Northern Ireland kick's off again

[Gripper]

http://www.ntlworld.com/news/story_uk.php?page_zone=223.1.1&storyid=6143182

thought we'd put all this behind us,why can't people just get along :(

[Jon L. Obscene]

why can't people just get along :(

In this case as in many others........Religion.

The orange people (umpa lumpa's) could'nt get down a road so instead of just moaning they called for help and trashed the place. Just shows where their beliefs lie......not in peace or tranquility but in violence and hurt.

Jonno :cool:

Edit: In fact, why do they have to have these marches? I mean you got all these years of fighting between the 2 factions yet they still insist on marching through teritory which is deemed "Unsafe" for them. Personally I see it as a wind up, an attempt to see if they can get a response. They know full well what can happen when they go on a march, simple advice would be "Don't go on a march in that area".

[whypikonme]

simple advice would be "Don't go on a march in that area".

Why shouldn't they? It's all the same country isn't it? Why do others object?

When l was a little kid we often visited our Catholic family members in Belfast, and they, and all the neighbours would stand in the street and wave at the Orange parades.

[JPaul]

simple advice would be "Don't go on a march in that area".

Why shouldn't they? It's all the same country isn't it? Why do others object?

When l was a little kid we often visited our Catholic family members in Belfast, and they, and all the neighbours would stand in the street and wave at the Orange parades.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

[whypikonme]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

:blink:

[Jon L. Obscene]

simple advice would be "Don't go on a march in that area".

Why shouldn't they? It's all the same country isn't it? Why do others object?

When l was a little kid we often visited our Catholic family members in Belfast, and they, and all the neighbours would stand in the street and wave at the Orange parades.

And your point is?
The FACT is that the orange march often starts trouble, reguardless of which side actually starts. So the best thing to do is don't cross the territory, they are 2 seperate peoples whether right or wrong thats a fact and they know by marching through the other factions area can cause trouble.
Got naff all to do with "Why should'nt they" they should'nt because it causes trouble. Duh.

Jonno :cool:

[JPaul]

Jonno,

He's trolling, you know that as well as I do.

[Jon L. Obscene]

Yeah I know, so am I ;)

:lol:

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

The FACT is that the orange march often starts trouble, reguardless of which side actually starts. So the best thing to do is don't cross the territory, they are 2 seperate peoples whether right or wrong thats a fact and they know by marching through the other factions area can cause trouble.
Got naff all to do with "Why should'nt they" they should'nt because it causes trouble. Duh.

Jonno :cool:

Bullshit! They're the SAME people from the SAME country, if they were allowed to march in THEIR country there would be no trouble, unless the other side started it. So why should they be stopped from doing something they have been doing since 1796?

[whypikonme]

Jonno,

He's trolling, you know that as well as I do.


:lips:

[Jon L. Obscene]

Bullshit! They're the SAME people from the SAME country, if they were allowed to march in THEIR country there would be no trouble, unless the other side started it. So why should they be stopped from doing something they have been doing since 1796?

Yet if Chelsea supporters marched round Millwall what would happen?
Same people, same country.....think about it, don't be so naive :rolleyes:

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

Yet if Chelsea supporters marched round Millwall what would happen?
Same people, same country.....think about it, don't be so naive :rolleyes:

Jonno :cool:

Why would there be trouble if Chelsea supporters marched around Millwall?

[Jon L. Obscene]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Ok I'll just go on the obvious fact you live in a tiny village on a small island populated only by vegetarian pigmys who like flowers :) ........and spend your evenings watching the umpa lumpa's march along the road from your neighbourse doorway :)

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

So you've realised that Millwall Football Ground isn't in Millwall then?

Did you know that Chelsea Football Ground isn't in Chelsea either?

[Jon L. Obscene]

Ah I see, so we now sway off onto a different topic because you can't think of a good enough answer, ok :)

Did you watch the cricket this w/e? aparently it was quite entertaining :D

Jonno :cool:

[peat moss]

Politics and religion , can't fuking stand either of them . Half the time I don't know one side from the other in the news .

