President McAleese Heckled as she visits Primary in Coleraine

[his holiness nb]

Fair enough, but its by no means a big leap to go from "certain posters, who would be the first on here to comment were this behaviour displayed by the Nationalist community, strangely decided to sit this one out" to the implication that they might approve or at the very least be much less outraged than if it had been the other side involved.

Its a big leap indeed to go from that to accusing them of approving.
To suggest they were less outraged than they would pretend to be were it nationalists, well, I dont think thats too unreasonable.

Or do you feel they are as quick to point out unionists behaving badly as much as they do nationalists?
I'm not talking the token "of course I abhor this from any side, blah blah" disclaimer thrown in every now and then. I'm talking in general.

[nifan]

Can you point out who "they" are?

[his holiness nb]

Can you point out who "they" are?

not you anyway Nifan 

Was thinking of EG and Sammy specifically.
Not all Unionist posters or anything of the sort.

[Rav67]

In fairness I haven't noticed either of them 2 on the past few days, really it's not that big an issue anyway.  It was a relatively small collection of people without an ounce of sense between them, I don't care how snobby I sound but I went to school there and had a few jobs in Coleraine and overall the intelligence levels aren't too high down there believe me!  I'm not sure if McAleese's stupid and offensive comments after the holocaust memorial contributed to getting people out to protest but it certainly gives certain people an excuse.  I'd be more annoyed about Jim Allister's comments about McAleese, really childish and bitter from an elected representative.

[his holiness nb]

In fairness I haven't noticed either of them 2 on the past few days]

Fair enough, I take it back so.
I still them them two are dodgy though 

[ziggysego]

Sammy did say that he was experiencing computer problems lately, so he could be still experiencing them.

As for EG.. who knows.

[orangeman]

Her advisors should have told her not to go near this joint !

[MW]

It says a lot that MW's only post was to correct someones grammer and not comment on the protestors themselves.

"it says a lot" that you only took me to task , eh?

Not really, you were the only one who did this. What should I take the other posters to task for?? 

Have a look back at the posts of Surreal Steve, Shamrock Shore and Bogball XV on the first page. Then ask yourself why you decided to single me out.

[Bogball XV]

It says a lot that MW's only post was to correct someones grammer and not comment on the protestors themselves.

"it says a lot" that you only took me to task , eh?

Not really, you were the only one who did this. What should I take the other posters to task for?? 

Have a look back at the posts of Surreal Steve, Shamrock Shore and Bogball XV on the first page. Then ask yourself why you decided to single me out.

My post wasn't trying to correct anyone's grammar, I was only trying to best answer a query put forward by another poster

[MW]

It says a lot that MW's only post was to correct someones grammer and not comment on the protestors themselves.

"it says a lot" that you only took me to task , eh?

Not really, you were the only one who did this. What should I take the other posters to task for?? 

Have a look back at the posts of Surreal Steve, Shamrock Shore and Bogball XV on the first page. Then ask yourself why you decided to single me out.

My post wasn't trying to correct anyone's grammar, I was only trying to best answer a query put forward by another poster

Meh, sush you

[J70]

Fair enough, but its by no means a big leap to go from "certain posters, who would be the first on here to comment were this behaviour displayed by the Nationalist community, strangely decided to sit this one out" to the implication that they might approve or at the very least be much less outraged than if it had been the other side involved.

Its a big leap indeed to go from that to accusing them of approving.
To suggest they were less outraged than they would pretend to be were it nationalists, well, I dont think thats too unreasonable.

Or do you feel they are as quick to point out unionists behaving badly as much as they do nationalists?
I'm not talking the token "of course I abhor this from any side, blah blah" disclaimer thrown in every now and then. I'm talking in general.

As I said, I accept that it wasn't your intention to imply that, but it is nevertheless an easy implication to make, absent your clarification. Obviously what is considered an implication can depend on the person interpreting what has been written.

[SammyG]

Can you point out who "they" are?

not you anyway Nifan 

Was thinking of EG and Sammy specifically.
Not all Unionist posters or anything of the sort.

I love this site, no matter how many times I post and say that I'm not on at the minute, the next time I log on there's always somebody accusing me of something.

For the umpteenth time, I'm working in a customers office, so I can't get the site from work at the minute, so I can only log on now and again. It's nice that you all miss me but I'm alright really. 

[stiffler]

[/quote]

I love this site, no matter how many times I post and say that I'm not on at the minute, the next time I log on there's always somebody accusing me of something.

[/quote]

Are you on the drink Sammy? that statement makes a load of sense. 

[Yes I Would]

Thats it Sammy cant live with ya! cant live without ya!!

[SammyG]

I love this site, no matter how many times I post and say that I'm not on at the minute, the next time I log on there's always somebody accusing me of something.

[/quote]

Are you on the drink Sammy? that statement makes a load of sense. 
[/quote]

That should have read I'm not on much at the minute.