Pat Cannon Commemoration , Dublin .

by Sharon. - Individual. Mon Jul 16, 2012 16:01

Hi !

This commemoration is going ahead as outlined above , and a bus offering a return service will be leaving from 223 Parnell Street at 4.40pm (price per seat €3 [three Euro] per person - just enough to cover the diesel costs!) and Andy Connolly will Chair the event.
The main oration will be delivered by Paddy Tidd , from Ballyfermot , Dublin.
Thanks!
Sharon.

by Damien M - PW Mon Jul 16, 2012 18:30

"They crossed the border from Donegal into Tyrone and were approaching the town of Castlederg when the device exploded prematurely."

What was the target, were there military bases there, or was it the civilian population of Castlederg?

by Sharon. - Individual. Mon Jul 16, 2012 19:23

Hi Damien M !

I presume the intended target was either commercial or military but, as far as I know, that information was never disclosed.

Thanks!
Sharon.

by Damien M - PW Tue Jul 17, 2012 16:15

Commercial - the height of all folly!

by Sharon. - Individual. Tue Jul 17, 2012 23:30

Hi !

The commemoration for Pat Cannon was held today , as advertised and, during his oration, Paddy Tidd referenced political events which took place in the year that Pat Cannon was born (1955) and also made reference to same in relation to the year that the man died (1976).
A few pics from the commemoration can be viewed on the 'Facebook' page listed at the 'Related Link' below ('sign-in' may be required) and a full report (and more pics) will be carried in the August 2012 edition of 'Saoirse' , which goes to print on Wednesday, 1st of that month.

Thanks,
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Jul 18, 2012 14:15

.. kids had been succesful in their 'mission'(directed by those reluctant to deliver the package themselves, no doubt)just what would it have achieved besides justifying more repression and deepening Orange paranoia?
Oh, and maybe killing and maiming innocent civilians in their quest for martial machismo glory?

And can you be sure they were not being directed by planted MI6 operatives false-flagging for just that purpose?

Britannia has always liked to justify her atrocities by framing them judiciously with black propaganda...and useful testosterone-dampened 'boys' have always been willing fodder.

Please enlighten me, Sharon...these are serious questions.

by Sharon. - Individual. Wed Jul 18, 2012 20:28

.....Opus , perhaps you could ask them in a "serious" manner ?

Hi Opus !

Far be it for me to attempt to "enlighten" one such as yourself , the very man that has "enlightened" many a poster on this Site !
But 'seriously' (!) - if you could frame your query in a less propagandistic style then perhaps we can have a chat.
And , meanwhile, if you are genuinely interested in 'kids/boys' and the political situation in this country , could I suggest you read the last article to be found on the 'Related Link' below ?
Thanks , Opus - hear from you later.
No doubt.

Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Jul 18, 2012 21:39

and also that I read attentatively.

You accuse me of propaganda.

You accuse me of not being serious.

You answer none of my considered enquiries.

If you consider them serious questions, answer them.

I will leave the readers to decide who is propagandising and evading serious issues.

I've looked at your link. Please do not presume I am historically illiterate.

You might begin by elaborating on just whom, or what ideology you think I am 'propagandising'.

I reserve the right to draw my own conclusions as to your own agenda if you cannot respond a little less evasively.

I have been paying attention without asking these questions for while. They remain serious.

Please try and treat them as such. I will not be dismissed flippantly. I make no assumptions as to your motives. You will reveal them yourself with your response.

by Sharon. - Individual. Thu Jul 19, 2012 14:42

Hi Opus !

I'll take your word for it , that you do "read attentatively" but, as evident by your post above (Wednesday July 18th) , you don't always write accordingly.
Re "propaganda" - I wrote that yours of July 18th was 'framed in a propagandistic style' - which it is - but perhaps you would prefer the word 'flippant' instead ? Either way , its style indicated to me that it is not a "serious" post , using your previous comments on this site as a yardstick , and is not a post in which serious (ie "considered enquiries") were made , as the method employed by you is more suited in trying to get a verbal dig in rather than to ask genuine questions.

