Willie Frazer threatens protests and riots if not allowed see Queen in Dublin

[Tubberman]

"Those who think they are serving their community are in fact serving the occupation and will be treated as such," the statement says.

Someone arrest this man, he's in the Real IRA!

Took me a few seconds!

[brokencrossbar1]

EG maybe you are right that Wee Willie is best ignored, the only problem is he gets air time and he is a hate filled, scaremongerer who has a lot of loose cannons.  It would do no harm for him to be hauled in and put through the ringer because what he is spouting repeatedly is bordering on the illegal.  There was no necessity for you to go to the bother of cutting and pasting pictures and postings about other idiots.  And anyway where the f**k did the idea of a definition of "whataboutery" come into it.  That sort of shite is the reason people can't move on and every action defended by someone like you, or Willie by saying well themmuns do it perpetuates the problem ad finitum hence my repetition of the words.  Get over it and stop looking for a fight that isn't there.

[nifan]

Hes a loon and a liability. In an ideal world hed be ignored, but it isnt ideal and some people will be lauding him for "telling it like it is". We saw the sorts that he has attracted before.

Im sure the queen will be awful disappointed if she missed meating him.

[BarryBreensBandage]

Hes a loon and a liability. In an ideal world hed be ignored, but it isnt ideal and some people will be lauding him for "telling it like it is". We saw the sorts that he has attracted before.

Im sure the queen will be awful disappointed if she missed meating him.

Please tell me that is a misspelling of "meeting"? Or is that what they call it these days?

[Evil Genius]

EG maybe you are right that Wee Willie is best ignored, the only problem is he gets air time and he is a hate filled, scaremongerer who has a lot of loose cannons.  It would do no harm for him to be hauled in and put through the ringer because what he is spouting repeatedly is bordering on the illegal.  There was no necessity for you to go to the bother of cutting and pasting pictures and postings about other idiots.

It's quite simple. If you ignore the likes of Frazer, they eventually go away. Would you suggest we take the same approach towards eg the Real IRA?

Which was only the point I was making.

And anyway where the f**k did the idea of a definition of "whataboutery" come into it.  That sort of shite is the reason people can't move on and every action defended by someone like you, or Willie by saying well themmuns do it perpetuates the problem ad finitum hence my repetition of the words.

As for "whataboutery", it was you  who introduced the concept, in order to attack me/my post. I merely pointed out that you don't even understand the term. Sadly, it appears you still  don't.

Get over it and stop looking for a fight that isn't there.

Actually, it is Frazer  who is "looking for a fight that isn't there"

If you could get over your habitual tendancy to attack the messenger, and instead actually address the message, you'd see I'm actually suggesting we don't give him one.

[saffron sam2]

EG maybe you are right that Wee Willie is best ignored, the only problem is he gets air time and he is a hate filled, scaremongerer who has a lot of loose cannons.  It would do no harm for him to be hauled in and put through the ringer because what he is spouting repeatedly is bordering on the illegal.  There was no necessity for you to go to the bother of cutting and pasting pictures and postings about other idiots.

It's quite simple. If you ignore the likes of Frazer, they eventually go away. Would you suggest we take the same approach towards eg the Real IRA?

Which was only the point I was making.

And anyway where the f**k did the idea of a definition of "whataboutery" come into it.  That sort of shite is the reason people can't move on and every action defended by someone like you, or Willie by saying well themmuns do it perpetuates the problem ad finitum hence my repetition of the words.

As for "whataboutery", it was you  who introduced the concept, in order to attack me/my post. I merely pointed out that you don't even understand the term. Sadly, it appears you still  don't.

Get over it and stop looking for a fight that isn't there.

Actually, it is Frazer  who is "looking for a fight that isn't there"

If you could get over your habitual tendancy to attack the messenger, and instead actually address the message, you'd see I'm actually suggesting we don't give him one.

Not sure you'd get any takers though regardless.

[johnneycool]

I'll not be standing in his way if he wants to go see Queen Elizabeth II of England. I hope he gets a front row seat as hopefully there'll not be too many Irish men and women in front of him.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

"Whataboutery" is where someone tries to defend their (or someone else's) wrongdoing, even claim that it is not wrong at all, on the basis that someone else did something worse.

Which is exactly what you did above, albeit in a rather circuitous way (claiming that Frazer might say... yeah, right).

Yep, I couldn't be arsed commenting on the wee bollix's latest lunatic ravings, but you do present such an irresistible target most times you post! 

[lynchbhoy]

But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout, But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,But whatabout, but whatabout, but whatabout,

indeed it is - but did you expect anything else from that source !
the usual whataboutery and lond winded nothingness !

[Farrandeelin]

Let him down to meet the queen and blow the two of them up together.

[red hander]

Willie should be fired out of a canon and lauched directly into Queen Elizibeths hotel room to great her on her return. (well thats what I'd tell him when I am pushing his head into the canon!)

Myles, in light of the sex scandals that have engulfed the Catholic Church in recent years, I don't think you should be encouraging such shocking practices involving members of the priesthood and vile little loyalist bigots 

[mountainboii]

Let him down to meet the queen and blow the two of them up together.

LOLZ!!!! Good one, that one there.

[Evil Genius]

"Whataboutery" is where someone tries to defend their (or someone else's) wrongdoing, even claim that it is not wrong at all, on the basis that someone else did something worse.

Which is exactly what you did above, albeit in a rather circuitous way (claiming that Frazer might say... yeah, right).

Here is the sequence:
1. Frazer "goes off on one" (via a Press Release to a newspaper etc);
2. Broken Crossbar states he should be arrested etc;
3. I point out that doing so would (a ) be a waste of time/resources, (b ) would demonstrate a skewed sense of priorities when eg the Real IRA go unchallenged etc; and (c ) would give a spurious "credibility" to Frazer's agenda;
4. On that basis, I formed the opinion he should not be arrested.

In other words, I was contesting Broken Crossbar's original point about the need to arrest him etc.

How does any of that constitute defending what Frazer originally said?

[imtommygunn]

(b ) would demonstrate a skewed sense of priorities when eg the Real IRA go unchallenged etc

How do they go unchallenged? The perpetrators haven't been caught which is hardly unchallenged. That's a bit of a slight on the PSNI there.

It is hardly a skewed sense of priorities when they arrest someone for breaking the law - do you expect that they down tools and don't arrest anyone for any crime until the real IRA are caught?

Poor poor post with little rationale except to just try and mention other "side" wrongdoings to try and get some cheap digs in.

[Evil Genius]

(b ) would demonstrate a skewed sense of priorities when eg the Real IRA go unchallenged etc

How do they go unchallenged? The perpetrators haven't been caught which is hardly unchallenged. That's a bit of a slight on the PSNI there.

I was referring to the recent "Commemoration" in Derry, where the Real IRA were able to stage a paramilitary display without being challenged by the Security Forces, that's how.
And unless they (PSNI) were instructed to take no action by the Secretary of State (or someone), which is always a possibility, then I consider that to be a dereliction* of duty by them.
And such dereliction would be further heightened were they to arrest gombeens like Frazer for his latest rant, as Broken Crossbar advocates.


* - Or were you not disturbed, even outraged, at the sight of vermin like the Real IRA being able to publicly threaten more murders like that of Const. Kerr?

It is hardly a skewed sense of priorities when they arrest someone for breaking the law - do you expect that they down tools and don't arrest anyone for any crime until the real IRA are caught?

No.

Nor may that be reasonably inferred from my posts, either.

Poor poor post with little rationale except to just try and mention other "side" wrongdoings to try and get some cheap digs in.

Who do you mean by "the other side", then?
I had hoped we were all on the same side when it comes to the Real IRA 
And whilst you may disagree with it, I fail to see how my original point (i.e. that it's best to ignore Frazer, until he goes away) constitutes a "cheap dig" at anyone (except, perhaps, Frazer himself?).

Sadly, you appear to be yet another of those Members of this Board who only have to see my name on a post  to automatically ascribe a (pre-conceived) position or motive towards me, without bothering to read or understand what it is I'm actually saying.