BS: Tory party conference

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 01:37 PM

Timeline for when Gay marriage became law in the world.
Netherlands (2001)
Belgium (2003)
Canada (2005)
Spain (2005)
South Africa (2006)
Norway (2009)
Sweden (2009)
Argentina (2010)
Iceland (2010)
Portugal (2010)
Denmark (2012)
Brazil (2013)
England & Wales (2013)
France (2013)
New Zealand (2013)
Uruguay (2013)
Luxembourg (2014)
Scotland (2014 )

Number of countries that have reversed that decision
Er..........!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 01:15 PM

Done deal Jim?
What I "done" was expose your lying and showed that views you called racist and right wing were no such thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 01:08 PM

Derrick, in one part of the United Kingdom H"M" is illegal, worldwide there is a huge majority of countries which do not recognise it.

It is becoming accepted in Western nations where the media control the political and social thought process.

I have watched from the days when homosexuality was a serious criminal offence....I opposed that law, as I oppose the legislation to redefine marriage.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 01:02 PM

An archetypal cantankerous combative mudcatter

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 12:59 PM

"all in one tiny post with not one fact to back them up? "
Your persistence in pursuing your bigoted line - over several years is fact enough Ake - give it a rest, it's a done deal and you and yours are not going to alter it - 21st century and all that.
Keith
You're a done deal too
Six "lies" to date - don't ever whine about being insulted again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 12:58 PM

You have never "addressed" any issue, you have simply parroted simplistic claptrap, you are a recognised troll and shall be treated as such by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 12:51 PM

"Laws" can be changed at will by any government who depends on the media to keep power....without recourse to the views of the general public....Sexual minorities have been pushing for years for a lowering of the age of consent.
We have no longer any control over which
direction society is dragged by media power

Ake,

Looking at the link below,it looks like a large percentage of people are not opposed to gay marriage.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/marriage.aspx

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 12:48 PM

Name calling is just personal, ad hominem abuse. Again.
Resorting to that suggest you are incapable of supporting your case.

Nonsense, Keith. I have addressed the issue. I have said over and over again that two people who love each other should not be disbarred from marrying as long as the relationship is legal. I have said that forced testing of any human being is not acceptable. These are my opinions, formulated over the years, in real life. Ake has shown that he is incapable of understanding this and, as I keep repeating, no one is going to change anyone's mind on here.

If opinions are not going to be changed then what is the point of the debate other than to show that some people are talking out of their arses?

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 12:47 PM

"Homophobia, bigotry, fetish of gender hatred, threat of eternal damnation,crazy, hatred of homosexuals, round the twist."....all in one tiny post with not one fact to back them up?    Is this a new record in abuse? why don't you put as many swear words as you can think of in a box and post them without comment?   That would make more sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 12:39 PM

Jim,
We did not discuss cartoons that depicted famine victims as apes, as you claimed.
That was a lie as was your claim that I supported them as being "just the humour of the time."
Also a lie was your claim that I denied "No Irish" signs.
You lied and lied.

You also claimed that I expressed racist, right wing views on Irish education.
I have shown that the views I expressed were those of an eminent, left wing Irish historian, as published in the pre-eminent journal of Irish history, with supporting references to the works of other eminent Irish historians.

Your argument is demolished Jim, and your lies exposed.

It is not homophobic to be on either side of the gay marriage debate.
The fact that it is gaining acceptance does not change that.

