Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Twilight of the Psychopaths

2»

Comments

  • #52
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    OK if you thinks its ok to oust the Talliban from power and install yer own puppet regieme, then you are obliged to invade China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Zimbabewe......... basicly all the places that are screwed up acording to this enlightened world view, you cant just pick and choose the soft targets.


  • #53
    Nick_oliveri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Nick_oliveri


    Diogenes wrote: »
    And now the damage isn't ? it's going to be undone. Thatcher did horrendous things to irish republicans Blair managed to heal these wounds.
    How do you propose to undo the damage dealt to innocent people who were caged up and tortured even minutley for years?

    Or apologise to the people who lost children, parents etc? Is there a list of the people that collaterral damage affected? What to do? Send a letter of condolance?

    I know i HAARP on about these two things but they are not to be ignored and they are a real manufactured threat that (IMO) are not realistically fixable. (even by Obama....)
    And what about those taliban who weren't detained punished or had their families killed. I mean the Taliban were in existence before the US arrived, and fought the soviets in the 80s, and continued existing throughout the 90s when no one was attacking them.
    They matter too. Its the new generation or coming one that will matter more.
    Theres being upset at the GWB administration which im sure we can all proudly admit to, and theres also a general hatred towards western peoples and western influence and ways.
    Never let logic, reality or the facts on the ground alter your worldview nick.
    It is logical that if you cage a man up or **** up his family that he (or some will) want revenge. People ignore this. And the existing insurgents will get more recruits or easily manipulate them.
    yes. yes it is. But blaming one side for this cycle is narrow minded.
    I can see how you would have assumed i was blaming one side. I am not.
    Yes it can, can you imagine what would happen to the women who took positions of power once the taliban got back in power?
    They probably wouldn't last long. Hell look at Benazir Bhutto.
    The only hadith relating to female political leadership is Sahih Bukhari 5:59:709, in which Muhammad is recorded as saying that people with a female ruler will never be successful
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam
    Lawd, im goin Wiki crazy these days.

    Edit: i just had to laugh at this one:
    The status of women's testimony in Islam is disputed. Some jurists have held that certain types of testimony by women will not be accepted. In other cases, the testimony of two women can equal that of one man ( although Quran says 2 women and 2 male are needed but if a male cannot find another male he may carry this testimony out himself


  • #54
    Nick_oliveri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Nick_oliveri


    King Mob wrote: »
    You are aware that the Taliban have been abusing human rights long before America invaded right?
    The same could be said about other Islamic nations. See my last wiki link above.


  • #55
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    OK if you thinks its ok to oust the Talliban from power and install yer own puppet regieme, then you are obliged to invade China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Zimbabewe......... basicly all the places that are screwed up acording to this enlightened world view, you cant just pick and choose the soft targets.
    No one is saying that ousting the Taliban was the best thing to do. Only that it happened.
    What we're saying is that it is disingenuous to call such an oppressive regime like the Taliban patriotic or to call them freedom fighters.

    But tell me aren't Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and China all abusing human rights badly? Or is it ok be cause it's their culture.


  • #56
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Nick_oliveri wrote: »
    The same could be said about other Islamic nations. See my last wiki link above.

    Yes it can. Whats your point?


  • #57
    Nick_oliveri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Nick_oliveri


    What? I answered your question. Its obvious that im drawing comparisions between sexist regimes.

    I thought we were talking about sexism. Shiit i must be in the wrong thread.


  • #58
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    King Mob wrote: »
    No one is saying that ousting the Taliban was the best thing to do. Only that it happened.
    What we're saying is that it is disingenuous to call such an oppressive regime like the Taliban patriotic or to call them freedom fighters.
    why not, they are fighting an invading force for the right to be free to run their country the way they want, we might not agree with how they do it, but what gives us the right?
    But tell me aren't Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and China all abusing human rights badly? Or is it ok be cause it's their culture.

    hear that sound, thats the point whooshing over your head, look quick, oh no you missed it again


  • #59
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Nick_oliveri wrote: »
    What? I answered your question. Its obvious that im drawing comparisions between sexist regimes.

