Chinese Delegates walk out of Greens Conference following Gormley's remarks on Tibet

eoin5

Pro C wrote: »

yeah, he must help divide the country just by a slip of the tougue, funny.

If you want to improve human rights then you have to put the humans in danger as the number one issue and all other issues including your distaste with an ignorant Irish green party minister somewhere down the list.

Pro C

Tomas_V wrote: »

His name is Gormley. It's a matter of respect to get people's name right. In Ireland we respect people even if we disagree with them.

He disrupted a political meeting of a party with conflicting views to his own, knowing in advance what would be said.

Normally, ambassadors do not do this no matter how much they disagree with what is said. Exhibitions of disgust or contempt at the exercise of free speech in our country is not normal diplomacy.

Of course I know his name is Gormley, but I have 3 reasons, to call him Golm,

1. I have right to call what I want to call him (that's a bit pain, isn't it?)
2. Who call Tibet as a country doesn't have my respect,
3. This is what Eoin5 said on thread #172 "At least Gormless has his heart in the right place and the ambassador should have the patience to see that." If your own people don't even repect him, how do you expect others?

Tomas_V wrote: »

He disrupted a political meeting of a party with conflicting views to his own, knowing in advance what would be said.

Normally, ambassadors do not do this no matter how much they disagree with what is said. Exhibitions of disgust or contempt at the exercise of free speech in our country is not normal diplomacy.

How on earth do you know he knew in advance? Proof? Just because RTE said so, or Golm?

Tomas_V

Pro C wrote: »

1. I have right to call what I want to call him (that's a bit pain, isn't it?)

You also have to right to demean yourself in the sight of others by doing so.

I have heard that China is an ancient civilisation and highly evolved when we were still living in mud huts. Is normal political debate in China permeated with insults and name calling or are you special?

Pro C wrote: »

How on earth do you know he knew in advance? Proof? Just because RTE said so, or Golm?

Mr Gormley is reported on RTE as having said so and I have not heard or seen any official denial from your ambassador.

eoin5

Pro C wrote: »

This is what Eoin5 said on thread #172 "At least Gormless has his heart in the right place and the ambassador should have the patience to see that." If your own people don't even repect him, how do you expect others?

Gormless means clueless where I'm from. I think hes a genuine guy but he is a bit clueless as he showed in his speech, but that doesnt excuse the ambassadors walkout.

If I was Chinese ambassador I would have had at least sat through the speech and then made a press statement afterwards. Something like this maybe:

"I thank John Gormley for his concern for the people of Tibet and he should rest assured that we are doing everything possible to stabilise and restore peace to the region. I would also recommend that Mr. Gormley would review his geography on the region; I believe that he will find that Tibet is not a country, it is and has been part of China for a very long time and almost all of its inhabitants wish it to remain so."

Jim_Are_Great

Pro C wrote: »

What we are trying to do here is trying to correct your wrong views, you do have right one, ie. like human right issues, but we are encouraging you to go to China and have a look at it yourself.
.

my wrong views? That's a bit patronising, but I wouldn't mind if you told me exactly which of the views I have shared with you is wrong. If you read through everything I have said throughout this discussion, you'll see that I never made any comments about China or Tibet which went beyond what I actually know. And none of my views are media-tinted. By the way, I'd love to go to China, it looks like a fascinating place. But a trip to China isn't necessary to back up anything I've said here.

Pro C wrote: »

We do have human rights issues; nobody denied that, our government did not deny that. But so does the Americans and British with their prisoners of war, they have problems as well. I am not switching the focus; I am just comparing the like with like. We are improving, doing a better job than years ago. So, why do the West focus your comments on China all the time?

I suppose in replying to this, I'm the one shifting the focus. Oh well. But "western media" (which you still haven't defined) runs stories of guantanamo all the time. Human rights abuse is fairly big news, whether it happens in China, Pakistan, America or anywhere else.

Pro C wrote: »

We do have censorship in China, but by and large we are happy where we are, the country does not appreciate your way of freedom, thanks very much. By the way, your media has control of what they want you to know as well

Our media sources are many, they are all self-regulating, they serve no political interest, and they answer to nobody (with the possible exception of businessmen). So they don't control what we think, really.

Pro C wrote: »

About Tibet, very clear, it was and is always part of China, 99% of Irish have never been there themselves, which is nearly 10,000 miles away from Ireland. How on earth do you think you know everything right through the LCD, maybe through your biased Western media, like the one above? If your media is always right, why did the Express Newspaper compensate Gerry McCann? If the Western government is always right, why there is no Weapon of Mass Destruction found in Iraq?

(a) One of the reasons the media exists is so we can get information about things that happen in places where we can't see. You can't possibly expect anyone to avoid having an opinion about anything that they didn't witness first hand. If that were the case, nobody would be in a position to say anything about dinosaurs, the first world war etc.
(b) nobody here has claimed to know everything about Tibet. I doubt you know everything about Tibet either. But we still have opinions about things, like human rights, whether they happen in Inchicore or Lhasa.
(c) Our media is NOT always right. Nobody said it was. Gerry McCann was compensated because of a little thing called libel.
(d) the government isn't always right. Show me one person who believes that and I'll show you a twit.

Pro C wrote: »

To give you a perfect example, you have your point by saying your way of solving problem by open dialogue, which I personally agree. But what about the West boycott the Olympic if China doesn’t buy your suggestion, isn’t it a suppressing?

There's not going to be a boycott, rest assured. Even if there was, that would not be a decision made by anyone on this forum, or by the government, or by the media.

Also, I see that Pervez Musharraf has supported Chinese rule in Tibet. With friends like that who needs enemies?

Pro C

Tomas_V wrote: »

You also have to right to demean yourself in the sight of others by doing so.

I have heard that China is an ancient civilisation and highly evolved when we were still living in mud huts. Is normal political debate in China permeated with insults and name calling or are you special?

Mr Gormley is reported on RTE as having said so and I have not heard or seen any official denial from your ambassador.

Not demean, I am just saying what you feel but you don't want to say it out!

If you have heard so many great things about China, you did not show your respect by claiming something not right about China.

Gorm was reported on RTE as having said so, fine, there is one thing, you have not heard or seen any official denial from your ambassador does not mean he did not. The breakfast show said ambassador claimed he was not noticed.

RTE?? 106?? are we going to have a debate on who is more authoritative?

hzy33

Tomas_V wrote: »

Read this article on the RTE website:



Has the Ambassador contradicted this statement?

no, it's on yesterday's irish times, the Ambassador WAS informed that there will be criticisms, but he wasn't informed JG was going to claim Tibet as a 'country', that's a big offense by any international diplomacy standards, the Ambassador went to the conference was because he, represent our country, was willing to listen to irish people's concerns and opinions, he didn't expect an assault! and it was intentional, so he did the perfectly right thing to protest.

JG is obviously incompetent to handle such type of scenarios, he should get some professional training on diplomacy.

another thing is till now JG still refuses to apologise, saying he's position is in line with EU and irish government, does this mean the irish or the EU is now in a position to recognize Tibet as an independent country? this is very dangerous and would provoke a new cold war.

it's interesting that on yesterday's Q&A on RTE, they were saying the Ambassador didn't look angry - this is exactly how irish people are clueless about our culture, yes he was smiling, but I can assure you he was angry, maybe even very angry, remember what he said afterwards? he 'hope' that the ties between the two country can continue.

Pro C

eoin5 wrote: »

Gormless means clueless where I'm from. I think hes a genuine guy but he is a bit clueless as he showed in his speech, but that doesnt excuse the ambassadors walkout.

If I was Chinese ambassador I would have had at least sat through the speech and then made a press statement afterwards. Something like this maybe:

"I thank John Gormley for his concern for the people of Tibet and he should rest assured that we are doing everything possible to stabilise and restore peace to the region. I would also recommend that Mr. Gormley would review his geography on the region; I believe that he will find that Tibet is not a country, it is and has been part of China for a very long time and almost all of its inhabitants wish it to remain so."

You are making a fair point, that's the manor you regard as polite, but if I was Gorm I would have my message across in a special meeting regarding foreign affairs, rather an a Party meeting, is it a right occasion? The ambassador was there not for any propaganda but to view different side of Irish internal politics, isn't it what's a party conference is? Remember, it is not a cabinet or Dail meeting!

And the last thing is, you are not our ambassador, I am not Gormley, so stop your Western habits of making irrelervant assumptions!

muck-savage

Pro C wrote: »

Of course I know his name is Gormley, but I have 3 reasons, to call him Golm,

1. I have right to call what I want to call him (that's a bit pain, isn't it?)

That's a (human) right you don't enjoy in China. I hope you can at least appreciate the right you enjoy here, to make fun of and to criticise our politicians freely, without the fear of being censored, arrested, or god forbid imprisoned.
Having been living in Beijing for the past few years, I know it's not something I would get away with saying in your country.