Why should you viewing the link I supplied indicate to you that I 'presume you to be historically illiterate' ? I don't understand how you made such a link (pardon the pun!) ?
The ideology you are attempting to propagate against in yours of 18th July is Irish republicanism, an ideology which, in a flippant manner , you attempted to mock , using the deaths of two young men to do so. And I am not bold enough to attempt to deny you 'the right to draw your own conclusions' but I am bold enough (!) to expect the same grace in return from you.
Finally , Opus - if you post a flippant comment for my attention then don't be so surprised when you fail to get a 'serious' answer as I'm under no obligation to 'play along' with that which you seem to consider 'humorous'.
Thanks!
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Thu Jul 19, 2012 16:26

I will leave it to any reader to make their own decisions as to whether my questions have serious content or are the flippant 'propagandistic' stylistics you inpute.

I see no reason, given your evasive and dismissive response, not to view your post as at best deluded and immature posturing, or something possibly even more sinister, an attempt to recruit other innocents for your glory-bound gesture blood-letting.

I find your answers vaccuus, shallow, self-serving, and reminiscent of standard political refusal to engage with anything resembling democratic accountablity.
I also find your usurpation of republicanism offensive. Who appointed you?
But then I am well used to meeting such self-appointed arbiters of the one true line, and the sectarian factionalisms they generate in their contentions. 'With us or against us' Republicans..now who was it revived that strain recently?
It is the same gung-ho jingoism that has sent dupes to die(and kill) for flags and slogans and utopian pipedreams down the centuries, usually by armchair generals ready to sacrafice gullible idealists for their own material ends.

Dangerous cant.

Which is more or less what I was expecting, though hitherto I was prepared to extend the benefit of the doubt.

I had hoped you might have been capable of defending your actions and arguing your case. Some republicans can. But they tend to have thought through what they are about and recognised the gravity of their actions.

Slan leat, abhaile.

by Sharon. - Individual. Thu Jul 19, 2012 17:18

Hi again , Opus !

If your questions (Wednesday July 18th) were genuine then you would have framed them as such , but you didn't : instead you attempted to present both young men as 'dupes brain-washed by evil Godfathers' or some such similar spin ie ".. kids.... (directed by those reluctant to deliver the package themselves, no doubt).... justifying more repression and deepening Orange paranoia... killing and maiming innocent civilians in their quest for martial machismo glory.... useful testosterone-dampened 'boys' ..."
That is plainly an attempt on your part , Opus , to get a verbal dig in , poorly dressed-up as a 'genuine and serious' post. I have seen better (ie not so blatant) 'stir-it-up' attempts over the years from others and, having read and enjoyed most of your posts on this site , I expected a better effort from you. But it seems I was promoting you above your level of competence - either that or you're just going through a 'dry spell' , and I hope it's the latter.
Slán go foill anois,
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite partyraed Thu Jul 19, 2012 19:17

..into the honest questions I posed.

I do not consider these deaths a subject for jest, or for 'stir' polemics. Nor do I welcome your attempts at matronising plaumause. You flatter yourself.

Your inability to discriminate between critical interrogation of motive, and a non-presented levity of your own projection, signifies a locked ideological mindset alergic to honest critique.

Who are you to judge my genuine intentions?And what have my other postings to do with this issue. I addressed the issue, not you personally, or your motives, though the reactive manner of your responses renders them increasingly suspect.

The phantom argument you erect is not the set of brief questions I posed, but an expedient smoke-screen of obfuscation and projected straw-decoys to serve your own denial of the hollowness and poverty of your own propagandising. Your republicanism is more religious, than rational. Blind faith in a ritualised liturgy without grasping, or even engaging with, the philosophical implications.

You can wrap all the green flags you like around your hollow case, I rest content you have exposed the poverty of your shallow 'republicanism'.

May the Irish republic never have to rely on such a feeble defense of its just case for instalation. Thankfully, the majority of Irish republicans, even the younger ones, of whom I am acquainted with a few, have a more developed political consciousness.