    I thought we were talking about sexism. Shiit i must be in the wrong thread.


    bangs head against wall.....

    We're not talking about sexism Nick, the issue is whether the Taliban are a bunch of patriotic freedom fighters, or fanatical religious fundamentalists, it got dragged off tangent by people saying "well the bushes are just as bad" and other inane tangents.
    OK if you thinks its ok to oust the Talliban from power and install yer own puppet regieme, then you are obliged to invade China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Zimbabewe......... basicly all the places that are screwed up acording to this enlightened world view, you cant just pick and choose the soft targets.

    Mahatma I know this is a troubling and difficult concept for you to grasp but here goes. Mahatma the world is an imperfect place. Suggesting America has to basically start world war 3 if they go after the Taliban is insane. No one would win, there is neither the manpower, the will, or the resources to do the above and it would make the world a worse place.

    Getting rid of the Taliban and Saddam, are the two sorry wins we can take out of the last 7 years. I'm hoping that with the change in the administration, the mistake that was made diverting troops and resources out of Afghanistan too soon, will be reversed.


  • #60
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    so bombing Afghanistan into the stoneage and destabalizing Iraq creating one of the biggest clusterfukcs in history are WINS!!!!!


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    so bombing Afghanistan into the stoneage and destabalizing Iraq creating one of the biggest clusterfukcs in history are WINS!!!!!


    If you're a 14 year schoolgirl would you rather be under Taliban or the current regime?

    Hint; if the answer is the former you don't exist because they didn't allow you to go to school.

    Mahatma, the world isn't a black and white place.


  • #62
    Nick_oliveri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Nick_oliveri


    Diogenes wrote: »
    bangs head against wall.....

    We're not talking about sexism Nick, the issue is whether the Taliban are a bunch of patriotic freedom fighters, or fanatical religious fundamentalists, it got dragged off tangent by people saying "well the bushes are just as bad" and other inane tangents.

    Fair enough, thats the subject it got dragged to. With the help of myself of course. Not need to bang your head bud, i just go with the flow.

    I think that there may be individuals within the organisation who think or really believe that they are freedom fighters. Obviously they chose the wrong group/medium.


  • #63
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    why not, they are fighting an invading force for the right to be free to run their country the way they want, we might not agree with how they do it, but what gives us the right?
    You mean they're fighting for the right to take away other peoples rights?

    Also probably the third time I've said it: but I don't agree they that America should have invaded.
    Rather I'm stating that the Taliban are a very oppressive regime, much worse in fact, than what many people on this forum believe the NWO of trying to do.

    And maybe the one good thing about the war in Afghanistan is some people might have a chance at basic human rights.


  • #64
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    well yeah, and we want to take away their right to take away other peoples rights, I concede that its not a simple black and white area, but we 'Westerners' believe in freedom of religion, or is that only the freedom to be good god Fearin Christians, women are still opressed by cults in the US, yet their freedom to do so is enshrined in their constitution.


  • #65
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    well yeah, and we want to take away their right to take away other peoples rights, I concede that its not a simple black and white area, but we 'Westerners' believe in freedom of religion, or is that only the freedom to be good god Fearin Christians, women are still opressed by cults in the US, yet their freedom to do so is enshrined in their constitution.

    The cognitive dissoance displayed above. Yes the West allows for Freedom of Religion but Freedom of Religion does not trump other rights. Religious Cults in the US are often arrested for breaking the law The Waco Siege (Not that I'm condoning the tactics used in the Waco Siege, merely citing it as an example of the federal authorities acting against a Christian religious cult) and the perhaps Mahatma should do some reading on the subject matter, before he proclaims that the USA will allow Christians to do whatever they want in the USA.


  • #66
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    well yeah, and we want to take away their right to take away other peoples rights, I concede that its not a simple black and white area, but we 'Westerners' believe in freedom of religion, or is that only the freedom to be good god Fearin Christians, women are still opressed by cults in the US, yet their freedom to do so is enshrined in their constitution.

    Many of these cults are prosecuted for abuses of human rights.