Instead of calling someone a homophobe, address what he actually says.
Name calling is just personal, ad hominem abuse. Again.
Resorting to that suggest you are incapable of supporting your case.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 11:56 AM

"Expend some of your energy on fighting against the REAL inequalities in this world."
How are you decide on my behalf what the "real" inequalities of the world are.
Homophobia, in any shape or form is to support an "inequality" which has led to lifelong misery, suppression of self, has instigated open violence against people, murder and suicide and it has brought about all sorts of psychological and medical problems.
It is a bigotry that effects millions of human beings - you seem to be pleading a 'special case' to be allowed to continue your own particular fetish of gender-hatred.
If you believe for one minute that a different government will withdraw the basic hard-won human rights that have now been put into place after decades of struggle, you're crazier that I thought you were.
In the case of Ireland, the people voted a change of constitution to allow same-sex marriage, despite the most powerful form of opposition available to its opponents - the threat of eternal damnation.
Has your hatred of homosexuals finally driven you round the twist?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 11:40 AM

That is not an argument Jim, that is a rant, full of inconsistencies and nonsense.....what on earth does left handedness have to do with marriage or sexual health.

"Laws" can be changed at will by any government who depends on the media to keep power....without recourse to the views of the general public....Sexual minorities have been pushing for years for a lowering of the age of consent.
We have no longer any control over which
direction society is dragged by media power

As I have said, all you have is a failed ideology to support.

Expend some of your energy on fighting against the REAL inequalities in this world......there are plenty of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 09:04 AM

" have produced dozens of facts which have been studiously ignored."
No - you have produced a handful of "facts" (as you see them) dozens of times and they have been responded to and rejected - not just by us, but by the world in general.
One of your most repeated "facts" which you appear to gloat over is your 'Gay Plague' argument.
Being gay is as natural and normal as being left for a large number of people (we don't exactly know how large as bigotry such as that displayed by people such as yourself has served to make homosexuality something to be cautious about - ie - it has actively suppressed it).
Left-handedness carries with it certain problems (I have always been aware of this in tradesman I have worked with and my own peculiar form of left-handedness led me to be punished numerous times at school).
It would be grotesque if people were to adopt your attitude of persistently harping on the problems of left-handedness as you do about your perceived health problems with homosexuality - which is inhumanly (assuming it is true!!)
What would I like - other people's sexuality is none of my, or anybody's business, and those who chose to indulge in such interference appear to me to be very unsure of their own sexuality.
Of course I would like to see people allowed to express their own natural sexuality freely (within the law) and the fact that you wouldn't makes you the bigot you are.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 08:48 AM

In this case there is only one fact that matters. All human beings should be treated fairly and in a consistent manner. To do anything else is nothing but prejudice. Not that it matters to you. As I said, your opinion that they should not. There is as little point in trying convince you otherwise as there is trying to push butter up a porcupines arse with a hot needle.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 08:19 AM

I have produced dozens of facts which have been studiously ignored.
All I have heard from you people is the media chorus of "it's just not fair/right" that any two people who "love" each other are not allowed to be married.
Although you scream for that.....you wouldn't really like to see it....would you?

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 08:05 AM

"blown out of the water".
Your arguments (what there were of them) have been blown out of the water by the fact that society has moved on and you and those who share your views are now a thing of the past - all we can hope for that the persecution that your views have inflicted on a sizeable portion of the world population will end and, as has its companion bigotry, racism. eventually be made illegal.
Nobody expects you to change your mind - these arguments seldom do that, but they are put up for general scrutiny.
People have put reasonable and articulate arguments on all these subjects - the fact that you and others refuse to acknowledge them as having been made is your problem, nobody else's - they are there for others to see.
You - as with Keith, refuse toi accept arguments - fair enough, your prerogative - but when you fail to make your case, you then go on to claim that no arguments have been been put forward and are just "blind ideology" - it is this which destroys reasonable debates and turns them into dog-fights.
If you addressed the facts rather than debasing them with statements such as the one you have just made, we might get somewhere - at least we wouldn't have to put up with the foul atmosphere your insulting dismissal creates.
As with Keith, my thanks for making my point so succinctly - far better than I could.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 07:34 AM

Only a mystery to you, ake...

I have already discussed opinions with Teriboob but I may as well go though it here as well. Debate is all about trying to change opinion. It is very rare for opinion to change due to the rantings of complete strangers on an internet forum. And, yes, I do include myself in ranting. There is little or no point in trying to explain your opinions to people who have already made their mind up on the basis of real world experience. There is even less point in trying to justify opinions that contravene human decency.

My opinions are mine, your opinions are yours. Never the twain shall meet and I am neither going to spend time trying to convince you that you are wrong or listen to you trying to convince anyone else.

May as well just have some fun :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 07:17 AM

Whether you agree with my views or not is immaterial in this case, we are talking about reasoned debate.

If we all agreed, there would be no debate.

Regarding the Homosexual "marriage", I have heard nothing which would make me alter my views, never mind my views being "blown out of the water".....That sort of remark is typical of your clique who are no doubt feeling insecure after the mysterious disappearance of "Team Musket".......no facts, just blind ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 06:58 AM

The same tactics were employed against my self over Homosexual "marriage"
Your anachronistic and extremely homophobic view of homosexual marriage has been blown out of the water time and time again, by argument here and by the fact that, like with capital punishment, society has moved on, yet you still argue for it here - can there be any further proof needed of who is ******* up these threads by fighting long lost battles -
Homosexual marriage is now part of all civilised societies and opposed only by dinosaurs and bigots .
Thank you for making my point, over and over again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 06:23 AM

You are wrong Jim, at least you attempt to make a case, you put a bit of time and effort into what you contribute others on your side of the ideological fence do not.

There are several people here who simply keep up a personal vendetta against Keith, with no attempt to construct an argument.

The same tactics were employed against my self over Homosexual "marriage".
Childish stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 06:13 AM

"Have you no shame?"
I think you trio are making the point of who is fucking up these threads perfectly Ake - feel free to keep it up and hopefully this one will be the last.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:42 AM

"Arguments with these people are simply stating the obvious and a bit of a waste of time and energy"

Well Jim, you seem to waste more time than anyone on the forum and Teribus is correct, you people do not engage in informed discussion you simply attempt to validate your failed ideology by attempted intimidation and falsehoods.

Have you no shame?

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:37 AM

That's fine, Teri. If you do not care for my opinions, why spend so much time picking them apart? My opinion is that it is probably because you are a complete knob head But as you do not care less I guess that doesn't matter to you.

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:30 AM

"You lose."
Many thanks Keith incredible timing; I couldn't have made my point more perfectly than you have just done.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:28 AM

GUEST,Raggytash - Date: 31 Oct 15 - 04:33 AM"

Is that really the best you can do Raggy? Taking single lines and phrases and posting them without context? Pathetic

Gnome - I couldn't care less for you or your opinions - all I know is that if I hold an opinion on anything that opinion is based on information, reasoning and logic that leads me to believe that opinion to be true. But there again it would appear that you have rather idiotically chosen to completely ignore the word necessarily contained in the definition of the word opinion which therefore logically would lead one to automatically regard any "opinion" of yours to be uninformed and ill-founded - a stance I adopted quite some time ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:21 AM

Or you could restrict yourself to discussing the issues instead of making false, personal, ad hominem accusations against contributors you do not agree with, and refrain from telling lies about them.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:09 AM

Personally, I think Achmelvich is right and while we let these discussions degenerate to this level we are all guilty of negating any chance of these threads acting as an exchange of ideas and knowledge
There are people here who don't want this - they appear to have neither and would rather shine like stars and win points.
If anybody has anything further to say on the subject in hand, I suggest we leave it there and move on.
Arguments with these people are simply stating the obvious and a bit of a waste of time and energy
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 05:04 AM

Jim,
we did discuss cartoons depicting the Irish as apes

Yes we did, as I acknowledged.
We did not discuss cartoons that depicted famine victims as apes, as you claimed.
That was a lie as was your claim that I supported them as being "just the humour of the time."
That was a lie as was your claim that I denied "No Irish" signs.
You lied and lied.

