Dail Hunger Strike

Villain

This might be more suitable in the Humanities Forum, but it seems very quite there at the moment.

Anyway I'm sure most people will have heard something about Tom Sweeny the man who along with his son is on hunger strike outside the Dail for the last 21 days.

He was abused by the Patrician Brothers in 2 schools as a child, and he took a high court case against the state and they offered him compensation at the 11th hour preventing the case going to trial.

He then went to the redress board but said he came out feeling worse than ever, they didn't want to hear his story and there wasn't any of the offenders present.

I heard him on the Gerry Ryan show this morning and the man is very angry at what has happened.

He hasn't had food or liquid in 22 days, so if this continues he will die.

Green Party TD Paul Gogarty was dismissed from the Dail after he refused to take his seat until a debate on the issue was held

This man will die unless the Government of today intervenes.

He is looking for the redress board to be changed and an apology from the brothers.

From the Indpendent

"One in Four, a support group for victims of child abuse, has called on the Government to take all the necessary steps to save the life of a man on hunger strike outside the Dail. 57-year-old Tom Sweeney, who was abused as a child in the 1950s and 1960s, began the hunger strike three weeks ago in protest at his treatment by the Residential Institutions Redress Board. Mr Sweeney had originally been offered €113,000 in compensation, but this was reduced to around €70,000 after he chose to tell his story to the board.
Speaking about the matter today, One in Four director Colm O'Gorman said it would be unthinkable if Mr Sweeney was to die because of the Government's failure to act. "What's essential is that [the] Government take whatever steps they need to take to resolve the situation," he said. "I know they have had sensible proposals put forward to them that would end the hunger strike and would allow Tom to get some medical attention and I'd call on the Minister for Education and Science, Mr Dempsey, and indeed the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, to act urgently on these proposals."

Turner

First of all it wasnt about the money... Now it is..

Yeah sure he was abused in the past.... But thats what it is...in the past. He'd want to get on with his life while he's still alive..

Some people really annoy me with their self pity and self harm. Hes willing to throw his healthy body away while theres people dying in hospitals with chronic illnesses. I certainly wouldn't give him any attention.

Mighty_Mouse

Yeah sure he was abused in the past.... But thats what it is...in the past.

I see you have a complete understanding of the matter so

Some people really annoy me with their self pity and self harm. Hes willing to throw his healthy body away while theres people dying in hospitals with chronic illnesses.

I'm sure he's just bored with nothing better to do and "REALLY" "REALLY" motivated by money!:rolleyes:

<Sarcasim>

Villain

Originally posted by Chief---
First of all it wasnt about the money... Now it is..

Yeah sure he was abused in the past.... But thats what it is...in the past. He'd want to get on with his life while he's still alive..

You obviously didn't hear him on the Ryan show.

IT IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY

The 1 in 4 group raised that issue not Mr Sweeny, he simply wants a chance to have his story told and have the people who abused him aplogise to him.

Originally posted by Chief---

Some people really annoy me with their self pity and self harm. Hes willing to throw his healthy body away while theres people dying in hospitals with chronic illnesses. I certainly wouldn't give him any attention.

Chief, that a very sad statement, I think you should reseacrh the topic before posting statements like that, sad very sad.:mad:

Turner

Is he not on hunger strike because he wants the original sum of E113,000 that he refused in the beginning.

Thats the way it came across to me in the media.


Either way hunger strike is not the way to go about it. He should have some respect for his body.

I personally would have no time for him due to the way he has chosen to highlight the issue.
Im sorry thats just the way i am.

Villain

Originally posted by Chief---
Is he not on hunger strike because he wants the original sum of E113,000 that he refused in the beginning.

Thats the way it came across to me in the media.

NOT at all, thats a complete misguided media report if they stated that, 1 in 4 group raised that issue, Mr Sweeny never mentioned that in his interview.