[JPaul]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Ok I'll just go on the obvious fact you live in a tiny village on a small island populated only by vegetarian pigmys who like flowers :) ........and spend your evenings watching the umpa lumpa's march along the road from your neighbourse doorway :)

Jonno :cool:
http://img278.imageshack.us/img278/3315/post111222067156fd.jpg

[Jon L. Obscene]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

Ah I see, so we now sway off onto a different topic because you can't think of a good enough answer, ok :)

But l did answer, you said there would be trouble if Chelsea supporters marched through Millwall, l pointed out that that was not true, as Millwall FC is not in Millwall.

l've already given you my view on the NI issue, or are you trying to dissuade me?

[Jon L. Obscene]

No, I am trying to get you to see my view.
You understood perfectly what I meant by the chelsea,millwall thing.
Ok Football/soccer supporters, if one teams fans such as chelsea fans marched through the grounds of Millwall fc while millwall fans were present there would most likely be trouble no?
So you saying that because they are from the same country and they should be allowed to do it is irrelevent, the fact is that it can and does cause trouble. Trouble which could be avoided if they simply took a different root.

Now, do you see my point?

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

Now, do you see my point?
Jonno :cool:

l saw your point in your first post Jonno, l just don't agree with you that they should march elsewhere.

[Jon L. Obscene]

No, you replied to me with these questions.



Why shouldn't they? It's all the same country isn't it? Why do others object?

I've answered you and up until now you have not said that you understood what I was saying, instead you decided to pick out part of an analogy I used and say it was wrong.
Therefore you have not seen my point otherwise you would not have asked those questions.

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

No, you replied to me with these questions.



Why shouldn't they? It's all the same country isn't it? Why do others object?

I've answered you and up until now you have not said that you understood what I was saying, instead you decided to pick out part of an analogy I used and say it was wrong.
Therefore you have not seen my point otherwise you would not have asked those questions.

Jonno :cool:

They were rhetorical question Jonno.

[Jon L. Obscene]

So why should they be stopped from doing something they have been doing since 1796?

And this was rhetorical?

Jonno :cool:

[Rat Faced]

So why should they be stopped from doing something they have been doing since 1796?

Just because a society have been around for a long time, does not mean its right for them to march where they are not welcome.

I take it you believe the KKK should have every right to march through deprived areas of Georgia too?


If the Orangemen have to march, they should stick to the areas where they are supported. Likewise if the Nationalists have to march, they should stick to the areas they are supported.

Personally, I dont see why either side have to inflame things.

[MediaSlayer]

i think the should march, but softly

[MediaSlayer]

no wait, i changed my mind, they shouldn't march.

[whypikonme]

I take it you believe the KKK should have every right to march through deprived areas of Georgia too?

How the fuck can you compare Irish Protestants to the KKK?

[lynx]

I take it you believe the KKK should have every right to march through deprived areas of Georgia too?

How the fuck can you compare Irish Protestants to the KKK?When their actions promote hatred against another section of society, the comparison is quite apt. The fact that you can't see it speaks volumes about you.

[whypikonme]

How the fuck can you compare Irish Protestants to the KKK?When their actions promote hatred against another section of society, the comparison is quite apt. The fact that you can't see it speaks volumes about you.

Trolling again? Why don't you try to find a job, it can't be easy living on the dole.

[lynx]

When their actions promote hatred against another section of society, the comparison is quite apt. The fact that you can't see it speaks volumes about you.

Trolling again? Why don't you try to find a job, it can't be easy living on the dole.Back to your usual form, I see.

Can't supply an answer so you resort to insults.
How pathetic.

[whypikonme]

Trolling again? Why don't you try to find a job, it can't be easy living on the dole.Back to your usual form, I see.

Can't supply an answer so you resort to insults.
How pathetic.

You expect civil replies to your insults? Just what status do you believe being a mod confers on you?

[lynx]

Back to your usual form, I see.

Can't supply an answer so you resort to insults.
How pathetic.

