Act of Union partially repealed

British State forces murdered children. The British State has never condemned the murder of children by its own officers. The existence of NI is a imposition of British State forces.
The Stanley affair has been done to death. He espoused the military capabilities of IRA in 1979 and 1920. On military terms, the two attacks have similarities.
He didn't espouse Mullaghmore because it was shameful hideous wreck less attack.
Subsequent to Stanleys remarks, the righteous of Irish commentariat could only hone on the attack of 1979. The completely by-passed, in acts of barefaced hypocrisy, could not bring themselves to condemn the attack in 1920 - because they themselves peddle the narrative of the hero's of the Good Ol' IRA (GOIRA).
There is a thread elsewhere where this hypocrisy is highlighted.

GOIRA, a terrorist organisation by any defenition of the word. An organisation that committed sectarian massacres, murdered children, disappeared bodies on a scale far beyond what the Provos did.

This State is borne out of those atrocities. An criminal organisation with no mandate from the people. An organisation whose 'war' against Britain was rejected by the Dáil that they purportedly answered to.

But that was the 20th century, times have changed. Peace comes dropping slow. No-one can change the past.

But there are those who are blind to changing times. Caught up in the politics of condemnation of certain atrocities, but not others. It is pure political contrivance.

The violent movement for an Irish Republic, since 1798, has been an abysmal failure. It has failed at every attempt. Best effort, the establishment of a 26 county State that led to civil war, two sectarian states, and 25yrs of conflict. I give an E grade.

Nothing is going to change the past, but the future can be changed. Through peaceful democratic process. Anyone engaged in any sort of criminality should be held accountable, including the murder of children by State forces (its sad that has to be pointed out).
 
If Sinn Fein deal with their IRA links and their IRA recent past

And how should they 'deal' with their IRA links to satisfy you that the broad political spectrum across the island is not asking for?
Aside from your good self, who else is asking for what you want?
 
And how should they 'deal' with their IRA links to satisfy you that the broad political spectrum across the island is not asking for?
Aside from your good self, who else is asking for what you want?
This is a discussion forum. I'm offering my opinion in the context of a discussion.
Perhaps the nearly 70% of the electorate in this country who don't support your party agree with me.
 
Perhaps the nearly 70% of the electorate in this country who don't support your party agree with me.

Perhaps, indeed. Maybe I will agree you? Just hard to when it not clear what it is you want them to do to 'deal' with IRA links that the rest of the political establishment (representing that 70%) have not already asked them do.
 
Aside from your good self, who else is asking for what you want?
I could ask a similar question of you. Who else places such emphasis on soldier F not being prosecuted 50 years on? The vast majority of folk in the 26 counties see it in the context of the GFA which abandoned all pretence at moral culpability for abhorrent crimes. Even your good self wants soldier F to go unpunished, provided he goes through the gate of moral abandonment that is the GFA.
The failure of the British to prosecute soldier F 50 years on does not validate the republican credo that the Troubles were a just war with equal atrocities on both sides, as happens in every war, a credo which you seem to share.
 
Who else places such emphasis on soldier F not being prosecuted 50 years on? The vast majority of folk in the 26 counties see it in the context of the GFA which abandoned all pretence at moral culpability for abhorrent crimes. Even your good self wants soldier F to go unpunished, provided he goes through the gate of moral abandonment that is the GFA.

The GFA does not give immunity from prosecution. I do not want soldier F to go unpunished. But I accept, in the context of the environment he murdered people, he was a paid actor of the British State. In such circumstances he is entitled to the same early release as others. That is why he won't serve prison time.
He is not entitled to evade justice and a prosecution that records him officially as a murderer - unless of course, powers that be bestow that privilege upon him in their continuing cover-up of their crimes.

I'm curious as to why there is such a defence of soldier F? He wasn't under attack, he wasn't in any danger whatsoever. He let loose, or was let loose by commanding officers - perhaps that is the most likely scenario? Hence the cover-up.

The failure of the British to prosecute soldier F 50 years does not validate the republican credo that the Troubles were a just war with equal atrocities on both sides, as happens in every war, which seems to be your mantra.

Who said it did? You are continually lumping single atrocities of one side with the entire actions of the other side.

I could equally just as say the IRA murder of a particular innocent civilian does not validate a British Armed response of soldiers onto the streets, internment, torture, murder, shoot to kill, collusion, censorship, etc for 25yrs, does it?
 
shoot to kill
Just on that. Nobody shoots to injure. They shoot at the torso, the main mass of the body. It's only in Western's that people shoot the gun out of someone's hand, Western's like Blazing Saddles, or shoot to injure or incapacitate.
 
Just hard to when it not clear what it is you want them to do to 'deal' with IRA links that the rest of the political establishment (representing that 70%) have not already asked them do.
The rest of the political establishment has asked them repeatedly over a period of decades to condemn the IRA's murder of civilians, and children in particular. Unless you are in some sort of Scientology type bubble you must be aware of that.
 
The rest of the political establishment has asked them repeatedly over a period of decades to condemn the IRA's murder of civilians, and children in particular. Unless you are in some sort of Scientology type bubble you must be aware of that.

Yes, well unless you were in the same bubble then you will know that the same political establishment has asked British State to condemn the British State's murder of civilians, children in particular.