Nuttzz

Chief, if you (and the mods) can excuse my crudeness but no amount of money can compensate you for getting a dick up your ass (or elsewhere)

This child (as he was then) was placed into care by the state. The people the state entrusted to look after this child abused him, his rights and their positions. Sex offenders get away too lightly in this country, the catholic church, one of the major land holders in the state, has escaped with a sweet deal from the government.

All abuse victims deserve to receive at least €250k from the church or the employers of the abusers

Turner

Aparently its not about money.

I agree, being abused as a child is probably the worst thing that could happen to anybody. Dont get me wrong i have big issues with the church as individuals and as a body.

Its just his way of highlighting the issue that i have a problem with.

Villain

Originally posted by Chief---
Aparently its not about money.

I agree being abused as a child is probably the worst thing that could happen to anybody.

Its just his way of highlighting the issue that i have a problem with.

I agree its a big extreme but I doubt his story would be getting the same attention if he had done his protest quitely

Turner

But still, harming his body irreversibly.
Is it worth it for publicity ??

Obviously he might not have a healty mind considering the ordeal he went through but should he not be happy that he has a healthy body and not damage that aswell.
Not everybody has one.

swiss

He was abused by the Patrician Brothers in 2 schools as a child, and he took a high court case against the state and they offered him compensation at the 11th hour preventing the case going to trial.

Did he take the money? Or if he didn't, why didn't it end up in the high court?

You see, this is the sticking point for me. If he did accept the cash to stop it from going to trial, then his assertions that "it's not about the money" are worthless. The money was clearly worth something to him. He accepted the cash, knowing that it would mean that his case would not be heard.

If he didn't accept the cash, why did he opt for a 'redress board' that would more than likely have involvement with the very institution that was indirectly responsible for his abuse, in lieu of the high court? When that failed, would he not then have gone for the high court - unless of course he had waived that right by taking a settlement.

Maybe I'm missing something here, I'm sure he's been through a harrowing ordeal, but I see it as slightly disingenuous when someone takes to hunger striking, apparantly neglecting our existing mechanisms (i.e the courts) for dealing with these kinds of abuses.

Villain

Swiss as far I know the state offered him money which he refused, but he agreed to go to the redress board becasue he thought he would have his chance to tell his story, the 1 in 4 person said on the Ryan show that Mr Sweeny didn't realise what the redress really was, and that the high court case could still proceed as he turned down all money to date.

Basically I think the poor man thought that he would be able to tell his story in the redress board and that people who done this to him would be present.

ALLGOOD

Originally posted by Chief---
First of all it wasnt about the money... Now it is..

Yeah sure he was abused in the past.... But thats what it is...in the past. He'd want to get on with his life while he's still alive..

Some people really annoy me with their self pity and self harm. Hes willing to throw his healthy body away while theres people dying in hospitals with chronic illnesses. I certainly wouldn't give him any attention.

Your a dirty ****ing idiot. And a Nazi. Hope you die in a car crash.

<mod edit> 1 week ban for you. </mod edit>

Villain

Update from RTE.ie

"A man who has been on hunger strike outside Leinster House for 22 days has been taken into the building on a wheelchair for talks.

Mr Tom Sweeney was brought inside by the Dublin South West Fianna Fáil TD, Charlie O'Connor.

Mr Sweeney is protesting over his treatment by the Residential Institutions Redress Board in relation to abuse he suffered in two institutions.

It is understood that a set of proposals is being put to him.

The proposals arose from a meeting between the four Dublin South-West TDs and the Minister for Education yesterday."

Ryvita

Originally posted by Chief---
But still, harming his body irreversibly.
Is it worth it for publicity ??

Obviously he might not have a healty mind considering the ordeal he went through but should he not be happy that he has a healthy body and not damage that aswell.
Not everybody has one.

Publicity?

The guy was abused as a kid and because he wanted to tell his story to the redress bored his compensation (which he more than deserves) was reduced by about 40%.
The people who did this to him weren't even present when he told his story to the board. I don't blame him at all for protesting this way ... he must feel completely powerless.

