, but during the conversation Cahill, clearly forewarned, interrupted the pleading and turned on the television news, where first reports of the Bloody Friday bombings, which left 11 dead in 26 explosions, were coming in. 'That's the way it's got to be,' said an unapologetic Cahill. The MP rushed outside and was sick in the garden"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2004/jul/26/guardianobituaries.northernireland

To compare someone like Henry Allingham to a bigoted, pyschopathic monster like Cahill says everything about the people making such comparisons, and nothing whatever about Allingham.


* - http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sunday-life/news/bulldozers-move-in-on-abercorn-13905084.html
** - http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/20/newsid_2544000/2544121.stm
*** - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/2132219.stm

[pintsofguinness]

...and you dare to call me a terrorist, while you look down your gun, when I think of all the deeds that you have done...

[A Quinn Martin Production]

This particular tangent has seen comparisons made between WWI veteran William Allingham and Joe Cahill.

I don't suppose too many people (in the ROI, at least) know much about Allingham, but he was exceptional not just for his longevity, but for his humanity and compassion in seeing that the sacrifice of his fellow veterans (and enemy combattants too, btw) were never forgotten by succeeding generations. In dpoing so, he never showed any bitterness or hatred, merely sadness, and if he ever felt guilt, it was only in that he had survived whilst so many others perished.

Of course, I would expect that more people on here know about Joe Cahill, but going by the lack of objection to the reverence certain posters are according him, it seems that they may not.

Cahill first came to public attention in 1942, when he was part of a gang which murdered a working class, Cathoic father of nine from the Falls Road, Patrick Murphy, for the sole "crime" of becoming a policeman.  

Throughout his subsequent "career", Cahill was notable for his consistently adhering to the hardest of lines, always scorning, indeed violently opposing, those Repuiblicans who were less extreme than he. By 1970, he had become Belfast leader of the (Provisional) IRA, a period which saw many of their most grisly crimes, such as the Abercorn bombing*, right through to his suspected ordering of the bombing campaign in England which included the Warrington Bomb**.

Perhaps most notable of all was his involvement in, and reaction to, Bloody Friday***, when over 20 bombs were planted in Belfast, many with no warning, resulting in the murders of nine innocent civilians and injury to nearly 150 others, many of them horribly mutilated. As this extract from Cahill's Obituary in the Guardian records:

"Another peace initiative, this time involving Northern Ireland Secretary William Whitelaw, foundered in July 1972. An Irish MP met Cahill at a house in Dublin in a last-ditch bid to save a further ceasefire, but during the conversation Cahill, clearly forewarned, interrupted the pleading and turned on the television news, where first reports of the Bloody Friday bombings, which left 11 dead in 26 explosions, were coming in. 'That's the way it's got to be,' said an unapologetic Cahill. The MP rushed outside and was sick in the garden"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2004/jul/26/guardianobituaries.northernireland

To compare someone like William Allingham to a bigoted, pyschopathic monster like Cahill says everything about the people making such comparisons, and nothing whatever about Allingham.


* - http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sunday-life/news/bulldozers-move-in-on-abercorn-13905084.html
** - http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/20/newsid_2544000/2544121.stm
*** - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/2132219.stm

William Allingham...is he not a poet from Ballyshannon??  Right enough some of his stuff was murder

[Evil Genius]

William Allingham...is he not a poet from Ballyshannon??  Right enough some of his stuff was murder

Oops! I meant, of course, Henry Allingham.

As it happens, I was reading about some Irish poets the other day, and I think William A got a name-check:

UP the airy mountain,   
  Down the rushy glen,   
We daren't go a-hunting   
  For fear of little men;

I had an Aunt who somehow believed in that sort of bollox - my poor mother (her sister) was mortified...

[A Quinn Martin Production]

William Allingham...is he not a poet from Ballyshannon??  Right enough some of his stuff was murder

Oops! I meant, of course, Henry Allingham.

As it happens, I was reading about some Irish poets the other day, and I think William A got a name-check:

UP the airy mountain,   
  Down the rushy glen,   
We daren't go a-hunting   
  For fear of little men;

I had an Aunt who somehow believed in that sort of bollox - my poor mother (her sister) was mortified...

Which one owned the hotel in Bundoran??

[deiseach]

To compare someone like William Allingham to a bigoted, pyschopathic monster like Cahill says everything about the people making such comparisons, and nothing whatever about Allingham.

Two men react to two different situations in, well, different ways. Very useful contribution. I should post a comparision between Daniel O'Connell and Reginald Dyer as a contrast between the peace-loving nature of Irish nationalism and the blood-thirsty, civilian-slaughtering bent of British imperialism

[pintsofguinness]

Btw EG, I'm still waiting on you to tell me why it was ok for Churchill to buddy up to Stalin.

Or are you still ignoring the hard questions?

[red hander]

Btw EG, I'm still waiting on you to tell me why it was ok for Churchill to buddy up to Stalin.

Or are you still ignoring the hard questions?

Don't be holding your breath

[Evil Genius]

Btw EG, I'm still waiting on you to tell me why it was ok for Churchill to buddy up to Stalin.

Or are you still ignoring the hard questions?

See my post of July 21st, 12.20 am (post #220) - or are you still ignoring the "hard answers"? 

[Evil Genius]

Btw EG, I'm still waiting on you to tell me why it was ok for Churchill to buddy up to Stalin.

Or are you still ignoring the hard questions?

Don't be holding your breath

You might benefit from looking at post #220 as well...

[pintsofguinness]

EG you never answered me, do you condem Churchill for his links with Stalin?

Absolutely not, essentially for three reasons.

First, whilst Stalin was personally every bit as nasty as Hitler, nonetheless Communism is/was not so inherently evil as Fascism (imo). That is because if you look at the Marxist principles* which underlie Communism (or should do, at any rate), they are basically reasonable, if not even admirable. Therefore, when Stalin was conducting his reign of terror, he was breaking  his own Constitution and Laws. Whereas, when Hitler was doing so, he was doing so entirely in accordance with  Fascist Law, designed as it was to legitimise Racism and anti-Semitism etc.

Secondly and more importantly, Churchill's co-operation with Stalin was anything but willing (unlike, say, Sean Russell's co-operation with the Nazis). For when the UK declared war on Germany in September 1939, it did so alongside France (only), following the German invasion of Poland (the three countries had a tripartite mutual defence Pact). At that stage, the USSR was actually an ally  of Germany, under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed just a few weeks previously. Indeed, not only did Stalin use the German attack on Poland and the West as a pretext for making territorial gains of his own in Eastern Europe, but the two countries actually assisted each other, with German arms and machinery going to the USSR and oil, in desperately short supply in Germany due to the British Naval blockade, going the other way.

Of course, the Mol-Ribb Pact was a mere convenience for both parties, since neither was yet ready to take on the other. Nonetheless, Churchill did not conclude Britain's alliance with the USSR until after  Hitler commenced his surprise attack on the USSR (Operation Barbarossa) in June 1941. At which point, whilst Churchill would 'unsay no word' of his previous clear and unequivocal opposition to Communism, nonetheless this was for him a direct attack on the Russian people by a greater evil, so that  'the cause of any Russian fighting for his hearth and home is the cause of free men and free peoples in every quarter of the globe'.

Finally, if you study what drove Hitler on, it was the inherently racist-motivated desire for Lebensraum for the German people, to be carved out by force in Eastern Europe. It was not ever his design to go to war with Britain, but when Britain surprised him by declaring war over Poland, he hoped to force the UK to sue for peace by the threat of invasion. Indeed, had the UK permitted him a free hand on the Continent, Hitler would happily have allowed us to keep our overseas Empire unmolested. By contrast, Soviet Communism was a declared enemy of Western-style democracy, wherever it was manifested.

Therefore had he been operating purely out of self-interest, nothing would have suited Churchill and the UK more than to watch the two great enemies of Democracy fight each other to a standstill in Europe, whilst the British Empire, undrained by any war effort, continued to grow ever stronger elsewhere. Consequently, I have no doubt whatever over the righteousness of the the UK's strategic wartime alliance with the USSR, any more than I have of its prosecution within NATO, of the Cold War against the USSR, in the decades which followed the Axis defeat in 1945.

And if you want to know what Churchill thought about that,  I suggest you read the following:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/churchill-iron.html


* - "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs" etc

I do apologise, I completley missed your answer (at the second time I'd to ask my question).

Nice try but it's really irrelevant.  It's irrelevant what communisms true principle where (you're right, they didnt involve slaughtering) the point is stalin slaughtered a hell of a lot more people then Hitler.  It didnt stop Churchill being his buddy though.  Fact is, chuchill united with a mass murderer to fight a common enemy.  If you want to convince us he was right and Russell (if he even did help the germans) was wrong you'll have to do better than talking about communisms true principles. 

[red hander]

Btw EG, I'm still waiting on you to tell me why it was ok for Churchill to buddy up to Stalin.

Or are you still ignoring the hard questions?

Don't be holding your breath

You might benefit from looking at post #220 as well...

I did look at the post, unfortunately I dozed off after about the third paragraph ... having looked at it again with matchsticks propping my eyelids, it still doesn't answer the question you were asked