has martin mcguinness got some cheek ?

[dirtyvileHARRYuk]

i found it so hypercritical that martin is condeming the current troubles as of his past and the party he was representing. how dare he < what a cheek ? i just think they are out of the picture now a days as they can not compete with the moslims as not only do they plant bombs but they send themself up with it lol

the joe is hopeing i dont get knee capped on way to work now lol



martin mcguinness



we are nearly in april,

step forward the fool,

martin mcguinness you are discredited,

over my eyes you wont pull the wool.

how dare you criticize,

its so hypercritical,

today's troubles are minor,

i remember the i-r-a before you went all political.

you may say you are not connected,

just a representative carrying and reading there script,

for years i watched you justify the terror,

and that is now what's causing my conflict.

it don't wash with me,

peace and the i-r-a i don't trust,

but in no way can you compete with al-qaeda,

that's why your story has started to rust.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Joe444

i found it so hypercritical that martin is condeming the current troubles as of his past and the party he was representing. how dare he < what a cheek ? i just think they are out of the picture now a days as they can not compete with the moslims as not only do they plant bombs but they send themself up with it lol

the joe is hopeing i dont get knee capped on way to work now lol



martin mcguinness



we are nearly in april,

step forward the fool,

martin mcguinness you are discredited,

over my eyes you wont pull the wool.

how dare you criticize,

its so hypercritical,

today's troubles are minor,

i remember the i-r-a before you went all political.

you may say you are not connected,

just a representative carrying and reading there script,

for years i watched you justify the terror,

and that is now what's causing my conflict.

it don't wash with me,

peace and the i-r-a i don't trust,

but in no way can you compete with al-qaeda,

that's why your story has started to rust.

Well said. I can't stand the hypocrite - how he expects anyone to take him seriously with his history is beyond belief - convenient short memory I'd say! Revolting, smarmy disgusting man!!

Good poem Joe!

[setanta]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

Well said. I can't stand the hypocrite - how he expects anyone to take him seriously with his history is beyond belief - convenient short memory I'd say! Revolting, smarmy disgusting man!!

Good poem Joe!

Nelson Mandela is now proclaimed the hero of his nation - a great pacifist and negotiator - but you should check up on his activities prior to his arrest and incarceration.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by setanta

Nelson Mandela is now proclaimed the hero of his nation - a great pacifist and negotiator - but you should check up on his activities prior to his arrest and incarceration.

probably the worst comparison of 2010






stop being an apologist for murder

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Nelson Mandela is now proclaimed the hero of his nation - a great pacifist and negotiator - but you should check up on his activities prior to his arrest and incarceration.

Interesting idea. Would you be putting Martin on a pedestal up there with Nelson?

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Interesting idea. Would you be putting Martin on a pedestal up there with Nelson?

Because prior to his arrest Mandela was the leader of the ANC's armed wing , who went on a bombing campaign. They were also considering guerilla warfare if the sabotage didn't have the effect that they desired. He's indirectly responsible for the deaths of many individuals. Just think it's interesting to compare events in different areas sometimes. And it has absolutely nothing to with pedestals of any kind (oh, and it's fairly transparent what you're trying to insinuate there): just curious the way history is viewed or obscured at times.

[Niamhxo]

Originally Posted by setanta

Because prior to his arrest Mandela was the leader of the ANC's armed wing , who went on a bombing campaign. They were also considering guerilla warfare if the sabotage didn't have the effect that they desired. He's indirectly responsible for the deaths of many individuals. Just think it's interesting to compare events in different areas sometimes.

but you're missing the one big difference..........................it wasn't the UK.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Because prior to his arrest Mandela was the leader of the ANC's armed wing , who went on a bombing campaign. They were also considering guerilla warfare if the sabotage didn't have the effect that they desired. He's indirectly responsible for the deaths of many individuals. Just think it's interesting to compare events in different areas sometimes. And it has absolutely nothing to with pedestals of any kind: just curious the way history is viewed or obscured at times.

