I know you all read the Daily Mail, but we should boycott it

Pittens · 22-06-2010 10:25AM

you want to be annoyed... be annoyed with the rira cira

We can be annoyed with both. However you are making a fairly obnoxious link - kinda like the Mail - between protestors and an illegal terrorist group, as if to say: Yes A killed B, but B killed A.

Not only is this WhatAboutary, it is obnoxiously wrong. The IRA is an illegal organisation engaged in criminal acts, the protestors were British Citizens walking along streets mown down by the British Army. They were not IRA.

This would be a big deal anywhere. It was a civil rights march - which by necessity is Catholic dominated - and there may have been IRA sympathisers. The Mail said it was not like a Luther King march. But that is exactly what it was like, the King marches had armed people too. They were not invited but the Black Panthers were there. As for Malcom X's march, that was crawling with Panthers.

If the American Army, or National Guard had killed tens of people there - without any evidence of being fired upon - it would be major news to this day. Articles like this would get even right wing journalists fired.

spank_inferno · 22-06-2010 10:29AM

If the Daily Mail could afford it this would be the only ad in their paper

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3313/3479011023_a3b028b7c6.jpg

ejmaztec · 22-06-2010 11:01AM

The Mail should leave the heavy stuff out of its pages and just do what it does best, tell lies about celebrities.

Dudess · 22-06-2010 11:44AM

moonpurple wrote: »

the article opens up with

"Bloody Sunday was a shameful day in the proud history of the British Army."

events 35 years ago

So fukken what? No matter how long ago it was, the pain must still be raw for the families.

how about shameful activities that saw small children forced to leave the safety of their beds and go in fear to a church hall

in the last 4 weeks

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0618/breaking1.html

you want to be annoyed... be annoyed with the rira cira

Yeah, let's have an atrocity competition - get a fukken grip...

Most people with a sense of balance are annoyed by ALL acts of violence in the North - clearly you're not though.

Always has to be a fukken Conor Cruise O'Brien type genius on these threads - well done you...

pirelli · 22-06-2010 04:44PM

goose2005 wrote: »

Actually 502 British soldiers were killed (plus seven TA), and only 3,526 died total, 718 of whom were not Northern Irish.

I found some better stats online, I had always thought it was 4000 and it appears the 150 was the amount of civilians killed by the British Army that has not been investigated. Thanks for correcting me. My post was to criticise the Daily mail whom seems to want to focus entirely on the British Army ... and it's war in afghanistan at the time of the Saville report.

DAILY MAIL

As we illustrate on our front page, these men, and their sons and grandsons who are dying now in Afghanistan, are the true face of the British Army. And nothing can diminish the debt we owe them

There were another more than 500 Non british army that were killed in northern ireland?

It was soldiers of the british Army that shot those people on Bloody Sunday and yet instead of honouring the civilians killed or the 500 non british army personnel killed in the troubles the DAILY MAIL prefers to thank the british Army and not the Non Armed forces that were also british citizens that died while trying to preserve peace.

I jut think this was a both a miscarriage of justice if not a travesty of justice and a murder that was commmited by soldiers of the british Army and for some reason the DAILY MAIL wants to commend in particular the British Army at this time of the Saville report and not the countless other british lives that were lost in those years.

In the words of David Cameron:

'We do not honour all those who served with such distinction by keeping the peace and upholding the rule of law in Northern Ireland by hiding from the truth.

The Daily Mail would like to very quickly forget those words and move on it seems.

Fact Sheet on the conflict in and about Northern Ireland

Every day of the year marks the anniversary of someone’s death
as a result of conflict in and about Northern Ireland.
1· 3,725 people were killed as a result of the conflict.
2· Approximately 47,541 people were injured.
3· There were 36,923 shootings.
4· 16,209 bombings were conducted.
5· Between 1969 and 1998, 1,533 of the deaths as a result of the
conflict were under the age of 25. 257 of those killed were under
the age of 18.
6 · The largest age group (25% or 898 people) killed between 1969
and 1998 were those between the ages of 18 and 23.
7 · As of 1998, the largest group (54%) of the deaths as a result of
the conflict were civilians.
8 · As of 1998, the largest group (68%) of those injured were
civilian.[/I]

ScumLord · 22-06-2010 04:47PM

The Daily Mail is already on my boycott list as is,
The Sun
The Star
And all the rest. Outdated sensationalist propaganda, it's all muck.

Elliemental · 22-06-2010 04:50PM

I have never read the Daily Mail in my life. Just accidentally glancing over the headlines while in the corner shop queue is enough to make me scream out loud.

Butch Cassidy · 22-06-2010 04:51PM

Daily Mail supported Hitler don'tcha know.

It's all about scaring the living **** into the middle-England middle class.

Left wing terrorists are going to gain power in the House of Commons
jailbait preggo teen whores are having babiez just to steal aw yr tax monies
immigrants are here to steal your Britishness

Et cetera. Et Cetera. Et cetera

eightyfish · 22-06-2010 05:24PM

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Daily Mail supported Hitler don'tcha know.

I didn't know that. Just Wiki'd it. Cheers.

The DM comes up all the time on here. People universally hate it. In fact, considering the British edition was heavily anti-Irish in the past, I can't understand why anybody in Ireland would buy it.

This is my favourite example of the Daily Mail being self-promoting and ignorant.

owenc · 22-06-2010 05:28PM

ynotdu wrote: »

The Daily Mail Newspaper has an English version and an Irish version.

It is not so evident now but still happens.
Englands version panders to the lowest common denominator 'Little Englanders in its Editorials and panders in the Irish version to 'Little Irelanders'

In its English version it once called Ireland "A swamp"

There are inconsistancys in the OP's post,but he is coming from the right direction about the rag!

Yes, people on here saying they read it have never read it at all they have read the irish version.:P

kraggy · 22-06-2010 05:28PM

Anyone else find it like the primary school yard, the way whole threads go in AH depending on the first 2 or 3 replies and everyone else is afraid to speak up and protect/agree with the first poster?

I think the article is a disgrace.

But hey, that wouldn't fit in with what the cool kids have to say...

FlutterinBantam · 22-06-2010 05:37PM

Butch Cassidy wrote: »

Daily Mail supported Hitler don'tcha know.

It's all about scaring the living **** into the middle-England middle class.

Left wing terrorists are going to gain power in the House of Commons
jailbait preggo teen whores are having babiez just to steal aw yr tax monies
immigrants are here to steal your Britishness

Et cetera. Et Cetera. Et cetera

That's not happening is it.

take a look around ya buddy,and get real.

Minstrel27 · 22-06-2010 05:52PM

Daily Mail website wrote:

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

I wonder why.

Pittens · 22-06-2010 06:55PM

That's not happening is it.

take a look around ya buddy,and get real.

:rolleyes:

I know you all read the Daily Mail, but we should boycott it

Comments