Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Border Poll discussion
Comments
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »You speak as one who thinks there is a perfect conflict/war. Like Janfebmar who thinks that rules apply.
I am happy that someone is going on trial for Bloody Sunday. I just wish that no letters of comfort were ever issued and that an awful lot more people were going on trial.
You can choose to glorify and romanticise what happened on this island, but to me none of the violence was ever justified. Ireland was never apartheid South Africa, never a place that deserved or required violence. Like many others, I am ashamed of what the IRA claimed to have done in my name.0 -
The children killed and injured by so many IRA bombs never got a trial. Neither did Lord Mountbatten, or the Tory party in Brighton. Those people kneecapped, the children sexually abused by IRA members in safe houses, one convicted only last week, where was their justice?
Yes, just like the 34 people killed in the Dublin-Monaghan bombings by the UVF, assisted by British Security Forces.
As for Mountbatton - millions died in India under his watch. I'm not sure how well he would do if he had to face charges for his actions in India. Similarly for the Tory Party. Churchill of the Tory Party should have been court marshalled for war crimes.
As for child abuse, bearing in mind the scale of the abuse in this part of the country, I don't think I'd be singling the Provos out for what happened in a place where the state had lost all moral authority and trust with half the community.It is clear that the British government and its agents dropped their standards during the Troubles, it is also clear that SF/IRA had no standards during that time.
Do you honestly think that the British Government was a one off drop in standards and that up to that they were honorable, decent and principled? :eek:0 -
As for Mountbatton - millions died in India under his watch. I'm not sure how well he would do if he had to face charges for his actions in India. Similarly for the Tory Party. Churchill of the Tory Party should have been court marshalled for war crimes.
Yep, no trial. Thanks for admitting that. Gibraltar three never got a trial, do you think their shooting was justified, given their previous history and their intentions that day?As for child abuse, bearing in mind the scale of the abuse in this part of the country, I don't think I'd be singling the Provos out for what happened in a place where the state had lost all moral authority and trust with half the community.
Yeah, the old argument of we only abused a few children, while that lot abused more. Don't buy it, don't buy the cover-up, don't buy the Liam Adams getting a job working with kids in Louth, don't buy that the safe house abuse also happened in Louth as a complete coincidence etc.0 -
I am happy that someone is going on trial for Bloody Sunday. I just wish that no letters of comfort were ever issued and that an awful lot more people were going on trial.
You can choose to glorify and romanticise what happened on this island, but to me none of the violence was ever justified. Ireland was never apartheid South Africa, never a place that deserved or required violence. Like many others, I am ashamed of what the IRA claimed to have done in my name.
Glorify and romanticise? Would you ever stop telling lies.
If you are happy to see someone on trial for Bloody Sunday we would have seen you criticise the British involvement here without prompt. You have never done this in all the time I have engaged with you.
There was never a perfect or moral conflict/war, ever. All sides are to blame, but some sides have the power and responsibility to stop it and in Ireland's case those sides failed us, profoundly.
There was not one thing given by the British in the GFA that could not have been given in 1969.
And one of those was having SF and the IRA at the table, so don't go on about Sunningdale please.0 -
Yep, no trial. Thanks for admitting that. Gibraltar three never got a trial, do you think their shooting was justified, given their previous history and their intentions that day?
Do you think its ok to execute people without trial?Yeah, the old argument of we only abused a few children, while that lot abused more. Don't buy it, don't buy the cover-up, don't buy the Liam Adams getting a job working with kids in Louth, don't buy that the safe house abuse also happened in Louth as a complete coincidence etc.
I think you need to read up on the Kincora Boys Home! Even the Rev. Ian Paisley knew what was happening there and turned a blind eye on it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kincora_Boys%27_Home0 -
Advertisement
-
You can choose to glorify and romanticise what happened on this island, but to me none of the violence was ever justified. Ireland was ... never a place that deserved or required violence.
Except the violence that kept it under British rule for centuries and kept the sectarian junta in power in the north, is it?0 -
Junkyard Tom wrote: »Except the violence that kept it under British rule for centuries and kept the sectarian junta in power in the north, is it?