I suggest you revisit my questions, and take them seriously. You will meet them again.

by Sharon. - Individual Fri Jul 20, 2012 17:08

Hi Opus !

"Read what you will....into the honest questions I posed."
As stated - it's the manner in which you posed them , Opus , that I take issue with.

"I do not consider these deaths a subject for jest, or for 'stir' polemics. Nor do I welcome your attempts at matronising plaumause. You flatter yourself."
Then act accordingly , and frame your questions in a more neutral (=productive) way ie avoid 'loading' them as you did - " kids... (directed by those reluctant to deliver the package themselves, no doubt)....in their quest for martial machismo glory....useful testosterone-dampened 'boys' have always been willing fodder...."

"Your inability to discriminate between critical interrogation of motive, and a non-presented levity of your own projection, signifies a locked ideological mindset alergic to honest critique."
The "levity" , in this instance, is there in black and white and cannot now be undone. The "honest critique" is, however, absent.

"Who are you to judge my genuine intentions?"
Are you to 'big' , Opus, to have your intentions "judged" , do you think ?

"And what have my other postings to do with this issue."
I consider them to have been framed better , as I implied.

"I addressed the issue, not you personally, or your motives, though the reactive manner of your responses renders them increasingly suspect."
Not so : you wrote - "Please enlighten me, Sharon..."
You did in fact 'address me, personally'.

"The phantom argument you erect is not the set of brief questions I posed, but an expedient smoke-screen of obfuscation and projected straw-decoys to serve your own denial of the hollowness and poverty of your own propagandising. Your republicanism is more religious, than rational. Blind faith in a ritualised liturgy without grasping, or even engaging with, the philosophical implications."
Lol!
The "philosophical implications" as understood by "...testosterone-dampened 'boys'..." , you mean ? Very philosophical and grasping , indeed !

"You can wrap all the green flags you like around your hollow case, I rest content you have exposed the poverty of your shallow 'republicanism'.May the Irish republic never have to rely on such a feeble defense of its just case for instalation. Thankfully, the majority of Irish republicans, even the younger ones, of whom I am acquainted with a few, have a more developed political consciousness."
So your 'republican acquaintances' would have no issue with yours of July 18th ? They must be of the Fianna Fail variety !

"I suggest you revisit my questions, and take them seriously. You will meet them again."
I have 'met them' many times before and, if presented properly , have no problem with them.
But, when presented in the fashion you used they backfire due to the inflammatory tone employed.

And, finally , a genuine 'Thank You' to the Admin for leaving this thread opened , as I know they don't like 'chit-chat' threads , which is what this has become. I hope we won't be imposing on your generosity for much longer !
Thanks!
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Jul 20, 2012 18:12

Much ado about nothing...blow smoke and dodge..

Originally I was prepared to put it down to naivety.

But your convoluted and sophistic attempts to decoy, distort and dismiss, and your stubborn refusal to address the questions(plus the half-witticism attempt to insult about FF)indicate a more cynical and calculated undercurrrent.

I'll leave the intepretation of the exercise to any who might have bothered to read it. Whether you realise it or not, you did actually answer my questions, despite yourself. Any residual doubt I may have had about your interest in anything other than a group of self-reinforcing platitudes are banished. And I had been giving you the benefit of doubts.

Enjoy your comfortable ideological cul-de-sac. Its obvious you don't even have an answer for yourself. How could you, when you have never questioned your received trite shibboleths.

Your republic is as self-reflective and geriatrically bereft of social analysis as Fine Gael's green Toryism. They too, thought that by declaring a republic they could magic it into existence. Unlike your own, at least my parallel is founded on a legitimate comparison. It is not mere polemic, which I find this issue far too serious for, despite your inane accusations.

I trust the moderator will also consider it serious enough to leave at least the original questions and your refusal to respond.

by Sharon. - Individual. Fri Jul 20, 2012 21:59

Hi Opus !

Good grief , Opus - but you're predictable.
On this thread , anyway , but I look forward to a return to form from you elsewhere on a subject (and there are many , credit where it's due!) you feel more comfortable with.
And , like yourself , I hope the Admin will , when the time comes , 'lock' this thread rather then 'clean' it up as it is as good an example as any of how not to attempt a (loaded) post consisting of sly digs whilst trying to present same as a genuine query/concern.
Thanks for that , at least , a chara.
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:18

..I'm quite 'comfortable' to pursue this issue.

I've been confronting boneheaded militarist jingoism since I first refused to stand up with the regimented school for an anthem celebrating the pathetic music of guns and bullets as a solution to poverty, ignorance and endemic corrruption. I was raised in Dev's glorious republic of emigration and croziers. I recognise symtoms. The martial priestcraft is nothing new. It has many mutations still in its armoury.

And the thread, much as you might like to divert it now your propaganda has gone blowback, is not about opus.

You would be better advised to reread the thread with a less reflexive and reactionary, and more reflective and receptive, attitude. You might find my 'predictability' is actually just a consistent disgust with self-serving mindless bullshit.

Or you can keep digging. I'm comfortable either way. Your choice.

by Sharon. - Individual. Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:51

Hi Opus !

"..I'm quite 'comfortable' to pursue this issue."
As am I , as stated.
And, as stated, it's the manner in which you "pursue this issue" that I object to ie yours of July 18th (above).

"I've been confronting boneheaded militarist jingoism since I first refused to stand up with the regimented school for an anthem celebrating the pathetic music of guns and bullets as a solution to poverty, ignorance and endemic corrruption."
Yet you claim to have to have republican-minded friends (and not of the Fianna Fail variety !) : strange bedfellows.

" I was raised in Dev's glorious republic of emigration and croziers. I recognise symtoms. The martial priestcraft is nothing new. It has many mutations still in its armoury. "
A good topic for a new thread , but hardly suitable for this one ?

"And the thread, much as you might like to divert it now your propaganda has gone blowback, is not about opus."
Well !
No more compliments for you then !

"You would be better advised to reread the thread with a less reflexive and reactionary, and more reflective and receptive, attitude. You might find my 'predictability' is actually just a consistent disgust with self-serving mindless bullshit. "
And it would stand to you , even at this late stage , to reflect on your post of July 18th , which is where the "mindless bullshit" entered the mix.

"Or you can keep digging. I'm comfortable either way. Your choice."
Lol!
I'm not even warmed-up in relation to this style of 'discussion' , Opus - but I reckon the admin will 'crack' before you do !
We'll see : over to you....
Thanks!
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:29

..and keep trying to reverse the charges and make me, rather than your unreflective ideological propagandising, the issue.

The questions remain. I've revisited the comment several times. Your detection of some spurious levity remains in the eye of the beholder unwilling to confront their relevance. Your repeated attempts to project both motive and non-existent content are not working.

I see no need to restate them or reword them. But its increasingly obvious just who is 'uncomfortable'. The lady doth protest too much..to quote a percipient Englishman.

I will leave the admin to their own judgements; thats just another of your desperation red-herrings. You might be better off considering whether there is a grain of validity in my unpalatable questions.

Your tar-brush won't erase them.

by che guevara's ghost Sat Jul 21, 2012 20:12

Opus, don't you believe that under any military occupation, there comes a time when people rightly conclude that the democratic process is clearly exhausted / a dead end / totally stacked against them in service of the occupiers, and some people are left with the conclusion that all that is left is violence.

For example, what do you think of the greek protests? Clearly polite leafletting will not change austerity policies dictated from european banksters. However, violent protests meant that people drew a line beyond which it was unsafe to push them. Without that line, the banksters would keep pushing no?.

And how about the Palestinians? Should they just power leaflet Benjy notayahoo? No. Sometimes they need to fight back when Israel attacks or the next attack will push further, until their limit is found. Life is not always as neat and tidy as you might wish.

Pushback is often used as a guage of how far an oppressor can go. For instance, since there is no violent pushback on the streets in Ireland now, the European banksters are still squeezing us, waiting for us to pop.

Furthermore, should leaders always charge into battle on the front line with their troops and being the first to die? Surely that is a really stupid strategy, leaving your troops leaderless?.

