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

The glorious 12th

Options
1…2122242627…166

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    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.

    It’s used every day. Nationally.
    I tried to use I in a thread responding to one of your(or was it downcow?) nebulous misguided factually bereft posts and you reported me and I got a ban.

    Look up the policy for Irish on boards. You’ll be delighted.


  • Options
    #693
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    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.


  • Options
    #694
    Imreoir2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    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.

    Personally I disagree that communication in Irish should be restricted to facilitate communication in English, I think it is a terrible idea, but I don't make the rules.


  • Options
    #695
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    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.

    I wasn’t aware of the rule I was in a post just trying to let the poorly informed and unaware poster that people use it every day. Just because they are unaware doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.
    The account in question would have reported anyways.


  • Options
    #696
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    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?

    They can see that - that's their point. Soldier F banners may as well read 'we're delighted Soldier F murdered a bunch of you taigs, **** you'.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    J Mysterio wrote: »
    https://www.rte.ie/news/2000/0728/8126-prisoners/

    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


  • Options
    #698
    Imreoir2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    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

    Why would Loyalists need a letter of comfort when all they needed to do was ask their mates in the RUC?


  • Options
    #699
    J Mysterio
    Registered Users Posts: 11,035 ✭✭✭✭J Mysterio


    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

    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.


  • Options
    #700
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    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)

    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


  • Options
    #701
    J Mysterio
    Registered Users Posts: 11,035 ✭✭✭✭J Mysterio


    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

    See above.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,044 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.

    Maybe the blame should be laid where it lies...their 'partners' in this much vaunted 'Union' they keep on about.


  • Options
    #703
    Imreoir2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    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

    If that soldier is responsible for murdering innocent people, you you really think they deserve immunity from prosecution?


  • Options
    #704
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    downcow wrote: »
    Quite simply treat them all the same and I’ll not have a problem.

    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.


  • Options
    #705
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    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;

    What do you think they were in prison for. Slipping a stitch in their knitting? They belong to a very effective sectarian killing machine that often shot and killed civilians.
    Do you really not know this??


  • Options
    #706
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,044 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.

    306 people (that we know about) were killed by the BA. 156 were civillians of them 61 were children.
    4 soldiers in total were convicted of murder and ALL of them were released after 2 to 3 years and allowed to rejoin the army.

    Speaks profoundly for itself.


  • Options
    #707
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Imreoir2 wrote: »
    If that soldier is responsible for murdering innocent people, you you really think they deserve immunity from prosecution?

    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?


  • Options
    #708
    firemansam4
    Registered Users Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭firemansam4


    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


    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.


  • Options
    #709
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,044 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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?

    Take the Letters Of Comfort out on Westminster, it was they in their usual duplicitous perfidious way that issued them.


  • Options
    #710
    Imreoir2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    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?

    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.

    Please answer the question though. Do you believe it is right that Soldier F be given imunity if they are gulty of murder?


  • Options
    #711
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,044 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.

    He is talking about Gerry Kelly I think, who didn't get a letter of comfort. He got a
    royal prerogative of mercy because the British wanted him back from The Netherlands to finish his sentence. He got it for 'escaping' - not the for the bombing of the Old Bailey which he was convicted for.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    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.

    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.


  • Options
    #713
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    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.

    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


  • Options
    #714
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    killed by the BA.

    Also, the salient point, when it comes to BA killings is that all too often the message to the loved ones of those killed was 'they deserved it' because the soldiers who did the killing were exonerated via sham enquiries or no investigation at all.

    What people tend to forget is that the Bloody Sunday and Ballymurphy families were/are fighting to have their loved ones found innocent.


  • Options
    #715
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,044 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.

    Are you willing to take all banners and statues in northern Ireland down that lionises and makes heros of British army figures and Unionist figures of contention, like Carson?
    Have you ever walked around just Belfast as a member of the nationalist community with sensitive eyes similar to your Unionist ones, open? Be thankful that all symbolism of your identity and 'culture' is allowed maybe?


  • Options
    #716
    Imreoir2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    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

    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.


  • Options
    #717
    firemansam4
    Registered Users Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭firemansam4


    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.


    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.


  • Options
    #718
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    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.

    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.


  • Options
    #719
    downcow
    Registered Users Posts: 11,157 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    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.

    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.


  • Options
    #720
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,044 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    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.

    ..and amazingly, the 'question' asked remains unanswered. Marvelous.

    I'll re-ask as it is spot on...Downcow, should soldier F be immune from prosecution if they are a murderer?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    firemansam4
    Registered Users Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭firemansam4


    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.

    But I said soldier f, not the paras as a whole, I just can't see how anyone could defend him after the things he has stated. Its sickening.


Advertisement