Martin McGuinness

[QUOTE=AntrimMan]In fairness, McGuinness has never really shyed away from his past and why should he?

I think when you see rev David Lattimers thoughts on him, there's more similarities than differences with people like Mandella.

Personally, I don't really understand the nomination, surely he'll have to give up deputy first minister to run?[/QUOTE]

Baldrick wrote: What wrong with being gay. Is it better to be a terrorist than a gay person. How would people like that every time our president goes around the world he is describes as ex terrorist on fox news or sky news or BBC or French or german tv.

Of course ex-terrorist cause that's manly and when he visits African countries he'll rip them a new arsehole. Chuck Norris aka Martin McGuiness v's David Norris aka Bruno.

This is how Irish Pride looks at the election

IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: Baldrick wrote: If norris has to answer about his past so should mc Guinness. Hypocrisy for anyone not to want noriss to run because of his past and yet support mc guiness and his past.     +1   As I said above though don't forget the usual Shinner bollixology ''whatever happend in the past should be left there.'' So you want to dwell on the past then? Funny how you said i was living in the 19th century last weekend when i was shouting for the yanks in the Rugby. You cant have it both ways. You either have to forget about the past or not.          Bit of a difference between a game of Rugby and somebody wanting to run for President. Oh you also said If I'm not mistaken having Norris as President would be an embarrasment yet you have no problem in voting for some like McGuinness. It wasnt the actual game of rugby but the principles with regards to the flag and anthem etc.., behind the game. I think you knew that. What i was questioning here was your hypocrisy when you said we shouldnt forget the past in this situation, while you were telling me last week to stop living in the past, not the morals of each candidate. I thought having Norris as president would be embarrassing because hes a gay. Not because of stuff that happened in the past.       Well done you go on about moving on from the past in relation to McGuinness and you come out with a bigoted remark like that Im not saying whether we should move on from the past or dwell on it im just highlighting your own hypocrisy when you said we should not forget the past. I just wouldnt be happy with a gay president. Im not afriad to say it. Also can you have any discussion without the use of a  or a . Its a bit lazy.

   

Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: Baldrick wrote: If norris has to answer about his past so should mc Guinness. Hypocrisy for anyone not to want noriss to run because of his past and yet support mc guiness and his past.     +1   As I said above though don't forget the usual Shinner bollixology ''whatever happend in the past should be left there.'' So you want to dwell on the past then? Funny how you said i was living in the 19th century last weekend when i was shouting for the yanks in the Rugby. You cant have it both ways. You either have to forget about the past or not.          Bit of a difference between a game of Rugby and somebody wanting to run for President. Oh you also said If I'm not mistaken having Norris as President would be an embarrasment yet you have no problem in voting for some like McGuinness. It wasnt the actual game of rugby but the principles with regards to the flag and anthem etc.., behind the game. I think you knew that. What i was questioning here was your hypocrisy when you said we shouldnt forget the past in this situation, while you were telling me last week to stop living in the past, not the morals of each candidate. I thought having Norris as president would be embarrassing because hes a gay. Not because of stuff that happened in the past.       Well done you go on about moving on from the past in relation to McGuinness and you come out with a bigoted remark like that Im not saying whether we should move on from the past or dwell on it im just highlighting your own hypocrisy when you said we should not forget the past. I just wouldnt be happy with a gay president. Im not afriad to say it. Also can you have any discussion without the use of a  or a . Its a bit lazy.       But yet you'd be happy to have an ex-terrorist. Which he has been referred to already today by Reuters. Jesus wept

Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: IrishPride wrote: Denis Irwin wrote: Baldrick wrote: If norris has to answer about his past so should mc Guinness. Hypocrisy for anyone not to want noriss to run because of his past and yet support mc guiness and his past.     +1   As I said above though don't forget the usual Shinner bollixology ''whatever happend in the past should be left there.'' So you want to dwell on the past then? Funny how you said i was living in the 19th century last weekend when i was shouting for the yanks in the Rugby. You cant have it both ways. You either have to forget about the past or not.          Bit of a difference between a game of Rugby and somebody wanting to run for President. Oh you also said If I'm not mistaken having Norris as President would be an embarrasment yet you have no problem in voting for some like McGuinness. It wasnt the actual game of rugby but the principles with regards to the flag and anthem etc.., behind the game. I think you knew that. What i was questioning here was your hypocrisy when you said we shouldnt forget the past in this situation, while you were telling me last week to stop living in the past, not the morals of each candidate. I thought having Norris as president would be embarrassing because hes a gay. Not because of stuff that happened in the past.       Well done you go on about moving on from the past in relation to McGuinness and you come out with a bigoted remark like that Im not saying whether we should move on from the past or dwell on it im just highlighting your own hypocrisy when you said we should not forget the past. I just wouldnt be happy with a gay president. Im not afriad to say it. Also can you have any discussion without the use of a  or a . Its a bit lazy.       But yet you'd be happy to have an ex-terrorist. Which he has been referred to already today by Reuters. Jesus wept Who has reformed and done a lot of good towards peace in the North. David Norris isnt going to stop riding fellas any time soon.     You really are a fcuking tool

athlonecelt wrote: I Irish people are so afraid to sound homophobic that they have gone the other way to accomodate gays.  If this was a case of a hetrosexual , people would have no problem in denouncing Norris for his letters and statements. But too many people are afraid to sound homophobic'.

 

i hate this denouncing of mcguiness because he was in the ira. if you were a 20 year old, working class man, living in belfast, you nearly had no choice but to join the ira. say whatever you want, but if it wasn't for the ira, it would still be a protestant government for a protestant people. i know there were those like john hume and the rest of the sdlp who wanted to achieve civil rights through reasoning and a peaceful means, but there is no denying that a paramilitary organisation did force the hand of the british government to change the proceedings in stormont and stamp out gerrymandering.

Baldrick wrote: If norris has to answer about his past so should mc Guinness. Hypocrisy for anyone not to want noriss to run because of his past and yet support mc guiness and his past.

Denis Irwin wrote: deise316 wrote: Baldrick wrote: What wrong with being gay. Is it better to be a terrorist than a gay person. How would people like that every time our president goes around the world he is describes as ex terrorist on fox news or sky news or BBC or French or german tv.     There was a time Nelson Mandela was described in similar terms.....           Bit of difference between Mandela and McGuinness