Terrorism

[Pogue]

So, I'm a bit dim am I ?

Um, not to my knowledge, although that wasn't what I said in my post. I said that to be in favour of a united Ireland, in what I perceive to be your view, you have to be either:
1. A terrorist
2. A bit dim
So I wasn't calling you a bit dim, because clearly you're not in favour of a united Ireland. Maybe you could read that 'waffle' next time?

Not so dim to notice your post never explained how you would achieve a united Ireland. You just said more stuff like the British had no business being in Ireland and a lot of general waffle without answering the questions. I'm talking about the Ulster-Scots, how will you achieve a united Ireland with us peacefully, when we don't want to untie with you?

As I said (is this font hard to read or something?) there are non-violent ways of protest, such as civil disobedience, which can win a country it's independence. Like what happened in India. Peaceful protest and negotiation is much better than violence.

Could you address my points about 'republicanism in general', and how that's different from Irish republicanism, and multiculuturalism? Somewhere among all that waffle were a few questions, you see.

 

[Steezie]

As I said (is this font hard to read or something?) there are non-violent ways of protest, such as civil disobedience, which can win a country it's independence. Like what happened in India. Peaceful protest and negotiation is much better than violence.

In Ireland, people tend to end up dead when that happens.

Peaceful protest is a good avenue but sometimes you have only one alternative and thats to draw your sword and stand and fight

 

[Pogue]

In Ireland, people tend to end up dead when that happens.

Peaceful protest is a good avenue but sometimes you have only one alternative and thats to draw your sword and stand and fight

Well, that's one view. I don't want to get into another debate here (I really couldn't cope ) but I find that violence leads to more violence. So not only is it morally wrong, it doesn't work to respond to violence with violence, because it results in a cycle that can't be broken until everyone is dead, or until somebody takes a stand of a different kind, and resolves to act for peace.

But I guess that raises the question of the French and Dutch resistene during WW2. They resisted a regime which was doing terrible things, and nobody would ever condemn them for it, even though their resistence did include killing people. So I do take your point, and I understand it's a very tricky issue. I myself remain a pacifist- it's what I believe is right.

 

[Steezie]

Well if peaceful protest gets you shot by the Black and Tans and the Auxies, I dont see where the positive comes in. Bobby Sands proved that martyrdom can be effective, but a man holding a gun seems like a better choice when peaceful protest earns you a wooden box

 

[Pogue]

Well if peaceful protest gets you shot by the Black and Tans and the Auxies, I dont see where the positive comes in. Bobby Sands proved that martyrdom can be effective, but a man holding a gun seems like a better choice when peaceful protest earns you a wooden box

I think the hunger strikes in particular gave a huge amount of support for republicanism. For every man that died, hundreds more became interested in republicanism. Plenty of people kill for a cause, but to die for it, especially to die in such a way, takes something else altogether. If you respond to violence with violence, it tends to taint the entire viewpoint. This can be seen on this very thread, with a couple of people who seem to think that being a republican means you support terrorism. It means that people can't see it as a serious political view, without raising personal questions about terrorism.
For this reason, I actually think peaceful protest, especially on a large scale, can be hugely effective.

 

[Steezie]

I think the hunger strikes in particular gave a huge amount of support for republicanism. For every man that died, hundreds more became interested in republicanism. Plenty of people kill for a cause, but to die for it, especially to die in such a way, takes something else altogether. If you respond to violence with violence, it tends to taint the entire viewpoint. This can be seen on this very thread, with a couple of people who seem to think that being a republican means you support terrorism. It means that people can't see it as a serious political view, without raising personal questions about terrorism.
For this reason, I actually think peaceful protest, especially on a large scale, can be hugely effective.

But again you have the problem of getting SHOT every time you stand up. Yes it makes a powerful statement to die for a cause and there is indeed great honor to be had in that. But it would seem to be more useful for the cause to have a fighter rather than a dead man

 

[Pogue]

But again you have the problem of getting SHOT every time you stand up. Yes it makes a powerful statement to die for a cause and there is indeed great honor to be had in that. But it would seem to be more useful for the cause to have a fighter rather than a dead man

Well, I disagree. Killing, even if it's in response to killing, will never get you any support from ordinary people. I think you do much more by passively resisting because it appeals to such a wide range of people. It takes a lot of courage to resist passively, and it's not been attempted on a large scale before. I think if it was, the effect it would have would be massive.

 

[Tyndale]

Well if peaceful protest gets you shot by the Black and Tans and the Auxies, I dont see where the positive comes in. Bobby Sands proved that martyrdom can be effective, but a man holding a gun seems like a better choice when peaceful protest earns you a wooden box

You've been watching too many Irish propaganda movies The Black and Tans were no angels, but they weren't the Nazi's people like you like to promote. They had a job to do and that was find the Irish rebels who murdered innocents and Royal Irish soldiers.

Bobby Sands proved to the Palestinians that suicide bombers can get political recognition. He gave the green light to present day suicide bombers.

 

[Pogue]

Bobby Sands proved to the Palestinians that suicide bombers can get political recognition. He gave the green light to present day suicide bombers.

Even though he wasn't a suicide bomber?

 

[Steezie]

You've been watching too many Irish propaganda movies The Black and Tans were no angels, but they weren't the Nazi's people like you like to promote. They had a job to do and that was find the Irish rebels who murdered innocents and Royal Irish soldiers.

Bobby Sands proved to the Palestinians that suicide bombers can get political recognition. He gave the green light to present day suicide bombers.

The Black and Tans were responsible for a great deal of cruelty and agression against the Irish people.

"In the summer of 1920, the Black and Tans burned and sacked many small towns and villages in Ireland, beginning with Tuam in County Galway in July 1920 and also including Trim, Balbriggan, Thurles and Templemore amongst many others. In November 1920, the Tans "besieged" Tralee in revenge for the IRA abduction and killing of two local RIC men. They closed all the businesses in the town and let no food in for a week. In addition they shot dead three local people. On 14 November, the Tans abducted and murdered a Roman Catholic priest, Fr Michael Griffin, in Galway. His body was found in a bog in Barna a week later. Finally, the Black and Tans sacked Cork city, on the night of 11 December 1920, the centre of which was burned out — destroying more than 300 buildings. They also shot dead two IRA suspects in the city that night."
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_and_Tans#In_action_in_Ireland )

I'd also like your input on the Croke Park attack by the Auxies

 

[Tyndale]

In Ireland, people tend to end up dead when that happens.

Peaceful protest is a good avenue but sometimes you have only one alternative and thats to draw your sword and stand and fight

Total total nonsense. If it wasn't for British freedom and the right to protest you wouldn't have been able to make your voice heard. If the British were the oppressors like you said, you wouldn't even be talking about Irish republicanism today, because the British would have stopped it once and for all.

Republican terrorists took advantage of the British right to protest and free speech, they used that right to rebel against their own government while murdering their own people because they wore a uniform with the crown on it.

Republican terrorist bigots, the whole lot of them.

 

[Tyndale]

Even though he wasn't a suicide bomber?

From July 1972, Bobby participated in various IRA crimes and vandalism, rarely staying at his parents' home overnight as the authorities became aware of his criminal activities. In October that year he was caught with 4 pistols and imprisoned in Long Kesh where he was given considerable latitude and education at British taxpayer expense. During this spell in prison, he was allowed to wear his own clothes, and did not have to do any of the work or cleaning expected of most convicts.

In October 1976, in his IRA role, "Community Worker" Bobby Sands, participated in the bombing of the Balmoral Furniture Company in Dunmurry. In order to destroy the jobs provided to the community by this company, the Twinbrook IRA gang were helped by some IRA thugs from Rosnareen, Andersonstown. After the bombing, Bobby, and at least 5 others in the bomb team, were involved in a gun battle with the police. Abandoning two of their wounded friends, Seamus Martin and Gabriel Corbett , Bobby with Joe McDonnell, Seamus Finucane and Sean Lavery, tried to escape in a car, but were caught. Bobby had one of the revolvers used in the shooting in his possession.

 

[Steezie]

Total total nonsense. If it wasn't for British freedom and the right to protest you wouldn't have been able to make your voice heard. If the British were the oppressors like you said, you wouldn't even be talking about Irish republicanism today, because the British would have stopped it once and for all.

Republican terrorists took advantage of the British right to protest and free speech, they used that right to rebel against their own government while murdering their own people because they wore a uniform with the crown on it.

Republican terrorist bigots, the whole lot of them.

The IRA killed fellow Irishmen because they chose to support the occupation forces.

So was Bloody Sunday an example of "British freedom"?

 

[Pogue]

From July 1972, Bobby participated in various IRA crimes and vandalism, rarely staying at his parents' home overnight as the authorities became aware of his criminal activities. In October that year he was caught with 4 pistols and imprisoned in Long Kesh where he was given considerable latitude and education at British taxpayer expense. During this spell in prison, he was allowed to wear his own clothes, and did not have to do any of the work or cleaning expected of most convicts.

