Jim Carroll - 01 May 16 - 04:27 AM - more ill-informed opinion and emotive twaddle presented as fact.

The Irish Holocaust -start a thread so that we can hammer over the same old ground with the same old facts - dig out, I'm not going to waste my time on it.

Throughout your rant you constantly contradict yourself - Your history is based on pure conjecture, but I see your pals on this forum let you get away with it unchallenged, fortunately for the sake of honest discussion and debate neither Keith, myself and a few others do not.

You have no right whatsoever to say what anybody else would do, say or think, restrict those statements for the only person you can speak for - YOURSELF.

But please answer the question a Free State V IRA civil war, or a Independence V Unionist civil war - which would have been worse for Ireland as a whole.

Figures Raggy come from the Covenant, many of the signatures written in blood, signed in the North in 1913 (452,252 in 1913 is close enough to ~500,000 in 1919 for me). Any civil war between North and South would have been bitter, protracted and bloody in the extreme and that was the point I was making. By the way no children signed the Covenant and women can pull triggers and throw bombs just as well as men. If you are going to quote the right of self-determination as justification for one group then it must be quoted for all - True?

The plain truth is that Daniell O'Connell sought Dominion Status for a United Ireland with the British Sovereign serving as Head of State.
It worked for Australia and for Canada.