Have some compassion.

Villain

Update from Rte Again:
" A man who has been on hunger strike outside Leinster House for 22 days is considering a set of proposals put to him in an attempt to end his protest.

Tom Sweeney is meeting lawyers at Buswells Hotel, across the road from the Dáil.

He is protesting over his treatment by the Residential Institutions Redress Board in relation to abuse he suffered in two institutions."

IT IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY

Why isn't he sitting outside the Highest office for the Church in Ireland then? He and others have seen that the government is quick to pay for the church's mistakes, and he's there for the money. Otherwise he'd be protesting the the Church for the Treatment he received.

Horrible what happened to him, but the State is not to be blamed. Get things straight and target the Church.

Villain

Originally posted by klaz
Why isn't he sitting outside the Highest office for the Church in Ireland then? He and others have seen that the government is quick to pay for the church's mistakes, and he's there for the money. Otherwise he'd be protesting the the Church for the Treatment he received.

Horrible what happened to him, but the State is not to be blamed. Get things straight and target the Church.

The state were responsible for the schools, and it was the state who set-up the redress board and limited the churchs liability

Ryvita

Originally posted by klaz
... He and others have seen that the government is quick to pay for the church's mistakes, and he's there for the money ...

Is he not entitled to compensation for what happened to him? The state put him in Care and let the Church do what they liked.

Villain

Update from RTE once again:

"The man who has been on hunger strike outside Leinster House for 22 days has given up his protest and is taking his case back to the High Court.

Tom Sweeney made his decision following a meeting with his lawyers in Buswells Hotel near Leinster House. "

seamus

While it's not a nice state of affairs, I agree with Chief--- in principle.

The man is not highly educated. The State underinformed him about what he would receive from the redress board. So now he has gone to a ridiculous extreme to have himself heard. It's not good that he has, but it's not like he exhausted all avenues open to him. There are ways of having yourself heard that are just as powerful, and don't require you to martyr yourself.

We live in a democracy, not a dictatorship. There's no need to take such a step.

Villain

Originally posted by seamus
While it's not a nice state of affairs, I agree with Chief--- in principle.

The man is not highly educated. The State underinformed him about what he would receive from the redress board. So now he has gone to a ridiculous extreme to have himself heard. It's not good that he has, but it's not like he exhausted all avenues open to him. There are ways of having yourself heard that are just as powerful, and don't require you to martyr yourself.

We live in a democracy, not a dictatorship. There's no need to take such a step.

Would he have got to meet with the TD's etc if he hadn't taken this form of protest, I think not. He is heading to the high court where he can have his story told and name those who assaulted and raped him, and get his Justice.

Chief and Seamus I don't think anyone can judge the man for taking this action unless you have suffered the abuse he has and been misled by the state. I think to say that he is in this for the money is simply IGNORANT.

seamus

Originally posted by irish1
Would he have got to meet with the TD's etc if he hadn't taken this form of protest, I think not. He is heading to the high court where he can have his story told and name those who assaulted and raped him, and get his Justice.

Well, they're hardly going to let him die on the street....

I think to say that he is in this for the money is simply IGNORANT.

Chief retracted his statement, and I never said he was.

Villain

Originally posted by seamus
Well, they're hardly going to let him die on the street....

Exactly so without this course of action would he have met them??

I don't think so, its a pitty that this is what it takes to get noticed by our government

Originally posted by seamus

Chief retracted his statement, and I never said he was.

I didn't think he did all I remember his saying was "Aparently its not about money"

Hardly a retractment, apologies if he did retract it.

Ajnag

Keep it in perspective, First up, It is somewhat disturbing that it took 3 weeks for the media to catch on that some guy was starving himself outside the Dail(If they reported before this, Its news to me, Feel free to link).

Second of all, his action was supported by other victims, If his reasons were as shallow as said, then I feel this support would have been absent.

