I assume you think that the RUC is entirely Protestant, well it isnt,
there is a healthy sprinkling of RC's who have dared to join it against the
will of the communist terrorists such as the provos and they live in daily
fear of being assassinated or having their children murdered, as has
unfortunately happened only too often in the past, your KKK peopel would
find like minded people amongst the rank and file of the provo's who just
like to maim , injure and terrorise, and I thank you for shewing that you
identify with the terrorists , I do hope your FBI take note, tho as you are
probably not from the middle east they more than likely wont.
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:23:15 GMT, Peter Forden wrote:
I rather think the provos were to a degree engendered by the actions of
those Paisleyite (and worse) members of the RUC.
Shame! You sound like Karl Rove or a 1950s McCarthyite. I have no brief
for the Provos or for any armed wing of the IRA,and have never given them a
dime. But I think the worst things ever happened to Ireland were The
Catholic Church, the English, and the introduction of pinch-souledScots
Calvinists tossed of their own lands by greedy English allied "nobility".
Your ignorance of the situation in Ulster is not suprising to me, however
you should know in your little racist tirade that the Scots people originate
from Ulster, hence the latin name for Ulster "SCOTIA"( ie Land of the Scots)
when the Romans extreminated half the population of Caledonia (Known as
Caleds the half were known as Picts)through starvation the Scots migrated to
what is now known as Scotland and laid claim to the empty lands once ruled
by the Caleds, they created a nation known as dal Riada which lasted to I
believe circa 1200 and later became known as we know it today Scotland, the
fact that the scots never completely left Ulster which has never politically
been a part of Ireland (A completely seperate race of celts) the fact that
the Irish have waged war for 2500 years in order to exterminate the Ulster
people,(scots) the fact that the Normans in the 11/1200ดs tired of Irish
slave and pirate raids on the English and Welsh coasts and invaded, the fact
that you dont know these things but are content to utter ignorant opinions
doesnt suprise me in the least, the English (who didnt exist as a people
before 1300!) inherited Ireland in a manner of speaking because its high
King had sworn fealty to a norman King and then another High King later
broke this trust (treaty if you prefer)and under the norms of the day
started a war with England, not the English starting a war with the Irish,
Irealise that for an american the irish are all romantic wee fellows with
crooked sticks and fairies on the brain, a fact which would suprise and
irritate many Irish, who are fast becoming one of Europes most modern
countries,I myself am part Irish and part Scot and am proud of both
heritages , I dont particularly like the Orange or Black lodges, but if one
has been in a war that has lasted so long then its not suprising that the
both sides have a tendency to hate each other these days, I make allowances
for that you apparently are to ill educated to make any allowance for
anything. I dont intend to reply to any reply to this post I've no idea who
Karl Rove is, an ameican politician I suspect, I've heard the name a few
times but never been bothered enough to learn more about him , that his name
in Swedish means arse says enough..... I'm not a McCarthyite, I've never
hated anyone that much, and I hope I never shall. As a last little piece of
knowledge for you The scots people have in one way and another been in
Ulster for c9000 years whereas the Irish have been in Ireland for only 2500
years so I think we can guess who is in the right in the war over the
rights to Ulster. The fact is thแt the Irish Problem is complex, its history
far more complex than you can even believe, its a race war thee days with
the Irish being the villains and the Ulster people wanting only peace and
never getting it thanks to americans sending money to the IRA, thanks to the
USA government supporting the IRA and giving them a safe haven in the USA,
I pray that that policy wont backfire, but I can bet you it will and you'll
be having a Belfast situation in downtown Chicago or New York or L.A.
Peter Forden spake thus (responding to Steve Caple):
1. Learn to use punctuation. Your sentences go on and on and on ...
2. Learn to break up your prose into paragraphs: reading your messages
is like trying to read chunks of concrete.
3. What the hell does "Vale" mean?
4. Since when did the U.S. give aid and comfort to the IRA? As I
remember it, we (the U.S. government, officially), had them pegged as
Don't talk to me, those of you who must need to be slammed in the
forehead with a maul before you'll GET IT that Wikipedia is a
(google for "salutation Vale"):
--> The Romans applied --> Salve! "Be in health!" especially to meeting, and --> Vale! "Be well!" to parting.
