Free Staters and their hypocrisy on their violent, bloody past

[dublin7]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

You cannot separate the campaign which you describe as "legitimate" and the consequential deaths with which you are not "happy" with.

Should the PIRA have planted the bomb and hoped it didn't go off? Fire the bullet and hope it be blown off course? Kidnap the guy and hope he was Houdini?

So because you think an armed campaign was legitimate, that means you have to be happy about it and enjoy it? By that logic, people can only join armed groups because they like war and death, and not because they believe they are left with no alternative but to take up arms?

Francis Hughes, who died in Hunger Strike 40 years ago yesterday, talking about his involvement in attacks on British forces said "They're just kids. For God's sake, I don't want to be shooting them. I want them to bloody go home in the morning." He was perhaps the most active IRA Volunteer there was and he certaintly wasn't happy with there being a conflict.

I think it's sad that anyone had to lose a life as a result of violence here either in 1921 or 1969. The reality remains though that in each case, Irish republicans becoming involved in conflict was both inevitable and legitimate.

I don't like to hear of anyone being killed, but I'm not naive enough to believe bad things don't happen and innocent people don't get hurt/killed during conflicts such as during the Michael Collins era. It's some leap from that though to the PIRA carrying out a bombing campaign in England in civilian areas to deliberately target ordinary working people. That was a pretty sick and twisted "military strategy" to adopt and in reality it's just terrorism. They couldn't defeat the British (the many informers in their own organisation didn't help) so they adopted the most cowardly approach as possible. I don't see how you can consider that a legitimate campaign 

[Angelo]

Who was searched regularly as a teenager, spreadeagled against a wall purely because of your name and birthplace?
Who had their school buses stopped by soldiers on a regular basis, school bags searched, called stupid paddy bastards?
Who had helicopters land in their back yard, throwing stones up smashing windows?
Who had their 'fort' that they built with their mates in their back yard turned into an army surveillance point?
Who had to play football as a kid whilst guns were pointing directly at you from a look out post that wouldn't look amiss in an Eastern Bloc country under Communist rule at the time?
Who walked down the street and watched as a soldier traced their steps with his assault rifle aimed directly at them?
Who had people they grew up with shot dead or seriously injured?
Who had their car searched 18 times in the one day, 1 single day, because they lived in a ring of steel and couldn't travel 2 miles without being stopped at a permanent check point?

We may question the reason for starting the war but there is absolutely no doubt that the actions of the governing bodies and the army exacerbated the situation. I have given small examples of what my life growing up was like and I was pretty lucky as there was no sectarianism where I was.  My family and I had a few sliding doors moments whereby it could have gone either way.  I was born at the height of the Glennane Gangs killings and my father very nearly got caught up in one of the incidents. My uncle was there, my great uncle was there, people who I later in life became very friendly with lost their family members in it, yet members of the Irish establishment, MSM, government etc want us basically to do what I posted in the Waterford Whispers article, 'get over yourselves'. I was born the same day, in the same hospital, in the same ward as someone whose father was shot dead 2 days later by a loyalist gang, colluding with the security forces, whilst out wetting their head. She never saw her father. How does she get over herself?

Great post BCB.

What a lot of the out of touch free staters don't understand is how patronising it is to diminish and dismiss someone The Troubles in the callous manner they do.

It's the lowest of the low for me the way we have a cohort of arond 10 posters on here (Seafoid, Rossfan, Hound etc) who want to comment authoritatively on The Troubles, on the rights and wrongs when they have no pratical experience of living in a sectarian state. I was born in the 80s. I don't remember too much of the really dark days but I can remember checkpoints and I can remember the worry and anxiety they would have caused my parents when they came across them. I can remember the stories from my parents, my relatives, my friends parents of all the intimidation and discrimination they faced in their daily lives.

A spell under the Brits would have done them no harm maybe, their outlook might have changed.

The thing that really bothers me though is these people and the establishment parties down south who only refer to The Troubles to score political points, never out of care or to gain justice, only in a bid to slur a political rival, a political rival who was at the heart of a community who was brutalised by a sectarian state.

Have the Free Staters on here who are obsessed with the PIRA ever asked themselves why SF are the largest political party in the nationalist community in the north. Have they ever asked themselves why the generations who lived through that conflict and their children don't seem to have any truck with the Provisional campaign and why they return SF to office? No, they think we are all animals clearly, while they sit on their holes in Roscommon and Galway moralising about something they have not the faintest notion about.

[Itchy]

Who was searched regularly as a teenager, spreadeagled against a wall purely because of your name and birthplace?
Who had their school buses stopped by soldiers on a regular basis, school bags searched, called stupid paddy bastards?
Who had helicopters land in their back yard, throwing stones up smashing windows?
Who had their 'fort' that they built with their mates in their back yard turned into an army surveillance point?
Who had to play football as a kid whilst guns were pointing directly at you from a look out post that wouldn't look amiss in an Eastern Bloc country under Communist rule at the time?
Who walked down the street and watched as a soldier traced their steps with his assault rifle aimed directly at them?
Who had people they grew up with shot dead or seriously injured?
Who had their car searched 18 times in the one day, 1 single day, because they lived in a ring of steel and couldn't travel 2 miles without being stopped at a permanent check point?

We may question the reason for starting the war but there is absolutely no doubt that the actions of the governing bodies and the army exacerbated the situation. I have given small examples of what my life growing up was like and I was pretty lucky as there was no sectarianism where I was.  My family and I had a few sliding doors moments whereby it could have gone either way.  I was born at the height of the Glennane Gangs killings and my father very nearly got caught up in one of the incidents. My uncle was there, my great uncle was there, people who I later in life became very friendly with lost their family members in it, yet members of the Irish establishment, MSM, government etc want us basically to do what I posted in the Waterford Whispers article, 'get over yourselves'. I was born the same day, in the same hospital, in the same ward as someone whose father was shot dead 2 days later by a loyalist gang, colluding with the security forces, whilst out wetting their head. She never saw her father. How does she get over herself?

Excellent post. Although I was born 20 minutes drive South of the border and have family all along the border, its amazing how mild our experiences were in comparison. People further South just had very little to no interaction. But I do remember going through the border checkpoints, kids with guns pointing them into the cars. I remember being caught up in a couple of bomb scares. I find it pretty disgusting when I see and hear the apathy coming from some in the South but you know most of it comes from a place of ignorance not malice. Southern governments tried to keep us apathetic to the North I feel for fear we would drag an ill prepared republic into conflict.

[GetOverTheBar]

Who was searched regularly as a teenager, spreadeagled against a wall purely because of your name and birthplace?
Who had their school buses stopped by soldiers on a regular basis, school bags searched, called stupid paddy bastards?
Who had helicopters land in their back yard, throwing stones up smashing windows?
Who had their 'fort' that they built with their mates in their back yard turned into an army surveillance point?
Who had to play football as a kid whilst guns were pointing directly at you from a look out post that wouldn't look amiss in an Eastern Bloc country under Communist rule at the time?
Who walked down the street and watched as a soldier traced their steps with his assault rifle aimed directly at them?
Who had people they grew up with shot dead or seriously injured?
Who had their car searched 18 times in the one day, 1 single day, because they lived in a ring of steel and couldn't travel 2 miles without being stopped at a permanent check point?

We may question the reason for starting the war but there is absolutely no doubt that the actions of the governing bodies and the army exacerbated the situation. I have given small examples of what my life growing up was like and I was pretty lucky as there was no sectarianism where I was.  My family and I had a few sliding doors moments whereby it could have gone either way.  I was born at the height of the Glennane Gangs killings and my father very nearly got caught up in one of the incidents. My uncle was there, my great uncle was there, people who I later in life became very friendly with lost their family members in it, yet members of the Irish establishment, MSM, government etc want us basically to do what I posted in the Waterford Whispers article, 'get over yourselves'. I was born the same day, in the same hospital, in the same ward as someone whose father was shot dead 2 days later by a loyalist gang, colluding with the security forces, whilst out wetting their head. She never saw her father. How does she get over herself?

Excellent post. Although I was born 20 minutes drive South of the border and have family all along the border, its amazing how mild our experiences were in comparison. People further South just had very little to no interaction. But I do remember going through the border checkpoints, kids with guns pointing them into the cars. I remember being caught up in a couple of bomb scares. I find it pretty disgusting when I see and hear the apathy coming from some in the South but you know most of it comes from a place of ignorance not malice. Southern governments tried to keep us apathetic to the North I feel for fear we would drag an ill prepared republic into conflict.

I was born 20 minutes the other side of it - so little distance, such a massive difference. Some in the South will never truly understand it. It's not their fault, they just don't know.

[smelmoth]

I think it's true that people who grew up in the south do not know what it was like to have grown up in the north in that area. It can't be surprising.

It's also true that people growing up as a nationalist in crossmaglen would have had a different experience than someone growing up as a nationalist in Craigavon at the same time. Many similarities. Many differences. In some ways better. In others worse. A nationalist on the Malone Road would have had a different experience again.

I would have share some of BCB's experiences but not all. And probably had worse experiences from a purely sectarian perspective.

But we have be very careful that we don't equate accurate descriptions of the problems of NI with a justification for the violent response of some to those problems. Noting of course that the violent response very often made things worse.

There should be no denial of the abuses that took place here. And if you try to justify violence you can expect to be challenged and asked to explain

[mouview]

Have the Free Staters on here who are obsessed with the PIRA ever asked themselves why SF are the largest political party in the nationalist community in the north. Have they ever asked themselves why the generations who lived through that conflict and their children don't seem to have any truck with the Provisional campaign and why they return SF to office? No, they think we are all animals clearly, while they sit on their holes in Roscommon and Galway moralising about something they have not the faintest notion about.

So why then for many years, including a post-GFA spell, were the SDLP the largest nationalist party in NI?

[Louther]

The last post sums it up really. In any walk of life, a border can be difference in night and day. We lived not on border but close enough, lot moved into our area to either flee the North or flee authorities. That was our main interaction in the troubles unless you ventured north.

The 60s, 70s and 80s you where led the six news and print media. There was little other news sources bar word of mouth. But people's motives in south very different to those in North. Everyone had their own battles - employment, housing, emigration and all that came with those. Religion was so dominate, politics even in the 26 was so hostile and attritional. People in Wexford, Longford, Clare where far removed from what was happening up North as an example. Is it their own fault? Or the way things where at the time? Can you drill it down to an individual narrative where own needs dominated their thoughts and actions or a collective will driven at national media and those in political power.

In that age the war of independence was still very raw and families still labelled each other for which side their relatives had taken.

I don't think it was a decision taken to ignore what was happening up North but that on a day to day basis, people had their own battles to fight. We can still see the fall out from those times with the church scandals.

Politically, yes, greater efforts could be done. A country that was still finding its feet and stumbling from one economic crisis to another and viewed very much as a political back water on international stage may have had limited influence but should have sought it out.

The 90s saw a much more confident 26 with growing international standing and I don't think it can be denied that this influence helped bring about peace and the GFA. Also, into the 2000s people can find their own news sources and much more open in delivering and receiving unbiased and factual news without agendas or influence. People more able to make their own minds up. In more recent times this has gone other way, where people are driven to extremes with fake news, a term I don't like but is their another name for it.

Over the years, I don't think their is a conscious decision to ignore or judge what has happened up North. What happened done here 100 years ago took along time to heal and has been painted as a glorious episode in history when it was far from it and took generations to heal rifts in communities and between families.

There is a lot of wind up posts here and on other threads. But you can't ignore the reality of what was endured daily by many up north and those that paid ultimate cost. BC1 post is very real.

Waterford Whispers can be very funny but rarely do they miss and it's satire at its best. Their headline is very reflective of the modern age "get on with it". Every thing is instant and entitlement. People care more about themselves than at any other time in history, because they have so much. A 30 year old would have no concept of what the troubles was like. Is it their fault?

Sinn Fein have greatly benefited from this as the baggage that FF and FG like to throw at them (which isn't naive at best and politically a poor strategy) means nothing to a lot of the 20-40 year old voters. They see very little of relevance to them if the past.

Raffling a bit but basically this isn't a straightforward topic with many sides and outcomes.

As they say History looks favourably on the winner. That's why maybe the 1916 to 1920s is remembered romantically by many in the 26 and with no victor, if that is right phrase, in 6 history has not decided what way it'll be written yet.

[johnnycool]

"I'm very confused, Ted. Does 'Angelo' actually want to unite with us Free State bastards? Or does he hate us as much as he hates his Brit bastard neighbours in the North?"

He is shooting for a Republic of Tyrone I think.

He's going down the Martina Anderson rabbit hole of being a hindrance to the very goal they want to achieve.

[Snapchap]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

You cannot separate the campaign which you describe as "legitimate" and the consequential deaths with which you are not "happy" with.

Should the PIRA have planted the bomb and hoped it didn't go off? Fire the bullet and hope it be blown off course? Kidnap the guy and hope he was Houdini?

So because you think an armed campaign was legitimate, that means you have to be happy about it and enjoy it? By that logic, people can only join armed groups because they like war and death, and not because they believe they are left with no alternative but to take up arms?

Francis Hughes, who died in Hunger Strike 40 years ago yesterday, talking about his involvement in attacks on British forces said "They're just kids. For God's sake, I don't want to be shooting them. I want them to bloody go home in the morning." He was perhaps the most active IRA Volunteer there was and he certaintly wasn't happy with there being a conflict.

I think it's sad that anyone had to lose a life as a result of violence here either in 1921 or 1969. The reality remains though that in each case, Irish republicans becoming involved in conflict was both inevitable and legitimate.

The armed campaign was a campaign of killing. You cannot say you approve of the campaign but not the killing. There is no logical basis to what you say.

If Francis Hughes didn't want someone to be killed he would have been well advised (if he hadn't the wit to work it out himself) not to shoot them.

Sorry to be logical about the whole thing

"The armed campaign was a campaign of killing" - You don't say. Can you tell me an armed campaign anywhere in history that wasn't? Does that mean that those who engaged in it did so because they just wanted an excuse to kill people? Or is it perhaps possible that they felt there was no realistic alternative to resist, for instance, a sectarian regime specifically designed to keep them as a second class citizen?

Unless of course Michael Collins was just a bloodthirsty, stone cold murderer who just loved killing people? Is that what you're telling me?

[Snapchap]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

You cannot separate the campaign which you describe as "legitimate" and the consequential deaths with which you are not "happy" with.

Should the PIRA have planted the bomb and hoped it didn't go off? Fire the bullet and hope it be blown off course? Kidnap the guy and hope he was Houdini?

So because you think an armed campaign was legitimate, that means you have to be happy about it and enjoy it? By that logic, people can only join armed groups because they like war and death, and not because they believe they are left with no alternative but to take up arms?

Francis Hughes, who died in Hunger Strike 40 years ago yesterday, talking about his involvement in attacks on British forces said "They're just kids. For God's sake, I don't want to be shooting them. I want them to bloody go home in the morning." He was perhaps the most active IRA Volunteer there was and he certaintly wasn't happy with there being a conflict.

I think it's sad that anyone had to lose a life as a result of violence here either in 1921 or 1969. The reality remains though that in each case, Irish republicans becoming involved in conflict was both inevitable and legitimate.

I don't like to hear of anyone being killed, but I'm not naive enough to believe bad things don't happen and innocent people don't get hurt/killed during conflicts such as during the Michael Collins era. It's some leap from that though to the PIRA carrying out a bombing campaign in England in civilian areas to deliberately target ordinary working people. That was a pretty sick and twisted "military strategy" to adopt and in reality it's just terrorism. They couldn't defeat the British (the many informers in their own organisation didn't help) so they adopted the most cowardly approach as possible. I don't see how you can consider that a legitimate campaign

Your careful use of language is revealing. You say the PIRA "targeted" civilians in a "sick and twisted strategy", but that civilians "got hurt or killed" by the Old IRA. They were TARGETED by the Old IRA. In the same, if not higher proportion than they were targeted by the PIRA did. So you're notion that it's "some leap" between targeting civilians in 1921 and targeting them in 1969 is just a symptom of your complete and utter hypocrisy. With your word games like that you could end up writing headlines for the Indo if you're not careful.

[brokencrossbar1]

Show me war where there are no innocent victims?  Show me a conflict where there are no mistakes? Every war has to also be seen in the context of what is happening around the world and the various different Governments that are ruling. I firmly believe if Labour had been more competent in the early 80's and prevented Thatcher from getting back to back victories there would have been an earlier end to the Troubles. Thatcher ramped it up and this re-radicalised an awful lot of young men to go harder again. The hunger strikes then coupled with army policy in the ground, and the underlying sectarian nature of the rule of law in the North ensured that there was a catholic/nationalist/republican community who actively or passively kept the fight going. Thatcher was dividing England at the time also between the working class and the upper class so NI was an afterthought. Thatcherism was a big contributor to the bombing campaign of the 80's and 90's as it was the only way to get them to the table. Hit them in their heart lands, like Canary Wharf, then they will have to talk.