And lastly, so what if he did accept compo, and then felt it was a bad decion.We all **** up on occasion and make bad decisions.Now Imagine the mental state of a victim of institutional abuse, Are they not worthy of the benifit of the doubt ?

seamus

Originally posted by irish1
Exactly so without this course of action would he have met them??

I don't think so, its a pitty that this is what it takes to get noticed by our government

That's my point. He went straight for the jugular. What if he had got a group of abusees (word?) together and marched on the dail? Would he have been heard then? We don't know, because he went over the top.

I'm also quite disturbed that this guy was 21 days on the side of the street before RTE took notice. Obviously people just thought that they were homeless people, not hunger strikers, or it would have been brought out straight away. Everyone loves to take pot shots at the Government and this would have been ideal fodder. It just highlights once more that it was a poorly planned over-reaction on his part, since himself and his son obviously just sat there, and didn't make a fuss about it.

Villain

Originally posted by seamus
That's my point. He went straight for the jugular. What if he had got a group of abusees (word?) together and marched on the dail? Would he have been heard then? We don't know, because he went over the top.

I'm also quite disturbed that this guy was 21 days on the side of the street before RTE took notice. Obviously people just thought that they were homeless people, not hunger strikers, or it would have been brought out straight away. Everyone loves to take pot shots at the Government and this would have been ideal fodder. It just highlights once more that it was a poorly planned over-reaction on his part, since himself and his son obviously just sat there, and didn't make a fuss about it.

It took the government 21 days of hunger strking and a lot of media pressure to get this resolved, and you think he should have marched on the dail.

Get real man, don't mean to sound offensive but I think it would have taken a lot of marches to get the result he did. Remember this was his 22nd day outside the Dail, took the media to get involved before anything really happened. I think that speaks volumes about our goverment. Fair play to Pat Rabbite and a few others who did speak with him.

I think to say that he is in this for the money is simply IGNORANT.

You're entitled to your opinion, just as i'm entitled to mine. Oddly enough I don't see us calling you ignorant because you believe what he says his motives are, even though i'm skeptical.

Get real man, don't mean to sound offensive but I think it would have taken a lot of marches to get the result he did. Remember this was his 22nd day outside the Dail, took the media to get involved before anything really happened. I think that speaks volumes about our goverment. Fair play to Pat Rabbite and a few others who did speak with him.

Does anyone know if he tried to promote his Hunger Strike in any way or did he just plonk himself down, and begin without a fuss? Most Hunger strikes that i've heard about had a number of Family members or friends nearby to promote their protest.

I don't know if it speks Volumes about our government but rather our own ability to phase out apparent homeless people. (which most people seem to have done, until someone spoke to him)

Villain

Originally posted by klaz
You're entitled to your opinion, just as i'm entitled to mine. Oddly enough I don't see us calling you ignorant because you believe what he says his motives are, even though i'm skeptical.

I didn't call anyone ignorant I said
"I think to say that he is in this for the money is simply IGNORANT"
BTW Ignorant means lack of understanding.

Originally posted by klaz
Does anyone know if he tried to promote his Hunger Strike in any way or did he just plonk himself down, and begin without a fuss? Most Hunger strikes that i've heard about had a number of Family members or friends nearby to promote their protest.

I don't know if it speks Volumes about our government but rather our own ability to phase out apparent homeless people. (which most people seem to have done, until someone spoke to him)

Well in this case theres not much any of us could have done, IMHO I think it does speak volumes about our government

Cork

Originally posted by irish1
It took the government 21 days of hunger strking and a lot of media pressure to get this resolved, and you think he should have marched on the dail.

This is totally unfair comment.

Has the relevant minister not been available at clinics etc?

seamus

Originally posted by irish1
It took the government 21 days of hunger strking and a lot of media pressure to get this resolved, and you think he should have marched on the dail.

