Martin McGuinness

[Earl Aelfheah]

ive always had a sneaking suspicion that people like McGuiness (and for that matter the guy who ran people over in Westminster), attach themselves to causes largely as a way of rationalising /excusing their violent tendencies and desire to hurt people. If he'd grown up in a different era, he'd have probably still been hurting people but perhaps under some different banner, or none.

[Alan Medic]

Pure speculation Rah. Poets, writers attached themselves to the cause of Independence in Ireland. That guy on the bridge....fuck knows who he was fighting.

[Earl Aelfheah]

OF course it is speculation, yes. But like I say, I've always had a suspicion that certain people have violent tendancies and if they can will gravitate to violent movements.

[Mick Mac]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Maybe his passing should be

> seen as an opportunity to put another bit of a

> generally shameful past behind us.

History is an opportunity to learn about causes, effects and solutions

You recent posts suggest you are a very simplistic thinker, willing to bury your head in the sand of easy conclusions

It might have been better if you had sat back and ate your popcorn as you suggested you might do originally

[Otta]

Mick I think it "might have been better" for everybody if you hadn't started this troll edged thread in the first place. Chapel of rest would have done the trick.

[steveo]

Despite the fact that everybody who disagrees with me is wrong...

I reckon the level of discourse on here has been pretty civilised really considering the gravity of the subject matter and the passions it engenders. There's been very little in the way of ad hominem outbursts and name calling so in that spirit I'm calling for a peace agreement.

Let it rest

[Alan Medic]

Are you ready to hand back the 6 counties then? ☺

[steveo]

I will, if you do a little dance

 

[red devil]

No Surrender to the Soft Jig, everyone knows the Sand Dancers are The People...FTSJ!

 

[Mick Mac]

MeGuinness

 

[Loz]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you ready to hand back the 6 counties then?

Sort of. We've decided to give them to Scotland as a leaving present.

[rodneybewes]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OF course it is speculation, yes. But like I say,

> I've always had a suspicion that certain people

> have violent tendancies and if they can will

> gravitate to violent movements.

Like chummy old Nelson Mandela in that respect I suppose.

[rendelharris]

rodneybewes Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > OF course it is speculation, yes. But like I

> say,

> > I've always had a suspicion that certain people

> > have violent tendancies and if they can will

> > gravitate to violent movements.

>

> Like chummy old Nelson Mandela in that respect I

> suppose.

Sorry, can't let that pass: Mandela did not actually carry out any terrorist activities as he was captured and imprisoned while they were still in the planning stage. However, the activities he was planning were specifically acts of sabotage, chosen to eliminate casualties as far as possible - it was planned to bomb railway lines and other infrastructure at night when there would be nobody around to be injured. To lump Mandela in with those of violent tendencies who join violent movements as an outlet for their violence is frankly shameful, I haven't heard that sort of cr@p since the Young Conservatives were going round wearing "Hang Nelson Mandela" T-shirts in the '80s.

[Otta]

In short, don't be fucktard Rodders.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rodneybewes Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rahrahrah Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > OF course it is speculation, yes. But like I

> > say,

> > > I've always had a suspicion that certain

> people

> > > have violent tendancies and if they can will

> > > gravitate to violent movements.

> >

> > Like chummy old Nelson Mandela in that respect

> I

> > suppose.

>

> Sorry, can't let that pass: Mandela did not

> actually carry out any terrorist activities as he

> was captured and imprisoned while they were still

> in the planning stage. However, the activities he

> was planning were specifically acts of sabotage,

> chosen to eliminate casualties as far as possible

> - it was planned to bomb railway lines and other

> infrastructure at night when there would be nobody

> around to be injured. To lump Mandela in with

> those of violent tendencies who join violent

> movements as an outlet for their violence is

> frankly shameful, I haven't heard that sort of

> cr@p since the Young Conservatives were going

> round wearing "Hang Nelson Mandela" T-shirts in

> the '80s.

Mandela explicitly said the MK was a terrorist organisation. The MK were more careful than most terrorist groups in selecting targets but civilians were still killed. And, y'know, the IRA and MK had joint operations, and happily collaborated with other dodge merchants: the PLO, Gadaffi's regime, Honecker, the Soviet Union...

