janfebmar wrote: » It's a dead language, nobody speaks it, nobody uses it to any extent in any thread on boards.ie or social media, there are virtually no Irish language newspapers or magazines...all this despite the hundreds of millions the Irish government has squandered on it over the years. A much bigger waste than the new children's hospital being built.
dudara wrote: » We ask posters to post in English, so that a post is understandable to all. Not everyone speaks Irish to the same level of comprehension, and it’s unfair to post solely in Irish in the “mainstream” forums. The same principle would apply if a poster were to post solely in Spanish, German or another language. A limited amount of Irish, in the sense of a seanfhocal or cúpla focal is fine, but don’t make it hard on people to understand your posts. If Irish speakers want to discuss through Irish, we ask that they do in the Gaeilge or Teach na nGaelt forums, where they will find posters with the same goal. Let me state that I grew up in a Gaeltacht, went to primary and secondary in Irish,I still regularly listen to RnaG and TnaG (can’t break those habits!) and I am a supporter of Irish. But I understand why we ask people to limit it in forums like AH.
Sunny Disposition wrote: » Don’t get the banners up supporting Soldier F, in advance of a trial. If he’s guilty he’s at least as bad as an IRA man. How can the Unionists not see that?
J Mysterio wrote: » https://www.rte.ie/news/2000/0728/8126-prisoners/
downcow wrote: » This was across the board. It has nothing to do with the secret deals with republican. Loyalists got zero letters of comfort republicans got them all
firemansam4 wrote: » I would say a lot of the anger towards the support soldier f gets is due to the whole hypocrisy of those who support the soldier. Its like the IRA have been vilified and called out as bloody murderers by much of the unionist population but would label the British Army including those involved in Bloody Sunday as hero's and keepers of the peace, ignoring some of the atrocities they have been involved in because it does not suit their political views. (not saying I disagree with labeling IRA members murderers BTW)
downcow wrote: » Quite simply treat them all the same and I’ll not have a problem. While Gerry etc have letters of comfort so as they can’t be charged then I’ll support the soldiers to get them as well. I like equality
J Mysterio wrote: » The 'Republicans' were sent 'letters of comfort' to say Her Majesty's Government would not seek to prosecute. This was done to 'seal the deal' as it were. The lads on 'the other side' weren't quite as bothered at the time. Further, this article may be of interest.
downcow wrote: » Quite simply treat them all the same and I’ll not have a problem.
armaghlad wrote: » You aren’t really stating equivalents though. Hunger striker banners obviously don’t bother me, to the best of my knowledge none of them deliberately shot and killed any civilians;
Junkyard Tom wrote: » If they'd been treated the same they'd have been jailed not long after their killings and described as murdering terrorists. Yes, let's have equality.
Imreoir2 wrote: » If that soldier is responsible for murdering innocent people, you you really think they deserve immunity from prosecution?
downcow wrote: Quite simply treat them all the same and I’ll not have a problem. While Gerry etc have letters of comfort so as they can’t be charged then I’ll support the soldiers to get them as well. I like equality
downcow wrote: » They deserve a letter of comfort no more or no less than Gerry. Is that not fair? Or would you give it to one and not the other?
Imreoir2 wrote: » No, it's not. As far as I am aware Garry Adams is not suspected of personal involvement in a murder. If he was then you would have a point, but I don't think that is the case.
firemansam4 wrote: » 2 wrongs don't make a right, wrongs that your government in Westminster signed up to BTW. Nobody should be supporting the actions of that soldier but hey if it goes with your political beliefs, who cares if he killed some innocent catholics huh? You need to defend you military heroes no matter what I guess.
FrancieBrady wrote: » killed by the BA.
downcow wrote: » So the question remains unanswered whether you would call for the banners supporting the hunger strikers be removed. Some on here said they didn’t kill civilians. One of them was directly involved in the kings mill massacre, separating a bus load of civilians in to prods and catholic’s and then murdering all the Catholics - and he has a kids play park named after him. But let’s get the para banners down cause they were bad boys.
downcow wrote: » Ask the civilians who were burnt alive at their dinner in la mon or the family of Jean McConville. They may not agree with you
downcow wrote: So the question remains unanswered whether you would call for the banners supporting the hunger strikers be removed. Some on here said they didn’t kill civilians. One of them was directly involved in the kings mill massacre, separating a bus load of civilians in to prods and catholic’s and then murdering all the Catholics - and he has a kids play park named after him. But let’s get the para banners down cause they were bad boys.
Imreoir2 wrote: » I am asking you, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer? I want your opinion, not wataboutery or suggestions of other people who should be asked.
firemansam4 wrote: » I've already stated what I thought about the IRA in my previous post so yes I don't support seeing the hunger strikers banners up either. But there is a difference in that the hunger strikers were looked up to as hero's because of the actual hunger strikes and standing up to the British government, not as much for some of the killings some of them carried out. Soldier f is looked up to as a hero because he shot some catholics.
downcow wrote: » Few here believe there is the slightest chance he will be found guilty of murder so it’s a hypothetical question. I actually would draw a line under the whole thing and have no more prosecutions. I no that’s probably not a majority view in my community. But we must move on.
downcow wrote: The paras are looked up to as hero’s because they stood up to terrorism. You should look back at what you are saying - it would be like me saying to you that the hunger strikers are looked up to because they slaughtered Protestants. I would have a little more empathy with you than to say that.
