Curry my yoghurt!

Iwasfrozen

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Kinda like the way you... constantly... throw in whatabouting when it's not of relevance?
I'm familiar with your posts for many years - my assumptions are not without foundation.

Engaging in whataboutary to accuse me of whataboutary.

How many other ways can you cover up the fact you have no respect for freedom of speech when the person speaking is mocking something you personally care about. That's three so far.

Crooked Jack

loughside wrote: »

must have missed that - link please??

Cant believe anyone actually needs a link for this. It's like asking for a link that proves water is wet. Oh well, here ya go. There are countless more that you can look up yourself.

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/regional/stormont-meeting-launches-dup-friends-of-israel-group-1-6114099

Iwasfrozen

Crooked Jack wrote: »

So if someone's going to threaten violence just give them what they want? I'd hate to live in your democracy. I would say I cant believe that someone is on here accusing a democratic compromise of being petty as opposed to the knuckledraggers who tried to burn belfast to the ground, but given your previous posts it doesnt require much of a leap of imagination.

No. Those in power should never give in to violence or the threat of violence but neither should they engage in such pettiness.

Laura Palmer

loughside wrote: »

oops, lets throw a little bit of racism into the mix - Hey, we`re on a roll - why not !!


dear o dear

But there's no racism?
I was only referring to that person's selectivity. They don't condemn threats of violence when they're from people they support/agree with.
What "roll" am I on?

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Engaging in whataboutary to accuse me of whataboutary.

How many other ways can you cover up the fact you have no respect for freedom of speech when the person speaking is mocking something you personally care about. That's three so far.

Absolute freedom of speech does not exist. Stop twisting my words. I know your tactics, lots of people do. If an organisation said something that you found deplorable, you wouldn't think they had the freedom to do so - hence why I said "Freedom of speech when it suits".

Laura Palmer

Crooked Jack wrote: »

well established link between unionism/loyalism and the apartheid state of Israel

Known as the "Sticking it to the nationalists" link.

Crooked Jack

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No. Those in power should never give in to violence or the threat of violence but neither should they engage in such pettiness.

You still havent explained how it's petty. It's a flag that less than half the people of Belfast identify with. SF could have pushed for it to be taken down altogether but they didnt. They, through their own volition, opted for a compromise. That's the opposite of petty.

Iwasfrozen

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Absolute freedom of speech does not exist. Stop twisting my words. I know your tactics, lots of people do. If an organisation said something that you found deplorable, you wouldn't think they had the freedom to do so - hence why I said "Freedom of speech when it suits".

Freedom of speech certainly exists. Especially in the assembly where members are given the added legal protection of Parliamentary privilege.

But the existence or non existence of freedom of speech is not the issue in contention here. I am making the case that you do not respect freedom of speech when the speaker is mocking something you personally identify with.

Laura Palmer

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Freedom of speech certainly exists. Especially in the assembly where members are given the added legal protection of Parliamentary privilege.

No it doesn't exist. Because if it truly did, anyone could say anything.

I am making the case that you do not respect freedom of speech when the speaker is mocking something you personally identify with.

And you're wrong/lying. I clearly said I find it unprofessional and unbecoming for any public representative (and listed various ones) to mock a language like petty schoolchildren.
Just because you're absolutely OBSESSED with ridiculing the Irish language IWF doesn't mean I don't have the right to hold that view, and it makes you incredibly biased. I do not believe for a nanosecond that you'd be ok with public representatives mocking other languages publicly.

feargale

tony 2 tone wrote: »

Maybe he was trying to say it in Ulster Scots, ya know, that real, totally not made up language some knuckle draggers are clinging too as a sign they have culture.

The status of Ulster Scots as a language or a dialect is a moot point. It has EU recognition. It is best classed as a sub-dialect of Scots, and while Scots is now a dialect of English, it was undoubtedly a language in its own right for a few centuries until 1600/1700 or thereabouts. There is a body of poetry in Ulster Scots. I'm sure you don't intend to stoop to Campbell's level, but that is what you do when you denigrate Ulster Scots, and stooping to his level is stooping pretty low.
True, some people have cynically exploited Ulster Scots, just as others have done likewise to Irish,

Karl Stein

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Just because you're absolutely OBSESSED with ridiculing the Irish language

He's gets a buzz out of this type of thing. Pretty sad really.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I think it's pretty funny. Anything that pisses off gaelgeoirs is funny in my book.

Laura Palmer

Karl Stein wrote: »

Pretty sad really.

Incredibly so.

Karl Stein

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Incredibly so.

I don't have any Irish and have no strong feelings about it but I think that people shouldn't be mocked for using a language they care about, any language.

If members of the DUP started using Ulster Scots in Stormont I don't think it would be right to mock them for it and I certainly wouldn't get some sort of idiotic thrill out of it - it's a strange way of getting a buzz out of life imo.

The thread has been thoroughly defaced now by means of whataboutery and diversion.

I'm out.

feargale

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I think regardless of where you stand we can both aagree the right to mock a language is as important as the right to speak it.

Both rights exist in law. One of them equates with another legal right i.e. the right to be a bigot. Bigot is an accurate description of a person who gratuitously mocks a religion, a language or any other aspect of culture which is held dear by a community. But those who were nurtured in imperialism come slowly to that realisation. It often takes a number of generations and intense, sustained education to eradicate such ignorance.

feargale

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Freedom of speech certainly exists. Especially in the assembly where members are given the added legal protection of Parliamentary privilege.

But the existence or non existence of freedom of speech is not the issue in contention here. I am making the case that you do not respect freedom of speech when the speaker is mocking something you personally identify with.

You seem to be confused by what constitutes freedom of speech. You seem to be saying it's ok for someone to mock Irish, ( freedom of speech) but it's not ok for someone else to exercise their freedom of speech by condemning such yobbery.

Iwasfrozen

Laura Palmer wrote: »

No it doesn't exist. Because if it truly did, anyone could say anything.

Anyone can say anything. Especially those who are protected under Parliamentary Privilege. You have a right of course to express your malcontent but you have respect his right to mock Irish if he wants.

Laura Palmer wrote: »

And you're wrong/lying. I clearly said I find it unprofessional and unbecoming for any public representative (and listed various ones) to mock a language like petty schoolchildren.
Just because you're absolutely OBSESSED with ridiculing the Irish language IWF doesn't mean I don't have the right to hold that view, and it makes you incredibly biased. I do not believe for a nanosecond that you'd be ok with public representatives mocking other languages publicly.

Once again, that is an opinion. An opinion you are of course entitled to hold providing you respect the right of the politician in question to mock Irish.

Iwasfrozen

feargale wrote: »

You seem to be confused by what constitutes freedom of speech. You seem to be saying it's ok for someone to mock Irish, ( freedom of speech) but it's not ok for someone else to exercise their freedom of speech by condemning such yobbery.

That's the opposite of what I'm saying. To clarify a person may mock and language and another person is free to consider them a bigot.

loughside

and of course i respect the freedom of speech that allowed Adams to insult and refer to unionists as ba$tards tonight in Enniskillen


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-30186975

Foul-mouthed abuse'

The DUP's Arlene Foster said Gerry Adams' "foul mouthed abuse had been disrespectful to an entire community".
"Respect is a two-way street. The hyperbole from republicans over recent days has been exposed as hypocrisy," she said.
"Republicans use the Irish language as a weapon and tonight Gerry Adams confirms that they view equality as another weapon to attack unionists, or these b******s as he would term us."
Ulster Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt described it as "shocking to the point of nausea".
"The most shocking revelation is that he considers equality as a 'Trojan horse'," he said.
"The audio recording makes clear Gerry Adams thinks equality is nothing more than a tool to be used to manipulate people like me."
On Twitter, Gerry Adams said "Mea Culpa" acknowledging he was at fault, but insisted he had been talking about "bigots, racists and homophobes".

Laura Palmer

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Anyone can say anything

No they can't.

An opinion you are of course entitled to hold providing you respect the right of the politician in question to mock Irish.

No I don't. Why on earth should I?

I love this faux defence of "Free speech" stuff by people who would totally condemn any free speech they don't agree with. It is utter arguing for the sake of it.

Laura Palmer

loughside wrote: »

and of course i respect the freedom of speech that allowed Adams to insult and refer to unionists as ba$tards tonight in Enniskillen

Why on earth should you? I certainly don't. That was utterly obnoxious by Adams. It's polarising and of no use in trying to move things forward.

Ulster Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt described it as "shocking to the point of nausea".

Shocking to the point of nausea seems a bit much, but I certainly understand him feeling provoked.

Iwasfrozen

Laura Palmer wrote: »

No they can't.

I'm not really sure how else I can answer this other than sheer contradiction. Yes they can. Especially in the Assembly.

No I don't. Why on earth should I?

Because a person has the right to mock how a language sounds. You may not like it but they have that right. You can call them out for it but you have to respect their right to say it.

I love this faux defence of "Free speech" stuff by people who would totally condemn any free speech they don't agree with. It is utter arguing for the sake of it.

Ok I feel as if we've backtracked a couple of posts, again you're making assumptions about me.

Laura Palmer

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'm not really sure how else I can answer this other than sheer contradiction. Yes they can.

No, people cannot say anything at all - on the radio, on the street, on the train. If they could, there wouldn't be: slander, anti harassment, incitement to hatred, etc.

bobmalooka

The idea that anything goes "sure you have to respect free speach" is utter bollocks.

It's nothing but a cop out when you've exhausted all other attempts of defending the indefensible.

It's the type of attitude which is holding back the north from normalising and I refuse to engage with that nonsense, good night.

Iwasfrozen

Laura Palmer wrote: »

No, people cannot say anything at all - on the radio, on the street, on the train. If they could, there wouldn't be: slander, anti harassment, incitement to hatred, etc.

Nice job cutting out the "Especially in Assembly"

loughside

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Why on earth should you? I certainly don't. That was utterly obnoxious by Adams. It's polarising and of no use in trying to move things forward.

tongue in cheek from me,

Adams? Most hated man in these islands, just another one of his bigoted tirades. Fairness, equality? Hah!

A candidate for Incitement to Hatred if ever there was one.

Paramite Pie

loughside wrote: »

also i note your condemnation of said threat..

loughside wrote: »

ps, i do however note your condemnation of the death threat

:rolleyes:

I didn't see you condemn it either??? Not even in the post where you brought it up?

Bit hypocritical in fairness...

loughside

Paramite Pie wrote: »

I didn't see you condemn it either??? Not even in the post where you brought it up?

Bit hypocritical in fairness...

any idiot would know by reading my posts i condemn it,

its too late to be cute and clever,

in fact i dont see you having much to say, or are you trying to deflect from the hole Adams has dug for himself?

hotmail.com

I think he was poking fun at the random use of odd Irish phrases, which is a feature of many politicians and some RTE presenters. Load of nonsense.

feargale

loughside wrote: »

this gobblety gook lingo.

Bigotry.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Say them both in a strong nordie accent.

I think it's pretty funny. Anything that pisses off gaelgeoirs is funny in my book.

Bigotry.

loughside wrote: »

LOL!!

Well done Gregory, nice one - bout time these someone drew attention to this incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo lingo.

Bigotry.

Iwasfrozen

feargale wrote: »

Bigotry.

Your understanding of bigotry is broad and ill defined.

Crooked Jack

loughside wrote: »

and of course i respect the freedom of speech that allowed Adams to insult and refer to unionists as ba$tards tonight in Enniskillen


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-30186975

Foul-mouthed abuse'

The DUP's Arlene Foster said Gerry Adams' "foul mouthed abuse had been disrespectful to an entire community".
"Respect is a two-way street. The hyperbole from republicans over recent days has been exposed as hypocrisy," she said.
"Republicans use the Irish language as a weapon and tonight Gerry Adams confirms that they view equality as another weapon to attack unionists, or these b******s as he would term us."
Ulster Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt described it as "shocking to the point of nausea".
"The most shocking revelation is that he considers equality as a 'Trojan horse'," he said.
"The audio recording makes clear Gerry Adams thinks equality is nothing more than a tool to be used to manipulate people like me."
On Twitter, Gerry Adams said "Mea Culpa" acknowledging he was at fault, but insisted he had been talking about "bigots, racists and homophobes".

Only unionists could see equality as a weapon to be attacked with.

feargale

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Your understanding of bigotry is broad and ill defined.

Some time ago I read a piece written by a young Connemara woman who grew up speaking Irish as her first language. She expressed her deep sorrow at the decline of the world in which she was raised and the limited opportunities that she now has to live in that culture. While I have that piece somewhere I cannot now lay my hands on it or give you a link, but if you read it it might broaden your understanding and you might begin to appreciate how offensive some of the comments here would be to her.
I suspect that if a Methodist wrote a similar piece about the decline of his or her community somewhere in the South you would readily appreciate similar sentiments expressed by that writer, while remaining oblivious to the similarity of the two situations and the consequent sentiments expressed. And I suspect that you would studiously refrain from the type of ignorant comment that has accompanied some of the contributions here.

J Cheever Loophole

A good number of years ago, I recall the Lord Mayor of Galway coming up to Belfast on a mayoral visit. He of course went to the City Hall and was greeted by the then Unionist Lord Mayor of Belfast. There was a photo opportunity at the front door of the City Hall and the assembled press photographers asked both men, with their chains of office on, to shake hands. The Lord Mayor of Belfast refused, siting the Anglo Irish Agreement and Irish government interference - the photo thus was shown with a smiling, if slightly embarrassed, Lord Mayor of Galway standing beside a sullen faced Lord Mayor of Belfast.

The incident made the headlines up here, and I recall two colleagues from the Unionist tradition looking at the paper and discussing it. The conversation went something along the lines of;

"Did you see that yesterday?"

"Yes, I did - what do you think?"

"I'll tell you what I think - they're making us the laughing stock of the world."

Fast forward over twenty years to this current issue and essentially you have the same principles at play - a Unionist Politician acting in a way that no self respecting politician would act - appealing to the lowest common denominator via a cheap laugh.

Contrast that with the tweet made by Labour's Emily Thornberry about the house in Rochester with England flags and a white van outside - more subtle than Gregory, but she was immediately drummed out of her job - she had become a liability.

Unfortunately that is the reality up here - the Gregory Campbells of this world will thrive in a political system, with acts that has the rest of the world looking in and shaking its head in disbelief.

If you think this is bad, then unfortunately you ain't seen nothing yet. Next May, there will be a General Election in the UK and already the DUP and UUP are talking about an electoral pact that will see single Unionist candiates run in marginal constituencies - this is despite the fact that they are diametrically opposed on many, many key issues and indeed have no real love for each other. However the underlying principle still remains - keep themmuns out - sectarian politics at its best - and it is likely to be met with electoral success.

That's the background for Gregory's comments and he knows he can say it and get away with it without any real consequence, and what's more, he doesn't give a damn what the rest of the world thinks.

loughside

loughside wrote: »

and of course i respect the freedom of speech that allowed Adams to insult and refer to unionists as ba$tards tonight in Enniskillen


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-30186975

Foul-mouthed abuse'

The DUP's Arlene Foster said Gerry Adams' "foul mouthed abuse had been disrespectful to an entire community".
"Respect is a two-way street. The hyperbole from republicans over recent days has been exposed as hypocrisy," she said.
"Republicans use the Irish language as a weapon and tonight Gerry Adams confirms that they view equality as another weapon to attack unionists, or these b******s as he would term us."
Ulster Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt described it as "shocking to the point of nausea".
"The most shocking revelation is that he considers equality as a 'Trojan horse'," he said.
"The audio recording makes clear Gerry Adams thinks equality is nothing more than a tool to be used to manipulate people like me."
On Twitter, Gerry Adams said "Mea Culpa" acknowledging he was at fault, but insisted he had been talking about "bigots, racists and homophobes".

