Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[Nally Stand]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

[lawnseed]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

dont think gerry will law her, sinn fein have lawed jao duffy several times over his comments. poor jao bollix comes out of it looking like the victom. better to keep your powder dry and hit her with it during a tv debate when shes on her high horse. ala sean gallagher

[AQMP]

One good thing to come out of this spat is that it seems that at long last "Lost Lives (RTE Edition)" is gaining more entries, but appears still to be a short tome.

[Hardy]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

[Nally Stand]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

[Hardy]

Ah well.

[dec]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

"Another standard response". Another standard response.

[Nally Stand]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

"Another standard response". Another standard response.

Speaking of responses, I haven't heard back from you on:

According to Nally Stand "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion."
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19293.msg962172#msg962172

And the dogs in the street also know that Adams and McGuinness were senior figures in the IRA.

Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

[deiseach]

This is all getting very meta.

[Hardy]

[dec]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

"Another standard response". Another standard response.

Speaking of responses, I haven't heard back from you on:

According to Nally Stand "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion."
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19293.msg962172#msg962172

And the dogs in the street also know that Adams and McGuinness were senior figures in the IRA.

Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

You said "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion" because it is well known that the security forces colluded with loyalist paramilitaries. Gerry Adams was asked about a murder committed by the IRA because it is well known that he was a senior figure in the IRA.

[ranch]

There's a serious obsession with all things Sinn Fein on this site. As for the title of the thread 

[Nally Stand]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

"Another standard response". Another standard response.

Speaking of responses, I haven't heard back from you on:

According to Nally Stand "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion."
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19293.msg962172#msg962172

And the dogs in the street also know that Adams and McGuinness were senior figures in the IRA.

Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

You said "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion" because it is well known that the security forces colluded with loyalist paramilitaries. Gerry Adams was asked about a murder committed by the IRA because it is well known that he was a senior figure in the IRA.

Not realy answering my question there are you. Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

[dec]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

"Another standard response". Another standard response.

Speaking of responses, I haven't heard back from you on:

According to Nally Stand "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion."
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19293.msg962172#msg962172

And the dogs in the street also know that Adams and McGuinness were senior figures in the IRA.

Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

You said "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion" because it is well known that the security forces colluded with loyalist paramilitaries. Gerry Adams was asked about a murder committed by the IRA because it is well known that he was a senior figure in the IRA.

Not realy answering my question there are you. Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

Gerry Adams was a senior member of the IRA. It is entirely reasonable for a journalist to ask him about the activities of the IRA.

[ranch]

So no comment on the murders themselves but blustering outrage at the commentary on the murders.

Standard response there hardy. Don't look at the conflict as a whole, and the context of it. Just pick one victim that suits the agenda and start the whatabouteries, eh.

Ah well, I didn't really expect you t be able to justify such a skewed set of sympathies.

"Ah well". Another standard response.

"Another standard response". Another standard response.

Speaking of responses, I haven't heard back from you on:

According to Nally Stand "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion."
http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=19293.msg962172#msg962172

And the dogs in the street also know that Adams and McGuinness were senior figures in the IRA.

Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

You said "The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion" because it is well known that the security forces colluded with loyalist paramilitaries. Gerry Adams was asked about a murder committed by the IRA because it is well known that he was a senior figure in the IRA.

Not realy answering my question there are you. Me saying that the dogs in the street knew about collusion is a bit different than a journalist at the state broadcaster on live tv making a direct accusation of involvement in the death of a named individual, wouldn't you say???

Gerry Adams was a senior member of the IRA. It is entirely reasonable for a journalist to ask him about the activities of the IRA.

If the evidence of him being in the IRA is so compelling then why hasn't he been charged with membership of an illegal organisation?