You expect civil replies to your insults? Just what status do you believe being a mod confers on you?
:lol:

[Jon L. Obscene]

Lets explain this so you can understand Mr.Onme.

It's like when you march thru this forum, what happens? same thing ;)

Jonno :cool:

[lynx]

Lets explain this so you can understand Mr.Onme.

It's like when you march thru this forum, what happens? same thing ;)

Jonno :cool:Fucking brilliant. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[whypikonme]

Lets explain this so you can understand Mr.Onme.

It's like when you march thru this forum, what happens? same thing ;)

Jonno :cool:

If that post had made any sense l'd have considered replying. :P

[manker]

Lets explain this so you can understand Mr.Onme.

It's like when you march thru this forum, what happens? same thing ;)

Jonno :cool:

If that post had made any sense l'd have considered replying. :PYeah.

Good thing you didn't reply :blink:

[whypikonme]

Good thing you didn't reply :blink:

Maybe you should look up the definition of 'reply' grammar buoy.

[sArA]

tsk children purleeeeze!!!

Actually, this thread makes me consider that this is precisely why different factions and groups cannot seem to get along together. Each has their own view and is unwilling or unable to even acknowledge that others might have a point. Intolerance and bigotry on all sides (even if only purpotrated by a few) will inevitably (it seems) lead to violence, either of words or actions.

The 'agree to disagree' mantra is not operating well within the confines of this forum, so what hope is there in the real world?

[manker]

Good thing you didn't reply :blink:

Maybe you should look up the definition of 'reply' grammar buoy.Why would I do that.

[manker]

tsk children purleeeeze!!!

Actually, this thread makes me consider that this is precisely why different factions and groups cannot seem to get along together. Each has their own view and is unwilling or unable to even acknowledge that others might have a point. Intolerance and bigotry on all sides (even if only purpotrated by a few) will inevitably (it seems) lead to violence, either of words or actions.

The 'agree to disagree' mantra is not operating well within the confines of this forum, so what hope is there in the real world?Agreeing to disagree won't help.

I disagree with your right to walk down that road.
I respect your right to disagree with us walking down that road.

c.f.

Would you mind still going on the march but walking down a different road, just to avoid the bother, like.
Yeah, okay.

Compromise is the only solution.

[Rat Faced]

I take it you believe the KKK should have every right to march through deprived areas of Georgia too?

How the fuck can you compare Irish Protestants to the KKK?

Simple.

The Orange Order is a politically motivated organisation that opposes the Good Friday Agreement for starters, and many members are also members of loyalist paramilitary groups.

It celebrates the defeat of the Catholics in Ireland and until quite recently was quite open about Nationalist/Catholic suppresion in Ulster. They considered Nationalists to be traitors, pure and simple.

The fact is that until the 60s, the Catholics did have less rights than Protestants in Ulster. No one can actually deny that, they were the underclass.


The KKK is a younger organisation that is also based upon the politics of keeping a section of society down.. in this case non-whites.

The protestant paramilitary murdered catholics.

The KKK murdered blacks.


How is it that you cant see the similarity?

I say again... if you support Orangemen marching through Catholic, Nationalist areas; by definition you also support Nationalists marching through Loyalist areas and the KKK marching through Black areas.

Personally, i quite support any organisation to march for that which they believe in... even the ones i despise like the KKK or BNP.

I do however draw the line on them marching through areas where they are hated and despised.. that is just fanning the flames of hatred for no other reason than they want to cause trouble.

[Gripper]

Eight Words the Wiccan Rede Fulfil! An It Harm None, Do What You Will

This is how it should be,but I'm sad to admit that there will always be factions of people who's sole purpose in life is to cause pain and suffering wherever they go and gain enjoyment from doing it:(

[whypikonme]

I say again... if you support Orangemen marching through Catholic, Nationalist areas; by definition you also support Nationalists marching through Loyalist areas and the KKK marching through Black areas.


What a stupid, puerile thing to say, l would have thought better of you.

[Rat Faced]

I say again... if you support Orangemen marching through Catholic, Nationalist areas; by definition you also support Nationalists marching through Loyalist areas and the KKK marching through Black areas.


What a stupid, puerile thing to say, l would have thought better of you.

Why?

You are the one that seems to think one type of baseless hatred is better than another.

I'm saying thay're all pretty fucked up.

My Great Grandad was an Orangeman.. my Grandad was disowned for marrying a Catholic. They really are all for the community huh?

[whypikonme]

You are the one that seems to think one type of baseless hatred is better than another.

lt gets worse and worse ... any more baseless shit?

Talk about putting words in one's mouth!

[Jon L. Obscene]

lt gets worse and worse ... any more baseless shit?

Talk about putting words in one's mouth!

If you're gonna dissagree with something it's always better to have a reason for it and to state that reason.

To simply make comments about how good or not a post is.......well.....is a bit silly really.

:shifty:

Jonno :cool:

[whypikonme]

lt gets worse and worse ... any more baseless shit?

Talk about putting words in one's mouth!

If you're gonna dissagree with something it's always better to have a reason for it and to state that reason.

To simply make comments about how good or not a post is.......well.....is a bit silly really.

:shifty:

Jonno :cool:

You know, one day Jonno, you'll read what's going on and make a sensible post.

[Rat Faced]

You are the one that seems to think one type of baseless hatred is better than another.

lt gets worse and worse ... any more baseless shit?

Talk about putting words in one's mouth!

I did say that it appeared that way, not that it was.

This is because you have yet to give one reason why the Orange Order in Ulster is different.

Merely stating "thats crap" without any reasons why it is so.. doesnt make it so.

There is plenty of evidence concerning the history of the Orange Order in Ireland, it shouldnt be a problem.

[whypikonme]

This is because you have yet to give one reason why the Orange Order in Ulster is different.

So what you're saying then, is that lynching black people, and tying them to the backs of pick-up trucks and dragging them through the streets, and burning their houses down, is the same as men and boys marching through the streets banging drums and waving flags?

Weird! :(

[DanB]

This is because you have yet to give one reason why the Orange Order in Ulster is different.

So what you're saying then, is that lynching black people, and tying them to the backs of pick-up trucks and dragging them through the streets, and burning their houses down, is the same as men and boys marching through the streets banging drums and waving flags?

Weird! :(


Maybe he meant that blowing up and killing innocent people was the comparitive?

[Jon L. Obscene]

You know, one day Jonno, you'll read what's going on and make a sensible post.

:lol: Yeah ok :rolleyes:


So what you're saying then, is that lynching black people, and tying them to the backs of pick-up trucks and dragging them through the streets, and burning their houses down, is the same as men and boys marching through the streets banging drums and waving flags?

No, in this case the Orange men would be the blacks and the other lot would be lynch mobs.
Difference being that the orange men only have to walk a slightly different route to avoid trouble, it was the lynch mobs who went looking for people.
And in NI it's the Orange lot who go looking for trouble and thats exactly what they get. I'm sorry but if you knew full well that maching your flag through certain places would cause trouble and violence then you would go a different way wouldn't you?

Actually you probably wouldn't cos no one scares you etc blah blah :rolleyes: but most people would unless they actually wanted trouble.

THAT is my point which you seem to have so much difficulty comprehending.

Jonno :cool:

[Rat Faced]

This is because you have yet to give one reason why the Orange Order in Ulster is different.

So what you're saying then, is that lynching black people, and tying them to the backs of pick-up trucks and dragging them through the streets, and burning their houses down, is the same as men and boys marching through the streets banging drums and waving flags?

Weird! :(


No,

Im saying that an organisation that has killed people in the past for their beliefs and still has in its code that these people are not worthy to socialise with... many of the members also being in paramilitary organisations

are the same as

An organisation that has killed people in the past for the colour of their skin and still believe that those people are not worthy to socialise with... many of the members also being in paramilitary organisations.



The only difference is that in the past one killed for religious belief and the other for the colour of the skin.

If either of these organisations wish to march where they are not welcome they shouldn't be allowed.

I'd object to Nationalist/Catholics (eg PIRA, Sein Fein) marching in a Loyalist/Protestant area they weren't welcome for the same reason... i havent particularly got a hatred of one side or the other.


Edit:

I wish to differentiate something.

The Orange Order is active in many countries, however it is only in Ulster and Scotland that i have ever heard of associations of violence. This is probably due to the sectarian nature of the areas.

I do not include the "Lodges" of any other nations in any accusations of hatred and bigotry... however read your "Qualifications" to join, if the shoe fits...

[whypikonme]

No, in this case the Orange men would be the blacks and the other lot would be lynch mobs.

..................

And in NI it's the Orange lot who go looking for trouble and thats exactly what they get.

So let me get this straight Jonno, you're saying that it was the blacks fault, for looking for trouble, that caused them to be lynched?

Even weirder.

[whypikonme]

Im saying that an organisation that has killed people in the past for their beliefs and still has in its code that these people are not worthy to socialise with... many of the members also being in paramilitary organisations

You seem to conveniently forget that both sides here are the same, almost, one side has killed thousands of innocent people who had nothing to do with their shit, or are you saying that the blacks deserved what they got, as Jonno says?

[lynx]

Im saying that an organisation that has killed people in the past for their beliefs and still has in its code that these people are not worthy to socialise with... many of the members also being in paramilitary organisations

You seem to conveniently forget that both sides here are the same, almost, one side has killed thousands of innocent people who had nothing to do with their shit, or are you saying that the blacks deserved what they got, as Jonno says?
You missed this bit out.

I'd object to Nationalist/Catholics (eg PIRA, Sein Fein) marching in a Loyalist/Protestant area they weren't welcome for the same reason... i havent particularly got a hatred of one side or the other.
No doubt you'll accuse me of not reading the thread again. :lol:
Thing is, the rest of us could actually see it up there, so obviously whoever reads these out to you missed that bit.

Edit: Just heard that the UVF have been declared to have broken their ceasefire. About time too, they haven't really been sticking to it for years.

[whypikonme]

Thing is, the rest of us could actually see it up there, so obviously whoever reads these out to you missed that bit.

Why don't you just FUCK OFF! l'm getting sick of your constant insults, that you bring up for no other reason than to be a CUNT, you're supposed to be a fucking MOD, why don't you start acting like one?

[Jon L. Obscene]

No, in this case the Orange men would be the blacks and the other lot would be lynch mobs.

..................

And in NI it's the Orange lot who go looking for trouble and thats exactly what they get.

So let me get this straight Jonno, you're saying that it was the blacks fault, for looking for trouble, that caused them to be lynched?

Even weirder.

No, if you actually read what I said, I said that the lynch mobs went looking for blacks and the blacks got hurt/killed.
In NI the Orange people go looking for trouble.......and get hurt/killed so the orange people are a bit of a mix of the 2, they go to a place knowing they will get attacked yet they still do it. Why?

btw, reduced to telling people to f-off? dayum I thought you could hold out longer than that :(

Jonno :cool:

[4play]

they go to a place knowing they will get attacked yet they still do it. Why?

pride, stupidity or just fancy stiring up shit maybe a mixture of each.
they may be wrong to march through somewhere they are not wanted but they should have the right to do so.

[Jon L. Obscene]

Yes we all know that, but by the same token you should be able to walk down the street without getting mugged, you should be able to leave your door unlocked at night, you should be able to go to the pub without getting in a fight, you should be able to travel on a plane without the fear of terrorism, you should be able to do a lot of things, the point being if you knew a bad thing would happen as a result or your actions you would not follow that course of action unless you actually wanted that trouble it may cause (with a few exceptions obviously, but in this case it applies).

Jonno :cool:

[4play]

I often go down the pub and not get into a fight just as the people marching often march and dont start off a riot. It seems to be more the uvf looking for an excuse to attack the police and get themselves noticed rather than the people marching smashing the place up.

would you stop travelling on the tube to work because of a terrorist attack im guessing not. then why should these people stop marching because a terrorist organisation wants to use them as an excuse to cause trouble.