The fact is, like it or not, there was an armed conflict here on this Island. BOTH sides did stuff that wasn't exactly glorious. That's the nature of such an asymmetric armed conflict. It's unpleasant out of control, frightening messy brutal and cruel by nature. That's why such armed struggle is usually only a last resort.

I am interested in your views on Che Guevara BTW. Was he a villan or a hero of the revolution??

However the fact remains these were brave young Irish men who chose to put their life on the line for what they believed was the longer term good of their country. I don't see many of those these days , do you? We should mourn their passing as we would a rare species going extinct.

Now what we see around us mostly is the utter dominance of the "lesser spotted me fein drunk irish boy in english league football jersey spouting celebrity crap" species. A lot of good these are even if you want to protest peacefully on the takeover of our country by banksters and financial terrorists (who only kill people indirectly) They are too busy buying booze in tesco to care and "aren't interested in politics"

I don't know what these young men intended to bomb, but if it was a crowded supermarket without any warning, then no
I certainly wouldn't support such an action.

However in my understanding, bombings (in the old days!!) were usually intended as a property damaging economically painful publicity stunt designed to gain political leverage and helping secret negotiatiors to be taken more seriously, despite having a clearly weaker hand than the military occupiers, and as such, coded warnings were always issued well in time to clear the areas when an IRA bomb was planted and the only reason that these were occasionally not received and acted upon in time was usually deliberate cynical delays by a sociopathic british security force trying to give some bad publicity to the IRA and not giving a crap about a few more dead paddies.

So yes, lets celebrate the bravery of a few young Irish men who were willing to die to help liberate their people from military occupation. Then let us hope such an awful scenario never ever happens here again.

Our state sees fit to kiss the queen's ass and regularly honour the Irish soldiers who died in imperialist armies in imperialist wars for profit (and YES, I include WWII in this! http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28159. )

In that context, I see little problem in honouring the bravery of these two soldiers. At least they didn't die just to make money for rich old men. They died trying to make a better world. That's a step up from most imperialist soldiers in the past and today who are little more than economic conscripts protecting imperialist wealth who die/kill for nothing.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sat Jul 21, 2012 21:03

That at least constitutes a reply, rather than evasion and personalised denials and distortions of the questions raised, even if makes presumptions and fails to answer the questions raised.

I'm not going to answer your every point, much of which I second.

Point 1. Nowhere did I question the bravery of these young lads(check the questions). That was NOT my criticism. I would prefer if people would read without presumptions. Many of the qualifications you raise yourself were prompting the original questions. I am not a pacifist, but I do not think we need any more glorification of bloodletting, particularly if there seems to be no more behind it than venting of anger, no matter how justified the anger...it only leads to firestorms of counter brutality.

Your bolt from the blue on Che takes us away again from the case in question. In short, there is a controversy at the moment about a possible memorial to the man in Galway. As someone who was in court for defacing the statue of Christopher Columbus in Galway on the grounds he was a racist, gold and slave hunting, dynasty-building ethnic-cleanser, my defense was that seeing as Connaught was Cromwell's reservation for the displaced Irish Galway was an inappropriate location for honouring such an imperial thug. I will not be campaigning for Che, but I would certainly respect any commemoration. I hope that answers.

Again, this thread has degenerated from a short set of simple questions into a diversionary personalisation...which does not bode well for those of us who are trying to promote some semblance of objective discussion of important issues on the merits of the issues themselves.

We're back to Behan's lament for the Irish propensity to elevate the split to the head of every irish political agenda. I can't recall his quote exactly but something to the effect that ...Most people have a nationality..the Jews and Irish have a psychosis. He knew it from the inside. And if we cannot criticise each others stances without desending to the infantile abuse of some the above, what do we found any polity on..the biggest fucking arsenal?

by Sharon. - Individual. Sat Jul 21, 2012 23:14

Hi Opus (and 'Ghost' ) !

"..and keep trying to reverse the charges and make me, rather than your unreflective ideological propagandising, the issue."
As I have said (more than once) , 'the issue' that I have with yours of July 18th is the flippant manner of the way you framed your questions/queries/comments. I'm not so much 'trying to reverse the charges' as attempting to get a clear line.