    There is a huge difference between a very small community in a country and an entire country.

    The US didn't go into Afghanistan because the Taliban were abusing human rights, no one said they did.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Diogenes wrote: »
    the issue is whether the Taliban are a bunch of patriotic freedom fighters, or fanatical religious fundamentalists,

    The way you phrase that seems to suggest you don't believe they can be both.

    Imagine that you have someone fighting to restore a fundamentalist state. They can be fanatical and patriotic. Just because you or I may find the state they are fighting for distasteful doens't preclude it being patriotic.
    Getting rid of the Taliban and Saddam, are the two sorry wins we can take out of the last 7 years.

    Except they're not wins. In both cases, we have situations which are - by many benchmarks - worse than before we interfered. Now sure...one can argue that we have the possibility to make it better, but we'd have had that possibility had we not gone in there either.

    In a sense, its like saying that we've got a win because someone's snakebite infection has been "cured" because we've lopped their arm off. They're bleeding all over the floor, there's still traces of venom in their stump, and they've picked up no end of other infections through the amputation...but hey...they're not suffering as badly from the snakebite, so thats a plus, right?


  • #68
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    <mod_hat_on>
    Mahatma I know this is a troubling and difficult concept for you to grasp but here goes.
    For someone arguing on another thread that you don't call people idiots...you're not doing yourself any favours here.

    </mod_hat_on>


  • #69
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    bonkey wrote: »
    The way you phrase that seems to suggest you don't believe they can be both.

    Imagine that you have someone fighting to restore a fundamentalist state. They can be fanatical and patriotic. Just because you or I may find the state they are fighting for distasteful doens't preclude it being patriotic.

    I see your point, a better choice of words would be noble and heroic freedom fighters versus religious fundamentalists. The Taliban haven't been noble heroic freedom fighters since around the era of Rambo 3.

    Except they're not wins. In both cases, we have situations which are - by many benchmarks - worse than before we interfered. Now sure...one can argue that we have the possibility to make it better, but we'd have had that possibility had we not gone in there either.

    In a sense, its like saying that we've got a win because someone's snakebite infection has been "cured" because we've lopped their arm off. They're bleeding all over the floor, there's still traces of venom in their stump, and they've picked up no end of other infections through the amputation...but hey...they're not suffering as badly from the snakebite, so thats a plus, right?

    Again I'll concede that, but the potential for change is now there.


  • #70
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    bonkey wrote: »
    The way you phrase that seems to suggest you don't believe they can be both.

    Imagine that you have someone fighting to restore a fundamentalist state. They can be fanatical and patriotic. Just because you or I may find the state they are fighting for distasteful doens't preclude it being patriotic.
    That's the thing I can grasp how can someone love their then inflict such horrible abuses on it's people and history?
    I'm sure the Taliban consider themselves patriots, but I really don't see their behavior in anyway patriotic.

    bonkey wrote: »
    Except they're not wins. In both cases, we have situations which are - by many benchmarks - worse than before we interfered. Now sure...one can argue that we have the possibility to make it better, but we'd have had that possibility had we not gone in there either.

    In a sense, its like saying that we've got a win because someone's snakebite infection has been "cured" because we've lopped their arm off. They're bleeding all over the floor, there's still traces of venom in their stump, and they've picked up no end of other infections through the amputation...but hey...they're not suffering as badly from the snakebite, so thats a plus, right?
    But the thing is while the region was more stable before the invasion people were denied their rights. Now not so much.
    At least now people are able to get an education and fly kites again.
    A small compensation but at least it's something.


  • #71
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    King Mob wrote: »
    But the thing is while the region was more stable before the invasion people were denied their rights. Now not so much.
    ...
    At least now people are able to get an education and fly kites again.

    If you say so. Its more a discussion for the politics forum than here, to be honest.

    I was only trying to point out that the issues are far from the simple black-and-white mutually-opposed positions that seem all too often to crop up.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    Hello all, couple of quotes regarding the US/British invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan

    Speaking to Nancy Perry Graham,AARP, July 2006 Colin Powell said the following about the lies he told the UN/World prior to the invasion.