Whilst its true that Mandela was leader of the MK(the armed wing of the ANC) while in charge his policy was only to hit local government offices - out of hours to ensure there werent as far as possible civilian casualties, in fact his policy was to avoid any deaths or even injuries, it was mentioned at his trial that he cancelled some operations because it couldnt be ensured there would be no collateral injuries. ( see: Wolfie Kadesh )

Whilst in prison he often called for the ANC leadership to plan and execute operations which would result in minimal casualties. And condemned certain operations as being overly violent. Since the end of apartheid in South Africa and during the Truth and Reconciliation Commision. Mandela was never implicated in any actions which breached human rights, in fact he cristicised others for withholding information etc, including his own wife.

Thats a lot different than Martin's history, with the Hegarty case, Enniskillen and a host of other operations he was linked with. Interesting to note he refused to accept the authority of the court that sentenced him in the 70's in the Republic of Ireland.

Saying that Martin McGuinness has done a lot to bring peace to Northern Ireland negotiating on behalf of both the IRA and Sinn Fein since the 1980's in fact even before that. Without his efforts and risks I dare say there wouldnt be the situation there is there today.

A young Martin McGuinness:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/new...t=true&bbcws=2

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Whilst its true that Mandela was leader of the MK(the armed wing of the ANC) while in charge his policy was only to hit local government offices - out of hours to ensure there werent as far as possible civilian casualties, in fact his policy was to avoid any deaths or even injuries, it was mentioned at his trial that he cancelled some operations because it couldnt be ensured there would be no collateral injuries. ( see: Wolfie Kadesh )

Whilst in prison he often called for the ANC leadership to plan and execute operations which would result in minimal casualties. And condemned certain operations as being overly violent. Since the end of apartheid in South Africa and during the Truth and Reconciliation Commision. Mandela was never implicated in any actions which breached human rights, in fact he cristicised others for withholding information etc, including his own wife.

Thats a lot different than Martin's history, with the Hegarty case, Enniskillen and a host of other operations he was linked with. Interesting to note he refused to accept the authority of the court that sentenced him in the 70's in the Republic of Ireland.

Saying that Martin McGuinness has done a lot to bring peace to Northern Ireland negotiating on behalf of both the IRA and Sinn Fein since the 1980's in fact even before that. Without his efforts and risks I dare say there wouldnt be the situation there is there today.

A young Martin McGuinness:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/new...t=true&bbcws=2

You're not really telling me anything that disproves that there's similarites in both cases, and it's interesting to note Mandela was offered freedom earlier on in his imprisonment on the sole condition that he publically rejected violence as a political weapon. He refused of course.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

You're not really telling me anything that disproves that there's similarites in both cases, and it's interesting to note Mandela was offered freedom earlier on in his imprisonment on the sole condition that he publically rejected violence as a political weapon. He refused of course.

Of course he refused. You are however putting two facts together and coming up with a third "fact" that isnt really conclusive. It's interesting to note the statement that was released through his daughter at the time. It doesnt mention about not wanting to give up an armed struggle or being willing to give up an armed struggle, it did mention however that he was a prisoner even if he was freed he would still technically be a prisoner and as such not in a position to act as a negotiator.

"What freedom am I being offered while the organisation of the people remains banned? Only free men can negotiate. A prisoner cannot enter into contracts"

This was because at the time the ANC was outlawed, even if Mandela was free he was then subject to re arrest at any time for being the negotiator or representative of a banned organisation. So logically he couldnt represent anything.

In other words the outlawing of the ANC had to be reversed before any member of the ANC could or would sit and negotiate.

Incidentally referring back to the offer it was if they gave up the armed struggle, as I said Mandela didnt mind destroying parts of government, buildings etc, they were legitimate targets, but denounced the taking of life. Though this position was only taken up after the Sharpsville Massacre.

Besides how many people did Mandela shoot?(his early life as Derry's top shot) Or authorise to be "interrogated" then topped?(Hegarty) Or authorise blown up (Enniskillen)

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Of course he refused. You are however putting two facts together and coming up with a third "fact" that isnt really conclusive. It's interesting to note the statement that was released through his daughter at the time. It doesnt mention about not wanting to give up an armed struggle or being willing to give up an armed struggle, it did mention however that he was a prisoner even if he was freed he would still technically be a prisoner and as such not in a position to act as a negotiator.

"What freedom am I being offered while the organisation of the people remains banned? Only free men can negotiate. A prisoner cannot enter into contracts"

This was because at the time the ANC was outlawed, even if Mandela was free he was then subject to re arrest at any time for being the negotiator or representative of a banned organisation. So logically he couldnt represent anything.

In other words the outlawing of the ANC had to be reversed before any member of the ANC could or would sit and negotiate.

Incidentally referring back to the offer it was if they gave up the armed struggle, as I said Mandela didnt mind destroying parts of government, buildings etc, they were legitimate targets, but denounced the taking of life. Though this position was only taken up after the Sharpsville Massacre.

Besides how many people did Mandela shoot?(his early life as Derry's top shot) Or authorise to be "interrogated" then topped?(Hegarty) Or authorise blown up (Enniskillen)

And you don't think that the IRA had the same troubles in Northern Ireland during internship when Nationalists were rounded up without trial while Loyalists weren't touched?

You really don't think Mandela has blood on his hands too? Of course he does.

[sooty]

Hello Joe

Whenever I hear about IRA, I am still scared.

They may act like peaceful politicians now but,,,,.
Yes I still remember one of bomb was at Liverpool Street Staion.
I was in City for 11 years during IRA was very active.

Yesterday's Terrorist, todays heroes?

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

And you don't think that the IRA had the same troubles in Northern Ireland during internship when Nationalists were rounded up without trial while Loyalists weren't touched?

You really don't think Mandela has blood on his hands too? Of course he does.

It was Internment not internship. An internship is a period of training. I wouldnt call what the internees went through as training, would you? Yes, Faulkner and co had a lot to answer for. What really got to me over that was there were members of the civil rights movement interned even though they had denounced violence. And of course the fact it was loyalist paramilitaries who had started the violence and terrorism and none of them were touched.

I would say that Mandela has next to no blood on his hands compared to McGuinness.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

It was Internment not internship. An internship is a period of training. I wouldnt call what the internees went through as training, would you? Yes, Faulkner and co had a lot to answer for. What really got to me over that was there were members of the civil rights movement interned even though they had denounced violence. And of course the fact it was loyalist paramilitaries who had started the violence and terrorism and none of them were touched.

I would say that Mandela has next to no blood on his hands compared to McGuinness.

No point getting like that. I put in the wrong word in my tiredness but you knew exactly what I meant. Although, in saying that internment did function as a type of internship for nationalists.

Mandela has blood on his hands. He created, financed and directed that organization and it's silly to assume that he had no role to play in it's functioning while he was in prison.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

No point getting like that. I put in the wrong word in my tiredness but you knew exactly what I meant. Although, in saying that internment did function as a type of internship for nationalists.

Mandela has blood on his hands. He created, financed and directed that organization and it's silly to assume that he had no role to play in it's functioning while he was in prison.

Of course he had a role to play, but mostly as a figurehead, are you trying to say he ran the ANC's armed struggle from his prison cell? Via mail and visitors perhaps? As it wasnt till his last couple of years imprisonment he was allowed access to a phone.

His mail inbound and outbound was not only censored, sometimes to the point of making it illegible, it was often held back from him or not posted for several weeks. Oh he could have also passed messages via his visitors?

Yeah that would be right, visitors and mail were the same rate. One letter and one visitor every six months. He obviously couldnt run the organisation that way.

He did however send messages to not only the ANC but the wider black and even white South African Community calling for a democratic society in which black and white would be equal with neither side ruling the other.

