QuoteKeep on throwing out meaningless chirps, to hide your seeming inability to deal with the substance.Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
I thought we'd been through this.
Lee Camp never played for Northern Ireland, whilst harbouring ongoing ambitions to represent another Assocation at senior international level.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Keep on throwing out meaningless chirps, to hide your seeming inability to deal with the substance.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Hmm, if you say so....
More like you keep repeating the same contradictions & factual errors which is tedious enough in itself.
Last edited by ArdeeBhoy; 22/08/2011 at 3:47 PM.
It seems you are unwilling to, or incapable of, highlightling these "contradictions" and "factual errors" you speak of.
You're good at the "you're wrong" and "keep digging" stuff, but don't ever substatiate such comments - that's a shame really.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Lee Camp is playing for NI as a second choice, occupying a space that you feel should be reserved for those who see NI as first choice. Stop whinging about the denial and deprivation of dreams if you're willing to accept it at senior level.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
None of which counters/negates these sentiments, which you appear to be unable to grasp.
"Players in our under age set up who harbour realistic ambitions of switching to another Association at senior international level should be weeded out.
Our underage teams should be geared towards players who wish to progress and represent Northern Ireland at senior international level".
I really can't be any clearer than that.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Except I (and more importantly numerous others) have done. You just choose toignore certain responses.
And certain points are so obvious eg. SF voters, except to the average passing ostrich or completely paranoid, they don't need substantiating...
Oh. my. god.
PS: Disappointed this forum has no smiley smashing his head off a wall.
I do my best to answer challenges as honestly as I can.Except I (and more importantly numerous others) have done. You just choose to
And certain points are so obvious eg. SF voters, except to the average passing ostrich or completely paranoid, they don't need substantiating...
I believe there are, indeed, completely panarnoid passing ostriches commenting on the thread - but I'm not one of them.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
What I have expressed is not an attempt to counter what you have said there. You are the one who is dodging the sentiment I raise. The problem I have is that you appear to be so worked up about those such as McClean/Duffy who are said to be denying dreams at underage level, but are willing to accept those English born lads who are also arguably (certainly, if the notion is to be taken seriously) denying dreams.
It completely undermines the alleged moral high-ground that many among the NI fanbase are trying to claim to support them.
Thanks for the insight awec, you rarely let us down. Well done.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
The fundamental difference between the two cases (and it is a fundamental difference, however you look at it) is that in the case of the former, they are denying another player a place in a squad / team despite being unwilling to represent NI at senior level, while those in the latter category are denying others a place in the team /squad because of their willingness to represent NI at senior level.
So denials all round then??
Not to worry. Don't even mention it. I hadn't been the issue, thank God.
You've caught me somewhat tired and cranky this morn, however, and I do resent your running deceit with regard to this matter, along with the insincere accusation of paranoia you've since thrown at me. Rather than thinking of it as paranoid, think of it as being not completely pig-****ing-thick when I perceive this to be a shot directed at myself along with your attempted smoke-machine defence of the reference to James McClean as a "provo" as an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has bothered following your brazen efforts to obfuscate the issue and worm your way around it.
I'll interpret that as an admission that the reference to McClean as a "provo" was inappropriate then...McClean is not "a Provo", on the basis that I don't believe him to be a member of the Provisional Movement.
And in case there's still some unwillingness on your part to acknowledge this, or a residual confusion as to why it was inappropriate - although I suspect it's more likely you're just playing dumb here - it was absolutely not because the idiot who disparaged McClean would and should have been "more accurate" in referring to an open Sinn Féin supporter as a "Provo/Provisional Movement supporter", a twisted and irrelevant straw man you've since spent a number of pages attempting to erect. We all know that was not the connotation behind the label used as it was on OWC. It was inappropriate for the following number of reasons; don't necessarily think of them as exhaustive.
Sinn Féin refer to themselves officially as just that; Sinn Féin. Note the missing word/letter. You won't find one mention of the word "Provisional" on their home page. They also outline the following in an introductory document:
Couldn’t be more clear.The Sinn Fein which emerged in 1970 - popularly known at the time as 'Provisional' Sinn Fein - was to evolve through the '70s and ' 80s to the party we know today.
The PIRA are effectively defunct as an organisation and have been for a number of years. Take your pick from since either 1997 or 2005; whichever you prefer. Republican Sinn Féin, in terming themselves as they do, officially do any necessary distinguishing from Sinn Féin for you in their own title, thereby making it wholly surplus to requirements for you or anyone else to continue referring to Sinn Féin as "PSF". There is no ambiguity in the simple use of Sinn Féin nowadays. It is especially unnecessary outside of an intra-republican context where the two organisations aren't even being discussed at once, if even extra clarification would be necessary within such a context, except to also make some political point. Everyone knows who Sinn Féin are and to which organisation one would be referring when using that title. And do you really believe that RSF are a genuine political force or anything other than a peripheral organisation within contemporary Irish republicanism, never mind Irish politics generally? Or was your reference to their apparent increasing strength merely another attempt to further lead us down the garden path; to pretend that they have a level of popularity and influence (indeed miniscule in reality) approaching something that might even nearly challenge Sinn Féin's claim over the Sinn Féin title, thereby invoking some need for disambiguation? The whole need for distinction by use of "Provisional" or "P" has become redundant with time, yet you still try to hoodwink myself and others here that you adhere to the strict use of a completely superfluous and outmoded distinction at all times. Are we supposed to believe that you genuinely fear people might think you're actually referring to a virtual non-entity when you mention Sinn Féin without a prefix? I certainly don’t.
It is fairly obvious that anyone who derisively dubs someone a "provo" in the current political climate is doing so to make a snide political point. In the context of OWC, it was so obviously anything but neutral and was loaded with contemptuous and slanderous innuendo that I can't believe you're still trying to defend it via unrelenting faux-denial. I mean, why else would anyone even mention the term if not to make some cheap point? Could you imagine Sinn Féin assembly members being referred to as "provos" by their unionist counterparts up in Stormont? Of course not. Well, OK, I admit I wouldn’t put it past the likes of Jim Allister, but other than that...
Have a read of this: http://www.tuv.org.uk/press-releases...-provo-victory
A story about the proposed conflict resolution centre on the old Maze site, and it's even tagged under "terrorism". It's abundantly clear the baggage the term "provo" carries in unionist circles, especially eccentric ones.
You’d think I was having a laugh if I started insulting you with various slurs that might be offensive to a unionist in certain contexts and then made it worse by blaming your sensitivity and paranoia for you taking offence because, after all, a unionist is exactly what you are. It'd be the height of ignorance and denial on my part. You surely must be aware that certain labels can have different meanings when used within different contexts and, depending on the intent behind them, might be considered pejorative in certain scenarios but not in others. I go back to the famous distinction between a white man referring to a black man as a "n*gger" and a black man referring a black man as a "n*gger". You think it would be acceptable for the white man to turn around and feign ignorance to the black man claiming, "But how can you get all worked up about this when a n*gger is exactly what you are?" You grew up in a region dogged by violent political conflict where verbal nuance was a public necessity in order to ensure various identities and sensitivities were respected, for God’s sake! It is important that unionists relinquish any last vestiges of that infamous culture of denial y'know.
Now, it would help if you acknowledged what you've been doing.
Subtle. Only some of them then, aye?Nor do I consider all supporters of the Provisional Movement to be "*******s".
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 23/08/2011 at 9:47 AM.
That's obvious. However, there is absolutely no difference between the two cases when it comes to the notion of "dream-snatching".
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
Think of cries of dream-snatching as emotive masks to conceal self-interest when it suits.
I've been coming to that conclusion all right. Just like the fairness argument.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
If your entire argument is only that they are both 'dream-snatching', without any interest whatsoever in any context which might make one seem acceptable and the other acceptable, then you are right, but only in the sense and to the extent that every footballer in the world who has earned an international cap, is 'dream-stealing.'
Last edited by osarusan; 23/08/2011 at 10:50 AM.
Indeed, which is why it is redundant to complain about dream denial, as Not Brazil has done.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
You choose not to differentiate between a player taking another player's place in a squad because he wants to play senior football for that country, and a player taking another player's place in a squad despite not wanting to play senior football for that country.
I think your decision not to differentiate is nonsense in the extreme.
Who actually does that though?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks