Ibrahim Halawa acquited(mod warning in op-Heed it)

givyjoe

gozunda wrote: »

I though you said you 'respected' other people opinions. It is clear you do not looking at those replies. As for names?
How about Bigot being used ad nauseum?



The last time I looked we were referring to "bigotry" definitions which appear to have by magic moorped now into "discrimination" - why you do that? Who are you saying is being discrinated against? More whataboutery?




Well for both your inquiries I respect the law - something that you appear to do when it suits you I see. So there's something you don't agree with and you want to get rid of it? Not suit your narrow worldview? Even though as you state those with religous should not be treated less favourably - however with that you are walking all over the beliefs no? More irrelevant rhetorical questions?

Are you going to answer the question that has been put to you 4 times? Or are you going to continually trying to bury it in your ramblings?

Do you think it's ok to treat others less favourably, based on their religious beliefs..?

Can you even answer yes or no? It's starting to become patently obvious what your honest answer would be.

I asked you about beliefs, not if you obeyed a law.. which you may or may not agree with.

As for my law breaking, please.. feel free to report me to the guards. I'm sure they will pass the matter on to the DPP. I'll bow to their legal knowledge on the matter.

gozunda

givyjoe wrote: »

Are you going to answer the question that has been put to you 4 times? Or are you going to continually trying to bury it in your ramblings?
Do you think it's ok to treat others less favourably, based on their religious beliefs..?
Can you even answer yes or no? It's starting to become patently obvious what your honest answer would be.

You didn't hear the last time - so I'd better shout

WHATABOUTEY?

YOU POSED THAT QUESTION TO OMACKERAL BTW NOT ME!

givyjoe wrote: »

I asked you about beliefs , not if you obeyed a law.. which you may or may not agree with.As for my law breaking, please.. feel free to report me to the guards. I'm sure they will pass the matter on to the DPP. I'll bow to their legal knowledge on the matter.

You gave stated many times that alledgedly you respect people's beliefs but here you are harassing Omackeral, myself and others on our 'beliefs'. Yor hypocrisy is showing again btw.

As for questions I asked and YOU have failed to answer the list is getting quite tidious tbh

Here are the first couple to be answered. And no whataboutery please ...

1 - why did you state that posters did not have the right to express their opinions?

2. Why were calling posters bigots simply because you disagreed with their views

3. why did you deny that using your own definition of bigotry - you called yourself a bigot?

4. Why did you claim to respect posters views and opinions and then clearly disrespected the by insulting what they had written etc

Answer that lot and I'll get back to you with the rest ok

Hitman3000

givyjoe wrote:

Sorry but I cant leave smart arse comments, such as the above go. Were you or were you not baptised a Catholic? I should have just said statistical probability instead of assumption. I think you completed missed my point of referring to 'our faith'.

Asking you not to make an assumption is a smart arse comment? We have a live one here. lol. Didn't miss your point at all it's not my faith.

Ash.J.Williams

Strange thread this. I'm guessing the side that feel strongly about one side of the argument have never left their villages before.

givyjoe

gozunda wrote: »

You didn't hear the last time - so I'd better shout

WHATABOUTEY?

YOU POSED THAT QUESTION TO OMACKERAL BTW NOT ME!



You gave stated many times that alledgedly you respect people's beliefs but here you are harassing Omackeral, myself and others on our 'beliefs'. Yor hypocrisy is showing again btw.

As for questions I asked and YOU have failed to answer the list is getting quite tidious tbh

Here are the first couple to be answered. And no whataboutery please ...

1 - why did you state that posters did not have the right to express their opinions?

At no point did I ever say this

2. Why were calling posters bigots simply because you disagreed with their views
Please refer back to either definition

3. why did you deny that using your own definition of bigotry - you called yourself a bigot?
Do you still not understand what a bigot is?


4. Why did you claim to respect posters views and opinions and then clearly disrespected the by insulting what they had written etc

Do you understand the difference between respecting an opinion and respecting a person's right to express their opinion?


Answer that lot and I'll get back to you with the rest ok

Im on the mobile so easier to reply in line as above.

I won't be answering any more of your questions as I've asked you 5 times to answer a very simple question. I think it's fairly clear what your thoughts are.

You need help my friend, lots of it. No doubt this will offend or insult you. Oh well.

I wish you well in your crusade against the young lad. I'll be popping you on the ignore list, do unfortunately I won't see your replies.

end of the road

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Does anyone know why his links to the Brother hood where not written about in the main stream media ?
After reading Mark Humprys write up on the whole thing surely himself and his family should be on a extremist watch list if it is all true ?

because ultimately, none of it is true. there are no reliable sources to back up the claims.

Galwayguy35

end of the road wrote: »

because ultimately, none of it is true. there are no reliable sources to back up the claims.