    "And im dissapointed.Im sorry it happened and wish those who knew better had spoken up at the time. But there isnt anything else I can say about it. When people ask me,"Is this a blot on your record?" Yeah, okay, fine, its a blot on my record. But do you want me to walk around saying I have a blot on my record every day? I have a blot on my record. There it is. Its there for everybody to see forever.

    http://www.aarpmagazine.org/people/colin_powell.html

    Colonel Lawrence B. Wilkerson (US Army (retired), chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell.

    "My participation at that presentation at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council."
    "I was intimately involved in the preparation of Secreary Powell for his five February 2003 presentation at the UN Security council".

    http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Lawrence-Wilkerson

    Nobody agrees with the way taliban law is enforced be they rebel fighters or religious fanatics and you might not like the way they live but the cold truth of the matter is its their country/land you cant invade and butcher them because you dont agree with their way of life.
    And you certainly cant make up lies and bull**** , invade an entire region and start a potential wolrd wide race war all in the name of "freedom" its so two faced its sickening.

    As Mahatma metioned a few posts back it seems to be going a bit off topic. Could we please keep to the topic Kevin Barret makes some very valid points imo especially with the large military build up taking palce all over the world.




  • #73
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    WakeUp wrote: »

    Nobody agrees with the way taliban law is enforced be they rebel fighters or religious fanatics and you might not like the way they live but the cold truth of the matter is its their country/land you cant invade and butcher them because you dont agree with their way of life.
    Again no one is claiming that the US invaded because the taliban was abusing human rights. The war had nothing to do with anyone's way of life.

    WakeUp wrote: »
    And you certainly cant make up lies and bull**** , invade an entire region and start a potential wolrd wide race war all in the name of "freedom" its so two faced its sickening.
    Race war? Seriously?

    WakeUp wrote: »
    As Mahatma metioned a few posts back it seems to be going a bit off topic. Could we please keep to the topic Kevin Barret makes some very valid points imo especially with the large military build up taking palce all over the world.
    Well some of us were pointing out that he had a very simplistic view of a very complicated issue.


  • #74
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    OK then King Mob, briefly outline in your own words WHY the US invaded.


  • #75
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    The Taliban were supporting terrorists and to establish a presence in the area.
    But even that is a very simplistic explanation. I lack the expertise to give a better one.


  • #76
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    Who supported the Talliban, where did most of the terrorists come from?


  • #77
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    Who supported the Talliban, where did most of the terrorists come from?

    Well I think America had a hand in getting the Taliban into power but I'm not too familiar on the Taliban history.
    And I believe that many of the terrorists where from different extermist organizations.
    Again this probably is oversimplifying it.


  • #78
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    America and one other big nasty abuser of Human Rights in the Area.

    The 'Terrorists' were from many organisations, on that springs to mind is David Hicks, who started off his 'Terrorism' with the KLA


  • #79
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    America and one other big nasty abuser of Human Rights in the Area.

    The 'Terrorists' were from many organisations, on that springs to mind is David Hicks, who started off his 'Terrorism' with the KLA

    Israel? Iran? Pakistan?

    But what exactly has this to do with whether or not the Taliban are patriotic?


  • #80
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    Define Patriotism in your own words please.


  • #81
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    bonkey wrote: »
    The way you phrase that seems to suggest you don't believe they can be both.

    Imagine that you have someone fighting to restore a fundamentalist state. They can be fanatical and patriotic. Just because you or I may find the state they are fighting for distasteful doens't preclude it being patriotic.



    Except they're not wins. In both cases, we have situations which are - by many benchmarks - worse than before we interfered. Now sure...one can argue that we have the possibility to make it better, but we'd have had that possibility had we not gone in there either.

    In a sense, its like saying that we've got a win because someone's snakebite infection has been "cured" because we've lopped their arm off. They're bleeding all over the floor, there's still traces of venom in their stump, and they've picked up no end of other infections through the amputation...but hey...they're not suffering as badly from the snakebite, so thats a plus, right?