[manker]

I often go down the pub and not get into a fight just as the people marching often march and dont start off a riot. It seems to be more the uvf looking for an excuse to attack the police and get themselves noticed rather than the people marching smashing the place up.

would you stop travelling on the tube to work because of a terrorist attack im guessing not. then why should these people stop marching because a terrorist organisation wants to use them as an excuse to cause trouble.It's simply about using discretion in order to give rise to compromise.

It's a free country, I should be able to watch Man United Vs Liverpool in the Liverpool supporters end and be able to cheer when my team scores and wear a shirt of my choosing with a bunch of like-minded mates.

However, I use my discretion and realise that it would be a bad thing and I'd be better off in the Man United end. I still get to watch the game, except in a different seat (The Orangemen still get to march, except along a different route), I still get to cheer (the Orangemen still get their message out), I still get to wear attire of my choosing (the Orangemen still get to wear their funky clothes).

It's fairly easy if you're a reasonable person, however, reason has always been in short supply regarding this issue.

[JPaul]

they go to a place knowing they will get attacked yet they still do it. Why?


they may be wrong to march through somewhere they are not wanted but they should have the right to do so.
The people who live on the streets they wish to march down also have the right to say, "No we do not want you here, please march somewhere else. Somewhere the local residents appreciate your message". That seems fair to me. In my view the rights of the people who live there outweigh the rights of those who want to march.

That way they have their march, the local residents have there peace and quiet and everyone should be satisfied.

Unless the only point in marching is to upset other people, which can only be achieved by proving you are the dominant force and that you can march where you want, whatever anyone else thinks.

[manker]

The people who live on the streets they wish to march down also have the right to say, "No we do not want you here, please march somewhere else. Somewhere the local residents appreciate your message".Good point.

[Busyman]

The people who live on the streets they wish to march down also have the right to say, "No we do not want you here, please march somewhere else. Somewhere the local residents appreciate your message".Good point.
.....sure as long as it's just talk.

[JPaul]

Good point.
.....sure as long as it's just talk.

I said " ... the right to say ..." which would mean it was talk.

I don't think that's ambiguous, if so my apologies.

They have the right to make their views know. To the Parades Commission, the Police and any other relevant local authority. It is then up to those people to decide whether a march should be allowed to go ahead, or whether it's route should be changed.

Again, this seems fair to me.

These are the people who decide (http://www.paradescommission.org/general/members.cfm)

[Busyman]

.....sure as long as it's just talk.

I said " ... the right to say ..." which would mean it was talk.

I don't think that's ambiguous, if so my apologies.
My apologies as well. I should have said, "sure as long as it stay just talk".

Rights to verbally object are obvious. Unless you live in a communist country.

[JPaul]

@BM,

Then we are agreed.

The one group has a right to request to march and specify the route they wish to take.

The other group has the right to protest, saying that they wish the march to be held elsewhere as they do not want it (and what it represents) going thro' their streets.

Someone then arbitrates on what is the fairest solution. Which in this instance, as I understand it, was the march going ahead with a different route.

That all seems perfectly reasonable and makes sense to me.

Compromise is, as maker said, the only way.

[j2k4]

@BM,

Then we are agreed.

The one group has a right to request to march and specify the route they wish to take.

The other group has the right to protest, saying that they wish the march to be held elsewhere as they do not want it (and what it represents) going thro' their streets.

Someone then arbitrates on what is the fairest solution. Which in this instance, as I understand it, was the march going ahead with a different route.

That all seems perfectly reasonable and makes sense to me.

Compromise is, as maker said, the only way.

Hmmm.

I beg to differ.

Arbitration is not compromise, last I looked.

Good, though, if it works, and peacefully.

I'm not sure that particular solution would work in a lot of circumstances over here.

[Rat Faced]

It didnt in this circumstance either, the Orangemen's supporters rioted all over Ulster from what i heard. (I havent been watching the news though, just hearsay)

[j2k4]

It didnt in this circumstance either, the Orangemen's supporters rioted all over Ulster from what i heard. (I havent been watching the news though, just hearsay)

Has the arbitrater resigned in disgrace yet?

[Rat Faced]

In this case, it was a lose:lose for the arbitrator..

If the march had went ahead where they wished to march, then there would have been riots.

If the march was not allowed there wold have been riots from the other side.

They therefore tried to compromise.. let the march go ahead, avoiding the Catholic area.... guess what, there were riots. ;)

[j2k4]

Then I reiterate:


Has the arbitrater resigned in disgrace yet?

[JPaul]

Then I reiterate:


Has the arbitrater resigned in disgrace yet?
Why would they.

They made a decision which was in their power to make. They made the only reasonable decision they could under the circumstances.

They allowed the march to go ahead, but did not allow it to go thro' an area which would obviously cause problems. They tried to find a compromise solution, which I think they did (which is why I said it earlier).

Where is the disgrace in that. The disgrace is in the behaviour of those who did not accept the legal decision and who rioted in the streets.

This holds equally for either "side" in such circumstances.

[chalice]

There have been voices of descent in the Orange Order of late but there's been no talk of resignations. On the contrary, leading loyalists have drop-kicked the blame into the PSNI's end of the field and are happily attributing the recent anarchy to poor policing.

The UVF promised that there would be serious repercussions for the security forces if women and child protestors (children, I ask you) were removed from the road blockades. The PSNI premitted the blocking of traffic, claiming that the protests were peaceful and so the entire city ground to a halt.

I didn't get home from work until 9pm on Monday. They were burning cars on the railway line. And to add insult to injury, some old bint decided it was a good time to commit suicide so it was a good two hours before the train got moving again. How inconsiderate.

[j2k4]

Then I reiterate:


Why would they.

That should be obvious; when an official is even peripherally involved in an endeavor that goes bad (so to speak), the de-facto public stance is to demand a resignation.*

Is this person different.

*Feel free to surmise intended sarcasm.

[JPaul]

Why would they.

That should be obvious; when an official is even peripherally involved in an endeavor that goes bad (so to speak), the de-facto public stance is to demand a resignation.*

Is this person different.

*Feel free to surmise intended sarcasm.
It's not a person, it's a group of people, I linked to it earlier.

They made a decision, which one group disagreed with and brought violence to the streets. It was their decision to make and it appears to be a fair and reasonable compromise. I can think of no earthly reason why they (or any one of them) would be expected to resign, under these circumstances.

If a group in the US asked for permission to have an "anti-black" march, thro a predominantly black area and the powers that be said "No, sorry, that's inflamatory likely to cause offence and possibly trouble. The march must be held elsewhere", would you expect them (the decision makers) to then resign, if the marchers became violent over the decision.

[Rat Faced]

Oh, i see where tis is going...

The big difference is of course that they made a compromise and tried like hell to stop any trouble or violence on either side.. granted they failed, as there is no compromise in the eyes of bigots.

They didnt finish their vacation, go fundraising, to the opera and shopping whilst just letting the people get on with dying.


Edit:

To clarify; no one expected the useless arsehole in the whitehouse to get a shovel out and get his hands dirty. What they did expect was that he showed that this was more important than the above, and to cancel these useless engagements to show that he was doing all he could.

[JPaul]

There have been voices of descent in the Orange Order of late but there's been no talk of resignations. On the contrary, leading loyalists have drop-kicked the blame into the PSNI's end of the field and are happily attributing the recent anarchy to poor policing.

The UVF promised that there would be serious repercussions for the security forces if women and child protestors (children, I ask you) were removed from the road blockades. The PSNI premitted the blocking of traffic, claiming that the protests were peaceful and so the entire city ground to a halt.

I didn't get home from work until 9pm on Monday. They were burning cars on the railway line. And to add insult to injury, some old bint decided it was a good time to commit suicide so it was a good two hours before the train got moving again. How inconsiderate.

Chalice,

Look time no speak old bean, good to see you about.

Sorry to hear you were late how, some people, tch.