Says the man who has never backed up anything you say on here with proof!

Will I Am Not

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Strange thread this. I'm guessing the side that feel strongly about one side of the argument have never left their villages before.

How ironic. This is the type of post that has the thread so “strange”. Question anything and you’re a backwards racist that never left the village.

gozunda

givyjoe wrote: »

Im on the mobile so easier to reply in line as above.

I won't be answering any more of your questions as I've asked you 5 times to answer a very simple question. I think it's fairly clear what your thoughts are. You need help my friend, lots of it. No doubt this will offend or insult you. Oh well.
I wish you well in your crusade against the young lad. I'll be popping you on the ignore list, do unfortunately I won't see your replies.

You've asked someone else's question. Nothing to do with me.

Still insulting posters as ever and obviousley don't have a clue about what was posted :rolleyes:

Best you take a break alright

Kivaro

gozunda wrote: »

Still insulting posters as ever and obviousley don't have a clue about what was posted :rolleyes:

Best you take a break alright

My recommendation would be to ignore posters who are trying to derail the thread or who are just making ludicrous statements or 'facts' as they call them.
I gave up reading his posts after he called Halawa a "child" when he was arrested. Here it is: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105055606&postcount=1722

And here is a pic (from the Irish Times) of the child Halawa before he was arrested:

end of the road

Kivaro wrote: »

I gave up reading his posts after he called Halawa a "child" when he was arrested. Here it is: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105055606&postcount=1722

And here is a pic (from the Irish Times) of the child Halawa before he was arrested:

because he was a child when arrested. you cannot escape that fact.

Hitman3000

end of the road wrote:

because he was a child when arrested. you cannot escape that fact.

Depends on the culture.

RobertKK

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Strange thread this. I'm guessing the side that feel strongly about one side of the argument have never left their villages before.

Agree some people haven't left their villages or they wouldn't be so in favour of someone who supports the Muslim Brotherhood and Sharia Law. The MB who were involved in sectarian violence against Coptic Christians to the point a coup by the army was required to save the country from civil war.

People who never left the village, think there is nothing for the Halawa family to explain.
They need to condemn the Muslim Brotherhood for all the violence and death they encouraged against Christians.
They can say they were supporting democracy (Sheikh Halawa is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood). They were supporting the MB and their extreme Sharia law.
Brought home like a hero when all he did was support actions and views most Irish people don't support.
People who never left the village probably listened and watched too much RTE.

First Up

RobertKK wrote:

The MB who were involved in sectarian violence against Coptic Christians to the point a coup by the army was required to save the country from civil war.

The army ousted the elected government to stop the trial of Hosni Mubarak and the investigation into how he and his former army colleagues had been ripping the country off.

No other reason.

Hitman3000

First Up wrote:

No other reason.

You sure about that?

Kivaro

RobertKK wrote: »

They can say they were supporting democracy (Sheikh Halawa is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood). They were supporting the MB and their extreme Sharia law.
Brought home like a hero when all he did was support actions and views most Irish people don't support.
People who never left the village probably listened and watched too much RTE.

Can you imagine how the shouts of "Allahu Akbar" by MB supporters in the biggest airport in Ireland played to an international audience seeing it on their news programs or online?
And with an Irish Government Minister standing in the middle of this despicable display.

It is bewildering. I would be surprised as a result of all of this if Irish people going on shopping/holiday trips to the States do not receive extra "security" attention, secondary TSA searches etc.

The Halawa's and other Muslim Brotherhood supporters will be emboldened by this event.

Omackeral

Kivaro wrote: »

Can you imagine how the shouts of "Allahu Akbar" by MB supporters in the biggest airport in Ireland played to an international audience seeing it on their news programs or online?
And with an Irish Government Minister standing in the middle of this despicable display.

It is bewildering. I would be surprised as a result of all of this if Irish people going on shopping/holiday trips to the States do not receive extra "security" attention, secondary TSA searches etc.

The Halawa's and other Muslim Brotherhood supporters will be emboldened by this event.

Utter hyperbole.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

because he was a child when arrested. you cannot escape that fact.

no he wasnt

Spanish Eyes

Keep the live cattle exports to Egypt. all sorted now.

It has nothing to do with Halawa, but the global picture. Sorry not lecturing, but anyone with half a brain knows this.

branie2

Deleted User wrote: »

no he wasnt

you're right. He was 17

end of the road

RobertKK wrote: »

Agree some people haven't left their villages or they wouldn't be so in favour of someone who supports the Muslim Brotherhood and Sharia Law. The MB who were involved in sectarian violence against Coptic Christians to the point a coup by the army was required to save the country from civil war.

spare me. the egyptian military couldn't give a stuff about coptic christians. they saw an opportunity for a power grab and took it. the mb are filth but so are the egyptian military.

RobertKK wrote: »

People who never left the village, think there is nothing for the Halawa family to explain.

at the moment, there isn't. if the authorities here feel otherwise then they must investigate.

RobertKK wrote: »

They need to condemn the Muslim Brotherhood for all the violence and death they encouraged against Christians.

they really don't.

RobertKK wrote: »

They can say they were supporting democracy

technically they were.

RobertKK wrote: »

(Sheikh Halawa is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood).

maybe he is but that means nothing in terms of the rest of the family. even then the evidence for the claim he is a member is vague.

RobertKK wrote: »

They were supporting the MB and their extreme Sharia law.

proof please. they attended a protest which was against the murder of people protesting the overthrow of a democratically elected government.

RobertKK wrote: »

Brought home like a hero when all he did was support actions and views most Irish people don't support.

no he wasn't. he was brought home. nothing more. i think most irish people would disagree with the murder of people protesting the overthrow of their government who the majority voted for.

RobertKK wrote: »

People who never left the village probably listened and watched too much RTE.

better rte then some fake news nonsense. at least rte for all their faults will have sources to back up their claims.

end of the road

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Depends on the culture.

he was a child.

Hitman3000 wrote: »

You sure about that?

100% verified fact. the power grab covers all the reasons though.

Kivaro wrote: »

Can you imagine how the shouts of "Allahu Akbar" by MB supporters in the biggest airport in Ireland played to an international audience seeing it on their news programs or online?
And with an Irish Government Minister standing in the middle of this despicable display.

i can, yes. most people couldn't give a toss.

Kivaro wrote: »

It is bewildering. I would be surprised as a result of all of this if Irish people going on shopping/holiday trips to the States do not receive extra "security" attention, secondary TSA searches etc.

extra security checks will be happening for anyone flying to americ from all over the world, as announced today.

Kivaro wrote: »

The Halawa's and other Muslim Brotherhood supporters will be emboldened by this event.

why would the Halawa's be emboldened by this event, considering their links to the mb are only aledged.

Deleted User wrote: »

no he wasnt

yes he was.

First Up

Hitman3000 wrote:

You sure about that?

Yes

Atoms for Peace

First Up wrote: »

The army ousted the elected government to stop the trial of Hosni Mubarak and the investigation into how he and his former army colleagues had been ripping the country off.

No other reason.

Really, the increase in sectarian violence, attacks on minorities along with them interferring with the separation of powers by getting their own appointees into the judiciary had nothing at all to do with it?

Hitman3000

end of the road wrote:

he was a child.

In his culture he wasn't.

Hitman3000

end of the road wrote:

100% verified fact. the power grab covers all the reasons though.

100% verified, source please.

Hitman3000

First Up wrote:

Yes

Source please.

end of the road

Hitman3000 wrote: »

In his culture he wasn't.

doesn't matter, he was a child.

gozunda

First Up wrote: »

The army ousted the elected government to stop the trial of Hosni Mubarak and the investigation into how he and his former army colleagues had been ripping the country off.

No other reason.

Egyptian politics will never be as simple as you paint it ...

You fail to mention that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and the MB are believed to have struck a deal in 2011 involving the MB in the then government. It is believed that both interests were clearing the stage for their eventual showdown - which ultimitly the military won.

What about MB president Morsi instigating a temporary constitutional declaration which gave him unlimited powers and the power to legislate without review or judicial oversight

You didn't mention about the millons of protestors who took to the streets to request the removal of MB president Mohamed Morsi in 2013 only after which he was then overthrown by a military style coup council consisting of Defense Minister Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei, the Grand Imam of Al Azhar Ahmed el-Tayeb, and Coptic Pope Tawadros II ...

I could go on but there are many aspects to the politics of that era that would take a text book to detail. You are at best being disingenuous...

As for

end of the road wrote:

100% verified fact.

100 % verified my rear end ...

david75

SnakePlissken wrote: »

This is rather boring, just be adult about it and admit you have no proof to substantiate this claim, and did indeed pull it from your posterior;



Not all Catholics voted NO, not all those from other religions voted YES, what is so hard to grasp?



I'm a dying breed? Who exactly do you think I am? I voted yes in the equality referendum, I'm proud to live in a country which recognizes the equality between the sexes and those of all sexuality, I'm honestly baffled at how you could claim I'm part of a dying breed when you don't know who I am.

Please elaborate, who is this dying breed you speak of?

Brief read through your posting history and it’s riddled with you calling people liars, bvll****ters, and doing the contrarian macho keyboard warrior thing yet clearly being a transparently insecure mess.

*I wasn’t insulting you there, I was describing you.

Toddle on now.