Was it right? In my opinion, it was inevitable and if there were innocent victims that was wrong but the Government would not come to the table unless their own people were really being targeted. Such is the way of war. Horrible, dirty, nasty, vicious, wicked, but no different to any war that was ever fought.

[Angelo]

Have the Free Staters on here who are obsessed with the PIRA ever asked themselves why SF are the largest political party in the nationalist community in the north. Have they ever asked themselves why the generations who lived through that conflict and their children don't seem to have any truck with the Provisional campaign and why they return SF to office? No, they think we are all animals clearly, while they sit on their holes in Roscommon and Galway moralising about something they have not the faintest notion about.

So why then for many years, including a post-GFA spell, were the SDLP the largest nationalist party in NI?

Many years? The SDLP were the largest nationalist party in the Assembly elections held a couple of months after the GFA, from every election since then SF have been the largest nationalist party.

So what you are saying is just completely and utterly incorrect and is not consistent with the facts. 6 Assembly elections since the GFA was signed, SF have been the biggest nationalist party in the 5 of those 6 elections. They now have over double the no of MLAs the SDLP have. Why do you think that is? Why do you think nationalist communities who lived through The Troubles and whose families and friends did return SF as their representatives?

[mouview]

Have the Free Staters on here who are obsessed with the PIRA ever asked themselves why SF are the largest political party in the nationalist community in the north. Have they ever asked themselves why the generations who lived through that conflict and their children don't seem to have any truck with the Provisional campaign and why they return SF to office? No, they think we are all animals clearly, while they sit on their holes in Roscommon and Galway moralising about something they have not the faintest notion about.

So why then for many years, including a post-GFA spell, were the SDLP the largest nationalist party in NI?

Many years? The SDLP were the largest nationalist party in the Assembly elections held a couple of months after the GFA, from every election since then SF have been the largest nationalist party.

So what you are saying is just completely and utterly incorrect and is not consistent with the facts. 6 Assembly elections since the GFA was signed, SF have been the biggest nationalist party in the 5 of those 6 elections. They now have over double the no of MLAs the SDLP have. Why do you think that is? Why do you think nationalist communities who lived through The Troubles and whose families and friends did return SF as their representatives?

Why did nationalist communities not return SF as their representatives during the Troubles?

[Angelo]

Have the Free Staters on here who are obsessed with the PIRA ever asked themselves why SF are the largest political party in the nationalist community in the north. Have they ever asked themselves why the generations who lived through that conflict and their children don't seem to have any truck with the Provisional campaign and why they return SF to office? No, they think we are all animals clearly, while they sit on their holes in Roscommon and Galway moralising about something they have not the faintest notion about.

So why then for many years, including a post-GFA spell, were the SDLP the largest nationalist party in NI?

Many years? The SDLP were the largest nationalist party in the Assembly elections held a couple of months after the GFA, from every election since then SF have been the largest nationalist party.

So what you are saying is just completely and utterly incorrect and is not consistent with the facts. 6 Assembly elections since the GFA was signed, SF have been the biggest nationalist party in the 5 of those 6 elections. They now have over double the no of MLAs the SDLP have. Why do you think that is? Why do you think nationalist communities who lived through The Troubles and whose families and friends did return SF as their representatives?

Why did nationalist communities not return SF as their representatives during the Troubles?

Because they were focused on the military campaign, did not take their seats and only began to shift toward consitutional politics post the Hunger strikes. No Stormont election was held 1982-96

I note that when I put a question to you, you were only able to ask a question in return.

I've answered your question, despite the fact you dodged mine.

Why are you afraid to address the question I asked? What will it show that worries or scares you>?

[Milltown Row2]

One or two were being returned during the troubles , Sands most notably and Adams in West Belfast, the Armalite and ballot box became the slogan and the first real attempts at politics started, it was rough and eventually it started to gain traction.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strategy