    See, see, this is why Bonkey has been nominated as s deity

    he can sum up in one post what has taken some of us 4 pages

    <Dofs mod Hat in deference>


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Diogenes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    Who supported the Talliban, where did most of the terrorists come from?

    The majority support for the Taliban came from wealthy Saudis, consider it similar to the situation that existed between Irish Americans and the IRA in the 70s/80s. The earliest reports of Bin Laden come from Afghanistan/Pakistan in the 80s handing out money in training camps in the region. Fighters came from Afghanistan but also from the greater Muslim diaspora, there are links between the Taliban and Chechen rebels for example.


  • #83
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    Define Patriotism in your own words please.

    Love for ones country, it's people and culture?


  • #84
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    so that would make he Talliban Noble and Heroic Freedom Fighters then?


  • #85
    King Mob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,342 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    so that would make he Talliban Noble and Heroic Freedom Fighters then?

    No.
    They're weren't exactly showing much love for Afghanistan's people or culture.

    Edit:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7747621.stm Not exactly what I'd call patriotic.


  • #86
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    I came across this story the other day and after reading it , it reminded me of the comments John Lennon made a couple of weeks before he was shot.


    To cut a long story short some chap in England had been sending Jaquie Smith< Home Secretary, written letters calling her a communist and saying how evil she was for continuing to put in place systems to turn the UK into a massive police state.


    Some weeks later the man who sent these letters received a phone call from his local GP asking him to come see him. So he went to see him. When he got there his GP informed him he had received a letter from the Fixated Threat Assesment Centre (FTAC) following instructions form the home secretary herself.
    The GP was told to interview the man and determine his “state of mind”. If this was indeed what happened its something new in that if you criticize the government and they don’t like what you are saying you may receive a visit from a FTAC psychiatrist, be regarded as mentally ill and locked up forever with no trial or jury. Scary stuff indeed.
    http://elementalsblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/fixated-threat-assessment-centre-ftac.html
    http://www.ukcolumn.org/2009/05/05/hot-off-the-press-3/


  • #87
    humanji
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    That's fairly shocking, but then again, if true, we don't know the content of the letters. They could of been death threats, so at least it's not as bad as in the states where you get an automatic prison sentence.


  • #88
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    humanji wrote: »
    That's fairly shocking, but then again, if true, we don't know the content of the letters. They could of been death threats, so at least it's not as bad as in the states where you get an automatic prison sentence.

    If true it is fairly shocking I agree. Im thinking if he did send her death threats then he deserves a visit from someone because you cant do that, but if he did do that Id imagine he wouldnt have left his contact details on the letter and in turn his GP would not have been able to contact him. Maybe one these letters will surface at some stage and we can see for sure what was actually said.


  • #89
    6th
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    WakeUp wrote: »
    if he did do that Id imagine he wouldnt have left his contact details on the letter and in turn his GP would not have been able to contact him.

    A sane person wouldnt put their details on but thats the question, isn't it?


  • #90
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    6th wrote: »
    A sane person wouldnt put their details on but thats the question, isn't it?

    Its one of many questions alright would really need to see the letters this man sent to see for sure what was said. I will keep my eyes out for it online If I come across it I ll make sure to post it.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    6th
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    But you are willing to pass judgement on the people who did see the letters and took action against the man?


  • #92
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    6th wrote: »
    But you are willing to pass judgement on the people who did see the letters and took action against the man?

    I havent passed judgement yet, that cant be done until one of these alleged letters surface. Im only guessing now but the fact he wasnt arrested might indicate the letters were not phyiscally threatening I could be wrong though. Again Im only guessing but it might be just a case of him only critisising the government with words, regardless of what was said does it warrant a phonecall from his GP if indeed thats all it was. I think thats a fair enough question to ask.


  • #93
    humanji
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    But people have been criticising the government for years in many more vocal ways than simply writing letters. I haven't heard of any of these being asked to take psychological exams.

    Sure as it stands, the only proof that this happened is one site that is a tad on the sensationalist side. As I said before, it's fairly shocking if true, it just doesn't really seem to be true.


Advertisement