"Terry" <Terry1156@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:hh8kh01sfptj3aacu67ag0ln3c7i9dud1k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:31:34 +0100, "Des Higgins"
> <dazzhiggins@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
> >> >Terry me ole pal; I never claimed to have any dimensions at all.
> >>
> >> I've identified one. It's a beginning.
> >>
> >> > My only
> >> >role in discussing NI here is to
> >> >point out the hypocrisy of others,
> >>
> >> Your only role is to point out what you think is the hypocrisy of
> >> nationalists. You don't bother very much with pointing out the
> >> hypocrisy of the British or Unionists.
> >>
> >
> >Get me a unionist or Telegraph reader who wishes to defend internment,
> >Bloody Sunday, or criticise the role of the RoI government over the
past
50
> >years of this mess and I will hound them too.
> >Google threads between me and Matthew Huntbach, Falcon, Gavin Bailey,
John
> >Crawford, Concerned Ulsterman and others. Right now, you and others
have
> >scared most of them off. Bailey and Huntbach and others have
ironically,
> >in the past accused me of being republican.
> >
> >Do you knwo how to dig up old threads. There are literally hundreds of
them
> >with me arguing against the above. With Huntbach it went on for about
3
> >years.
>
> That's interesting. So what you're really saying is that there aren't
> enough obvious Unionists about now for you to come across as balanced.
Let's keep this simple.
You accused me of only arguing with nationalists.
I invited you to check examples where I argued with apologists for evils
perpetrated by the security forces.
You did not bother and then turned it into a different argument.
As for the unionists who post here;
I either find them pretty reasonable (e.g. Telmey or George Griffin)
or I ignore them.
I do not give a ****e if you like that or not.
It is my call.
>
> That's another way of putting one of the points I was making.
>
> >
> >> The problem thiough is that if you only point out the hypocrisy of
one
> >> group and leave the others alone then you actually sup****t them by
> >> ommission.
> >>
> >
> >That does not have to follow. My enemies enemy is my friend??
>
> It doesn't have to follow in terms of your individual view. It's the
> impression that's created, by what's left out.
So I have not argued about vegetarianism for 9 months now;
does that make me a rabid animal torturer.
Get me a rabid loyalist posting to SCI and I will have a go at him or her.
Right now, I cannot see any but there are several posters who make amazing
claims to have balanced views of NI but are simply trotting out simplistic
Brits Out propaganda.
If you dislike that, good.
>
> It's arguably possible that O'Reilly's gang at the Sunday Independent
> are a reasonably balanced bunch and we get a false impression of them
> because they've only been attacking Republicans for the past few
> years.
>
I honestly do not know or care.
> >I can criticise anyone I like on SCI, as can you.
> >
> >> So unless you're going to point out everyones hypocrisy, it probably
> >> not a good idea to go down that road in the first place,
> >>
> >
> >Life is too short. I can post what I like to who I like. There is no
time
> >to reply to every piece of ****e here.
>
> But would you agree that if all anyone sees is people attacking
> Republicans all the time then it creates a one dimensional picture of
> the North?
>
I do not arttack republicans all the time; I attack blatant bollox dressed
up as a balanced view.
Read what I said that started your diatribe.
I posted a few lines to point out how comical it was to claim a balanced
view when referring to the Crown viewpoint. I stand by that and your 40
pages of waffle does not change my view that what I said was a fair call.
I
do not give a flying **** if you do not like free staters, cuddle
clubbers,
revisionists, brit apologists,
people who have 3 brit friends, people who are simply friends or anyone
else.
What that guy wrote was silly and I called it that.
I give in.
There is nothing that I have ever read by you on SCI that has convinced me
of anything sensible
and clearly you have me written off as a Free Stater and you will never
like
anything I write. You seem to have vast quantities of time on your hands
to
argue the pointless (Is Michael Adams on holidays or something); enjoy
yourself.
SNIP
[more of the same]
|