All very quiet on the thread now after your foul mouth irish language hero fecks up yet again,
page after page, post after post about Campbells jibe - not a single word on this hypocrite,

nuff said.....

bobmalooka

loughside wrote: »

All very quiet on the thread now after your foul mouth irish language hero fecks up yet again,
page after page, post after post about Campbells jibe - not a single word on this hypocrite,

nuff said.....

I suggest you read the full quote on Adams rather than the carefully selected snippet picked by vested interests.

He said the bigots in unionism are ba$tards, and he'd be right. (All bigots are in my view regardless of political persuasion)

He said they way to defeat them was through equality, again he'd be right.

Are you really upset he said the word ba$tard while claiming free speach entitles someone to denigrate a nations culture by saying he'd treat it as toilet paper?

Donkey Oaty

I don't know about bigoted or racist, but Mr Campbell's attitude to the Irish language is definitely bordering on homophonic.

Iwasfrozen

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

I don't know about bigoted or racist, but Mr Campbell's attitude to the Irish language is definitely bordering on homophonic.

This is my new favorite word.

karma_

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

This is my new favorite word.

I didn't think I'd find you in here defending the bould Gregory 'The Bigot' Campbell...

oh wait...

I completely did, sorry.

Iwasfrozen

karma_ wrote: »

I didn't think I'd find you in here defending the bould Gregory 'The Bigot' Campbell...

oh wait...

I completely did, sorry.

I wasn't defending him but I'm glad I didn't disappoint you with my absence.

squeekyduck

Campbell's comments were out of line but the media has blown Adam's comments to be something it isnt or not intended to be. It reminds me of a primary school play yard.

I really have no hope for Northern Ireland in moving forward because there is such hatred on both sides but on that point it would seem that Sinn Fein are more open to discussions on integration for future compared to DUP.

circadian

I wonder how he feels about Ulster Scots. Any jokes there Gregory?

Donkey Oaty

circadian wrote: »

I wonder how he feels about Ulster Scots. Any jokes there Gregory?

Man in cake shop: Is that a doughnut or a meringue?

Baker: No, you're right - it's a doughnut.

(Frank Carson)

h2005

loughside wrote: »

All very quiet on the thread now after your foul mouth irish language hero fecks up yet again,
page after page, post after post about Campbells jibe - not a single word on this hypocrite,

nuff said.....

Why not start a thread on it? This thread is about Gregory Campbells comments on the Irish language.

kowloon

DuMorph wrote: »

Klata barradda nikto, etc..

You need to get that word perfect or all hell will break loose.

GaelMise

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Don't forget the removal of the flag form Belfast city hall, nothing petty about that. Nope, not at all.

Be fair, they did compromise from a position that said both or none to a position that mearly moved in line with the rest of the UK. Was Alliance being petty too when they supported it?

Capt'n Midnight

loughside wrote: »

Also if Campbell were a member in Dáil Éireann and started babbling on in UlsterScotch, something a very few understands, he would be looked upon as taking the pi$$, and rightfully so.

something a very few understands ???

you really think that even our TD's would "confess that a'm just no' able tae keep up wi' the folk nooadays or conform tae their new-fangl'd w'ys."

"Sang, it's lamentable," said the widow, "when ye think o' it calmly.

circadian

Ulster Scots is a dialect of English and fairly easy to understand. I fail to see how politicians in the Dail would struggle, or any English speaker from this part of the world.

Try reading some John Keats and compare that in difficulty to Ulster Scots.

Few understand me backside sais I.