This. ^^ The absolute hypocrisy of partitionist thinking. 'Ah sure it's not that bad, put up with it. I'm alright Jack'.0 -
I am happy that someone is going on trial for Bloody Sunday. I just wish that no letters of comfort were ever issued and that an awful lot more people were going on trial.
I think you misunderstand what the letters of comfort contained. What they say is that the PSNI/whoever do not have any evidence to convict them at the moment, but if they do come up with evidence, they will be prosecuted. John Downey who got one of those letters is currently appealing his extradition to the UK.You can choose to glorify and romanticise what happened on this island, but to me none of the violence was ever justified. Ireland was never apartheid South Africa, never a place that deserved or required violence. Like many others, I am ashamed of what the IRA claimed to have done in my name.
Who the hell is romanticising what happened on this island?
Deny it all you want but there are similarities between apartheid SA and Northern Ireland. You should be ashamed of. Seriously, your embarassament is nothing in comparision to what the nationalist community put up with in NI since partition.0 -
There are a few people in here seem to have lived on another planet for the last 50 years.
Apart from all the stuff listed like raping young girls ets. The provos often took 3 days to kill young men. The committed the most horrendous torture prior to assassination. They cut of bits of people’s bodies and posted them to family. They controlled communities and murder their own for falling out with the big boys in pubs. They left no warning bombs that killed infants. They killed Protestants who were an only child living on a farm so as the farm would not pass down. The firebombed a hotel because it was used primarily by protestan burning many to death. I could go on for pages. They were/are evil sectarian cowardly killers. There nickname I Ran Away seems to fit will.
Now I am wore down by the nonsense a couple of you believe, so i am also checking out of this area of discussion.
.....and loyalist paramilitaries were no better at all in case your confused in what I am saying.
The army and police were not perfect and made some ropey decisions under pressure. But thank god for them or we would have all been controlled by the above activities0 -
There are a few people in here seem to have lived on another planet for the last 50 years.
Apart from all the stuff listed like raping young girls ets. The provos often took 3 days to kill young men. The committed the most horrendous torture prior to assassination. They cut of bits of people’s bodies and posted them to family. They controlled communities and murder their own for falling out with the big boys in pubs. They left no warning bombs that killed infants. They killed Protestants who were an only child living on a farm so as the farm would not pass down. The firebombed a hotel because it was used primarily by protestan burning many to death. I could go on for pages. They were/are evil sectarian cowardly killers. There nickname I Ran Away seems to fit will.
Now I am wore down by the nonsense a couple of you believe, so i am also checking out of this area of discussion.
.....and loyalist paramilitaries were no better at all in case your confused in what I am saying.
The army and police were not perfect and made some ropey decisions under pressure. But thank god for them or we would have all been controlled by the above activities
Fairly typical of belligerent Unionism tbh. It is our version or nothing. :rolleyes:
If you are correct in your appraisal of the history then Unionism has a bigger issue with the mother Union than 'disinterest' and leaving Ireland to decide it's own future.
They sold you out to rabid sectarian killers by signing up to the GFA and reaching a deal.0 -
Advertisement
-
Took me a while to get around to it, but watched the Miami showband documentary on Netflix last night.
Seems apt to be discussing it on a border poll thread, seeing as it happened relatively close to the border they were due to cross.
For the history revisionists among us, the SAS with full permission (quite possibly under orders from) the top level of the British government, collaborated with loyalist terror groups (UVF) to murder a group of young men, who were of mixed religion, from north and south of the island, all apolitical, with no interest in politics at all.
Also revealed on the documentary was a letter apparently penned on "UVF headed paper" which disclosed an admission that the British governments MI5 wanted to murder Charlie Haughey, and asked that the UVF obliged them with taking the blame.
Worth taking into account when totting up points lads.0 -
Johnny Dogs wrote: »Took me a while to get around to it, but watched the Miami showband documentary on Netflix last night.
Seems apt to be discussing it on a border poll thread, seeing as it happened relatively close to the border they were due to cross.
For the history revisionists among us, the SAS with full permission (quite possibly under orders from) the top level of the British government, collaborated with loyalist terror groups (UVF) to murder a group of young men, who were of mixed religion, from north and south of the island, all apolitical, with no interest in politics at all.