Well, I think I will mosey along over to one of the moderated web
or maybe http://www.trains.com/trc/CS/forums /
It has been an - umm - "interesting" experience. At least it has helped
me decided that I have to break a 15-16 year old habit and just give up
on unmoderated newsgroups. Seems Dave (Fischer) was right when he in a
memorable quote labelled '93 as "the year September never ended" :-)
Anyways - live long and prosper! Have fun!
Royal Enfield Rifles havent been standard issue since the 60ดs and the Ruger
pistols were ...pistols, the police in Northern Ireland have always been
armed and the Fire arm laws in the Uk refer mainly to civillian useage not
military or police useage, the UK policeforces regularly use firearms
against armed villains (crooks) but beat coppers do not requiere arms
atall, in fact batons (Truncheons) are optional for them , they can and
often do refuse to carry them. The pistols the RUC needed were pistols not
rifles, and considering how heavily armed an american policeman is armed
dont you think that refusing their sale to an allied nation whilst selling
anti aircraft missiles to the Taliban is just a little hypocritical?
I was responding to Roger Aultmann's line:
"> >> More likely envy than hate."
It's a line that is frequently trotted out by yanks and I can only
imagine that it stems from your brainwashing - it certainly merits my
description of "unreasoning stupidity", or can you come up with some
reasoned justificationin support of it? Not just something that
satisfies you, but something, anything that might cause me envy?
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:24:00 +1300, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
Greg, you decried the personal attacks in a post and then did it
yourself. You got caught. Stop trying to weasel out of it by making
yet another personal attack on me. That's your style, mate. It's
what you do. Denying it or stating that you don't like it and then
doing it yourself has a name.
Show me where I've ever made a personal attack other than in response to
a personal attack initiated by others, yourself included.
"That sounds like unreasoning stupidity" is a comment relating to the
post, not an attack on the poster.
"you don't have anything to envy." is a statement which I believe to be
true in as much as Roger's response was to me and therefore begs a
comparison between the USa and New Zealand. It certainly seems to
deserve the "unreasoning" label which in turn deserves the "stupidity"
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:39:37 +1300, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
A personal attack is a personal attack whether it's by origin or in
reply. You don't get it, do you? People here laugh at you when you
moan about others attacking you while you do it yourself in the very
next post you make.
You can't have it both ways, Greg. Either you demonstrate what you
preach or give it up. There's nothing at all wrong with a personal
attack. This newsgroup and many others are inhabited by (guess
what?) persons who sometimes get up each others' noses. It goes with
having an opinion. What is laughable is your attempt to squelch
anyone who disagrees with you by calling it a "personal attack"
until you disagree with someone and make a personal attack.
I'm absolutely positive that you won't have a clue or even a
glimmering of understanding of this concept but the fact is all you
have to do is stop using that nonsense in an attempt to stifle
disagreement while you do it yourself to (guess what?) stifle anyone
who disagrees with you.
Here's a clue for you, mate. Don't be a contentious idiot and you
won't suffer personal attacks. Get it?
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:14:25 +1300, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
Oh, I get it, Greg. So do most others here. You cannot moan about
personal attacks when you do them. No matter the reason. You can't
justify personal attacks for you while declaring them unreasonable
for someone else. That's just plain stupid and hypocritical. Is that
what you want others to see you as? Remember, nobody here can sit
down and get to know the real Greg Procter. All we see is what you
present. You might be the nicest guy on the planet but you sure
don't put that image forward here.
The image of Greg that I see is one of a hypocritical crybaby who
pretends to know it all but really doesn't know much at all.
Of course I can. You as a yank surely understand the concept of defence?
Where are these personal attacks you claim come from me? Go back and
analyse them and you'll see they are responses relating to the comments
posted, not to the poster.
Is that a personal attack or a statement relating to the point of
I suggest you don't know the difference, even when I spell it out to you
in the simplest of terms.
If anyone here is stupid enough to judge the quality of my advice purely
on my responses to the likes of you then they don't deserve to receive
Have you any idea of your own image here? Time after time you've
responded to my attempts to give honest advice with derission and
insults - I'm still responding to you in a rational manner - that should
give others a good idea of my character.
I won't bother responding to that.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.