[j2k4]

That should be obvious; when an official is even peripherally involved in an endeavor that goes bad (so to speak), the de-facto public stance is to demand a resignation.*

Is this person different.

*Feel free to surmise intended sarcasm.
It's not a person, it's a group of people, I linked to it earlier.

They made a decision, which one group disagreed with and brought violence to the streets. It was their decision to make and it appears to be a fair and reasonable compromise. I can think of no earthly reason why they (or any one of them) would be expected to resign, under these circumstances.

If a group in the US asked for permission to have an "anti-black" march, thro a predominantly black area and the powers that be said "No, sorry, that's inflamatory likely to cause offence and possibly trouble. The march must be held elsewhere", would you expect them (the decision makers) to then resign, if the marchers became violent over the decision.

Yes, yes, but what about the sarcastic view?

Rat-

Your posting presumes an element of malice on the part of Bush; an active urge to do harm to others, in this case through the vehicle of an easy and deniable neglect.

We arrive, finally, at the root of your animus.

Thank you for the clarification.

You realize, of course, that this would require he be an evil genius, which effectively places a moratorium on future negative references to his intellect, which fact you no doubt find tremendously disappointing.

[Rat Faced]

I disagree J2,

It shows that he didnt consider them important.

If it was malice, he would have been actively making things worse rather than ignoring the problem.

From the coincidence in the aftermath, this may have been the case.. however it is not likely, he'd have had to work at the timings... work is something he is not strong on.

It would be much more likely to be someone less senior in the administration that was stage managing it all.

[j2k4]

I disagree J2,

It shows that he didnt consider them important.

If it was malice, he would have been actively making things worse rather than ignoring the problem.

From the coincidence in the aftermath, this may have been the case.. however it is not likely, he'd have had to work at the timings... work is something he is not strong on.

It would be much more likely to be someone less senior in the administration that was stage managing it all.

You mean you've never ascribed a quality of evil to Bush?

I think you just don't want to have to stop calling him stupid, and any discussion of matters evil could quickly gain a religious aspect which would surely turn sour.

[Rat Faced]

I dont mind saying that i think he's evil.

If i was Christian the word "anti-christ" would probably come from my lips.

Rape, Murder, Treason, Fraud.. all things he is alleged to have done in the past, and amazingly the claimants all die, disappear or are ignored.

He never has to go to court over the allegations himself, always "a friend" stepping up to say "I did it" when it looks like he may have to. :rolleyes:

[j2k4]

Rape, Murder, Treason, Fraud.. all things he is alleged to have done in the past, and amazingly the claimants all die, disappear or are ignored.

He never has to go to court over the allegations himself, always "a friend" stepping up to say "I did it" when it looks like he may have to. :rolleyes:

I thought we were talking about Bush, not Clinton... :huh:

[JPaul]

It's not a person, it's a group of people, I linked to it earlier.

They made a decision, which one group disagreed with and brought violence to the streets. It was their decision to make and it appears to be a fair and reasonable compromise. I can think of no earthly reason why they (or any one of them) would be expected to resign, under these circumstances.

If a group in the US asked for permission to have an "anti-black" march, thro a predominantly black area and the powers that be said "No, sorry, that's inflamatory likely to cause offence and possibly trouble. The march must be held elsewhere", would you expect them (the decision makers) to then resign, if the marchers became violent over the decision.

Yes, yes, but what about the sarcastic view?


Sorry, I thought you were staying on-topic and that it was a serious question.

My bad.

[Rat Faced]

Rape, Murder, Treason, Fraud.. all things he is alleged to have done in the past, and amazingly the claimants all die, disappear or are ignored.

He never has to go to court over the allegations himself, always "a friend" stepping up to say "I did it" when it looks like he may have to. :rolleyes:

I thought we were talking about Bush, not Clinton... :huh:

As i've said many many times...

The difference is only one of degree. :P

[j2k4]

I thought we were talking about Bush, not Clinton... :huh:

As i've said many many times...

The difference is only one of degree. :P

And ordering, I think.