In fairness, we don't know that. We didn't even know he was there until last night. You could be damn sure if anyone in Government knew he was there, they would have brought it up straight away instead of leaving him outside with no food or shelter for 3 weeks. "Get real man" as you would say.

Ryvita

Originally posted by seamus
In fairness, we don't know that. We didn't even know he was there until last night. You could be damn sure if anyone in Government knew he was there, they would have brought it up straight away instead of leaving him outside with no food or shelter for 3 weeks. "Get real man" as you would say.

The man was sitting there with a sign saying what he was doing and why for 3 weeks. The "government" passed him every day going into the Dail and only when the man was seriously ill and the media were putting the pressure on did they decide to talk to him.

The fact of the matter is, there was widescale abuse in State institutions which was covered up by the church and state. Paedophiles were shipped from one parish to the next. What have these victims seen done about it? Not much. Yes some of them have gotten compensation - which they totally deserve to get - but very few of the people responsible for letting this abuse happen have come out and at least apologised for it.

To have people on this board actually give out about this man hunger striking really shocks me. Do you think he was doing it for a bit of a laugh? for money? for attention?

To have people on this board actually give out about this man hunger striking really shocks me. Do you think he was doing it for a bit of a laugh? for money? for attention?

Wasn't that his intention? to receive attention, otherwise he would have calmly went through the legal process.

I don't know why he went on Hunger Strike. I've heard of his apparent reasons, and the assumptions from posters here. Frankly, I'm still suspicious, and fully expect his just looking for more money than he was offered.

The fact of the matter is, there was widescale abuse in State institutions which was covered up by the church and state. Paedophiles were shipped from one parish to the next. What have these victims seen done about it? Not much. Yes some of them have gotten compensation - which they totally deserve to get - but very few of the people responsible for letting this abuse happen have come out and at least apologised for it.

This is what really annoys me about this. The State and the Church shared responsibility for this. Except its only the State thats being targeted for compensation. If these people weren't looking for money, don't you think they'd be targeting the church also?

seamus

Originally posted by klaz
This is what really annoys me about this. The State and the Church shared responsibility for this. Except its only the State thats being targeted for compensation. If these people weren't looking for money, don't you think they'd be targeting the church also?

Agreed. The State haven't really tried to cover this up (anymore - I know they did long ago). They've wrongly stood in front of the Church and taken all the bullets, but they acknowledge that it happened. We (the State) *know* that it went on, and have made some effort to make reparations.

But the Church hasn't. The church is still sticking its fingers in its ears and shouting "LALALALALALA" so it can't hear the abused.
What's the point in trying to make the State listen? Most of the people you'll be dealing with would have been neither affected or even born when the abuse was taking place. You can tell them, but they won't really care.
This guy wanted people to listen - he should have campaigned against the Church. Banged on the doors of the priests that were present when he was abused. The state have listened to his case, what are they going to do? "Oh, sorry about that, here's some more money." If this man was looking for emotional reparations, I don't see why he was going to the State for it.

As you say Ryvita - "but very few of the people responsible for letting this abuse happen have come out and at least apologised for it"." This is a matter that the Church needs to be forced to address. The State have their hands tied. This is not the same state that allowed the abuse happen. Any politicians or civil servants who covered it up are dead or retired.

Ryvita

Originally posted by seamus
Agreed. The State haven't really tried to cover this up (anymore - I know they did long ago). They've wrongly stood in front of the Church and taken all the bullets, but they acknowledge that it happened. We (the State) *know* that it went on, and have made some effort to make reparations.

The man wanted to be able to address the people who abused him - these could be either people who worked for the church, state or both.

The man wanted to get his voice heard - as loudly as possible - and it seems to be happening for him. I just think it's so sad that he had to go to this length to have that happen. I think his point is that what has been put in place (by the state) for victims of abuse to get compensation (not just money but to get an aplogy and for people to take responsibility) is not at all satisfactory.

seamus

Originally posted by Ryvita
The man wanted to get his voice heard - as loudly as possible - and it seems to be happening for him. I just think it's so sad that he had to go to this length to have that happen. I think his point is that what has been put in place (by the state) for victims of abuse to get compensation (not just money but to get an aplogy and for people to take responsibility) is not at all satisfactory.

Agreed, but he went some crazy way about having himself heard. Everyone says "It's shocking that he had to go to these lengths" - but he didn't! At least not yet. He didn't have his voice heard, and instantly went on hunger strike. That's a big and sudden jump from mildly disappointed to suicidally desperate. There's a lot of things between, usually, furious anger and insane frustration.

Did he even try anything else?

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
Has the relevant minister not been available at clinics etc?

Cork...is this a rhetorical question, or a genuine one?

If its a genuine one, then how can you possibly comclude that the critisim was a "totally unfair comment."

If its a rhetorical one, then could you supply the relevant information which shows that this guy could easily have had access to the people he wanted to have access to?

jc

Ryvita

Originally posted by seamus
Agreed, but he went some crazy way about having himself heard. Everyone says "It's shocking that he had to go to these lengths" - but he didn't! At least not yet. He didn't have his voice heard, and instantly went on hunger strike. That's a big and sudden jump from mildly disappointed to suicidally desperate. There's a lot of things between, usually, furious anger and insane frustration.

Did he even try anything else?

Did he even try anything else? Sounds like you have already made your mind up on that one?

Here's a link that gives some detail about it

Tom Sweeney

seamus

Originally posted by Ryvita
Did he even try anything else? Sounds like you have already made your mind up on that one?

Here's a link that gives some detail about it

Tom Sweeney

So it is about money!

Shocker. Why didn't he gather together a group of people who feel similarly cheated by the redress board and picket the Dail? Why did he go on a one-man suicidal crusade?

The man wanted to be able to address the people who abused him - these could be either people who worked for the church, state or both.

No. He wants to address the Body's that employed the people that abused him. The people that actually abused him, are not mentioned in his plea. (At least from what i've heard abt this.)

The man wanted to get his voice heard - as loudly as possible - and it seems to be happening for him. I just think it's so sad that he had to go to this length to have that happen. I think his point is that what has been put in place (by the state) for victims of abuse to get compensation (not just money but to get an aplogy and for people to take responsibility) is not at all satisfactory.

Go to what length? He started an unannounced Hunger Strike, sat quietly, and waited patiently for 21 days until someone noticed him?

As for compensation and an apology not being enough? What does he expect? There is nothing else that could be supplied. Best be happy that he was offered something at all. (Since i'm against the State offering compensation at all)

Ryvita

Originally posted by klaz
Go to what length? He started an unannounced Hunger Strike, sat quietly, and waited patiently for 21 days until someone noticed him?

Do you know anything about this at all? Anything?

Unannounced hunger strike? It was clear to everyone who passed him what was happening and has been in the news for weeks.

It's major news now and people are talking about it. These people were in the care of the state and were abused .... it's their responsibility. The man was continuosuly abused for three years. He is entitled to his compensation and not to have it downgraded because he goes to a redress board.

You make him out to be some kind of sponger. I don't think anyone can understand how angry you'd feel about this unless you had been through the same yourself. As I said before have a little bit of compassion for the man. He obviously felt like this was his last option.

Do you know anything about this at all? Anything?

Actually I know some of whats being going on. Strangely enough.

Unannounced hunger strike? It was clear to everyone who passed him what was happening and has been in the news for weeks.

Really? If its been in the news for weeks how come everyone is only talking about it now. He's been there for weeks. It only recently become spotlighted by the media, and a number of politicians.

It's major news now and people are talking about it. These people were in the care of the state and were abused .... it's their responsibility. The man was continuosuly abused for three years. He is entitled to his compensation and not to have it downgraded because he goes to a redress board.

Yes and he was offered compensation. He refused what was offered. It was when the compensation amount decreased that he started his Hunger Strike. Or damn close to when the amount went down.

You make him out to be some kind of sponger. I don't think anyone can understand how angry you'd feel about this unless you had been through the same yourself. As I said before have a little bit of compassion for the man. He obviously felt like this was his last option.

And yet you're advocating what he's doing so completely, when you haven't expierenced what he endured. Lovely that you can support completely and i shouldn't criticise.

Compassion? I have some for what he endured. That doesn't conflict with my opinions abt state sponsored compensation for church related crimes.

Ryvita

Originally posted by klaz
Actually I know some of whats being going on. Strangely enough.
Compassion? I have some for what he endured. That doesn't conflict with my opinions abt state sponsored compensation for church related crimes.

How do you know the church was involved? He was in a state-run industrial school.

How do you know the church was involved? He was in a state-run industrial school.

He was abused by the Patrician Brothers in 2 schools as a child, and he took a high court case against the state and they offered him compensation at the 11th hour preventing the case going to trial.

Ryvita

A state run school

I'm not saying the church is not responsible but this man was in the care of the state and was abused.


<Had to edit that - my mind is elsewhere today>

I'm not saying the church is not responsible but this man was in the care of the state and was abused.

So the Church was responsible, but from your viewpoint, they weren't really because the State was also involved? Surely, You must agree that the Church should be responsible for providing Both the Apology, and the Compensation involved?

Villain

Originally posted by Cork
This is totally unfair comment.

Has the relevant minister not been available at clinics etc?

OK sorry I headed out on the piss early last night so been off this thread till now.

Cork and Seamus, I don't think it is totally unfair, the man was outside the DAIL for 22 days, Toms son who was on strike with him stated people had been out to visit he named Pat Rabbite and one other non FF member.

I stand by my statement, that
"It took the government 21 days of hunger strking and a lot of media pressure to get this resolved"

I think its a disgrace that its only when the media start running with things that the government takes notice. It should never have got this far, a bloddy disgrace.

Originally posted by Seamus

In fairness, we don't know that. We didn't even know he was there until last night. You could be damn sure if anyone in Government knew he was there, they would have brought it up straight away instead of leaving him outside with no food or shelter for 3 weeks. "Get real man" as you would say

The Government knew he was there they just decided to ignore him until the media got involved, so as I do say "Get real man"

Ryvita

Originally posted by klaz
So the Church was responsible, but from your viewpoint, they weren't really because the State was also involved? Surely, You must agree that the Church should be responsible for providing Both the Apology, and the Compensation involved?

What I'm saying is that they are both responsible.

I'm also saying that it is up to the State to ensure that these victims cases are heard properly and that the people who did this and the people who covered it up should pay for it.

I think this mans issue is with the way victims are being handled.

Obviously you don't agree so we'll agree to differ.

Gillo

Sounds to me like a bit of compo culture. I agree with the fact that what happened to him and others is inexcuseable and should never of happened. But it looks to me like he's just out for what he can get.

As for getting an appology from the people who did whatever happened to him (sorry but nowhere has actually said what was done to him, was he beaten, buggered or what??), guessing by the age of this guy. the guilty parties are more than likely dead, so how can they appologise.

Villain

Originally posted by gillo
As for getting an appology from the people who did whatever happened to him (sorry but nowhere has actually said what was done to him, was he beaten, buggered or what??), guessing by the age of this guy. the guilty parties are more than likely dead, so how can they appologise.

He was beaten and raped.

I dont think they are all dead, and the head of the order that done this to him should also apologise IMO.

What I'm saying is that they are both responsible.

Wow. I agree.

I'm also saying that it is up to the State to ensure that these victims cases are heard properly and that the people who did this and the people who covered it up should pay for it.

Another agreement. The difference comes as to where the compensation comes from. I think the Church should supply it. You on the other hand seem to think the State should. Thats where we really disagree.