You also claimed that I expressed racist, right wing views on Irish education.
I have shown that the views I expressed were those of an eminent, left wing Irish historian, as published in the pre-eminent journal of Irish history, with supporting references to the works of other eminent Irish historians.

Your argument is demolished Jim.
You lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 04:33 AM

Ah Teriblunder. "Definition - An ad hominem argument is one that is used to counter another argument; but, it is based on feelings or prejudice, rather than facts, reason or logic. It is often a personal attack on one's character rather than an attempt to address the issue at hand"

Lets just have a little look back shall we:

26th May "Joe - they are taking the piss, it is what they do, this one is targeted at you and Pete"

29th May "DtG before you go off pin head dancing again I asked Jim a question"

29th May "Care to tell us exactly where you actually touch reality in your life - or is reality a complete and utter foreign land to you?."

3rd June "You see the Musktwats feels free to put that tactic to use whenever they see fit, but others are castigated for doing so (even when they aren't)"

4th June "Go dance on the head of your pin DtG it is about all that you are good for"

I could go on. Again and again. Pot, Kettle, Black.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 04:31 AM

opinion
əˈpɪnjən/Submit
noun
1. a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

As an opinion is, by definition, neither true nor untrue how can one offer an opinion that is untrue? Neither is it an accusation so you seem to be railing against my view or judgement rather than anything else.

Still, it is nice to know that you are taking notice of my opinion when I really could not give a shit about yours :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 04:18 AM

"In previous threads so far mentioned and referred to Keith A has stated the comments, opinions and conclusions of others (Far more qualified to speak on the various subjects than anyone here on this forum) and asked for comment on those points. At no time at all has he claimed those comments, opinions and conclusions as his own - You DtG and the rest of the gang have insisted that he did. Oh and Raggy as to whether somebody has read about something or not - I can remember in one of the WWI threads where you claimed to know nothing about the subject but yet seemed qualified and informed enough to argue points made by "Professors" who had made a life's work of research and study into the subject" - Teribus

Now here is how Carroll deliberately misreads and/or demonstrates his selective comprehension skills when it comes to the English language:

"Life's work m,y arse - he and you spout jingoism, not knowledge on W.W.1. - he, at least hastily drags out carefully selected, and sometimes edited cut-'n-pastes to make his case - you just pontificate and pronounce and seldom produce anything to back up your statements." - Jim Carroll.

So Jim neither Keith, myself, Lighter or others who contributed to those numerous threads on WWI ever mentioned the names of Professors of History whose area of expertise was the "Great War"? - Or would you like me to give examples where I have done so chapter and verse? Where "you and the gang" cling to authors whose work has been discredited in the light of new information and who at best only dabbled in the history of the period, those mentioned above sought to discuss the impact of the new information brought to light by recent work and research into the period in question by academics who do specialise in the subject of WWI. IIRC Keith raised three points you agreed with two of them. What substantive "facts" did you lot bring to the discussion? What points of discussion did any of you counter with any facts at all? Both rhetorical questions Jim - to which the answer in both instances is none.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Oct 15 - 03:52 AM

Definition - An ad hominem argument is one that is used to counter another argument; but, it is based on feelings or prejudice, rather than facts, reason or logic. It is often a personal attack on one's character rather than an attempt to address the issue at hand.

You asked for an example of when you have made such an attack DtG

How about your post of:

Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 02:46 PM

Yes, Keith. Whatever. Like I said, whether you take any notice of my opinion is not my problem.

Teribus, if I really wanted to be abusive I would just tell you to fuck off[You mean as Raggytash has already done on this Thread in a response to Keith A?]. As it is, I will just utilise a favourite tactic and ask for any supporting evidence of where I have insisted anything like you suggest. I have always made it quite clear that my opinions are just that. Keith is pompous. You are a twat. Mere opinion only and nothing I would ever insist is true. No shame in proffering honest opinion."