And unless you are still in that bubble, you will know that condemnation is not going to happen - from any side.

The IRA however, and SF have recognised the suffering and hurt they caused and offered apology to all non-combatants.

How have the British State done in this regard? Even in regards to the torture and framing of innocent people for murder? Let alone the murder of innocent civilians. Let alone continued obfuscation of investigations such as Dublin / Monaghan?
 
Yes, well unless you were in the same bubble then you will know that the same political establishment has asked British State to condemn the British State's murder of civilians, children in particular.

And unless you are still in that bubble, you will know that condemnation is not going to happen - from any side.

The IRA however, and SF have recognised the suffering and hurt they caused and offered apology to all non-combatants.

How have the British State done in this regard? Even in regards to the torture and framing of innocent people for murder? Let alone the murder of innocent civilians. Let alone continued obfuscation of investigations such as Dublin / Monaghan?
Why do you keep going on about the British Government and Soldier F etc? They aren't seeking elected office in this country. If they were I'd be equally concerned. And before you say it no, Northern Ireland isn't part of this country. Many of us wish it was but it isn't. That's what the IRA were murdering all those children over.
"SF have recognised the suffering and hurt they caused and offered apology to all non-combatants", yea, expressions of regret... mealy-mouthed offensive patronising expressions of regret without accepting a sentilla of culpability, peddling that same rubbish about parity of hurt/parity of blame.
 
The thread started about that but you are replying to my comments about Sinn Fein.

I think you will find that you were responding to my comments about British soldiers and soldier F and the murder of children by bringing the IRA and SF into the discussion.
 
I think you will find that you were responding to my comments about British soldiers and soldier F and the murder of children by bringing the IRA and SF into the discussion.
Yes, that's how conversation works.
I've given my views on that but you keep answering a different question in relation to the Shinners and their child killing pedigree.
Your answer is "Yes, but what about the British and soldier F?", as if their actions give the Shinners a free pass on their past. It may do so legally but it doesn't do so morally and it is in that context that I question their fitness to run the country.
Soldier F isn't running for office. No party that thinks he is a hero is seeking to run the country. Do you get it? Sorry, of course you get it but it doesn't suit your agenda to engage with the issue do you obfuscate and trot out the party line.
 
The IRA however, and SF have recognised the suffering and hurt they caused and offered apology to all non-combatants.
Every time their elected representatives glorify armed groups and acts of violence they undermine any recognition and apologies
 
Every time their elected representatives glorify armed groups and acts of violence they undermine any recognition and apologies

Fair point, cancel 1916 commemorations and take down portraits of Dé Valera and Collins. Stop naming bridges and train stations after Fenian Thomas Clarke, indiscriminate bomber of public train stations and bridges and murderer of an innocent school child.
How else can we share this island.
 
@Purple I gave my views on repeal of the Act of Union from recent court case fighting against NI Protocol.
I support the repeal of the Act in its entirety without fear or favour.
I cited the recent decision by organs of the British State to continue to protect British officers against prosecution for murder of innocent civilians and children as good cause for this. I have a long record of citing that Irelands interests have always been a distant second to Britains interests in the 'United' Kingdom.

I am trying to discuss repeal of the Act of Union. You, and others keep reverting to the IRA.
 
@Purple I gave my views on repeal of the Act of Union from recent court case fighting against NI Protocol.
I support the repeal of the Act in its entirety without fear or favour.
And I said that I'm not in favour of that. I'd take the basket-case that is Northern Ireland as long as they join this country, proms not to murder anyone over it, promise to stop with all the god-bothering and bigotry and xenophobia and homophobia and racism and general tribalism and as long as the Brits continue to cover the cost of un-messing up (I was thinking of a different word) the whole foul jamboree until it's fixed.
I cited the recent decision by organs of the British State to continue to protect British officers against prosecution for murder of innocent civilians and children as good cause for this. I have a long record of citing that Irelands interests have always been a distant second to Britains interests in the 'United' Kingdom.
No argument there. The organs of the British State don't care about most of the people in England, let alone Wales or Scotland and as for their colony in Eyree...
I am trying to discuss repeal of the Act of Union. You, and others keep reverting to the IRA.
In any discussion about a United Ireland history and politics come into it. The Original Sinn Fein partitioned the Island and the new party that calls itself Sinn Fein ensured that no progress was made toward a united Ireland for 40 years. They are central to the issue.
 
They are central to the issue.

As is the British State, obviously.

But repeal of Act of Union need not have SF central to the issue.
All political parties of all persuasions are open to campaigning on an all Ireland basis. Only three parties do that I am aware of - SF, Greens and PBP.

I would gladly cast a vote for SDLP, if only they stood in my constituency. They don't.
I would gladly vote for DUP if they stood in my constituency (cognisant of the seismic shift in thinking that would have had to occur in the DUP for that to happen).
 
I would gladly vote for DUP if they stood in my constituency
I'd pay good money to see that :D
Only three parties do that I am aware of - SF, Greens and PBP.
I've vote for the Greens (the biggest issue we are facing is central to their policies) or PBP (real socialists) before I've vote for your lot. Would you not give the PBP a chance? Your-wan running in the by-election is a cracker.
 
Back
Top