Incidentally it wasnt until 2008 Mandela could legally go to Disneyland or Disneyworld on holiday. The US still had him as a listed terrorist until then and as such he had to be escorted from the airport to the UN and back, if he stayed in a hotel he had to be guarded and not allowed out without an escort. But that was because the ANC had been declared a terrorist organisation by the South African Government and the US State Department hadnt updated their status.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Of course he had a role to play, but mostly as a figurehead, are you trying to say he ran the ANC's armed struggle from his prison cell? Via mail and visitors perhaps? As it wasnt till his last couple of years imprisonment he was allowed access to a phone.

His mail inbound and outbound was not only censored, sometimes to the point of making it illegible, it was often held back from him or not posted for several weeks. Oh he could have also passed messages via his visitors?

Yeah that would be right, visitors and mail were the same rate. One letter and one visitor every six months. He obviously couldnt run the organisation that way.

He did however send messages to not only the ANC but the wider black and even white South African Community calling not for a democratic society in which black and white would be equal with neither side ruling the other.

Incidentally it wasnt until 2008 Mandela could legally go to Disneyland or Disneyworld on holiday. The US still had him as a listed terrorist until then and as such he had to be escorted from the airport to the UN and back, if he stayed in a hotel he had to be guarded and not allowed out without an escort. But that was because the ANC had been declared a terrorist organisation by the South African Government and the US State Department hadnt updated their status.

He founded them, he provided military training for them and weapons. He flew out of the country to get training himself. These are not the actions of a man who defined his political campaign as being non-aggressive. You reap what you sow and don't forget that Winnie and alot of his colleagues were still heavily involved while he was in prison.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

He founded them, he provided military training for them and weapons. He flew out of the country to get training himself. These are not the actions of a man who defined his political campaign as being non-aggressive. You reap what you sow and don't forget that Winnie and alot of his colleagues were still heavily involved while he was in prison.

Yes and has been previously stated he targeted buildings and government infrastructure only and denounced murders etc. He also denounced human rights breaches.

He insisted during the Truth and Reconciliation Commision that people be open and honest and admonished several of his colleaugues for lying, making false statements about crimes, altering statements or withholding evidence.

He divorced Winnie because of her militancy, shortly after he was released he separated fom her, divorcing her the legally required 4 years later.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Yes and has been previously stated he targeted buildings and government infrastructure only and denounced murders etc. He also denounced human rights breaches.

He insisted during the Truth and Reconciliation Commision that people be open and honest and admonished several of his colleaugues for lying, making false statements about crimes, altering statements or withholding evidence.

He divorced Winnie because of her militancy, shortly after he was released he separated fom her, divorcing her the legally required 4 years later.

Yes, but he had been planning guerilla warfare if the bombings didn't work out as planned, gaining funds from the Soviets among others, who hardly are the type to be giving out free advice to people who weren't about to attack. He would have followed that train of thought had he not been imprisoned. McGuinness was never imprisoned for such a length of time. That's the difference.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Yes, but he had been planning guerilla warfare if the bombings didn't work out as planned, gaining funds from the Soviets among others, who hardly are the type to be giving out free advice to people who weren't about to attack. He would have followed that train of thought had he not been imprisoned. McGuinness was never imprisoned for such a length of time. That's the difference.

We are talking South Africa of the 60's pmsl. Mandela wasnt found fuilty of murder, or conspiracy to cause murder, he was found guilty of charges of sabotage and also plotting to cause the invasion of South Africa.(the equivalent of treason). Leading workers on an illegal strike and being a member of the ANC.

McGuinness on the other hand was found guilty of being in possession of a very large amount of explosives and a few thousand rounds of ammunition in the Irish Republic. If Mandela had of been caught with that lot back in South Africa when he was arrested he would have been hung, no ifs or buts.

And PIRA sent people to Libya and the Lebanon, they even trained alongside Hezbollah. The stickies sent people to Russia as well. At the time the USSR financed lots of organisations and offered lots of training to them too, in the hope they would spread the good word of communism.

McGuinness was responsible for a lot of deaths, believe me. He is no folk hero. Now it is politically expedient to deal with him in the political arena. Although being a murderous Ba**ard, like Adams he had the sense to realise the way to acheive their aims either partially or in full was not through bomb and bullet but through the ballet box.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

We are talking South Africa of the 60's pmsl. Mandela wasnt found fuilty of murder, or conspiracy to cause murder, he was found guilty of charges of sabotage and also plotting to cause the invasion of South Africa.(the equivalent of treason). Leading workers on an illegal strike and being a member of the ANC.

McGuinness on the other hand was found guilty of being in possession of a very large amount of explosives and a few thousand rounds of ammunition in the irish Republic. If Mandela had of been caught with that lot back in South Africa when he was arrested he would have been hung, no ifs or buts.

And the IRA amongst others sent people to Liba, the Lebanon, they even trained alongside Hezbollah.

McGuinness was responsible for a lot of deaths, believe me. He is no folk hero. Now it is politically expedient to deal with him in the political arena. Although being a murderous Ba**ard, like Adams he had the sense to realise the way to acheive their aims either partially or in full was not through bomb and bullet but through the ballet box.

Because he wasn't actually tried for murder, which some wanted to happen at the time. He was willing to fight by means of physical force, just like McGuinness. It's naive to think that he would have become the pacifist had he been entrenched in warfare like his comrades at the time, in an organization that he created and trained. He never critized the path they had taken - in actual fact he acknowledge that an aggressive stance was needed.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Because he wasn't actually tried for murder, which some wanted to happen at the time. He was willing to fight by means of physical force, just like McGuinness. It's naive to think that he would have become the pacifist had he been entrenched in warfare like his comrades at the time, in an organization that he created and trained. He never critized the path they had taken - in actual fact he acknowledge that an aggressive stance was needed.

Wrong again he did criticise the taking of life by the ANC many many times.

If they had wanted to charge him with murder they would have, if he had been found guilty, which if they had anything at all on him he would have been, he would have been executed. End of a pain in the butt for the South African government.

As for sanctioning the Church Street bombing, if thats what you were referring to, well we only have his word he did, plus if you accept his word on that you should by default also accept him saying it was this act that steered him away from violence. You cant have it both ways.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Wrong again he did criticise the taking of life by the ANC many many times.

If they had wanted to charge him with murder they would have, if he had been found guilty, which if they had anything at all on him he would have been, he would have been executed. End of a pain in the butt for the South African government.

As for sanctioning the Church Street bombing, if thats what you were referring to, well we only have his word he did, plus if you accept his word on that you should by default also accept him saying it was this act that steered him away from violence. You cant have it both ways.

He never flatly condemned their tactics while he was in prison, that's the bottom line. His actions are that of a crafty and astute politician as well as fighter. Divorcing Winnie was politically motivated. Adams and McGuinness have never been directly linked to any bombings that took place after a certain time - that's how these organizations exist.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Adams and McGuinness have never been directly linked to any bombings that took place after a certain time - that's how these organizations exist.

LOL and what about all those bombings, shootings punishment beatings, kneecappings, toppings, drug running, post office jobs, oh the list goes on and on. There is evidence against the pair of them, maybe not enough to convict on all counts. but no doubt more than enough to bring charges against both of them.

Why weren't charges brought? Because they were both willing to reign in the more militant of their associates, if need be fatally, in order to get closer to their long term aims.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

LOL and what about all those bombings, shootings punishment beatings, kneecappings, toppings, drug running, post office jobs, oh the list goes on and on. There is evidence against the pair of them, maybe not enough to convict on all counts. but no doubt more than enough to bring charges against both of them.

Why weren't charges brought? Because they were both willing to reign in the more militant of their associates, if need be fatally, in order to get closer to their long term aims.

All political baby, just like in S.A. And the ANC were partial to the odd bout of punishment beatings too. Actually Amnesty found it very difficult to support Mandela at times, particularly when he wasn't condemning the violence perpetrated by his organization.

Oh, and one more thing: Mandela openly admitted to signing off on the Church Street bombing in his autobiography.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Oh, and one more thing: Mandela openly admitted to signing off on the Church Street bombing in his autobiography.

Yeah I know, thats why I meantioned it in a previous post, #21.