You may offer your opinion, but if that opinion includes accusations then you have to substantiate the grounds for making them. Do you really state opinions that you know to be untrue? - ("Mere opinion only and nothing I would ever insist is true." - Your words" - That would make you out to be the Twat Gnome.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 04:00 PM

Jim, I too have ask the Professor to visit Ireland, I even said I would buy him a meal and pay for his beer all night in a pub of his choice, e has yet to accept. But like many of his ilk he doesn't have the courage of his conviction. He has already said he knows sweet FA about Irish history and has no interest in it and has no desire to be educated about it despite his increasing number of posts. (500 plus)

But it's not really about Ireland, it's not really about the famine, it's about poor little Keith being "victimised" Sad little bugger really, we should feel sorry for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 03:50 PM

I'm gone from this - I really am Achmelvich
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 03:43 PM

.....and there we must leave them.......

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 03:30 PM

"After I left there were a number of posts about me that required a reply."
You have opened up arguments that have been covered over and over again - and you still haven't understood what was discussed first time round
You are still dredging up the same old same old links which contradict everything you are claiming - why not just save time and read the book - it's still available?
Nobody asked you any questions that required answering - you came back to claim you were not right-wing and you have managed to show that you were.
This is the fourth time you have called me a liar - we did discuss cartoons depicting the Irish as apes and you were given the Charles Kingsley quote that says exactly that - you passed it off by saying that's what cartoonists do - despite Britain's appalling reputation of open racism towards the Irish.
If Irish children were brainwashed - where and how - there was nothing published covering The Famine for 150 yeas except one book by an Englishwoman - do't you think it dreadfully remiss of brainwashers to not to attempt to influence their victims through print - the direct line to people's minds?
Your description of the Irish people, particularly their children remains the most offensively racist statement you have ever made - apart from... well, you know!!
Please come down to our local and repeat what you have written - I would like to sell tickets.
Finished with this - you are obviously not going to respond to any of this.
Jim Carroll
.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 03:01 PM

You defended Jim when he lied

I defended no-one.

You took the side of all those who accused me

I may agree with some people more than others but I take no sides.

You said it was my fault that they made me the subject of discussion.

I said it takes two to tango.

Three misinterpretations in a row, Keith. Is it any wonder people take the piss?

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 02:56 PM

Dave,
I will just utilise a favourite tactic and ask for any supporting evidence of where I have insisted anything like you suggest.

You defended Jim when he lied that I had said the cartoons were just the humour of the time, when he lied that I had denied the existence of "no Irish" signs, and when he lied that we had ever discussed "cartoons depicting famine victims as apes."

You took the side of all those who accused me of being right wing while refusing to produce any right wing view I had ever expressed.

You said it was my fault that they made me the subject of discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 02:50 PM

Jim,
He came back to this thread when he had no need to

After I left there were a number of posts about me that required a reply.

Re Kinealy,

She refers to the "traditional, nationalist paradigm" where "blame is generally attributed to ""key groupings, either within the British government.."

She said that "the government instructed history teachers" to deliver that propaganda to children.
That is a description of brain washing.
No wonder there is so much hate!

She said that in the 30s " the Irish academic establishment" tried to get the truth told to the children, but schools just carried on.

She said that the "popular understanding" of that history is coloured as a result to the present day.
http://www.historyireland.com/18th-19th-century-history/beyond-revisionism-reassessing-the-great-irish-famine/

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 02:46 PM

Yes, Keith. Whatever. Like I said, whether you take any notice of my opinion is not my problem.

Teribus, if I really wanted to be abusive I would just tell you to fuck off. As it is, I will just utilise a favourite tactic and ask for any supporting evidence of where I have insisted anything like you suggest. I have always made it quite clear thay my opinions are just that. Keith is pompous. You are a twat. Mere opinion only and nothing I would ever isist is true. No shame in proffering honest opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 02:18 PM

Dave,
Only if you let it, Keith. It takes two to tango and, if I may use another platitude, it doesn't matter who started it; it is whoever stopped it that counts.

You are wrong.
Calling me things is a personal, ad hominem attack and is a clear breach of forum etiquette.

Asking for the accusation to be substantiated is a perfectly reasonable response to unreasonable behaviour.
Objecting to Jim making up things that I have never said is a perfectly reasonable response to unreasonable behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 11:56 AM

i wonder if the moderators on this thread are allowing it to continue in the hope that the participants will look at its development and eventually realise that we are all completely, crazily obsessed with pointless squabbling. we all have to make a decision - rather than being thrown off the bus we could just get off at the next stop....

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 11:55 AM

"Far more qualified to speak on the various subjects than anyone here on this forum"
In fact and by self admittance not qualified in the slightest
He has held forth on subjects he has openly admitted that not on;y does he have no knowledge of, but that he has no interest in.
He is arrogant and abusive towards those who disagree with him - "lefties" and "Muppets" being a regular favourite of his, yet he constantly whinges about people being rude to him.
He lies constantly, and when his lies are pointed out to him (usually in the form of quotes he claims not to have made), he does not withdraw his accusations of our being "liars" (another of his favourites - he has used the term 3 times on this thread and numerable times on others), but goes on as if nothing has happened.
His ignorance on subjects he pontificates on is astounding (every bit as as astounding as your own), yet he constantly talks down to people.
He came back to this thread when he had no need to - not on the subject in hand, but defending his own unreasonable behaviour.
It's a bit rich for a bullying clown like yourself to talk about "cyber - bullying" - you are one of the most openly ill mannered, and personally insulting posters on this forum, and you have been told so numerous times.
Glass houses - stones and all that.
Life's work m,y arse - he and you spout jingoism, not knowledge on W.W.1. - he, at least hastily drags out carefully selected, and sometimes edited cut-'n-pastes to make his case - you just pontificate and pronounce and seldom produce anything to back up your statements.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Raggytash
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 11:51 AM

Ah Steve you forget it is quiet acceptable that Teribus can do it, that honour is reserved just for the few. In his most recent post he claims that I stated that I knew nothing about WW1. I think I am reasonably well versed in the subject to be able to express a considered opinion.

Mind you he also claims that Cork is on the East Coast of Ireland so we can judge his claims by that really!!

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 11:38 AM

Teribus, might I respectfully suggest that your hectoring, aggressive, name-calling demeanour on this board makes any aspiring bully, next to you, look like a crass amateur.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Oct 15 - 11:06 AM

"I'm sorry about you health issues and really do wish you well, Keith, but if you will make every thread about yourself then that does become the issue." - DtG

But the fact is "he does not make every thread about himself" - DOES HE? You along with the usual gang of cyber bullies does that by:

1: Refusing point blank to address civilly any point raised
2: Resorting to ad hominem attacks - Definition - An ad hominem argument is one that is used to counter another argument; but, it is based on feelings or prejudice, rather than facts, reason or logic. It is often a personal attack on one's character rather than an attempt to address the issue at hand.
3: Make baseless accusations and resolutely refuse to substantiate them when challenged to do so

In previous threads so far mentioned and referred to Keith A has stated the comments, opinions and conclusions of others (Far more qualified to speak on the various subjects than anyone here on this forum) and asked for comment on those points. At no time at all has he claimed those comments, opinions and conclusions as his own - You DtG and the rest of the gang have insisted that he did. Oh and Raggy as to whether somebody has read about something or not - I can remember in one of the WWI threads where you claimed to know nothing about the subject but yet seemed qualified and informed enough to argue points made by "Professors" who had made a life's work of research and study into the subject - so less of the pot calling the kettle black.

The gang of cyber bullies on this forum has destroyed any chance of balanced debate or discussion and the lot of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Oct 15 - 04:03 PM

Kinealy says nothing of the sort.
Kinealy argued at firs (certainly at the time of your cut-n-paste that the famine was caused by neglect and adopting predatory business practices - that is the situation with all historians - revisionist and otherwise - that the outcome of The Famine was due to the Laissez Faire‎ policy adopted by Britain - no historian disputes that - even British historians - it is what Blair apologised for on his visit to Ireland - even revisionist, Mrs Woodham Smith, criticised Britain;'s "full warehouses, selling famine relief" behabvior.
Her book criticises the the Nationalist Government for not examining the causes of the Famine in depth and only dealing with the Laissez Faire‎ policy, even though she admits that they did so in order to maintain good relations with Britain so the many thousands of emigrants could easily settle in Britain during the bad years - 'The Emergency' as it is known here.
She has shifted her position in that she now supports Coogan's view, based on his new evidence, that The Famine was deliberately used to solve 'The Irish Problem.
You cannot hope to understand from out-of context cut-'n-pastes red the ***** book!
You suggest the Irish children were brainwashed - they weren't and there is no evidence of them having been.
Hastred of the British is centred in the North and is down to nearly a century of partitioning, anti-Catholic prejudice since the six counties were set up, the brutal way the Civil Rights Marches were put down in the 1960s, Bloody Sunday - and now a new kid on the block, the Ballymurphy Massacre carried out by the Paras prior to Bloody Sunday, where 11 civilians were shot down known as Belfast Bloody Sunday) now being investigated.
None of this has SFA to do with the famine and it never has.
You have been given the facts of Kinealy's book, you have been given the experiences of my family in the Irish education system - yet you continue to present the Irish people as a hate-filled, brainwashed people and insist that it is all down to the education system NO HISTORIAN HAS EVER MADE SUCH A SUGGESTION - ONCE AGAIN, YOU HAVE INVENTED YOUR OWN SCENARIO AND ARE BLAMING IT ON A HISTORIAN YOU HAVEN'T READ
Far from the Irish hating Britain, it is people like you who are hate filled - towards the Irish - how else would you explain your behaviour.
Your own stance far exceeds the worst of the Loyalists, who are, at least, attempting to come to terms with their past and put things right - you appear to be firmly in the grip of The Red Hand of Ulster - as I said - an extreme hate filled-right wing fanatic who extends his hatred to children.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Oct 15 - 03:29 PM

When people fail to reply to what I actually post, making accusations about me instead, it makes the discussion about me.

Only if you let it, Keith. It takes two to tango and, if I may use another platitude, it doesn't matter who started it; it is whoever stopped it that counts.

Why not criticise them for making the accusations, instead of me for defending myself?

I am not criticising anyone for making accusations or defending themselves. I am criticising your style of argument. I find it very irritating. Whether you take any notice of that opinion or not is entirely up to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Oct 15 - 03:21 PM

Modette, Irish Times this year,

A contentious Orange Order feeder parade past the Ardoyne shops in north Belfast took place peacefully this morning.
There was a heavy police presence as two loyalist bands led Orangemen and some of their supporters past two nationalist protests at the shops this morning.
Some nationalists blew whistles and there was some taunting between nationalists and loyalists at the flashpoint but otherwise the parade which took a few minutes to process beyond the shops concluded peacefully.

The Orangemen were marching to the main parade which has started in Belfast. It features some 10,000 Orangemen and women, about 70 bands, with many thousands more spectating along the roadside.
In all there are 18 Orange Order parades and one Independent Orange Order parades taking place across Northern Ireland today. The vast majority of parades take place without incident.

Subject: RE: BS: Tory party conference
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Oct 15 - 03:04 PM

Jim, Kinealy says that generations of children have been taught that Britain starved the Irish people or allowed them to starve.
Like a totalitarian state, they did not allow historians to set the curriculum because that was not required political message.

That would make some hate Britain, and a few to seek revenge.
Hatred was sowed into the minds of children and we are reaping the bloody harvest to this day.