Journalist claims Martin McGuinness is still a member of the IRA

aah c'mn, just cause youse can't/won't engage in the truth, u result to childish snide little remarks, act like a man & take it on the chin.

Sirpeter can eloquently speak for himself.I do not live in your yellow brick world or give relevance to your Madhatter view of the world.Madhatter - "no wonder your late why! this watch is two days slow" unquote.

seano - everybody knows who was responsible for the 1st murders & I'm assuming that if you are quite rightly condemning the UVF, then you are equally condemning all other terrorist organisations in the north inc PIRA. Back to my main point, the RA from 1916-1992 didn't fight to preserve an Ulster run by the UK, they didn't win & as more & more relevations about the antics of GA & co come to light, you will see that if Bobby Sands was sacrificed for nothing. Be prepared for the Finucane enquiry, the whole rotten republican edifice will come crumbling down when we find out exactly what he was up to, i'm afraid that Hughes, Gillen, Copeland, McIntryre, O'Rawe all PIRA volunteers can't be dismissed, they have all opened up to the truth, for how long will you & sirpeter live in denial.

If you read my post 14th. oct.Your friends in the UVF Fired the first terrorist bullet in 69. "Status quo" I have no idea what you are talking about and I don't think you know yourself.The majority of the Irish people have always wanted a united Ireland the only differ on the means to attain that goal.You gloss over facts to prove some ridiculous point.

seano - youse no nothing about your own history, various RA didn't fight to preserve the status quo, they fought to end british rule in Ireland, PIRA leaders decided that the loyalists were getting the upper hand in the violence stakes & the craven attitude of the leadership who for years condoned the murders of 100s of people in their vain attempt to force a UI against the wishes of the people of Ireland suddenly saw the light when the UVF started to murder shinners/provies, the UFF killing of Eddie Fullerton proved that nowhere were they safe & 9/11 allowed them to hide behind this tragic event & sue for peace. It has taken us nearly 100 years to realise that violence doesn't pay, i couldn't care less whether McG gets elected or not, it won't deliver a UI, you can't airbrush 3000 lives out of history. I now know that youse & sirpeter are not the same person, even he knows that the RA didn't fight to preserve british rule.

And you should add "thats why the majority of nationalists in the north vote Sinn Fein".The unionist would not negotiate any civil rights for nationalists. The nationalist are where they are today because Sinn Fein/IRA bombed the Brits/unionists to the negotiating table.John Hume was "a bottle half full"(to use his own words) type of guy.Yes McGuiness will have my support unfortunatley I cannot vote.History proves your "list" gained nothing for nationalists(except maybe Hume). Try as you may to rewrite history Sinn Fein won the day.

@ Seanolmealbourne - that's right. In fact, the troubles only really got started when loyalist mobs attacked and burned out Catholic neighbourhoods - as an 18 year old, our current President, Mary McAleese, witnessed the destruction, all happily sponsored by the unionist B-Specials. What the Catholic community endured in those years from the Northern Ireland state was cruel, barbaric, and utterly inhumane. And any time they marched for civil rights they were either beaten or shot.It just demonstrates the depth of charecter of these people that the vast majority of NI Catholics - Mary McAleese, Seamus Heaney, Fr. Denis Faul, John Hume, Eamonn McCann, Nell McCafferty to name just a few of the more prominent ones - REFUSED to do as was done to them. The majority of NI Catholics did not support the IRA, did not vote Sinn Fein, and in the end it was THEIR perseverance that led to the 1998 Belfast Agreement. The SDLP always refused to condone violence, something that Sinn Fein only started doing in 1998. But by then, the IRA had murdered over 1700 people. In other words, they acted as badly as the loyalists and British. Worse, in fact, because they killed more people. They placed bombs in packed pubs, targeted SDLP activists, murdered Irish senators, cops, soliders and civillians. They did this because for decades they consistently refused to follow the democratic will of the Irish people, who still abhor the IRA. THAT is why Mr. McGuinness is so repellent to so many Irish people. He will not have my vote on October 27. Will he have yours?

