|
Post by Jim on Mar 1, 2008 2:21:59 GMT
Yes, we've been there, the whole state has been there, we all know he was in the IRA, his position is disputed but it hasnt lost him the vote either, so regardless of his position in the IRA, he has a mandate no one can take away.
The head of special branch isnt a member of a party with the most nationalist and republican votes, is he? If he was, let him be first minister, I can't object to it. I would like to say "no", but I wouldn't.
We call for heads to be rolled because an official regimentl army from a country thats a member of the UN, EU and NATO and therefore has legitimacy and international recognition, shot its own civilians. The IRA was neither of those, it was a paramilitary organisation. You may not think thats fair, but thats politics.
I keep saying 30 years ago because McGuinness stepped down his role in the IRA when he entered electoral politics during the transformation of SF from a protest party into a political party.
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Mar 1, 2008 9:48:51 GMT
Some attitudes on here completely stink and are so double standard i almost have to re read things time and time again to ensure i'm getting it right.
Stop bull shitting on behalf of the IRA, they played their part in the troubles. It doesn't matter one iota what position they held or if they were in government or elected or whatever. You cannot call for truths from one side and expect your own to be kept hush hush. If SF demand the truth then they bloody well have to tell some home truths, regardless of positions held in todays world. Either they are prepared to give the Unionist community answers and in return get the answers they require regarding collusion etc or they accept what has gone on and we accept what has gone and then we all try and move on.
|
|