Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - BennyCake

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 381
1
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 17, 2018, 09:06:47 PM »
Jesus benny you are on one man crusade against Harte. Christ get a life. Do something productive with your time instead stalking the board

One post about Harte = one man crusade? Riiiighhht  :o

2
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 17, 2018, 07:32:12 PM »
The religious stuff is disgusting carry-on by Harte.

Complete abuse of his position.

As was him meeting the players after Tyrone being knocked out to discuss future plans, before his contract was renewed.

3
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 17, 2018, 07:26:21 PM »
Do you genuinely believe all the Tyrone players want to go to mass and say the rosary etc.?
And if the answer is 'No', then do you think any individual player would feel free to opt out?
I went to mass every Sunday when I was a child.
NEVER wanted to be there and when I said it to my parents later in life they said, "Sure no one was forcing you to go".
Technically that's true, but if the assumption has always been that you will go and everyone else is going too, are you likely to turn around to your parents and say, "Actually, I don't fancy this religion stuff at all".
There is an implicit power imbalance here.
All the power resides with Mickey Harte in this equation.
If you made the panel after slogging your guts out and you're desperately trying to break into the first XV, are you going to turn around to Mickey and say, "Count me out of this stuff"?
Mickey may well be fine with that, but that's not the point.
You're presenting the player with a difficult choice he should never have to make about something that has absolutely nothing to do with sport.
Would you take the risk that opting out of mass, the rosary etc. will put a black mark against your name?


That's funny. Sean Boylan did exactly the same with Meath and won 4 All Irelands doing it. They've won nothing since he was ousted.

https://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-football/many-of-the-meath-team-had-gyms-then-they-were-called-farms-26212721.html

Quote
One big advantage we had at the time was that the routine changed little for many years. We had a kick around on Saturday evenings before all big games, attended Mass and went home to our own beds. Most of our matches were in Croke Park so Sunday was basically the same, whether the game was an early championship outing or the final.

a) I'd imagine all of those players were regular mass-goers, as most of the country was back then.
b) Regardless of that, I still don't agree with it.
'What we used to do' doesn't really cut the mustard as an argument.
The Captains don't kiss the bishops ring before games anymore and the mere idea that they ever did is laughable in this day and age.
Times change, attitudes change.

Jaysus thon was a weird tradition alright

4
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 17, 2018, 07:22:48 PM »
Would be some craic if the next Tyrone senior mens football manager after Mickey Harte is a Jehovas Witness where all members of the playing panel get free monthly copies of The Watchtower and are asked from time to time to accompany him (or her) going around knocking on people's doors.

How many Bob Dylan tracks did everyone else spot here? :D

5
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 17, 2018, 09:02:22 AM »
The game is taken too serious. Players devote most of their lives, even to club football. ROared on by a demented manager making a name for himself and a brown envelope in his back pocket, getting boys to climb redwood trees and pulling monster trucks in the chapel car park. Players end up doing anything to gain success and lose sight of what's fair, honourable and sportsmanlike. So we end up with lads taken to hospital, broken jaws, lost teeth etc.

There is no outlet for your average club player, those who can't/won't devote the time/effort to play elite club football. No place for recreational football, just for the craic. Where the stakes are low, and boys are lining out for the enjoyment, to stay fit and the comradeship.

The GAA go on about the drop off after minor level. The main reason for it isn't lack of interest in the game. It's that people just can't commit to crazy schedules just to play club football.

6
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 16, 2018, 08:44:32 PM »
Apparently he fell to the ground and when he was on the ground an opposition player "dropped the 2 knees" on him.

Ahh, he learned from the master.

7
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 16, 2018, 07:28:08 PM »
And these are the same boys saying rosaries!

8
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 16, 2018, 03:30:01 PM »
ADRIANNN!!!

Sorry couldn't help it.

Looks a nasty one alright. Them Tyrone boys, eh?

9
GAA Discussion / Re: Gaelic Football RIP
« on: September 14, 2018, 03:54:38 PM »
No place for Paidi? No hardier bucko than him.

10
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 14, 2018, 03:27:51 PM »
I know this was nothing new, but the stuff on Mass and the Rosary for me is something that the Tyrone CB should be looking very strongly at.  Totally inappropriate given the message it sends out to those with other faiths and none, that have an interest in playing Gaelic Football.
Noticed an reference to this elsewhere, so took a quick look to see what the reaction was on this forum.

Frankly, I'm shocked - though not surprised - that this particular aspect of Cavanagh's book doesn't merit a thread of its own (or at least some comment from more than one or two individuals).

I mean, is no-one else astonished, even outraged, that a team manager could get away with imposing his personal religious leanings on an entire team, to the exclusion of those who may feel differently?

i read a lot of stuff about sledging and foul play etc, but there is at least some possible redress (referee) or comeback (retaliation) to those things, but what can someone on the Tyrone panel who doesn't agree say or do to this? Speak out and never play for the county again?

And all that's BEFORE you get to the context of sport and society in  NI.

Could you imagine the shitstorm if eg the Linfield manager required his players eg to take part in some sort of Orange Order parade, or British armed forces commemoration, or attend a Free Presbyterian service?

It would be roundly and publicly condemned, with the governing body clamping down immediately, and QUITE RIGHTLY too, imo. In fact, it's unthinkable. (And I say that as someone who pretty much despises Linfield, btw).

"GAA For All (Protestants need not apply)"

I don't think your comparisons to OO are correct. But in general your point is. Harte should not be forcing his players to attend mass or say the Rosary or anything like that. But Harte is a bully and unfortunately a successful Bully which means his methods are beyond question from many in Tyrone. Do Tyrone have any protestants playing for them? Probably unlikely they will if this is what is going on. I think Ulster GAA or national GAA should put some sort of ban or at least a statement out saying this is not acceptable.

That was my thinking. If a promising Protestant player was called up for Tyrone, would he be put off by hearing about the rosary thing? I suspect he might be. And who would blame him?

That's it Benny - but its not just Tyrone that would be affected.  It is the whole of the GAA in Ulster that derives this image from Harte's actions.

Yes I agree. This can do as much harm to the GAA image, as a Protestant player getting sectarian abuse on the field.

11
GAA Discussion / Re: Paul Kimmage interviews Sean Cavanagh
« on: September 14, 2018, 03:16:13 PM »
I know this was nothing new, but the stuff on Mass and the Rosary for me is something that the Tyrone CB should be looking very strongly at.  Totally inappropriate given the message it sends out to those with other faiths and none, that have an interest in playing Gaelic Football.
Noticed an reference to this elsewhere, so took a quick look to see what the reaction was on this forum.

Frankly, I'm shocked - though not surprised - that this particular aspect of Cavanagh's book doesn't merit a thread of its own (or at least some comment from more than one or two individuals).

I mean, is no-one else astonished, even outraged, that a team manager could get away with imposing his personal religious leanings on an entire team, to the exclusion of those who may feel differently?

i read a lot of stuff about sledging and foul play etc, but there is at least some possible redress (referee) or comeback (retaliation) to those things, but what can someone on the Tyrone panel who doesn't agree say or do to this? Speak out and never play for the county again?

And all that's BEFORE you get to the context of sport and society in  NI.

Could you imagine the shitstorm if eg the Linfield manager required his players eg to take part in some sort of Orange Order parade, or British armed forces commemoration, or attend a Free Presbyterian service?

It would be roundly and publicly condemned, with the governing body clamping down immediately, and QUITE RIGHTLY too, imo. In fact, it's unthinkable. (And I say that as someone who pretty much despises Linfield, btw).

"GAA For All (Protestants need not apply)"

I don't think your comparisons to OO are correct. But in general your point is. Harte should not be forcing his players to attend mass or say the Rosary or anything like that. But Harte is a bully and unfortunately a successful Bully which means his methods are beyond question from many in Tyrone. Do Tyrone have any protestants playing for them? Probably unlikely they will if this is what is going on. I think Ulster GAA or national GAA should put some sort of ban or at least a statement out saying this is not acceptable.

That was my thinking. If a promising Protestant player was called up for Tyrone, would he be put off by hearing about the rosary thing? I suspect he might be. And who would blame him?

12
General discussion / Re: 9/11 What really happened to WT7?
« on: September 14, 2018, 03:04:59 PM »
A building doesn't fall into it's own footprint unless it's been wired with explosives.

13
General discussion / Re: 9/11 What really happened to WT7?
« on: September 14, 2018, 01:30:20 PM »
Building 7 was not hit by any plane.
The Fire commander leading the fight on the day, said that "the fires in WTC 7 were under control and only needed 2 teams to put it out". He called for the area command to assign the teams to fight the fire. They started to put the fires out, only to be told after half an hour to abandon their positions, and evacuate the building. They argued with the commanders that the fires were almost out, but the commanders radioed they had to evacuate immediately as the building was going to collapse and trap them in it. They radioed back saying they (The commanders) were talking rubbish as there was very little damage to the building and there was no way a collapse was imminent. They were then told not to argue but to evacuate immediately. Leave everything, run. About 5 minutes after evacuating the building it collapsed symmetrically to the ground into it's own footprint.
There are dozens of videos on YTube where firemen talk about what they heard and saw, as they evacuated the building. They describe hearing dozens of explosions from the top of the building on every floor all the way to the bottom. They also describe these explosions as exactly like a demolition.
None of this was ever mentioned in the NIST reports, where they completely ignored any and all testimony regarding explosions, not just in building seven but WTC 1 and 2.

As for the assertion that  multiple structural steel support beams were sheered by an Aluminum can, I guess we will never know because the evidence of what happened to the steel was never gathered due to the steel being removed immediately from the scene of the crime. Removal of evidence from a crime scene is a capital offence btw. Coverup anyone....

Building 7 was hit by debris from the collapse of the north tower and the cause of its collapse is well documented and understood.

Your crazy description makes it sound like even commanders in the NY fire department were in on the conspiracy. It'd be easier for you tinfoil hat-wearing people to list who you think is not involved.

Debris, eh? Fires, eh?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cK2TTl6LAnk

14
General discussion / Re: 9/11 What really happened to WT7?
« on: September 13, 2018, 03:54:57 PM »
There is no comparison between allegations of collusion in the wee six and the 9/11 conspiracy theories.
You canít compare 9/11 to collusion in the north as the British are well capable of such atrocities against Irish nationalists 

And yet the fact remains that in the early years of the conflict, the notion that the British state was colluding in the assassinations of Irish citizens WAS deemed a conspiracy theory. It's very easy to say now, purely with the benefit of hindsight, that it's not a fair comparison with contemporary conspiracy theories. But to my mind the real reason you lads are saying it's not a 'fair' comparison is because the collusion one was proven to have been true - possibly to a greater extent that anyone even anticipated - and that makes it hard to square it with what are regarded today as outlandish theories surrounding other events, due to the outlandish nature of them. But that's the essence of conspiracy theories. They are generally outlandish. That the collusion one has since been vindicated doesn't mean it was any less of a sneered at as an outlandish conspiracy theory in the early days. Hindsight should show that some previously termed 'outlandish conspiracy theories' can, occasionally, turn out to be true.

P.S. My initial post was not necessarily intended as a comparison with 9/11. It was in response to 'Trailer' who asked for an example of a conspiracy theory which turned out to be true, since he didn't appear to believe there was such any such examples.

Translation - there are no outlandish conspiracy theories that have ever turned out to be proven true, but here's the time the British colluded and if you argue against this as a conspiracy theory you're siding with them.

I was really hoping for something like the Illuminate rigging the All Stars in 1984.

Define "proven to be true". I mean, are you waiting for CNN to report that the Bush administration carried out 9/11 or the CIA shot JFK? Or the BBC to report that the Brits colluded with loyalists to murder Pat Finucane or Miami show band?

They'll never admit such things, meaning theyll always be classed as conspiracy theories. And because they're still looked upon as conspiracy theiries, you're a nutjob if you believe them.

The mainstream media tell us what is a conspiracy theory is and what's not. Anything they don't want you to know the truth about, is a conspiracy/fake news.

15
General discussion / Re: 9/11 What really happened to WT7?
« on: September 13, 2018, 01:38:12 PM »
Building 7 was not hit by any plane.
The Fire commander leading the fight on the day, said that "the fires in WTC 7 were under control and only needed 2 teams to put it out". He called for the area command to assign the teams to fight the fire. They started to put the fires out, only to be told after half an hour to abandon their positions, and evacuate the building. They argued with the commanders that the fires were almost out, but the commanders radioed they had to evacuate immediately as the building was going to collapse and trap them in it. They radioed back saying they (The commanders) were talking rubbish as there was very little damage to the building and there was no way a collapse was imminent. They were then told not to argue but to evacuate immediately. Leave everything, run. About 5 minutes after evacuating the building it collapsed symmetrically to the ground into it's own footprint.
There are dozens of videos on YTube where firemen talk about what they heard and saw, as they evacuated the building. They describe hearing dozens of explosions from the top of the building on every floor all the way to the bottom. They also describe these explosions as exactly like a demolition.
None of this was ever mentioned in the NIST reports, where they completely ignored any and all testimony regarding explosions, not just in building seven but WTC 1 and 2.

As for the assertion that  multiple structural steel support beams were sheered by an Aluminum can, I guess we will never know because the evidence of what happened to the steel was never gathered due to the steel being removed immediately from the scene of the crime. Removal of evidence from a crime scene is a capital offence btw. Coverup anyone....

This is just f**king bananas. Take a break from the internet lad.
Don't think it's that far-fetched myself

Saying that the American government blew up Building 7 is not far fetched? You're on a level with Willie Frazier and Jim Corr. Good company.

Worth noting that Willie Frazer (among plenty of others) maintained that state collusion was a conspiracy theory. There are still those who would accuse you of mad conspiracy theories for suggesting that the British State orchestrated the slaughter of innocent civilians in Dublin & Monaghan in May 1974, for instance.

I'm not suggesting I necessarily believe the 9/11 conspiracy theories, but if the world was made up solely of people who sneered at every seemingly outlandish conspiracy theory, it would be a dangerous world where states could get away with a lot more than what we already now know they have been up to.

Exactly. It's like Bush said once, telling people not to believe these conspiracy theories... You're either with us or you're with the terrorists. So you're not a proper American if you question 9/11. Clever propaganda line.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 381