[rodneybewes]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rodneybewes Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rahrahrah Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > OF course it is speculation, yes. But like I

> > say,

> > > I've always had a suspicion that certain

> people

> > > have violent tendancies and if they can will

> > > gravitate to violent movements.

> >

> > Like chummy old Nelson Mandela in that respect

> I

> > suppose.

>

> Sorry, can't let that pass: Mandela did not

> actually carry out any terrorist activities as he

> was captured and imprisoned while they were still

> in the planning stage. However, the activities he

> was planning were specifically acts of sabotage,

> chosen to eliminate casualties as far as possible

> - it was planned to bomb railway lines and other

> infrastructure at night when there would be nobody

> around to be injured. To lump Mandela in with

> those of violent tendencies who join violent

> movements as an outlet for their violence is

> frankly shameful, I haven't heard that sort of

> cr@p since the Young Conservatives were going

> round wearing "Hang Nelson Mandela" T-shirts in

> the '80s.

Tripe, he was leader of the MK and pleaded guilty to scores of acts of public violence. Amnesty International wouldn't take up his case because of it. It's odd how the hagiographists can't accept that he was a man who embraced violence and later became a man of peace, and you know what, it worked. The similarities between him and McGuinness are large - both men of violence who became men of peace and made a massive difference to their societies, both getting the peace prize for what they did. I won't bother with the young conservative jibe. Pathetic.

[rodneybewes]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In short, don't be fucktard Rodders.

A pathetic and gratuitous insult with no intellectual effort behind it at all, you don't even refute what I said. Go your way.

[rodneybewes]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rodneybewes Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > rahrahrah Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > OF course it is speculation, yes. But like

> I

> > > say,

> > > > I've always had a suspicion that certain

> > people

> > > > have violent tendancies and if they can

> will

> > > > gravitate to violent movements.

> > >

> > > Like chummy old Nelson Mandela in that

> respect

> > I

> > > suppose.

> >

> > Sorry, can't let that pass: Mandela did not

> > actually carry out any terrorist activities as

> he

> > was captured and imprisoned while they were

> still

> > in the planning stage. However, the activities

> he

> > was planning were specifically acts of

> sabotage,

> > chosen to eliminate casualties as far as

> possible

> > - it was planned to bomb railway lines and

> other

> > infrastructure at night when there would be

> nobody

> > around to be injured. To lump Mandela in with

> > those of violent tendencies who join violent

> > movements as an outlet for their violence is

> > frankly shameful, I haven't heard that sort of

> > cr@p since the Young Conservatives were going

> > round wearing "Hang Nelson Mandela" T-shirts in

> > the '80s.

>

> Mandela explicitly said the MK was a terrorist

> organisation. The MK were more careful than most

> terrorist groups in selecting targets but

> civilians were still killed. And, y'know, the IRA

> and MK had joint operations, and happily

> collaborated with other dodge merchants: the PLO,

> Gadaffi's regime, Honecker, the Soviet Union...

Let's not let that get in the way of a good story!

[rendelharris]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mandela explicitly said the MK was a terrorist

> organisation. The MK were more careful than most

> terrorist groups in selecting targets but

> civilians were still killed. And, y'know, the IRA

> and MK had joint operations, and happily

> collaborated with other dodge merchants: the PLO,

> Gadaffi's regime, Honecker, the Soviet Union...

That's funny, as at his trial Mandela quoted the MK manifesto:

Our men are armed and trained freedom fighters not "terrorists". We are fighting for democracy?majority rule?the right of the Africans to rule Africa. We are fighting for a South Africa in which there will be peace and harmony and equal rights for all people. We are not racialists, as the white oppressors are. The African National Congress has a message of freedom for all who live in our country.

I can't find any records of deaths caused by MK before Mandela was imprisoned, can you? And if there were some, Mandela and his comrades were fighting against apartheid (and only turned to the sabotage plan after the Sharpeville massacre) - he was not, as the very stupid post (not yours) above claims, simply a violent man joining a violent movement for an excuse to be violent, as his actions upon his release amply proved. I actually find it quite extraordinary that this point even has to be argued.

[rodneybewes]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Mandela explicitly said the MK was a terrorist

> > organisation. The MK were more careful than

> most

> > terrorist groups in selecting targets but

> > civilians were still killed. And, y'know, the

> IRA

> > and MK had joint operations, and happily

> > collaborated with other dodge merchants: the

> PLO,

> > Gadaffi's regime, Honecker, the Soviet Union...

>

> That's funny, as at his trial Mandela quoted the

> MK manifesto:

>

> Our men are armed and trained freedom fighters not

> "terrorists". We are fighting for

> democracy?majority rule?the right of the Africans

> to rule Africa. We are fighting for a South Africa

> in which there will be peace and harmony and equal

> rights for all people. We are not racialists, as

> the white oppressors are. The African National

> Congress has a message of freedom for all who live

> in our country.

>

> I can't find any records of deaths caused by MK

> before Mandela was imprisoned, can you? And if

> there were some, Mandela and his comrades were

> fighting against apartheid (and only turned to the

> sabotage plan after the Sharpeville massacre) - he

> was not, as the very stupid post (not yours) above

> claims, simply a violent man joining a violent

> movement for an excuse to be violent, as his

> actions upon his release amply proved. I actually

> find it quite extraordinary that this point even

> has to be argued.

I have sympathy for Mandela and his fighting against apartheid and admire him for turning that into something remarkably positive. I feel pretty much the same way about Martin McGuinness. I'm not reducing either of them. I have admiration for both.

[rendelharris]

rodneybewes Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Tripe, he was leader of the MK and pleaded guilty

> to scores of acts of public violence. Amnesty

> International wouldn't take up his case because of

> it. It's odd how the hagiographists can't accept

> that he was a man who embraced violence and later

> became a man of peace, and you know what, it

> worked. The similarities between him and

> McGuinness are large - both men of violence who

> became men of peace and made a massive difference

> to their societies, both getting the peace prize

> for what they did. I won't bother with the young

> conservative jibe. Pathetic.

Martin McGuinness won the Nobel Peace prize, did he? No he didn't. Nelson Mandela pleaded guilty to scores of acts of violence? No he didn't, he admitted four charges of sabotage. Your unpleasantness is thoroughly matched by your ignorance.

[rendelharris]

rodneybewes Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have sympathy for Mandela and his fighting

> against apartheid and admire him for turning that

> into something remarkably positive. I feel pretty

> much the same way about Martin McGuinness. I'm not

> reducing either of them. I have admiration for

> both.

What utter rubbish, under rahrahrah's post:

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OF course it is speculation, yes. But like I say,

> I've always had a suspicion that certain people

> have violent tendancies and if they can will

> gravitate to violent movements.

You wrote:

Like chummy old Nelson Mandela in that respect I suppose.

So you were explicitly saying that you thought Mandela was a person of violent tendencies who gravitated to a violent movement. It's rather too late to try to take that contemptible remark back.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ....Poets, writers attached

> themselves to the cause of Independence in

> Ireland.

Sure, but they didn't torture and murder people. You can support the cause of independence in many ways, but those who attack and kill civilians without regret (even once the fight is over), probably aren't particularly nice people.

[Otta]

rodneybewes Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > In short, don't be fucktard Rodders.

>

>

> A pathetic and gratuitous insult with no

> intellectual effort behind it at all, you don't

> even refute what I said. Go your way.

Yep, not big, not clever, but about as much as your "intellectual" fantasy deserved.

[JoeLeg]

And this thread was going so well...

My opinion, which is worth about as much as spit on a hotplate, is that the two people are not comparable. Yes, they were both terrorists, yes, they both turned their back on the gun and bomb, but there I believe the similarity ends.

For Mandela the stakes were much, much higher. A failure to ensure a smooth and above all peaceful transition for South Africs had real potential to result in appalling violence. Mandela - and President de Klerk - knew the risks, and the likely result of the apartheid regime trying to hold on to power. Both of them sensed the opportunity, knew the timing was crucial, and handled it deftly.

N Ireland, for all the tragedy, was not at the same risk of collapse. I fully recognise the sectarian divides that existed, and the intensity with which some felt - and still feel - them. But I submit that these were not the same as the prejudices running deep within both sides in South Africa.

Mandela was possibly the only person who could guide an entire nation out of the terrible legacy it had created. McGuinness, for all that he was at the centre of the peace process, was not playing for such high stakes. No one outside of the Middle East has in recent history. I don't mean to denigrate what McGuinness achieved, but simply to say that they were operating on different levels.

Just my opinion, feel free to tell me I'm wrong.