Also revealed on the documentary was a letter apparently penned on "UVF headed paper" which disclosed an admission that the British governments MI5 wanted to murder Charlie Haughey, and asked that the UVF obliged them with taking the blame.
Worth taking into account when totting up points lads.
The way the two army intelligence officers who questioned the establishment were set up and discredited was shocking as well.0 -
-
UVF headed paper! - that should make it easy to arrest them
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/loyalists-told-charles-haughey-mi5-asked-us-to-execute-you-1.33398040 -
-
Getting back the the thread.i hope some people from northern ireland are reading this because it concerns them.
i've been watching a few videos on what might happen to the north following brexit and one of the options is to reunify with ireland, which i believe, is not everyone cup of tea. me personally as an irishman, i have no strong feelings about this but i think it'd be nice to see a complete ireland on a map. however, i think i may have seen an option that hasn't been considered.
what if the north was to vote to rejoin ireland but in name only; establish yourselves as a separate state with your own government, your own police force (technically you have that already; Stormont and the PSNI) and your own currency.
could have the benefits of staying in the EU and not have the unpleasant taste of irish in your mouths. or am i talking rubbish? please, i'd to hear what you have to say.
I feel this is the most positive way i have ever seen a UI propositioned. Seagarox sounds like someone unionists could seriously converse with0 -
Getting back the the thread.
I feel this is the most positive way i have ever seen a UI propositioned. Seagarox sounds like someone unionists could seriously converse with
What would that proposal solve exactly? That Unionists wouldn't be offended or upset?
It will solve nothing and just underscore and deepen division.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »What would that proposal solve exactly? That Unionists wouldn't be offended or upset?
It will solve nothing and just underscore and deepen division.
Well it has a staring point that recognised that the roi don’t have some Devine right to take over another country just because it’s on the same land mass. That’s helpful0 -
Getting back the the thread.
I feel this is the most positive way i have ever seen a UI propositioned. Seagarox sounds like someone unionists could seriously converse with
As a unionist who has moved to the south, I can honestly say the biggest problem is ourselves and catholics in northern ireland. (our bubble does not represent the rest of ireland)
We have a massive divide between us that is perpetuated by refusing to move forward and let go of the past. (while I was raised in donegal, I rarely ventured outside of ulster, which is the same for most unionists, and therefore we dont realise how the south really live).
Having moved to the west of ireland I can honestly say my entire view of ireland has changed. I used to think it was backwards and hated us, now I know that is a northern ireland thing only. We live in a bubble up there and don't realise how modern and welcoming ireland is.
While I am still a moderate unionist (takes a long time to change a life time of living a certain way), I wouldn't be afraid of a united ireland. In fact if the north can adopt the same attitude as people in the south of Ireland then we would all be better off. And it would be much easier to live together.
What I am trying to say is, don't let the bubble of northern ireland blind you to how good life really is in southern ireland (outside ulster). It really is much better than we unionists believe, or give credit for. And its a shame most unionists never give it a chance, because they are missing out.
(catholics in the north do not help to bridge the gap between us, both sides are as bad as each other in the north).0 -
Well it has a staring point that recognised that the roi don’t have some Devine right to take over another country just because it’s on the same land mass. That’s helpful
Nobody is 'taking over' anything. This will happen when a majority decide it is the correct thing for the future.0 -
Advertisement
-
I appreciate that response - interesting and challenging.
Your parting phrase doesn't sit that well with me though "both sides are as bad as each other in the north". a little stereotypical, and i know the south has moved on, but a relative of mine had an experience recently in Cork that would suggest its not quite how you present it.
As for a UI. I dont 'fear' it any more than a canadian would fear joining with USA as one country. I don't think there is much to fear and of course there would be benifits. It is just that the country i love and feel part of is Norther Ireland eg I can't imagine how i life would be better without my football team. So this is the bigger difficulty, NI is separated 100 years. we have our own identity, culture, experiences of life, history, etc. Thats what i don'r want to get rid off. But i liked the opening question as it is not couched as a threat oe 'we have a right to take over your country because of history'0 -
Getting back the the thread.
I feel this is the most positive way i have ever seen a UI propositioned. Seagarox sounds like someone unionists could seriously converse with
Surely it still ruins the "Union" portion of "unionist" though. They'd no longer be a part of the UK, and I'd imagine a portion of unionists would find this objectionable on its own.