In October 1976, in his IRA role, "Community Worker" Bobby Sands, participated in the bombing of the Balmoral Furniture Company in Dunmurry. In order to destroy the jobs provided to the community by this company, the Twinbrook IRA gang were helped by some IRA thugs from Rosnareen, Andersonstown. After the bombing, Bobby, and at least 5 others in the bomb team, were involved in a gun battle with the police. Abandoning two of their wounded friends, Seamus Martin and Gabriel Corbett , Bobby with Joe McDonnell, Seamus Finucane and Sean Lavery, tried to escape in a car, but were caught. Bobby had one of the revolvers used in the shooting in his possession.

All interesting, but do you have a cite for any of this? It'd be interesting to have a look at it.
But taking this all into account, it doesn't change the act that his death was really nothing like a suicide bomber's death- it didn't kill or harm anyone else. So it's really got nothing to do with the Palestinians.
And could you address some of my previous points, if you've got the time? The post you called 'waffle', for example- it was actually mostly made up of answering a few of your points, and it's a little irksome that you've dismissed them offhand, without reading them. Only if you've got the time, of course.

 

[Tyndale]

The IRA killed fellow Irishmen because they chose to support the occupation forces.

So was Bloody Sunday an example of "British freedom"?

Occupying what? The vast majority of people in the island agreed to unity with Britian. Many, many, many Irish men held top responsibilities within the British Government and welcomed their partnership. You seen to be painting everything with a Republican paint brush and the real reality was far from your interpretation. When the IRA finally overthrew their own Royal Irish security they were pelted with rotting vegetables in Dublin by their own people. The IRA had to use intimidation for decades after their illegal coup in order to keep control and create a false historical record of their coup.

 

[Steezie]

Occupying what? The vast majority of people in the island agreed to unity with Britian. Many, many, many Irish men held top responsibilities within the British Government and welcomed their partnership. You seen to be painting everything with a Republican paint brush and the real reality was far from your interpretation. When the IRA finally overthrew their own Royal Irish security they were pelted with rotting vegetables in Dublin by their own people. The IRA had to use intimidation for decades after their illegal coup in order to keep control and create a false historical record of their coup.

The IRA is STILL regarded in Ireland as a heroic force fighting for the freedom of Irish people. As I have stated before, I have many many family members in Ireland and most of them speak very highly of the IRA as do most people THEY know.

You also have not given any justification for Bloody Sunday OR Croke Park.

 

[Tyndale]

The IRA is STILL regarded in Ireland as a heroic force fighting for the freedom of Irish people. As I have stated before, I have many many family members in Ireland and most of them speak very highly of the IRA as do most people THEY know.

You also have not given any justification for Bloody Sunday OR Croke Park.

You and your family are certainly in the minority.

Unlike you, I don't try to justify murder. I have no justification for Croke Park, I see it as a horrible attrocity by men who were suffering from shell-shock after their war experience in the Somme.

As for Bloody sunday it was revealed in the enquiry that the IRA were using the civil rights protest as cover for an attack on the British forces. The IRA were using innocent people and unfortunately the British killed some innocents and some young IRA members too. The IRA were the first to shoot at the British.

 

[Steezie]

It seems that when people you dislike kill colaborators and traitors, its an act of terrorism.

But when forces of your own government walk into a football stadium and open fire into the crowd killing men, women, and children who probably had nothing to do with ANY anti-British activity.....you make exscuses. Shell shock? Our modern military deals with the same thing and they can seem to resist firing thier guns into crowds of men, women, and children.

Hypocracy much?

And where are you getting that the IRA used civil rights protests to cover up thier activities? The IRA timed the attack to commence when a football game started to give the Apostles more cover to escape.

 

[Tyndale]

It doesn't change the act that his death was really nothing like a suicide bomber's death- it didn't kill or harm anyone else. So it's really got nothing to do with the Palestinians.

He starved himself to death because he wasn't treated as a political prisoner and allowed to wear his own clothes. I would like to see what you Welsh people would do If a modern terrorist would ask the same. Would yous support him and give him political immunity and give-in to his every desires? would you go half way around the world and blame it all on the Welsh Government?......

Pogue, please don't try and tell me it's got nothing to do with the Palestinians. Read the history of the hunger strikes and you will find that this is the period when they made allegiances with Palestine in tactics, weapons and financial support. You should think before you reply dear young one.

The post you called 'waffle', for example- it was actually mostly made up of answering a few of your points, and it's a little irksome that you've dismissed them offhand, without reading them. Only if you've got the time, of course.

So, lets hear your response to a united Ireland with a British Ulster-scots population that doesn't want to be united. Let's hear it

 

[Steezie]

So, lets hear your response to a united Ireland with a British Ulster-scots population that doesn't want to be united. Let's hear it

How would you respond to a large group of the Muslim population of Britan to demand thier own country in Britan?