"The questions remain. I've revisited the comment several times. Your detection of some spurious levity remains in the eye of the beholder unwilling to confront their relevance. Your repeated attempts to project both motive and non-existent content are not working."
If you have indeed "revisited the (July 18th) comment several times" and somehow not noticed the arrogant flippancy in that post then the only conclusion I can arrive at is that you have taken on the values of a system you (allegedly ?) detest.

"I see no need to restate them or reword them. But its increasingly obvious just who is 'uncomfortable'. The lady doth protest too much..to quote a percipient Englishman."
I see no reason why you wouldn't "restate them or reword them" unless , that is, your intention was to distract rather then to enquire ?

"I will leave the admin to their own judgements; thats just another of your desperation red-herrings. You might be better off considering whether there is a grain of validity in my unpalatable questions."
Once again : I don't necessarily consider the actual (July 18th) questions "unpalatable" - rather it's the presentation of those questions that I find objectionable.

"Your tar-brush won't erase them."
I think the admin will tar us both with the same one !

(And thank you , 'Ghost' - good post !)
Thanks !
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sun Jul 22, 2012 10:47

..to the fog-inspector's office.

As I said, your repetitive tail-chasing evasions and attempts to make the questioner the issue smack of Carr Comms. methodology, and confirm the worst of my suspicions as to the vacuity of your 'republicanism'.
Pity. I had hoped for a shred of intelligent substance. Your replies are worthy of a mainstream press-officer....or a stalking horse for provocation.

It still amazes me the effort and time you put in to deconstruct my follow ups and misrepresent them...but no answer to the original simple question.

I'll repeat one of them, for anyone who has bothered to follow the convolutions.

'And can you be sure they are not being directed by planted MI6 operatives false flaggging for just that purpose?'

If you think that is a 'flippant' question...I'd suggest your silence and smoke-screnery flags itself.

It may still be just naivety(plenty of that about, and you don't seem bright enough to stop shooting your feet from under yourself)...but the benefit of the doubt is withdrawn. I'll leave others to make their own judgements, as they will.

Excuse my 'manners'.

by Sharon. - Individual. Sun Jul 22, 2012 19:17

Hi Opus !

That 'sample question' you (re-)posted is meaningless on its own in relation to the issue at hand (flippancy) due to your attempt to remove the context in which it was first posted.
The (re-) posted question - "And can you be sure they are not being directed by planted MI6 operatives false flaggging for just that purpose?" - omits the "purpose" you attributed to those two young men ie "....their quest for martial machismo glory?" and, as such, is an attempt at false representation of your own intention !

Why, then , would I need to 'misrepresent your words' when you do it for me ?
And your "manners" can , for now, be excused as I understand the bind you have placed yourself in and am well versed in personal attacks from people in that position - but I still think you're capable of much better !
Thanks!
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sun Jul 22, 2012 20:15

..is 'flippancy' ??

Sorry, Sharon, that is not the topic you flagged, unless you were originally being flippant with the lives of these young victims of manipulative opportunistic militarism.

Nor have I powers of 'removal'. The 'context', despite your best attempts, remains in situ.

I suggest you desist from dictating my '..own intention..' to suit your agenda.

The evidence remains.

yaint gonna smother it that easy.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sun Jul 22, 2012 20:23

'..in personal attacks..'.

That i have to grant you.

by Sharon. - Individual. Sun Jul 22, 2012 21:04

Hi Opus !

Yes indeed - the issue at hand is flippancy as evident in yours of July 18th , and your denial of same ever since , despite the context of that post remaining (as you noted) "in situ" on this thread. The "evidence remains" , you say - it certainly does !

And here is a sample of your personal attacks on me (re which the "evidence [also] remains" !) -
"...deluded and immature posturing....vaccuus, shallow, self-serving....offensive.....you flatter yourself.....more religious, than rational.....feeble defense....naivety.....convoluted....your inane accusations......boneheaded.....your unreflective ideological propagandising.....the vacuity of your 'republicanism'....."

"Regressive Hypocrite" ?
Who'd have thought.....
;-)
Thanks!
Sharon.

by che guevara's ghost Sun Jul 22, 2012 22:11

get a room you two. what has any of this bunfight got to do with the subject matter??

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:08

My questioning was never of the young lads themselves..I well understand the anger that drove them; and its their exploitation by cynical leeches or other gullible 'usefuI idiots' I set out to expose.
Nor did I initiate the personalising. The remarks quoted out of context by the propagandist were referring to her evasions, distortions and rationalisations.
I will take it from your comment, however, that that job has been done.

And if you cannot see what my reference to false-flag planted operatives has to do with the subject matter...reread it.

Meantime, let the moderator do the editing. Certain mindsets still require decommissioning. They have done enough damage. I do not wish to see a return to the same trenches people have worked hard to extricate themselves and others from. And often with as much, and more, bravery and committment as these youngsters.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:19

Thats just the other side of this simplistic black/white 'we're the dood guys' stupidity...first dehumanise the enemy...then you can preen your own inhumanity on a falsified moral high-ground.

Orange racism initiated the collission, but green counter-racism should not be cultivated as a solution. That just reduces us to a different shade of bigotry. Not what republics thrive on.

by Sharon. - Individual. Mon Jul 23, 2012 13:45

Hi 'Ghost' !

I agree re the "bunfight" but , as off-track as this thread is (and has been since July 18th) I hope the Admin will 'lock' rather than edit it , as it still serves a purpose in that it is a good example of how going overboard whilst attempting to stir the pot can backfire.
Less is more if that is your objective.

Thanks!
Sharon.

by Saintly Pete. Mon Jul 23, 2012 13:55

"The device exploded prematurely"

That means the bomber murdered himself and not the innocent people he was walking towards.

by Sharon. - Individual. Mon Jul 23, 2012 14:40

Hi Pete !

"I'm all Tears.
"The device exploded prematurely"
That means the bomber murdered himself and not the innocent people he was walking towards."

Read the OP , Pete - then 'walk' back here and correct yourself !
Thanks,
Sharon.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Jul 23, 2012 17:20

...is Irish republicanism..'. July 19th, 14.42.

Thats the problem with ideologues..they rationalise and defend their dogmatic docrines; and view any questioning of their liturgical creeds as a heretical attack on their very identity, which they have invested in their rigid salvationary doctrines.

Thinking is just so awkward and troublesome, and might require an admission of one's fallibility. And then, Allah forbid, you might learn to develope an idea and the capacity to rationally defend it.

It comes in multiple shades. The comfort of likeminded blinkered adherents to formulated mantras is one of the hardest things to let go. It requires acquiring a conscience of your own. A more painful experience the longer you postpone it.

So painful that many prefer to surrender that conscience and kill, or even die, on instruction from the structure built around the ideology. Very often, post their 'revolutions', the ideologues turn on each other as they realise that differences of interpretations of hitherto unifying 'truths' require further 'purifying' of their movements.

Orwell does excellent depictions. As does history itself, not least Irish.

by Sharon. - Individual. Mon Jul 23, 2012 20:29

Hi Opus !

"Thats the problem with ideologues..they rationalise and defend their dogmatic docrines; and view any questioning of their liturgical creeds as a heretical attack on their very identity, which they have invested in their rigid salvationary doctrines....etc"

And "that's the problem" with 'regressive hypocrites' - you repeatedly tell them that it's not their actual questions (queries/comments) that you take issue with but rather the (in this case , flippant) manner in which same was made (see Opus , July 18th , above) but they don't understand the point you are making or, more likely , pretend not to.

Did you by any chance fall off that statue in Galway , kid , after your successful mission (directed by those reluctant to 'deliver the package' themselves, no doubt) during your quest for martial machismo glory ?
And can you be sure that you weren't being directed by false-flagging operatives , keen to use useful testosterone-dampened 'boys' who have always been willing fodder ?
Please enlighten me, Opus...these are serious questions.
;-)
Thanks!
Sharon.