It also doesn't, by itself, rectify the border problem. This indepedent NI would need to join the EU before it was fully addressed.
And "in name only"? The proposed solution is one of the more common propositions for a UI that I've seen - that Stormont and the PSNI should remain in place. At the very least for some kind of transition period. If the unification was to actually be in name only, then...it's not really any kind of unification and solves few of the problems while introducing whole new ones.
Would NI citizens be paying tax to the Oireachtas exchequer, or to Stormont? If the former, than that's not "in name only" and will surely anger staunch unionists and loyalists anyway. If the latter then you have the weak economy and budget deficit of NI to attend to - and without the support of Ireland because why would Dáil Eireann support any kind of economic development or financial support for what is tax-wise an independent NI? Loans, possibly. But loans must be repaid. You'd also lose the current financial support of the UK. If none of NI's tax income goes into the Department of Finance's books it's unreasonable to ask the Department to provide for NI in its budgets. Doubly so if NI is then also not abiding by the Irish Constituion and laws - if it wants to be treated separately for the sake of unionist fears of 'Irishness', then it must be treated so in all ways.
Would this "in name only" reunification mean that NI doesn't have to follow any of the Republic's laws? Well then it's fundamentally a separate state (at best, it's a federal state similar to those in the US, but without any federal level laws) and why would nationalists be happy with that at all?
Fundamentally there's only 3 (or 3-and-a-half) solutions to the NI/ROI reunification:- Stay as they are now, with NI in the UK and separate from RoI. Could cause border issues with Brexit, but we'll see in a few weeks I'd imagine. With changing demographics, unsure how long this might last even if the border stays as it is now post-Brexit.
- Independent NI. The least likely option, and imo I can't see it staying as a stable country for very long.
- Reunification. Solves the border problem, makes republicans happy. Pisses off the unionists. Host of problems, economic and social. I don't think it'll result in unionist culture (parades, British citizenship, etc) being wiped out or become second-class, but even if that is unlikely it's still a fear that needs to be addressed.
- Option 3.5. Reunficiation with a federal NI that is "in name only". Which isn't reunification except in the barest, least functional sense. You combine the problems of option 2 (unless NI follows pays Irish taxes and follows some Irish laws, in which case this isn't in-name-only as mentioned above), with the unionist fears of option 3 (however unfounded), and with the republican issues of option 1 (again, however unfounded).
0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Nobody is 'taking over' anything. This will happen when a majority decide it is the correct thing for the future.
What if a united Ireland doesnt quite take the form that you imagine Francie?
Compromises will need to be made, a united Ireland with a large unhappy minority could be as big a disaster as the north is with its unhappy minority.0 -
Topgear on Dave wrote: »What if a united Ireland doesnt quite take the form that you imagine Francie?
Compromises will need to be made, a united Ireland with a large unhappy minority could be as big a disaster as the north is with its unhappy minority.
Who ever suggested a UI without compromises?
That would be the very definition of a 'take over'. Of course there will be compromise, but compromise should not be mistaken for appeasement for the sake of it. Unionists will have to accommodate too if they wish to remain democrats.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Who ever suggested a UI without compromises?
That would be the very definition of a 'take over'. Of course there will be compromise, but compromise should not be mistaken for appeasement for the sake of it. Unionists will have to accommodate too if they wish to remain democrats.
Precisely. I don't think anyon in this thread has advocated a 'take over', because everyone with even a passing familiarity with Northern Ireland knows how much of a disaster forcing the issue would be. Reunification is always going to be a slow process once it gets started, but it's unfair to give unionists (or republicans, for that matter) a special right to 'protect their culture' without making accomodations for the other side.
Unionist parades should be allowed go ahead (because why wouldn't they, so long as they're peaceful). Republicans will have to deal with that. All citizens of a united ireland should be allowed hold parades, and that includes the unionists.
But likewise unionists will have to deal with (probably a poor example, but it's off the top of my head) Irish classes in their schools. It's mandatory in all of ours, and we might be able to accomodate some kind of exemption for first generational citizens (ie, those who were NI citizens prior to and during unification). I got an exemption for being born outside the country and that could be applied to NI kids if born prior to reunification, but that exemption only meant I didn't need it to get into NUI colleges. I still had to sit the classes in school, and sit the leaving certificate (pointless, considering I had no need to pass it but anyway) and unionist kids will have to deal with that too.