No pain here. Name call all you like:D

eoin5

hzy33 wrote: »

no, it's on yesterday's irish times, the Ambassador WAS informed that there will be criticisms, but he wasn't informed JG was going to claim Tibet as a 'country', that's a big offense by any international diplomacy standards, the Ambassador went to the conference was because he, represent our country, was willing to listen to irish people's concerns and opinions, he didn't expect an assault! and it was intentional, so he did the perfectly right thing to protest.

JG is obviously incompetent to handle such type of scenarios, he should get some professional training on diplomacy.

another thing is till now JG still refuses to apologise, saying he's position is in line with EU and irish government, does this mean the irish or the EU is now in a position to recognize Tibet as an independent country? this is very dangerous and would provoke a new cold war.

it's interesting that on yesterday's Q&A on RTE, they were saying the Ambassador didn't look angry - this is exactly how irish people are clueless about our culture, yes he was smiling, but I can assure you he was angry, maybe even very angry, remember what he said afterwards? he 'hope' that the ties between the two country can continue.

I think its horrible that the people getting hurt and killed in Tibet are getting overshadowed by some sovereignty debate.

eoin5

Pro C wrote: »

You are making a fair point, that's the manor you regard as polite, but if I was Gorm I would have my message across in a special meeting regarding foreign affairs, rather an a Party meeting, is it a right occasion, the ambassador was there not for any propaganda but to view different side of Irish internal politics, isn't it what's a party conference is? It is not a cabinet or Dail meeting!

Agreed, 100% . It was a very stupid thing to do. But if the ambassador had reacted more sensibly it may not have ended up being such a problem. Now unfortunately more of the Irish people see China as a country that puts pride before people.

hzy33

eoin5 wrote: »

I think its horrible that the people getting hurt and killed in Tibet are getting overshadowed by some sovereignty debate.

if you don't think sovereignty is that important, why don't ireland give up it's status as a country and join the UK and restore british rule on the entire island?

Pro C

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

my wrong views? That's a bit patronising, but I wouldn't mind if you told me exactly which of the views I have shared with you is wrong. If you read through everything I have said throughout this discussion, you'll see that I never made any comments about China or Tibet which went beyond what I actually know. And none of my views are media-tinted. By the way, I'd love to go to China, it looks like a fascinating place. But a trip to China isn't necessary to back up anything I've said here.

Did you not? OK then, my apologies. Don't make rush decisions until you have done the trip, many Irish went and told me what the feel after the trip.

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

Our media sources are many, they are all self-regulating, they serve no political interest, and they answer to nobody (with the possible exception of businessmen). So they don't control what we think, really.


(a) One of the reasons the media exists is so we can get information about things that happen in places where we can't see. You can't possibly expect anyone to avoid having an opinion about anything that they didn't witness first hand. If that were the case, nobody would be in a position to say anything about dinosaurs, the first world war etc.
(b) nobody here has claimed to know everything about Tibet. I doubt you know everything about Tibet either. But we still have opinions about things, like human rights, whether they happen in Inchicore or Lhasa.
(c) Our media is NOT always right. Nobody said it was. Gerry McCann was compensated because of a little thing called libel.
(d) the government isn't always right. Show me one person who believes that and I'll show you a twit.

Self-regulating, one word, you place too much trust and confidence in your media. One thing to point out is they are there to make money, Capitalism, profit-driven entity can't guarantee independent point of view, they can choose what opinion to sell best demostrated by you all have your own favourate papers. Don't be naive!

(a). If you did not withness it first hand, don't be so sure about what you are claiming, isn't it what most of Irish people should do here?

(b). OK, what about this, I have been there, talk to the local people and travelled around for a short period of time, at least I know a little bit better than most of you here.

(c). If your media is not always right, have you Irish people standout and rejected anything negative they claimed wrong about china?
If the media is not right, why do are they liable for nearly 1 million euro for the McCanns? Is that just a good gesture for good will?

(d). If majority think the goverment is wrong or has so much troubles, why are they still in power, isn't it your policy your vote counts? Is the voter's problem that constant vote the wrong governer or is there conspiracy in the voting system?

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

There's not going to be a boycott, rest assured. Even if there was, that would not be a decision made by anyone on this forum, or by the government, or by the media.

Also, I see that Pervez Musharraf has supported Chinese rule in Tibet. With friends like that who needs enemies?

Well Irish did not boycott, fair play to you, but I am talking about the opening ceremony?

About how to choose friends or enemies, Irish choose America, which killed more Iraqies than Sadam did.

Pro C

muck-savage wrote: »

That's a (human) right you don't enjoy in China. I hope you can at least appreciate the right you enjoy here, to make fun of and to criticise our politicians freely, without the fear of being censored, arrested, or god forbid imprisoned.
Having been living in Beijing for the past few years, I know it's not something I would get away with saying in your country.

No pain here. Name call all you like:D

I tell you what is not free here, at the day of the demostration on Satuday, the Garda told us beforehand what we can say what we can't say, and we can't go political. free my a.:eek:

Having been living in Dublin for 8 years, nothing symbolic can't be remembered once I go back.

Jim_Are_Great

Pro C wrote: »

Self-regulating, one word, you place too much trust and confidence in your media. One thing to point out is they are there to make money, Capitalism, profit-driven entity can't guarantee independent point of view, they can choose what opinion to sell best demostrated by you all have your own favourate papers. Don't be naive!

That is true; papers have markets for which they must cater. But I think you may be exaggerating the extent to which this influences their content. In Britain The Guardian, for example, is a traditionally liberal-leaning paper, whereas the Daily Mail is generally conservative. This slant comes out more in editorials and writing style than in representation of fact. The liberal-conservative base of the papers won't lead them to report different facts. The Guardian won't say "Plane crash, 50 killed" where the Mail would say "Boat Crash - 5 dead". There's no reason for the papers to distort the truth at all. Besides, journalists are (usually) mindful of the code of journalistic ethics and take distortion of truth very seriously.

Pro C wrote: »

OK, what about this, I have been there, talk to the local people and travelled around for a short period of time, at least I know a little bit better than most of you here.

Cool. If that is the case, you almost certainly know more about Tibet than I do, certainly about its geography, tradition and climate. But I know a lot about International Law and Human Rights, so despite the fact that I've never been to Tibet, I can still talk on these issues with some degree of authority. I don't have to visit Tibet to know that intransigence is a bad way of tackling disputes.

Pro C wrote: »

If the media is not right, why do are they liable for nearly 1 million euro for the McCanns? Is that just a good gesture for good will?

No, it's because if the media (or anyone else) says something bad and untrue about another person in public, they have to pay that person money. That's the law in this country and many others. It's not a reflection on the state of the media.

Pro C wrote: »

About how to choose friends or enemies, Irish choose America, which killed more Iraqies than Sadam did.

My friend, I never chose America, nor am I ever likely to.

SkepticOne

Pro C wrote: »

I tell you what is not free here, at the day of the demostration on Satuday, the Garda told us beforehand what we can say what we can't say, and we can't go political. free my a.:eek:

That is interesting. What did they say you could say? What did they say you could not say? I would be personally against the gardai getting involved in the content of a protest as opposed to the conduct.

muck-savage

Pro C wrote: »

I tell you what is not free here, at the day of the demostration on Satuday, the Garda told us beforehand what we can say what we can't say, and we can't go political. free my a.:eek:

Having been living in Dublin for 8 years, nothing symbolic can't be remembered once I go back.

Really? Did you get his/her Garda ID number or name?
What specifically did he say you could and couldn't say?
Did anyone else witness this? Strange that noone else
seems to have mentioned anything of this sort until now :rolleyes:

SkepticOne

There's the media angle, Pro C: "Gardai try to silence pro-china protesters" if you are looking for a higher media profile.

St Bunt

I'm late to this but seems like passions are running rampant here.
Without doing the old my best friend/colleague/family member/barman/drinking bud/boss is Chinese (3 of which are true btw, answers on a postcard) trick, can I respectfully agree with the FACT that China's (regime) government have a human rights record that makes the idea of athletes doing their thing sickening. The deal was China would open up if they got the Olympics. So far, so good. That's why I still think it's good the Olympics will be in China.
Now after years of **** (Irish Independence, French Revolution, Japanese invasion of China and any other total bloody atrocity we want to keep in the past), be nice, be clever.
This is today. We are human, we are selfish. The same selfish that makes us care what our kids have in the future, the same selfish that makes us stop and think sometimes beyond ourselves..(that's the difficult bit, boy, that's the difficult bit).
China is a proud nation. China (like Ireland) is still recovering from recent history. China is welcome to play the economic game (we won't deal with you unless we have carte blanche) as long as it likes (as America and Europe will). Thing is, and here's the bitch, information seems to flow free here, be it good or bad.
No Nations Just People!

Pro C

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

That is true; papers have markets for which they must cater. But I think you may be exaggerating the extent to which this influences their content. In Britain The Guardian, for example, is a traditionally liberal-leaning paper, whereas the Daily Mail is generally conservative. This slant comes out more in editorials and writing style than in representation of fact. The liberal-conservative base of the papers won't lead them to report different facts. The Guardian won't say "Plane crash, 50 killed" where the Mail would say "Boat Crash - 5 dead". There's no reason for the papers to distort the truth at all. Besides, journalists are (usually) mindful of the code of journalistic ethics and take distortion of truth very seriously.

One thing I think we all should agree is today's world is far from perfect, and better not be that naive to trust the media with so much comfidence. They can dig a hole and whoever is interested in can help digging.

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

Cool. If that is the case, you almost certainly know more about Tibet than I do, certainly about its geography, tradition and climate. But I know a lot about International Law and Human Rights, so despite the fact that I've never been to Tibet, I can still talk on these issues with some degree of authority. I don't have to visit Tibet to know that intransigence is a bad way of tackling disputes.

State how much you are sure about anything before putting in your comment, if people all talk in this way, there would not be such a heated debate, isn't it? And I am sure all the Chinese here would appreciate that as well, again we never denied the existences of those issues.

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

No, it's because if the media (or anyone else) says something bad and untrue about another person in public, they have to pay that person money. That's the law in this country and many others. It's not a reflection on the state of the media.

Classic example, the money they made by selling more papers on the day the days after are more the damages they paid out. After a while, everybody will forget they sold untrue stories, it won't affect their sales in the long term.

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

My friend, I never chose America, nor am I ever likely to.

Of course we know, at least I know there are lots of Irish are anti-American as much as we are, we do appreciate that, but the Government you voted for are always pro-america.

eoin5

hzy33 wrote: »

if you don't think sovereignty is that important, why don't ireland give up it's status as a country and join the UK and restore british rule on the entire island?

Sovereignty is obviously a very important issue in this case but securing peace and stability are more important at the moment. Very few people are drawing attention to this fact.

Personally if the state structure disappeared overnight I dont think I'd miss it.

Pro C

St Bunt wrote: »

I'm late to this but seems like passions are running rampant here.
Without doing the old my best friend/colleague/family member/barman/drinking bud/boss is Chinese (3 of which are true btw, answers on a postcard) trick, can I respectfully agree with the FACT that China's (regime) government have a human rights record that makes the idea of athletes doing their thing sickening. The deal was China would open up if they got the Olympics. So far, so good. That's why I still think it's good the Olympics will be in China.
Now after years of **** (Irish Independence, French Revolution, Japanese invasion of China and any other total bloody atrocity we want to keep in the past), be nice, be clever.
This is today. We are human, we are selfish. The same selfish that makes us care what our kids have in the future, the same selfish that makes us stop and think sometimes beyond ourselves..(that's the difficult bit, boy, that's the difficult bit).
China is a proud nation. China (like Ireland) is still recovering from recent history. China is welcome to play the economic game (we won't deal with you unless we have carte blanche) as long as it likes (as America and Europe will). Thing is, and here's the bitch, we are getting the info. Can anyone be sure China gets the same info?. Correct me if I'm wrong. Can you correct China if it's wrong?
No Nations Just People.

Mate, apart from the second last sentance, totally agree.

Getting biased info compare with getting no info, not a big diff!

eoin5

Pro C wrote: »

Getting biased info compare with getting no info, not a big diff!

Theres a huge difference. Biased media is much better than censorship. You can get information from even the most biased news if you know how to read it properly. You just have to remain sceptical and take nothing at face value.

Pro C

eoin5 wrote: »

Theres a huge difference. Biased media is much better than censorship. You can get information from even the most biased news if you know how to read it properly. You just have to remain sceptical and take nothing at face value.

Biased media is much better, much better? what a joke! Can biased media be seen as better in anyway?

if you know how to read it properly, Well, I don't, but I guess you must get used to that already, it seems you have so much experience read biased news, does not mean you agree with me that the western media are biased?

Try to make your argument water-tight next time, mate!

Pro C

eoin5 wrote: »

Agreed, 100% . It was a very stupid thing to do. But if the ambassador had reacted more sensibly it may not have ended up being such a problem. Now unfortunately more of the Irish people see China as a country that puts pride before people.

I appreciate Irish people do admit mistake when they realise and to be frank, that is something we should learn to improve?

But whose fault have we traced back to, now? It did not start with us, isn't it? That's one of the points we are making here.

If you want to talk about solution of the aftermass, we certainly can talk about that, but shouldn't the person ignite the whole thing make apology, first?

AngryHippie

eoin5 wrote: »

Theres a huge difference. Biased media is much better than censorship. You can get information from even the most biased news if you know how to read it properly. You just have to remain sceptical and take nothing at face value.

I agree with you on this one eoin5, you're on the money there, At least if there us biased reporting you know that there is some activity, and based on who is reporting it and why, from what is left unsaid, the scale and accuracy of what was reported can be deduced, kinda like that e-mail "leaked" about the Lisbon treaty last week in the British papers, The rumor mill was instantly asking questions about the source of it, which still hasn't surfaced (as far as me anyway) The thing is when it comes to civil rights abuses and body-bags, there is very little that can be done to spin it either way, read freedom fighter for terrorist, or protestor for rioter, It doesn't take a fecking rocket scientist to see what the potential story actually means, Then in the fullness of time, the picture will paint itself and a track record is established for both the reporting media and the involved parties. This is how the Western media machine works. Regardless of newspaper sales figures, media ownership and bias, If they get the story and get it out, intelligent people will read between the lines and sort truth from fantasy/spin. The problem I see from Pro-c's point of view would be a language barrier perhaps acting as an obstacle to reading an emphasis or spotting pieces that have been left unsaid by an unsubtle copy-writer. Thankfully our media here in Ireland are relatively honest as they had the balls sued of them often enough to make them back up their sources, although its been a few years since a big libel case now.....peoples republic vs independent media......could be the next big thing:rolleyes:

BigWilly

Pro C wrote: »

I tell you what is not free here, at the day of the demostration on Satuday, the Garda told us beforehand what we can say what we can't say, and we can't go political. free my a.:eek:

Having been living in Dublin for 8 years, nothing symbolic can't be remembered once I go back.

This is a lie.

AngryHippie

Pro C wrote: »

Classic example, the money they made by selling more papers on the day the days after are more the damages they paid out. After a while, everybody will forget they sold untrue stories, it won't affect their sales in the long term.


Of course we know, at least I know there are lots of Irish are anti-American as much as we are, we do appreciate that, but the Government you voted for are always pro-america.

Editors get fired, Journo's get fired, this is the stuff that makes them do their jobs well enough to keep them. Don't start any crap about paper sales, If a newspaper is guilty of selling out and out lies, heads will roll. Thats what courts are for. And very few editors or journalists with a guilty of libel smear on their CV's will ever work for large circulation media afterwards. Sure the paper gets forgiven, but not until someone loses their job.

On the American issue, The current government/political party are very pro-american, but they have taken issue with them a number of times, they declined to join their coalition, the Americans on the other hand are playing ball with corporate capital investment etc. The problem for them in the future is going to be the fcuked state of the dollar, Its gonna be harder and harder for them to buy friends, the Middle East is slowly chewing its own ears off, Europe is loafing on the couch wondering whether to get bigger, faster or just to form some opinions on how it should actually function and what its role in the future of the planet should be.
Meanwhile the Peoples republic is settling old scores, building in a massive way, shifting its workforce and becoming an industrial and economic behemoth, building everything cheaper and faster than anywhere else, because it can choose to ignore standards, regulations and human rights, all in the name of its own patriotism.

I see naivety, Skepticism is a good cure for that.
Failing that, find a cynic. they are usually right.

Tomas_V

Pro C wrote: »

I appreciate Irish people do admit mistake when they realise and to be frank, that is something we should learn to improve?...
But whose fault have we traced back to, now? It did not start with us, isn't it? That's one of the points we are making here....If you want to talk about solution of the aftermass, we certainly can talk about that, but shouldn't the person ignite the whole thing make apology, first?

Free speech includes the freedom to say things that other people disagree with.

Disrupting a political meeting and then threatening economic sanctions is an attack on free speech. Perhaps he left in frustration that he could not have Mr Gormley thrown in jail?

It is the job of a true friend to tell you things you might not like to hear. Only your enemies flatter you.

Pro C

BigWilly wrote: »

This is a lie.

It is up to you to decide, it is not a perfect world and don't be so naive to rush to conclusions and believe you really have the freedom that you think you do.

Rush to conclusions, isn't it not a typical Irish stereotype?