Fergananim may wish to know that the 1st,sectarian murders(J.Scullion,P.Ward wrer carried out by the UVF.The first bombs were laid by loyalists.The first state killings were the murder of Sam Devenny by the RUC and 9yr.old Pat Rooney was also shot by the RUC as he slept in bed.The first British soldier murdered in the north was Hugh McCabe.Hugh(a catholic)was home on leave,he was shot by the RUC. All of the above murders took place in 1969.Not one of the above murderers faced a trial,in fact they were treated as heros in their community. When you lay the blame make sure you have the facts sir. BTW if you are using gaelic in your name the gaelic for "name" is "ainm"

From the start of the Troubles, the SDLP, the Irish govenrnment, all the leaders of the the Catholic church in Ireland and a majority of Irish people north and south said the only way to achieve peace and civil rights in Northern Ireland was by consent. Not until 1998 did Sinn Fein and the IRA agree. Too late for the hundreds of Irish people murdered by the IRA.

Reynolds did not have the guts to accept the Adams/Hume document.He consulted his masters in London and was told no.We all know the gutless stickies and their commitment to a communist agenda.They failed and changed their name to the Workers party which was run by a few inntellectual snobs at Trinity college.You know the type fallsr sitting around in the comfort of their leather lounge sweets(red or brown of course) discussing what is best for the workers of Ireland. They think "a spanner is something you take for a walk whilst the wife mixes the cocktails".Mary Robinson was one of those Sticky/worker party types, with an upperclass background.

i suppose coming from a 'stickie' family, you class us as pro-brits, that's what i love about the republican movement, they can't stop the in-fighting. The simple truth of the matter is that the south were asked to vote for peace or war & they chose peace, not surprising really, since the UVF saw them off in 1972-74. My mate's uncle who was in the UVF he was fighting for his very survival, his home, the right to be british, his family not some bastardised fantasy of a UI that has never existed except in the fevered minds of the most committed republican, the truth is that the murder & mayhem that followed the shankill bombing showed that the loyalists viewed terrorism as the ultimate weapon against the NI catholic population, we the nationalists blinked 1st, quite rightly to give peace a chance, who was riding to our rescue, certainly not our southern cousins who couldn't wait to vote for the status quo. Albert Reynolds vetoed the Hume-Adams document, the most undemocratic document that JH has ever put his name too & the rest is history.

fallsr the question on the republic was loaded to split the republican vote.I'll simplify the referendum question for you. Ist. question"do you wish to retain the queen as head of state"2nd. Question "do you vote for a republic with a president elected by parliament.This question split the republican vote as around 30% of the people wanted a president elected by the people and they felt disenfranchised.the monarchy was uoheld by 40% of the vote. The referndum was worded by a cynical monarchist PM. The ROI voted to change the constitution to remoe articles 2 and three. The question was never asked do you accept a divided Ireland. You are using your voodoo maths again fallsr or skewing the truth to suit your pro british stance.

seano - the aussies can have a republic by voting in a free democratic election for 1 - in Ireland we had 2 democratic votes by the South & the North to preserve the status quo & not use the armalite as a solution to our troubles, why do you have so much trouble disrepecting democratic elections when they don't give you the solution you seek.

As I said I am stuck with her as head of state,why are you stating the obvious. If you wish to give Liz her full title and grovel like a true west brit so be it.I'll grudgingly accept the status quo in Australia.BTW a referendum on the monarchy about 10 years ago garnered less than 40% votes for the monarchy .The phraseology of the question was loaded to split the republican vote.The Aussies want a republic and you and your Finn Gael mates long for the return of YOUR majesty.

Seano: Thanks. I did have a lovely day! I could even hear yer cage rattling here in the 'green and lovely lanes ...' and could barely stop laughing at your pathetic attempt to make an even more pointless pointless point based on a couple of 'typos'!!! Look: there is a big difference between my few innocent typing errors and your ridiculous 'intellectual' stance. I can always be more careful, but you are a hopeless cause! Btw: who the hell is 'maggie'? ~~~ If you are unhappy with the Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II as your Head of State, you should accept the will of the Australian people who voted democratically to keep her. Tough luck,cobber! As I said 'I never lost a man' - but if you were with me, I might have wished I had! Now:Try and spend less time out in the sun without your auld skillara ...