Neither side of the NI community should be allowed to dig in their heels and go all "Ulster says No" on anything they don't like. That's not how democracy works.0 -
Precisely. I don't think anyon in this thread has advocated a 'take over', because everyone with even a passing familiarity with Northern Ireland knows how much of a disaster forcing the issue would be. Reunification is always going to be a slow process once it gets started, but it's unfair to give unionists (or republicans, for that matter) a special right to 'protect their culture' without making accomodations for the other side.
Unionist parades should be allowed go ahead (because why wouldn't they, so long as their peaceful). Republicans will have to deal with that. All citizens of a united ireland should be allowed hold parades, and that includes the unionists.
But likewise unionists will have to deal with (probably a poor example, but it's off the top of my head) Irish classes in their schools. It's mandatory in all of ours, and we might be able to accomodate some kind of exemption for first generational citizens (ie, those who were NI citizens prior to and during unification). I got an exemption for being born outside the country and that could be applied to NI kids if born prior to reunification, but that exemption only meant I didn't need it to get into NUI colleges. I still had to sit the classes in school, and sit the leaving certificate (pointless, considering I had no need to pass it but anyway) and unionist kids will have to deal with that too.
Neither side of the NI community should be allowed to dig in their heels and go all "Ulster says No" on anything they don't like. That's not how democracy works.
Unionists should never be allowed to parade where they are not wanted and certainly not with bands or groups called 'Red Hand Defenders'.
That is wrong in the current state and would be wrong in any new state. It is one of the compromises Unionism will have to make as they are being forced to make it now.
The 'inalienable right to march where-ever they want' has been repudiated as the nonsense it always was by the Parades Commission and should stay that way.
Republicans/nationalists will also have to accept that they cannot triumphalise/goad or intimidate either.0 -
Fundamentally there's only 3 (or 3-and-a-half) solutions to the NI/ROI reunification:- Stay as they are now, with NI in the UK and separate from RoI. Could cause border issues with Brexit, but we'll see in a few weeks I'd imagine. With changing demographics, unsure how long this might last even if the border stays as it is now post-Brexit.
- Independent NI. The least likely option, and imo I can't see it staying as a stable country for very long.
- Reunification. Solves the border problem, makes republicans happy. Pisses off the unionists. Host of problems, economic and social. I don't think it'll result in unionist culture (parades, British citizenship, etc) being wiped out or become second-class, but even if that is unlikely it's still a fear that needs to be addressed.
- Option 3.5. Reunficiation with a federal NI that is "in name only". Which isn't reunification except in the barest, least functional sense. You combine the problems of option 2 (unless NI follows pays Irish taxes and follows some Irish laws, in which case this isn't in-name-only as mentioned above), with the unionist fears of option 3 (however unfounded), and with the republican issues of option 1 (again, however unfounded).
Another option could be joint authority by British & Irish Government.0 -
I appreciate that response - interesting and challenging.
Your parting phrase doesn't sit that well with me though "both sides are as bad as each other in the north". a little stereotypical, and i know the south has moved on, but a relative of mine had an experience recently in Cork that would suggest its not quite how you present it.
As for a UI. I dont 'fear' it any more than a canadian would fear joining with USA as one country. I don't think there is much to fear and of course there would be benifits. It is just that the country i love and feel part of is Norther Ireland eg I can't imagine how i life would be better without my football team. So this is the bigger difficulty, NI is separated 100 years. we have our own identity, culture, experiences of life, history, etc. Thats what i don'r want to get rid off. But i liked the opening question as it is not couched as a threat oe 'we have a right to take over your country because of history'
I mean if we are being honest with ourselves both sides are as bad. We treat them as badly as they treat us in northern ireland. There rarely is a middle group. (of course there are nice people who don't do this, but im talking generally)
Everyone will have bad experiences somewhere, you can't judge a country on the actions of a few people. (ironcially my cousins are getting on well in cork. even joined the gaa team! madness I know)
But honestly NI is separate 100 years, but we are not actually any different culturally, thats one of the things I learned from moving south, we are still pretty much the same, even if we don't want to admit it (obviously there are minor differences such as the 12th etc but nothing major really).
