Reply to: aye, and my arse farts butterfies

[Eirikur]

Why are we talking about something which happened 30 years ago?

Only a week or two back a couple of IRA gunmen killed a 30 year old reporter in cold blood and with absolutely no remorse.

They are fooking animals and need to be treated as such.

Says a bre**eer who often keep comparing the effort of WW2 with B**it, only that was 75 years ago

[SimonMac]

I more pictured them skipping hand in hand through the streets of Leeds. What caused such a vivid image to go into your head? Oh yes, wishful thinking.

Cue -ve rep from SM, which will make my think my joke will be very accurate.....

I don't give -ve rep (other than to MF)

[meridian]

So why do you consistently refuse to answer the question?

Because you accused me of it before asking, and haven’t yet withdrawn the accusation.

Once you withdraw the accusation I will be happy to answer the question, if it really bothers you that much to know.

[Yorkie62]

For someone professing to be extremely qualified in your day job, you’re extraordinarily obtuse in understanding that explaining WHY things are, does not mean COMFORT or CONTENTMENT with the way things are.

So why do you consistently refuse to answer the question?

Sent from my SM-G955F using Contractor UK Forum mobile app

[meridian]

aye, and my arse farts butterfies

So as you say, you appear to be content that members of the British Armed forces can be prosecuted but IRA terrorist can't. The British Armed forces are currently being prosecuted on OLD evidence, but IRA terrorist cannot be prosecuted using OLD evidence. Are you happy and content with the fairness and justice in that position?

For someone professing to be extremely qualified in your day job, you’re extraordinarily obtuse in understanding that explaining WHY things are, does not mean COMFORT or CONTENTMENT with the way things are.

[Yorkie62]

Okay, so you’re going to ignore showing where I have “comfort” with that. Fine, let’s deal with the rest of your post then.



Just the IRA? Does it? Or all paramilitaries?




Yes they were sent. And you know, of course, that the Secretary of State for NI at the time, Theresa Villiers, sent out new letters afterwards advising that the original ones were legally incorrect and that they could face prosecution if there was enough evidence to bring charges?

As for why the British Army were not also exempted in the GFA, ask yourself why this might be so. Do you think there might be any other international Laws, Treaties, or Conventions (maybe one signed in Geneva) that don’t allow armies of national governments to be protected from crimes?

So as you say, you appear to be content that members of the British Armed forces can be prosecuted but IRA terrorist can't. The British Armed forces are currently being prosecuted on OLD evidence, but IRA terrorist cannot be prosecuted using OLD evidence. Are you happy and content with the fairness and justice in that position?

Sent from my SM-G955F using Contractor UK Forum mobile app

[meridian]

Okay, so you’re going to ignore showing where I have “comfort” with that. Fine, let’s deal with the rest of your post then.

It is written into the Good Friday agreement that all previous activities by IRA terrorists are immune from prosecution.

Just the IRA? Does it? Or all paramilitaries?

Each known IRA terrorist was sent a "comfort letter" by the UK government at the time (Labour under Tony Blair) giving the immunity as demanded as part of the Good Friday agreement by the IRA ruling council of the time.

Yes they were sent. And you know, of course, that the Secretary of State for NI at the time, Theresa Villiers, sent out new letters afterwards advising that the original ones were legally incorrect and that they could face prosecution if there was enough evidence to bring charges?

As for why the British Army were not also exempted in the GFA, ask yourself why this might be so. Do you think there might be any other international Laws, Treaties, or Conventions (maybe one signed in Geneva) that don’t allow armies of national governments to be protected from crimes?

[Yorkie62]

You haven’t explained your leap at all. Show me where I’m “quite content” that one side gets immunity but the other doesn’t, or withdraw your accusation.

Then we can have a proper conversation about the apparent discrepancies in the GFA.

It is written into the Good Friday agreement that all previous activities by IRA terrorists are immune from prosecution. Each known IRA terrorist was sent a "comfort letter" by the UK government at the time (Labour under Tony Blair) giving the immunity as demanded as part of the Good Friday agreement by the IRA ruling council of the time.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Contractor UK Forum mobile app

[meridian]

So. You are quite content that IRA terrorists get immunity from prosecution under the Good Friday agreement but British solders do not?

But is does show the bias of the Good Friday agreement. IRA terrorists have immunity from prosecution under the Good Friday agreement so why should the same not be extended to members of the Britsh Armed Forces?

You asked me to explain my leap and there you have to in your own quote. Perhaps you would now like to answer my original question.

You haven’t explained your leap at all. Show me where I’m “quite content” that one side gets immunity but the other doesn’t, or withdraw your accusation.

Then we can have a proper conversation about the apparent discrepancies in the GFA.

[Yorkie62]

Show me one quote here where I have tried to protect or rationalise a group of people.

Note for the hard of comprehension: Holding an inquest into why certain soldiers did a certain thing on a certain day, is not “protecting or rationalising” the actions of another group of people.

But is does show the bias of the Good Friday agreement. IRA terrorists have immunity from prosecution under the Good Friday agreement so why should the same not be extended to members of the Britsh Armed Forces?

You asked me to explain my leap and there you have to in your own quote. Perhaps you would now like to answer my original question.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Contractor UK Forum mobile app

[meridian]

I do not understand why you are trying to protect or rationalise a group of people who start a fight if they do not get to dress in a certain colour and walk down a certain street - because they have always done it and the only reason they do it is to spark conflict.

An abolsute fooking joke - small minded petty people doing small minded petty things.

Show me one quote here where I have tried to protect or rationalise a group of people.

Note for the hard of comprehension: Holding an inquest into why certain soldiers did a certain thing on a certain day, is not “protecting or rationalising” the actions of another group of people.

[original PM]

Because...

I do not understand why you are trying to protect or rationalise a group of people who start a fight if they do not get to dress in a certain colour and walk down a certain street - because they have always done it and the only reason they do it is to spark conflict.

An abolsute fooking joke - small minded petty people doing small minded petty things.

[BrilloPad]

Why are we talking about something which happened 30 years ago?

Only a week or two back a couple of IRA gunmen killed a 30 year old reporter in cold blood and with absolutely no remorse.

They are fooking animals and need to be treated as such.

oPM for PM!

[meridian]

aye, and my arse farts butterfies

Why are we talking about something which happened 30 years ago?

Because a crime may or may not have been committed, and there are people passionate enough about it to pursue it.

Only a week or two back a couple of IRA gunmen killed a 30 year old reporter

Correct.

in cold blood and with absolutely no remorse.

We don’t know that yet. Does that description also apply to the soldiers in the inquest?

They are fooking animals and need to be treated as such.

Who are you describing as “they”, and what relevance does that have to civilians being shot?

Be careful here - if you’re suggesting that an entire group of people should be treated as animals because of the actions of a few, then that could easily be applied to the British Army...

[original PM]

Why are we talking about something which happened 30 years ago?

Only a week or two back a couple of IRA gunmen killed a 30 year old reporter in cold blood and with absolutely no remorse.

They are fooking animals and need to be treated as such.