Both our football teams are terrible... join them together and we might have a good team like rugby!
There is an unreasonable fear from unionists that joining a UI would erase our history and culture. This simply true, non of our culture would be affected, our history would be preserved and other than marching, the south does a better job at commemorating events than we do. There are many unionist statues commissioned in Dublin compared to the few we have in NI.
I don't know where is 'take over the country' is coming from. You are assuming it would be a hostile takeover and our way of life would end. Thats not true at all and I find it much better being a protestant in southern ireland than NI. Here I am free to practice my religion and pretty much do whatever I want without anyone judging or being hostile.
I have worked in my current job for almost 2 years and no one here has ever asked what religion I am or what team I support. All that is irrelevant here, and it is a great feeling. The fact that nobody cares or judges is quite liberating.
Also, I now view myself as an Ulster man in Ireland. I find it describes me much better than a northern Ireland man.
I feel you are a little hostile and defensive, simply because you are worried that a UI would be a hostile take over and kick us out.
Proper discourse would solve these worries and show that there is nothing to be afraid of. And united or not, both countries would thrive from better communication and an end to the hostile attitudes. We have so much in common, its a shame we let prejudice get in the way.
Edit: I would also prefer the southern medical service. I do have to pay yes, but I find it a better service than the nhs.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Unionists should never be allowed to parade where they are not wanted and certainly not with bands or groups called 'Red Hand Defenders'.
That is wrong in the current state and would be wrong in any new state. It is one of the compromises Unionism will have to make as they are being forced to make it now.
The 'inalienable right to march where-ever they want' has been repudiated as the nonsense it always was by the Parades Commission and should stay that way.
Republicans/nationalists will also have to accept that they cannot triumphalise/goad or intimidate either.
Oh goodness yes. I was using it as a quick example and didn't want to get into the nitty gritty of it.
Part of my "so long as they're peaceful" summary included (in my head, at least) "not going anywhere that will infuriate the locals and cause potential aggression". If citizens of the town Middle in the county of Nowhere do not want a parade going down their main street, then they can object and have it called off. I'll admit that I'm not very familiar with how parades in the Republic are handled, but I'm sure there's a complaints procedure for them (whether their a celebration parade or protest march - I'm unaware of any that are similar in style to the Unionist parades up North).
And yes, if you're an unsavoury group who have a history of unsavoury actions then sorry. You've used and abused your right to hosting such events, and proven incapable of doing so peacefully and respectfully. No parades for you.
The Parade Commission does fine work in NI, my point was simply that we should keep it as it is in the event of a United Ireland and not bow to republicans going "no more Parades, we're not in the UK anymore. Tough."0 -
Advertisement
-
Oh goodness yes. I was using it as a quick example and didn't want to get into the nitty gritty of it.
Part of my "so long as they're peaceful" summary included (in my head, at least) "not going anywhere that will infuriate the locals and cause potential aggression". If citizens of the town Middle in the county of Nowhere do not want a parade going down their main street, then they can object and have it called off. I'll admit that I'm not very familiar with how parades in the Republic are handled, but I'm sure there's a complaints procedure for them (whether their a celebration parade or protest march - I'm unaware of any that are similar in style to the Unionist parades up North).
And yes, if you're an unsavoury group who have a history of unsavoury actions then sorry. You've used an abused your right to hosting such events, and proven incapable of doing so peacefully and respectfully. No parades for you.
The Parade Commission does fine work in NI, my point was simply that we should keep it as it is in the event of a United Ireland and not bow to republicans going "no more Parades, we're not in the UK anymore. Tough."
I don't see any appetite in the republican tradition to end ALL Orange parades.
So a bit of understanding and compromise and that should be fine. There is no doubt that the PC have taken a lot of the heat out of marches and that has only happened because it seems to be rigorously impartial and fair.
Tackling the sickening racism and bigotry on display at bonfires is another day's work and that is were we must start to hear Unionism's own politician's speaking out.
If they are calling for sanctions when republican's step over a line, then they have to follow through and condemn this behaviour.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement