Celtic singing at away games
Come on the Hoops
songs at away games are missing the point.
If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
Ireland and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides Hibs
comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
Now - Do all you HUN assholes know what the origin of the Billy Boys is?
I'll tell you.
A bunch of viscous mother fuckers from Bridgeton who stalked the area
looking for Catholics in order to slice their throats open, calling
themselves the Billy Boys.
Shame on you for glorifying this in your venomous spew.
Before you try to retort with a weak effort saying that Republican songs
glorify killing too then I defy any of you to mention the line from any song
which states anyone is killed other than for their beliefs and at the hands
of British security forces or police.
No songs glorify murder except your own.
I have said it before and will say it again.
Gerrituptyez!
www.comeonthehoops.co.uk
Shannon
better!
"Come on the Hoops" <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
news:HqyH6.11878$wO6.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
stuart graham
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
>songs at away games are missing the point.
>If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
>running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
>Ireland
Interesting interpretation, but patently untrue.
>and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
>both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
>The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides Hibs
>comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
Another untruth.
--
stuart graham
scottish fitba newsgroups homepage: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/stuartg/scottishfitba
the ayrshire work of james miller: http://www.james-miller.org.uk
dalquharran castle: http://www.robert-adam.co.uk
ronniethetim
news:HqyH6.11878$wO6.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Groan.
--
Ronnie the Tim
Come on the Hoops
"stuart graham" <stu...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:2tqtetgpcer4fo5g2...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 1 May 2001 13:55:31 +0100, "Come on the Hoops"
> <a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>
> >All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
> >songs at away games are missing the point.
> >If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
> >running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
> >Ireland
>
> Interesting interpretation, but patently untrue.
bothered I would quote you numerous examples.
>
> >and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
> >both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
> >The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides
Hibs
> >comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
>
> Another untruth.
-----EH????? I do not know of a single SPL team who do not sing Billy boys
at Parkhead. Sash is rarely heard, but quite often is heard.
Hibs are the only team not to sing it. They choose instead to go on about
"Glasgow slums".
Get your head out of your arse and talk sense. Ask any season book Tim and
you will know I am correct.
-COTH
Andy Mulhern
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
>songs at away games are missing the point.
As are the fans who sing them.....
>If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
>running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
>Ireland and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
>both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
If you can explain the relevance of Irish politics/terrorism at
scottish football matches to me in a manner that a) convinces me b)
doesn't use the word "tradition" and c) doesn't make you look more
stupid than you already do, then I'll agree with you.
>The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides Hibs
>comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
>Now - Do all you HUN assholes know what the origin of the Billy Boys is?
And the relevance of what other supporters do at CP is what exactly?
What others do can never be used as a justification for the failings
of ones-self. I'm not even convinved about the accuracy of these
points in the first place, as I've never heard anyone but Rangers fans
singing the sash.
>I'll tell you.
>A bunch of viscous mother fuckers from Bridgeton who stalked the area
>looking for Catholics in order to slice their throats open, calling
>themselves the Billy Boys.
>Shame on you for glorifying this in your venomous spew.
And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
>Before you try to retort with a weak effort saying that Republican songs
>glorify killing too then I defy any of you to mention the line from any song
>which states anyone is killed other than for their beliefs and at the hands
>of British security forces or police.
>No songs glorify murder except your own.
Hmmm, so songs linked to, and celebrating a terrorist organisation
that commits attrocities don't glorify murder? Interesting......
>Gerrituptyez!
If only you had stuck to this one word, I would have fully agreed.
Ally Dunn
Come on the Hoops <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
news:G1EH6.12932$Kt2.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> Sash is rarely heard, but quite often is heard.
Makes more sense than most of your posts i suppose.
stuart graham
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>
>"stuart graham" <stu...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:2tqtetgpcer4fo5g2...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 1 May 2001 13:55:31 +0100, "Come on the Hoops"
>> <a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>>
>> >All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
>> >songs at away games are missing the point.
>> >If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
>> >running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
>> >Ireland
>>
>> Interesting interpretation, but patently untrue.
>------ Stuart I gave you more credit. Of course this is true. If I could be
>bothered I would quote you numerous examples.
And i could give you an example of a song that while it may yearn
after a united Ireland also pofesses support for a terrorist
organisation.
>
>>
>> >and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
>> >both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
>> >The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides
>Hibs
>> >comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
>>
>> Another untruth.
In all my visits to Celtic Park i have heard this only once from the
Motherwell support and that was years ago. Fergus McCann's first game
IIRC.
>-----EH????? I do not know of a single SPL team who do not sing Billy boys
>at Parkhead. Sash is rarely heard, but quite often is heard.
Rarely but quite often? Do make your mind up.
>Hibs are the only team not to sing it. They choose instead to go on about
>"Glasgow slums".
>Get your head out of your arse and talk sense. Ask any season book Tim and
>you will know I am correct.
I know you are a moron. Killie sing it but not the same words, that
proves you wrong straight away.
Ross a.f.c
a...@icscotland.com says...
> The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides Hibs
> comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
>
>
Bollocks ive have never ever ever heard Aberdeen fans sing the fuckin
sash or the braindead fuckin billy boys youre talking complete and utter
pish.
Ross
afc
Donnix
"Ross a.f.c" <ro...@ross1903.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.15594757c...@news.freeserve.net...
Curious ?.
Donnix.
Come on the Hoops
"Andy Mulhern" <a_NOSPA...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3af30fe9...@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
> On Tue, 1 May 2001 13:55:31 +0100, "Come on the Hoops"
> <a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>
> >All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
> >songs at away games are missing the point.
>
> As are the fans who sing them.....
*true COTH*
>
> >If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
> >running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
> >Ireland and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
> >both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
>
> If you can explain the relevance of Irish politics/terrorism at
> scottish football matches to me in a manner that a) convinces me b)
> doesn't use the word "tradition" and c) doesn't make you look more
> stupid than you already do, then I'll agree with you.
*There is no relevance at all. b) I do not need to convince you of anything
and would prefer not to converse with you at all. c) Don't make me laugh. I
know my intelligence whereas you are bound by the limitations of your own. -
COTH
>
> >The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides
Hibs
> >comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
> >Now - Do all you HUN assholes know what the origin of the Billy Boys is?
>
> And the relevance of what other supporters do at CP is what exactly?
*None again, just a valid point in answer to the moaning of the songs sung
by Celtic supporters. BTW every team sings Billy Boys and very few sing sash
as I have said repeatedly. - COTH
> What others do can never be used as a justification for the failings
> of ones-self. I'm not even convinved about the accuracy of these
> points in the first place, as I've never heard anyone but Rangers fans
> singing the sash.
*See above lamer - COTH
>
> >I'll tell you.
> >A bunch of viscous mother fuckers from Bridgeton who stalked the area
> >looking for Catholics in order to slice their throats open, calling
> >themselves the Billy Boys.
> >Shame on you for glorifying this in your venomous spew.
>
> And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
> terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
> woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
* I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend and
condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed back to
the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the northern
six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97 percent
catholic population of the free south. Again, I state that these songs,
however, have no relevance at football. I do believe though that fans can
sing what they wish and I have yet to hear a song which defends or glorifies
murder, unlike your Billy Boys spew.
-COTH
>
> >Before you try to retort with a weak effort saying that Republican songs
> >glorify killing too then I defy any of you to mention the line from any
song
> >which states anyone is killed other than for their beliefs and at the
hands
> >of British security forces or police.
> >No songs glorify murder except your own.
>
> Hmmm, so songs linked to, and celebrating a terrorist organisation
> that commits attrocities don't glorify murder? Interesting......
*See above again. Read more slowly and you may understand. I do not know of
any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only know
of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by the
ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations. Name a rebel
song which defends terrorists. Just one!
-COTH
>
> >Gerrituptyez!
>
> If only you had stuck to this one word, I would have fully agreed.
*Gerritupyez. Rofl
COTH
Ally Dunn
Come on the Hoops <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
news:CdHH6.13665$Kt2.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>
> > And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
> > terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
> > woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
> * I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend and
> condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed back to
> the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the northern
> six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97 percent
> catholic population of the free south.
You think you could back this argument up if I argued with you? Or would
you have to pick me up on a typo?
Come on the Hoops
"Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:9cnfp7$encvt$1...@ID-34507.news.dfncis.de...
slagging what I'm about to say but one of my subjects for my MA degree was
Celtic history. (pronounced with a 'K' obviously). Don't even waste my time
by implying you could argue with me on Irish or Scottish history.
Let's drop this. It's getting boring.
As for typos, you would only suggest that they were deliberate to try to
noise me up.
-COTH
>
>
Andy Mulhern
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>> >All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
>> >songs at away games are missing the point.
>>
>> As are the fans who sing them.....
>
>*true COTH*
Glad we agree on something then. Oh, and you don't need the COTH after
every single thing you write. My intelligence does stretch to
remembering who I am arguing with
>> >If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
>> >running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
>> >Ireland and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
>> >both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
>>
>> If you can explain the relevance of Irish politics/terrorism at
>> scottish football matches to me in a manner that a) convinces me b)
>> doesn't use the word "tradition" and c) doesn't make you look more
>> stupid than you already do, then I'll agree with you.
>*There is no relevance at all.
So why should such songs be allowed to be sung at Football matches?
They go against *every* principle Celtic was based upon, and
strengthen not only the belief that celtic and rangers are still
embroiled in some sort of sectarian conflict, but also do nothing but
damage to the image of the club. If you can justify the singing of
these songs, I'll be impressed.....
>b) I do not need to convince you of anything and would prefer not
> to converse with you at all.
So you can't convince me then? If you can't defend your opinions on a
Newsgroup, and stick by them when they are questioned, don't impose
them upon the rest of us. And why would you prefer not to converse
with me? I'm looking forward to this answer
>c) Don't make me laugh. I know my intelligence whereas you
>are bound by the limitations of your own. -
You are already showing yourself up. Quit while your only slightly
behind, before you get shown up good and proper.
And of course I'm bound by the limitations of my intelligence. We all
are. What a fuckin stupid thing to say. Nearly as stupid as "Sash is
rarely heard, but quite often is heard."
>> >The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland, besides
>Hibs
>> >comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
>> >Now - Do all you HUN assholes know what the origin of the Billy Boys is?
>>
>> And the relevance of what other supporters do at CP is what exactly?
>*None again, just a valid point in answer to the moaning of the songs sung
>by Celtic supporters. BTW every team sings Billy Boys and very few sing sash
>as I have said repeatedly. - COTH
No relevance again? You certainly know how to build up a strong
argument, don't you? There is no valid point in what you have said.
You are deluding yourself into thinking that what others are doing
gives you some sort of excuse to do the same, even when it is wrong,
or indefensible. You have to do better than this.....
Oh, and the since we have had both a Motherwell *and* Aberdeen denying
the singing of these songs, perhaps we can discount your theory that
*every* team sings Billy Boys.
>> What others do can never be used as a justification for the failings
>> of ones-self. I'm not even convinved about the accuracy of these
>> points in the first place, as I've never heard anyone but Rangers fans
>> singing the sash.
>*See above lamer - COTH
Ah, good insult. I'll need to watch what I say to you in future in
case you hit me with more of these barbed insults. Now answer the
points raised
>>
>> >I'll tell you.
>> >A bunch of viscous mother fuckers from Bridgeton who stalked the area
>> >looking for Catholics in order to slice their throats open, calling
>> >themselves the Billy Boys.
>> >Shame on you for glorifying this in your venomous spew.
>>
>> And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
>> terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
>> woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
>* I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend and
>condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed back to
>the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the northern
>six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97 percent
>catholic population of the free south. Again, I state that these songs,
>however, have no relevance at football. I do believe though that fans can
>sing what they wish and I have yet to hear a song which defends or glorifies
>murder, unlike your Billy Boys spew.
>-COTH
All your stats about Ireland are utterly irrelevant, and a very, very
poor attempt to deflect the issue onto Irish politics. You *ARE*
defending the singing of songs linked to terrorism, and you fail yet
again to provide any arguments to back up why these songs should be
sung at Football matches when they have absolutely no relevance to
football.....
Interesting that you think the celtic fans should be allowed to sing
what they wish? Does that mean they could have been singing about Jim
Baxters death at the weekend? Surely they hold a responsibility to the
club to protect its image by not doing anything that may damage it?
Singing songs about Ireland and the IRA do nothing but damage to
Celtic.
And what do you mean by *MY* billy boys spew? Please explain that one.
>> >Before you try to retort with a weak effort saying that Republican songs
>> >glorify killing too then I defy any of you to mention the line from any
>song
>> >which states anyone is killed other than for their beliefs and at the
>hands
>> >of British security forces or police.
>> >No songs glorify murder except your own.
>>
>> Hmmm, so songs linked to, and celebrating a terrorist organisation
>> that commits attrocities don't glorify murder? Interesting......
>*See above again. Read more slowly and you may understand. I do not know of
>any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only know
>of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by the
>ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations. Name a rebel
>song which defends terrorists. Just one!
>-COTH
Did I say anywhere that Rebel songs *did* defend terrorism? You miss
the point completely (on purpose perhaps?). What I did say was that
these songs are sung, by some (not all), as a way of indicating
support for the modern IRA - regardless of the contents, or original
intentions of the song. If you think they are *only* singing as a
display of support for a United Ireland, you are naieve. Surely the
singing of songs that are linked to, and about a terrorist
organisation can be seen as a display of support for said
organisation? Hence, display of support for said organisation equates
with support for the methods of the organisation in achieving its
goals. In this case, this equates to the support and glorifying of the
attrocities carried out by the said organisation. It really is that
simple.....
Incidentally, if you read the words to "Go on home british soldiers" -
a song regularly sung at away games - I'm sure you'll agree it
defends the use of terrorism.
>> >Gerrituptyez!
>>
>> If only you had stuck to this one word, I would have fully agreed.
>*Gerritupyez. Rofl
>COTH
Nothing to be ashamed of in a good old fashioned gerritrightupye. I'm
done many in my time, and enjoyed every one of them.....
Jim Monaghan
Come on the Hoops wrote in message ...
>
>"Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:9cnfp7$encvt$1...@ID-34507.news.dfncis.de...
>>
>> Come on the Hoops <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
>> news:CdHH6.13665$Kt2.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>> >
>> > > And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
>> > > terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
>> > > woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
>> > * I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend
and
>> > condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed back
>to
>> > the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the
>northern
>> > six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97 percent
>> > catholic population of the free south.
Both of those figures are wrong. By referring to Republic of Ireland as the
free south, you show your limited knowledge of the subject.
>>
>> You think you could back this argument up if I argued with you? Or would
>> you have to pick me up on a typo?
>*Ally this is an argument you cannot win. Don't show yourself up for
>slagging what I'm about to say but one of my subjects for my MA degree was
>Celtic history.
So therefore you would not have studied 20th century Irish politics?
(pronounced with a 'K' obviously). Don't even waste my time
>by implying you could argue with me on Irish or Scottish history.
>Let's drop this. It's getting boring.
IMO it's just getting interesting.
Ross a.f.c
says...
och the usual football ditties you know "oh when the reds (sung to oh
when the saints) "stand free" (sung to the lord of the dance) "in your
******(whichever town your in ) slums " " sign on ..sign "(sung to the
weedgies) "10 men went to mow"and my favourite belted out at a quiet
Ibrox " where were you when you were shite". To get the full effect of
that last song you really have to be postioned alongside the Huns at the
corner of the broomloan the looks on their faces as they struggle to
remember just where they were when they were shite is fuckin
hilarious. Others songs are dependent on who your playing
Ross
afc
Ally Dunn
Let's not frop it at all. The majority of people in the north support the
status quo (it's not split down protestant/catholic lines 100% either but
let's assume it is to help you a wee bit). Now think about this - Say 85%
of Scots want independence for Scotland (following so far?), say 97% of
English say: 'no, you're not getting it because we want the revenue from
your oil supplies'. The people of Scotland's needs and wants should be
ignored because their bigger neighbour to the north has decided that they
know best? The people in Scotland should be forced into a situation that
they don't want because a larger population in a different country has
decided what's best? You think that makes sense? What's the difference
between that and the people of NI being forced to join an Irish nation
against their will just because their bigger neighbour says they should?
> As for typos, you would only suggest that they were deliberate to try to
> noise me up.
It doesn't matter if a typo's deliberate or not ya muppet. If someone puts
an argument to you and you ignore the whole argument and spend 3 lines
slagging someone for a typo like you did yesterday then you look like a
tube.
Dominic X
never did, and then gained some independence with Britain keeping the parts
where all the money was.
If the people that live in occupied Ireland think that they are British,
then why dont they come live in Britain? I dont see all the Scots living in
England trying to set up an enclave in the rich parts and take it over.
Secondly, I dont think the oil revenue is as much as some people believe.
For starters, the SNP only reckons its enough to cut income tax by seven
percent (comments from Alex Salmon to Parliamentary committee c.1996-1997).
Yet public spending in Scotland is 7% higher per head than in England. (or
at least was till the Scottish parliament took over).
Scotland is not ruled by England either (in my belief any way). The most
important people in our government come from Scotland, and Scottish
constituencies are averagely around 60,000 compared to 80,000 in England to
give us more representation in the house of commons. Scotland has a better
legal system in most areas of law.
The problem I se with Britain is its run for the rich wherever they come
from, not for the people that do all the work like us to keep the country
running and make the rich richer.
Papa-Bear
"Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
news:J5UH6.15450$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> Well, for starters, Scotland voted for Union with England and Wales,
Ireland
> never did, and then gained some independence with Britain keeping the
parts
> where all the money was.
oh, we did, did we...I must have missed history class that day...when
exactly did we vote for union with England?
> If the people that live in occupied Ireland think that they are British,
> then why dont they come live in Britain? I dont see all the Scots living
in
> England trying to set up an enclave in the rich parts and take it over.
..and if people who live in the democratic state that is Northern Ireland
think they are Irish why don't they move across the border to Eire? I don't
see Scotls living in Northumberland trying to reunite it with Scotland..
> Secondly, I dont think the oil revenue is as much as some people believe.
> For starters, the SNP only reckons its enough to cut income tax by seven
> percent (comments from Alex Salmon to Parliamentary committee
c.1996-1997).
> Yet public spending in Scotland is 7% higher per head than in England. (or
> at least was till the Scottish parliament took over).
more mince...the figures you quote are so worthless as to be
laughable...public spending in Scotland is a great, great deal lower than in
most of England..particularly the London area...practically all the civil
service jobs in the UK are based in London..is this included in public
spending figures? no.....the vast majority of funding for the 'national'
(ha!) museums etc is spent in London..is this included in the public
spending figures, no...I could go on and on and on... but you probably get
the point by now...
> The most
> important people in our government come from Scotland,
...the most important people on the plantations were the Uncle Toms
> and Scottish
> constituencies are averagely around 60,000 compared to 80,000 in England
to
> give us more representation in the house of commons.
because on average we are spread much more thinly on the ground....we have
1/10th their population spread over 1/2 their area....another reason why the
public spending figures are so worthless...1 mile of road in Wester Ross
costs a fraction of 1 mile of road in London but because it nominally serves
30,000 people rather than 3,000,000 the statistics make it look much more
expensive....smoke and mirrors
> The problem I se with Britain is its run for the rich wherever they come
> from, not for the people that do all the work like us to keep the country
> running and make the rich richer.
...nice...slip a wee bit of sense in at the end..confuse folks...like it...
pb
Dominic X
Papa-Bear <p...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:GdVH6.15564$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>
> "Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
> news:J5UH6.15450$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > Well, for starters, Scotland voted for Union with England and Wales,
> Ireland
> > never did, and then gained some independence with Britain keeping the
> parts
> > where all the money was.
>
> oh, we did, did we...I must have missed history class that day...when
> exactly did we vote for union with England?
Well, if ye'd been in class (except perhaps in Inverness or the Shetlands
etc etc) you'd have heard that it was Scottish Commisioners and the greedy
sods that ran the country in those days voted for it to get themselves from
more wealth from the English. The Parcel of Rogues?
If the people that live in occupied Ireland think that they are British,
then why dont they come live in Britain? I dont see all the Scots living
in
England trying to set up an enclave in the rich parts and take it over.
..and if people who live in the democratic state that is Northern
Ireland....
(with its manipulated demographics caused by english and Scottish protestant
(well, financially/stay out of prison protestants) settlers encouraged by
interfering English Monarchs and the Stewarts)
I don't see Scotls living in Northumberland trying to reunite it with
Scotland..
Aye, and if the North of Scotland got its independence and the south was
kept in the union we wouldn't see it either, no?
and Scottish constituencies are averagely around 60,000 compared to 80,000
in England
to give us more representation in the house of commons.
because on average we are spread much more thinly on the ground....we have
1/10th their population spread over 1/2 their area>
No, its nothing to do with the size of the area, else London would only have
a few MPs. Its directly so that Scottish issues get a fairer representation
in parliament.
Right, thats enough pish, ill jus post this and agree that your answers are
correct in advance :)
While were on politics.....
TAX THE RICH
SINK THE ROYAL YACHT.....
AND DROWN THE BLOODY LOT.....
Come on the Hoops
"Jim Monaghan" <J...@monaghans3.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9cnpko$j5e$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> Come on the Hoops wrote in message ...
> >
> >"Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> >news:9cnfp7$encvt$1...@ID-34507.news.dfncis.de...
> >>
> >> Come on the Hoops <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
> >> news:CdHH6.13665$Kt2.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> >> >
> >> > > And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
> >> > > terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
> >> > > woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
> >> > * I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend
> and
> >> > condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed
back
> >to
> >> > the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the
> >northern
> >> > six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97
percent
> >> > catholic population of the free south.
>
> Both of those figures are wrong. By referring to Republic of Ireland as
the
> free south, you show your limited knowledge of the subject.
JUST A TERM TO HIGHLIGHT THE DIFFERENCE
> >>
> >> You think you could back this argument up if I argued with you? Or
would
> >> you have to pick me up on a typo?
> >*Ally this is an argument you cannot win. Don't show yourself up for
> >slagging what I'm about to say but one of my subjects for my MA degree
was
> >Celtic history.
>
> So therefore you would not have studied 20th century Irish politics?
YES I DID INFACT. ALSO STUDIED EARLY SCOTTISH AND IRISH, ART HISTORY AND
MUSIC PERFORMANCE, HISTORY AND THEORY.
>
> (pronounced with a 'K' obviously). Don't even waste my time
> >by implying you could argue with me on Irish or Scottish history.
> >Let's drop this. It's getting boring.
>
> IMO it's just getting interesting.
NOT TO ME. SORRY ABOUT CAPS, I HAVE ASKED ALLY HOW IT IS BEST TO RESPOND TO
MESSAGES TO SHOW WHICH POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO REPLY TO.
-COTH
>
>
>
>
stuart graham
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>
>> And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
>> terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
>> woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
>* I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend and
>condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed back to
>the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the northern
>six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97 percent
>catholic population of the free south. Again, I state that these songs,
>however, have no relevance at football. I do believe though that fans can
>sing what they wish and I have yet to hear a song which defends or glorifies
>murder, unlike your Billy Boys spew.
>-COTH
If fans can sing what they wish then why are you condemning what otehr
fans sing?
>
>>
>> >Before you try to retort with a weak effort saying that Republican songs
>> >glorify killing too then I defy any of you to mention the line from any
>song
>> >which states anyone is killed other than for their beliefs and at the
>hands
>> >of British security forces or police.
>> >No songs glorify murder except your own.
>>
>> Hmmm, so songs linked to, and celebrating a terrorist organisation
>> that commits attrocities don't glorify murder? Interesting......
>*See above again. Read more slowly and you may understand. I do not know of
>any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only know
>of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by the
>ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations. Name a rebel
>song which defends terrorists. Just one!
We have done this before but if you analyse the lyrics to Go on Home
Brittish Soldiers Go on Home, you will find it refers to a
*continuing* fight.
stuart graham
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>
>"Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:9cnfp7$encvt$1...@ID-34507.news.dfncis.de...
>>
>> Come on the Hoops <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
>> news:CdHH6.13665$Kt2.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>> >
>> > > And shame on you for defending the singing of songs linked to a
>> > > terrorist organisation that has deliberately set out to murder men,
>> > > woman and children indiscriminantly, and regardless of religion.
>> > * I do not defend nor condone songs linked to terrorism. I do defend and
>> > condone songs linked with the belief that Ireland should be handed back
>to
>> > the Irish. After all, an 85 percent protestant population in the
>northern
>> > six counties is in the minority when compared to the larger 97 percent
>> > catholic population of the free south.
>>
>> You think you could back this argument up if I argued with you? Or would
>> you have to pick me up on a typo?
>*Ally this is an argument you cannot win. Don't show yourself up for
>slagging what I'm about to say but one of my subjects for my MA degree was
>Celtic history.
Oh dear, qualifications spouting. Well i think i can trump that. I
have a Scotvec module that taught me how to do word processing on a
BBC micro. So there!
stuart graham
<a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>
>> So therefore you would not have studied 20th century Irish politics?
>
>YES I DID INFACT. ALSO STUDIED EARLY SCOTTISH AND IRISH, ART HISTORY AND
>MUSIC PERFORMANCE, HISTORY AND THEORY.
Well i have a 50m swimming certificate!
stuart graham
wrote:
>
>"Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
>news:J5UH6.15450$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>> Well, for starters, Scotland voted for Union with England and Wales,
>Ireland
>> never did, and then gained some independence with Britain keeping the
>parts
>> where all the money was.
>
>oh, we did, did we...I must have missed history class that day...when
>exactly did we vote for union with England?
Its a common misconception that Parliament has always equalled
democracy.
stuart graham
<dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>
>Papa-Bear <p...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:GdVH6.15564$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>>
>> "Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
>> news:J5UH6.15450$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>> > Well, for starters, Scotland voted for Union with England and Wales,
>> Ireland
>> > never did, and then gained some independence with Britain keeping the
>> parts
>> > where all the money was.
>>
>> oh, we did, did we...I must have missed history class that day...when
>> exactly did we vote for union with England?
>
>Well, if ye'd been in class (except perhaps in Inverness or the Shetlands
>etc etc) you'd have heard that it was Scottish Commisioners and the greedy
>sods that ran the country in those days voted for it to get themselves from
>more wealth from the English. The Parcel of Rogues?
That doesnt equate to 'Scotland' voting for union. Did you miss the
bit in your history clas that told you about the general unpopularity
of this vote and the assorted unrest that followed?
Dominic X
> On Wed, 2 May 2001 16:52:18 +0100, "Dominic X"
> <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>
> That doesnt equate to 'Scotland' voting for union. Did you miss the
> bit in your history clas that told you about the general unpopularity
> of this vote and the assorted unrest that followed?
No I didnt, never said it was popular, and in any case, no politician in
England was popular either then. Oh, and the common Engilshman didnt really
like it much either (the English saw the Scots crossing the border to live
in the richer England as trying to steal from their well being then). Seeing
as Xenephobia was more wide spread then than it is now, it would take a fool
to suggest it was popular.
stuart graham
<dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>
>stuart graham <stu...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:bcj0ftcs9kprk03oh...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 2 May 2001 16:52:18 +0100, "Dominic X"
>> <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>
>>
>> That doesnt equate to 'Scotland' voting for union. Did you miss the
>> bit in your history clas that told you about the general unpopularity
>> of this vote and the assorted unrest that followed?
>
>No I didnt, never said it was popular, and in any case, no politician in
>England was popular either then. Oh, and the common Engilshman didnt really
>like it much either (the English saw the Scots crossing the border to live
>in the richer England as trying to steal from their well being then). Seeing
>as Xenephobia was more wide spread then than it is now, it would take a fool
>to suggest it was popular.
>
So why then suggest it was 'Scotland' voting for it?
Donnix
> och the usual football ditties you know "oh when the reds (sung to oh
> when the saints) "stand free" (sung to the lord of the dance) "in your
> ******(whichever town your in ) slums " " sign on ..sign "(sung to the
> weedgies) "10 men went to mow"and my favourite belted out at a quiet
> Ibrox " where were you when you were shite". To get the full effect of
> that last song you really have to be postioned alongside the Huns at the
> corner of the broomloan the looks on their faces as they struggle to
> remember just where they were when they were shite is fuckin
> hilarious. Others songs are dependent on who your playing
>
> Ross
> afc
Quite a repertoire !!
Donnix.
Papa-Bear
"Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
>
> Papa-Bear <p...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:GdVH6.15564$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> >
> > "Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in
message
> > news:J5UH6.15450$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > > Well, for starters, Scotland voted for Union with England and Wales,
> > Ireland
> > > never did, and then gained some independence with Britain keeping the
> > parts
> > > where all the money was.
> >
> > oh, we did, did we...I must have missed history class that day...when
> > exactly did we vote for union with England?
>
> Well, if ye'd been in class (except perhaps in Inverness or the Shetlands
> etc etc) you'd have heard that it was Scottish Commisioners and the greedy
> sods that ran the country in those days voted for it to get themselves
from
> more wealth from the English. The Parcel of Rogues?
...so it wasn't really Scotland that voted for the union was
it?..eh?..really..and if you want o quote from Parcel of Rogues how about
the line "we were bought and sold for English gold"...not no mention of no
votes nowheres...
> If the people that live in occupied Ireland think that they are British,
> then why dont they come live in Britain? I dont see all the Scots living
> in
> England trying to set up an enclave in the rich parts and take it over.
>
> ..and if people who live in the democratic state that is Northern
> Ireland....
>
> (with its manipulated demographics caused by english and Scottish
protestant
> (well, financially/stay out of prison protestants) settlers encouraged by
> interfering English Monarchs and the Stewarts)
..there is not a country in europe whose indigenous population has not been
subject to invasions and unnatural deomgraphic changes...and to suggest that
Northern Ireland should be treated as though the population was that of 300
years ago is as sensible as saying that we will no longer deal with George W
Bush, but only with Chief Running Scared as the true leader of the North
American peoples...
> I don't see Scotls living in Northumberland trying to reunite it with
> Scotland..
>
> Aye, and if the North of Scotland got its independence and the south was
> kept in the union we wouldn't see it either, no?
....eh?
>
>
> and Scottish constituencies are averagely around 60,000 compared to 80,000
> in England
> to give us more representation in the house of commons.
>
> because on average we are spread much more thinly on the ground....we
have
> 1/10th their population spread over 1/2 their area>
>
> No, its nothing to do with the size of the area, else London would only
have
> a few MPs. Its directly so that Scottish issues get a fairer
representation
> in parliament.
once again for the grampian viewers...the number of MPs is gnereally decided
on population size...however the Highlands is roughly the size of Belgium
and to ask a single MP to cover the area he or she would have to in order to
deal with 80,000 constituents would mean that there would only be about 2
MPs for the entire region...therefore because geography demands more MPs the
'average' Scottish figure is badly skewed...you'll find that teh number of
MPs in Edinbugh, Aberdeen or Dundee is the same as in a comparable English
city..
> Right, thats enough pish, ill jus post this and agree that your answers
are
> correct in advance :)
..a wise move Dom....it'll save on time and bandwidth and we'd end up there
anyway ;)
pb
Jim Monaghan
>status quo (it's not split down protestant/catholic lines 100% either but
>let's assume it is to help you a wee bit).
Neither is the south, his big mistake is assuming that R of Irelands
Catholics are supporters of a United Ireland. The most recent test of
public opinion saw the overwhelming majority of Irish people and most of the
parties renounce their territorial claim over the North. Support for SF in
Ireland is negligible.
Now think about this - Say 85%
>of Scots want independence for Scotland (following so far?), say 97% of
>English say: 'no, you're not getting it because we want the revenue from
>your oil supplies'. The people of Scotland's needs and wants should be
>ignored because their bigger neighbour to the north has decided that they
>know best? The people in Scotland should be forced into a situation that
>they don't want because a larger population in a different country has
>decided what's best? You think that makes sense? What's the difference
>between that and the people of NI being forced to join an Irish nation
>against their will just because their bigger neighbour says they should?
I know what you mean, but their neighbours don't say that, a minority
marxist organisation in the North with little or no support in the South say
they should.
>
>
Jim Monaghan
Come on the Hoops wrote in message ...
>
>> On Tue, 1 May 2001 13:55:31 +0100, "Come on the Hoops"
>> <a...@icscotland.com> wrote:
>>
>> >All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing
republican
>> >songs at away games are missing the point.
>> >running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
>> >Ireland
The majority of Rangers fans will also share genetic lines with the Irish,
ancestry is not an excuse. If it were, we would also be singing about
Danish politics and a Free Normandy.
>>
>> Interesting interpretation, but patently untrue.
>------ Stuart I gave you more credit. Of course this is true. If I could be
>bothered I would quote you numerous examples.
>
>>
>> >and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
>> >both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it.
The original IRA?, when exactly do we consider that the orifginal IRA ended
and a new one began? Enlighten me, as it is not clear from the songs. The
Provisional IRA and also the real IRA contain non-catholic members. This
does not work as some kind od justification. You really should try to
ditinguish between politics and religion , tehn all that studying will not
be wasted.
>Get your head out of your arse and talk sense. Ask any season book Tim and
>you will know I am correct.
I cant agree, I have heard such songs from other Scottish teams, but very
rarely and it is usually, I suspect, from local Rangers fans adopting their
home town team for the day.
Jim Monaghan
>any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only
know
>of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by the
>ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations.
The provos also contain both denominations and in fact are far less
influenced by religion, being a marxist group, then previous incarnations.
Ther's that Original IRA again, now I see you mean the IRA before the split
in 69/70. If you consider a bunch of communist intelectuals in Dublin
theorising while a group of thugs in London and Belfast extort protection
money from their own people in the name of their cause a gthing worth
singing about then I would suggest you go back to UNi and read the books
again. In fact, many of the songs sung bt Celtic fans are about the
Provisional IRA and I am sure that most who sing the songs supported the
provos and would not agree with your version of events.
Name a rebel
>song which defends terrorists. Just one!
Dont tempt me, define terrorist then I will give you a song.
Dominic X
> On Wed, 2 May 2001 21:37:18 +0100, "Dominic X"
> <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>
>
> So why then suggest it was 'Scotland' voting for it?
Because they 'represented' Scotland (as much as was possible in such times)
whether it was popular or not
Ally Dunn
Dominic X <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
>
>
>
> While were on politics.....
>
> TAX THE RICH
I don't think we should have any more than one tax band myself. If someone
earns a million a year they would pay 250000 at 25% income tax whereas
someone on £20000 a year would pay £5000 in tax. Why should someone who's
earned more money have to pay 40% or higher on their earnings?
Ally Dunn
Just reply how you did here but without the caps. You don't need an
asterisk (*) at the start of every new paragraph or your name at the end of
every para.
Marty
wrote:
To redistribute the wealth? Do I win a prize?
Marty
Ally Dunn
Marty <mart...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3af1743a....@news.demon.co.uk...
nope. It's all about deserts. (not the sahara kind, the other kind)
Moody Marco
Why should we do that? Sounds like a communist idea to me. If someone earns
their money, why should they fork out a higher percentage of it in tax? To
pay the dole cheques of the lazy bastards who can't be arsed getting a job?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.247 / Virus Database: 120 - Release Date: 06/04/01
Marty
wrote:
>> >
>> To redistribute the wealth? Do I win a prize?
>>
>
>nope. It's all about deserts. (not the sahara kind, the other kind)
>
>
The Kalahari?
Marty
Marty
wrote:
>> >> While were on politics.....
>> >>
>> >> TAX THE RICH
>> >
>> >I don't think we should have any more than one tax band myself. If
>someone
>> >earns a million a year they would pay 250000 at 25% income tax whereas
>> >someone on £20000 a year would pay £5000 in tax. Why should someone
>who's
>> >earned more money have to pay 40% or higher on their earnings?
>> >
>> To redistribute the wealth? Do I win a prize?
>>
>> Marty
>
>Why should we do that? Sounds like a communist idea to me. If someone earns
>their money, why should they fork out a higher percentage of it in tax? To
>pay the dole cheques of the lazy bastards who can't be arsed getting a job?
More of a Socialist ideal than a Communist one. The dole excuse is an
old, tired, and irrelevant one as the state will pay unemployment
benefit/income support regardless of the taxation system used.
To my mind it's all about how far you're willing to go to see an
improvement in public and social services. This country still has
many people living on or below the poverty line. Fiscal spending to
regenerate the more run-down areas of our country is one way to
improve the situation that poverty-stricken families find themselves
in. Not to mention the health service, education, and other
publicly funded systems that constantly need more and more resource.
Call me cold hearted if you want, but I'm not gonna shed any tears
for some fat cat who is earning £1m a year and ends up with *only*
£650 grand net. If it means they have one less trip to Barbados a
year then so be it, fuck'em.
Marty
Ally Dunn
no thanks, I'm off seafood at the moment.
Moody Marco
The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
that - he *earns* it. It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on, nothing more, yet we have these
arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we must
live. Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
fortune, the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
you". Fuck that.
Marty
wrote:
>
>The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
>that - he *earns* it. It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
>this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
Are you an anarchist?!
>It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on,
WHIT? Somebody slipped you some acid?
>nothing more, yet we have these
>arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we must
>live.
It's called a law-abiding society! Do you have something in mind to
replace this concept?
> Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
>I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
>laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
>fortune,
I bet the shitty planet isn't so shitty any more though, is it?
> the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
>you".
>Fuck that.
Meanwhile, in the ideal world of MM there's still loadsa people
stuck in their shitty planet, with their shitty lives and their
shitty prospects who aren't about to make a fuckin fortune!
You typify the "look out for number one" ideal espoused by Thatcher
and her cohorts during the 80's, which has unfortunately turned many
of our citizens into a bunch of greedy, selfish bastards. Would it
really hurt these fat cat cunts to give a bit back to the country that
has made them so well-off in the first place?!
Marty
Moody Marco
> On Thu, 3 May 2001 17:41:19 +0100, "Moody Marco" <ma...@zoom.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
> >that - he *earns* it. It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
> >this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
>
> Are you an anarchist?!
>
Far from it.
> >It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on,
>
> WHIT? Somebody slipped you some acid?
>
Not for years.
> >nothing more, yet we have these
> >arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we
must
> >live.
>
> It's called a law-abiding society! Do you have something in mind to
> replace this concept?
>
No.
> > Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
> >I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
> >laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
> >fortune,
>
> I bet the shitty planet isn't so shitty any more though, is it?
>
Not the point.
> > the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
> >you".
>
>
> >Fuck that.
>
> Meanwhile, in the ideal world of MM there's still loadsa people
> stuck in their shitty planet, with their shitty lives and their
> shitty prospects who aren't about to make a fuckin fortune!
>
Tuff luck (and don't call me selfish, cos I'm in the above category, and I
still say "tuff luck")
> You typify the "look out for number one" ideal espoused by Thatcher
> and her cohorts during the 80's,
Why thank you. And u can tell this from a few lines of text on a NG.
>which has unfortunately turned many
> of our citizens into a bunch of greedy, selfish bastards. Would it
> really hurt these fat cat cunts to give a bit back to the country that
> has made them so well-off in the first place?!
No, it wouldn't, you're right. What *is* wrong is that they should have to
pay a higher percentage than anyone else. Providing they have made their
money legally, I think it's very unfair to charge them more just because of
their success.
Tameside Emerald CSC
Moody Marco <ma...@zoom.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9cs44p$fbvjp$1...@ID-68982.news.dfncis.de...
What about VAT and other non-progressive taxes...petrol etc
Two people buy a pint for say £2.00 each.
Of that, say £1.50 is tax...
Person 'a' earns £100 a weak so that tax on the pint represents 1.5 % of his
income.
Person 'b' earns £1000 a week therefore the tax on his (same) pint is
.15% - where's the justice in that...
It's these fixed - and unfair - taxes which means that income tax should be
progressive - the more you earn - the more you should pay - as a
percentage...
Willie.
Tony
> The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
> that - he *earns* it. It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
> this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
You don't have to. Run about doing what the fuck you want, after all it's
just a rock, and we're just vehicles for our genes. Murder, rape and rob
your way through the small time you have on this 'rock'. Fuck everybody. Why
"must" you follow these laws and rules?
> It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on, nothing more, yet we have these
> arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we
must
> live. Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
> I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
> laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
> fortune, the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
> you". Fuck that.
Do you think all the people who are unable to work, or rely on others to
survive should be put down, or just left to rot away?
stuart graham
<dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>
>stuart graham <stu...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:vqr0ftci4m31mssmo...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 2 May 2001 21:37:18 +0100, "Dominic X"
>> <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote:
>>
>>
>> So why then suggest it was 'Scotland' voting for it?
>
>Because they 'represented' Scotland (as much as was possible in such times)
>whether it was popular or not
>
You really are stretching the point to suggest any real
representation. Like i said. parliament and democracy are not always
the same thing.
stuart graham
wrote:
>
Because they can afford it.
stuart graham
wrote:
>
>"Marty" <mart...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3af1743a....@news.demon.co.uk...
>> On Thu, 3 May 2001 15:35:29 +0100, "Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Dominic X <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
>> >news:k%VH6.15685$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> While were on politics.....
>> >>
>> >> TAX THE RICH
>> >
>> >I don't think we should have any more than one tax band myself. If
>someone
>> >earns a million a year they would pay 250000 at 25% income tax whereas
>> >someone on £20000 a year would pay £5000 in tax. Why should someone
>who's
>> >earned more money have to pay 40% or higher on their earnings?
>> >
>> To redistribute the wealth? Do I win a prize?
>>
>> Marty
>
>Why should we do that? Sounds like a communist idea to me. If someone earns
>their money, why should they fork out a higher percentage of it in tax? To
>pay the dole cheques of the lazy bastards who can't be arsed getting a job?
Interesting point of view. You are Anne Widdicombe and i claim my free
copy of the Daily Telegraph.
stuart graham
wrote:
>
>The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
>that - he *earns* it.
Does he? How can you define whether someone's activities are worth
that much? What about inherited money? What about money gained from
share dealing? What 'worth' does that have?
>It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
>this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
>It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on, nothing more, yet we have these
>arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we must
>live. Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
>I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
>laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
>fortune, the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
>you". Fuck that.
So you would rather have no tax at all? Do you not beleive in public
services? Do you not find roads, hospitals, the police, the fire
brigade, schools, useful things? Say you lots your job, would you like
to be told to just fuck off rather than given benefits to tide you
over? What if you suffered an accident and couldnt work? Should you
just be left to starve?
Ally Dunn
Tameside Emerald CSC <em...@nospam.com.uk> wrote in message
news:988912316.997233@dionysos...
So the person who earns £1000 a week should pay £20.00 for his pint just
because he's managed to get a job that pays better? Where's the justice in
that? Why should people with decent jobs be penalised by having to pay
more?
Ally Dunn
> On Thu, 3 May 2001 15:35:29 +0100, "Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Dominic X <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
> >news:k%VH6.15685$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> While were on politics.....
> >>
> >> TAX THE RICH
> >
> >I don't think we should have any more than one tax band myself. If
someone
> >earns a million a year they would pay 250000 at 25% income tax whereas
> >someone on £20000 a year would pay £5000 in tax. Why should someone
who's
> >earned more money have to pay 40% or higher on their earnings?
> >
>
> Because they can afford it.
So what? They all ready contribute more because of the fact that taxes are
percentages of earnings, not fixed amounts. Why should the rich have to pay
say 50-60% of their income? I don't see where the justification comes from.
stuart graham
wrote:
>
>stuart graham <stu...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:hu73ftc03mnpq6rtr...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 3 May 2001 15:35:29 +0100, "Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Dominic X <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
>> >news:k%VH6.15685$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> While were on politics.....
>> >>
>> >> TAX THE RICH
>> >
>> >I don't think we should have any more than one tax band myself. If
>someone
>> >earns a million a year they would pay 250000 at 25% income tax whereas
>> >someone on £20000 a year would pay £5000 in tax. Why should someone
>who's
>> >earned more money have to pay 40% or higher on their earnings?
>> >
>>
>> Because they can afford it.
>
>So what? They all ready contribute more because of the fact that taxes are
>percentages of earnings, not fixed amounts. Why should the rich have to pay
>say 50-60% of their income? I don't see where the justification comes from.
>
By them paying even more it allows those on lower incomes to pay
*less*. Its perfectly fair IMO. Once you earn above a certain level of
income cost of living issues become much less important therefore they
can be taxed more whilst not impacting significantly on quality of
life.
Ally Dunn
Do you think the current system's fair or would you like a return to the
days of 80%+ bands?
The Bhoyo
> Neither is the south, his big mistake is assuming that R of Irelands
> Catholics are supporters of a United Ireland. The most recent test of
> public opinion saw the overwhelming majority of Irish people and most of
the
> parties renounce their territorial claim over the North. Support for SF
in
> Ireland is negligible.
Small but growing. 10% in the South 15% in the North.
The Bhoyo
stuart graham
wrote:
I would like to see an increase in the current top band but not to
that level.
The Bhoyo
>
> >any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only
> know
> >of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by
the
> >ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations.
>
> The provos also contain both denominations and in fact are far less
> influenced by religion, being a marxist group, then previous incarnations.
> Ther's that Original IRA again, now I see you mean the IRA before the
split
> in 69/70. If you consider a bunch of communist intelectuals in Dublin
> theorising while a group of thugs in London and Belfast extort protection
> money from their own people in the name of their cause a gthing worth
> singing about then I would suggest you go back to UNi and read the books
> again. In fact, many of the songs sung bt Celtic fans are about the
> Provisional IRA and I am sure that most who sing the songs supported the
> provos and would not agree with your version of events.
>
Provisionals were too busy fighting a war to extort money from anyone, if
that's who you mean by thugs.
The Bhoyo
Moody Marco
Ya socialist! ;-)
stuart graham
Moody Marco
a wank? ;-)
stuart graham
wrote:
>> >Ya socialist! ;-)
>> >
>>
>> And?
>> --
>
>a wank? ;-)
>
Dont mind if i do! ;)
Ally Dunn
Marco, is that the bird on the pc offering her services to the group again.
Dominic X
> On Thu, 3 May 2001 08:09:28 +0100, "Dominic X"
Like i said. parliament and democracy are not always the same thing.
Couldn't agree more. There was a series on TV a couple of years ago about
some Bristol bloke and his slaves, and someone coined the phrase,
'parliament is a place where rich men go to make laws to make themselves
richer'. You were both right IMO
Dominic X
> The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
> that - he *earns* it. It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
> this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
> It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on, nothing more, yet we have these
> arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we
must
> live. Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
> I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
> laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
> fortune, the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
> you". Fuck that.
>
Completely ignoring the fact of course that anyone who earns that sort of
money makes it by exploiting people who have no choice but to be exploited.
Dominic X
The most recent test of public opinion saw the overwhelming majority of
Irish people and most of the
parties renounce their territorial claim over the North.
Probably has much to do with the Good Friday agreement?
Dominic X
Ross a.f.c <ro...@ross1903.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.15596476c...@news.freeserve.net...
> In article <9cnd4j$7up$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, champ...@2001.co.uk
> says...
> >
> > "Ross a.f.c" <ro...@ross1903.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.15594757c...@news.freeserve.net...
> > > In article <HqyH6.11878$wO6.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
> > > a...@icscotland.com says...
> > > > The thing which annoys me most is that EVERY team in Scotland,
besides
> > Hibs
> > > > comes to Parkhead and sings the Billy Boys and sometimes the Sash.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Bollocks ive have never ever ever heard Aberdeen fans sing the fuckin
> > > sash or the braindead fuckin billy boys youre talking complete and
utter
> > > pish.
> > >
> > > Ross
> > > afc
> > Now you mention it Ross , what do AFC fans sing.
> > Curious ?.
> >
> > Donnix.
> >
>
> och the usual football ditties you know "oh when the reds (sung to oh
> when the saints) "stand free" (sung to the lord of the dance) "in your
> ******(whichever town your in ) slums " " sign on ..sign "(sung to the
> weedgies) "10 men went to mow"and my favourite belted out at a quiet
> Ibrox " where were you when you were shite". To get the full effect of
> that last song you really have to be postioned alongside the Huns at the
> corner of the broomloan the looks on their faces as they struggle to
> remember just where they were when they were shite is fuckin
> hilarious. Others songs are dependent on who your playing
>
> Ross
> afc
Sounds more like a fucking concert!! ;)
Dominic X
Come on the Hoops <a...@icscotland.com> wrote in message
news:NgWH6.15718$wO6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
YES I DID INFACT. ALSO STUDIED EARLY SCOTTISH AND IRISH, ART HISTORY AND
MUSIC PERFORMANCE, HISTORY AND THEORY.
Erm, did I see you on Mastermind once?
Moody Marco
"Ally Dunn" <adu...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:9csefe$f9ic7$1...@ID-34507.news.dfncis.de...
Hi Ally, this is Amanda, and no, not the whole group, just you (and maybe
Mark if he's good)
stuart graham
wrote:
>> Marco, is that the bird on the pc offering her services to the group
>again.
>>
>>
>
>Hi Ally, this is Amanda, and no, not the whole group, just you (and maybe
>Mark if he's good)
>
Do you wear a wig and a dress when this personality takes over marco?
Moody Marco
> On Thu, 3 May 2001 22:51:18 +0100, "Moody Marco" <ma...@zoom.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> Marco, is that the bird on the pc offering her services to the group
> >again.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Hi Ally, this is Amanda, and no, not the whole group, just you (and maybe
> >Mark if he's good)
> >
>
> Do you wear a wig and a dress when this personality takes over marco?
> --
yes, and a bra stuffed with kitchen towel.
Come on the Hoops
"Dominic X" <dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm> wrote in message
opportunity to take the piss is there?
COTH
>
Ally Dunn
Did Mark tell on me for slagging you again Amanda?
(or is Amanda out for the night and Marks got her tights on again?)
Andy Mulhern
wrote:
>The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
>that - he *earns* it.
Sorry Marco, but very few people *earn* a million bucks a year. People
earning this much are either top level sportsmen/musicians/artists or
company directors/owners who rely on everyone else to do the work,
then take the profits. You're defending a system that pays wankers in
suits whatever they can get, but treats like shit nurses/teachers/care
workers etc etc.
>It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
>this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
Aw poor you ;)
>It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on, nothing more, yet we have these
>arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we must
>live. Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
>I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
>laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
>fortune, the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
>you". Fuck that.
Its called being a part of a society.
Marty
wrote:
>
>"Marty" <mart...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3af18b92....@news.demon.co.uk...
>> On Thu, 3 May 2001 17:41:19 +0100, "Moody Marco" <ma...@zoom.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
>> >that - he *earns* it. It pisses me off - we never asked to be born into
>> >this world or this society, yet me must follow all these laws and rules.
>>
>> Are you an anarchist?!
>>
>
>Far from it.
>
>> >It's just a fucking lump of rock we're on,
>>
>> WHIT? Somebody slipped you some acid?
>>
>
>Not for years.
>
>> >nothing more, yet we have these
>> >arseholes "in power" who reckon they can tell us what to do and how we
>must
>> >live.
>>
>> It's called a law-abiding society! Do you have something in mind to
>> replace this concept?
>>
>
>No.
Well stop whinging about "arseholes in power telling us what to do"
then.
>> > Then when some guy/women takes the bull by the horns and says "ok,
>> >I'm stuck on this shitty planet and have to live by the shitty rules and
>> >laws that some other cunt decided should be", then goes and earns their
>> >fortune,
>>
>> I bet the shitty planet isn't so shitty any more though, is it?
>>
>
>Not the point.
The point is that before he made his fortune the planet only appeared
shitty because of things like urban decay, underfunding of the social
infrastructure, fear of being attacked, having to wait months and
months on an operation, etc, etc. All of which can be alleviated,
to a certain extent, by public spending - which comes from, you
guessed it, income tax contributions, amongst other things. Now
taking on board the lower-earning workers are unable to contribute as
much, the duty then falls on the higher earners to make up the
balance towards the system that has made them so well-off in the first
place - whilst still living in their very comfortable existence.
That, Marco, is the point.
>> > the bastard government says "oh aye, we'll take 40% of that thank
>> >you".
>>
>>
>> >Fuck that.
>>
>> Meanwhile, in the ideal world of MM there's still loadsa people
>> stuck in their shitty planet, with their shitty lives and their
>> shitty prospects who aren't about to make a fuckin fortune!
>>
>
>Tuff luck (and don't call me selfish, cos I'm in the above category, and I
>still say "tuff luck")
No, it's tuff luck to any whinging fat cat fucks who have the gall to
complain about paying too much tax whilst earning a fortune!
>> You typify the "look out for number one" ideal espoused by Thatcher
>> and her cohorts during the 80's,
>
>Why thank you. And u can tell this from a few lines of text on a NG.
It's blatantly obvious from these "few lines of text". Your "tuff
luck" comments epitomise it!
>>which has unfortunately turned many
>> of our citizens into a bunch of greedy, selfish bastards. Would it
>> really hurt these fat cat cunts to give a bit back to the country that
>> has made them so well-off in the first place?!
>
>No, it wouldn't, you're right. What *is* wrong is that they should have to
>pay a higher percentage than anyone else.
But contributing through a higher tax bracket *is* the way to give a
bit back. Do you think if they were on the same rate as everyone else
they'd voluntarily donate cash to the govt?!
> Providing they have made their
>money legally, I think it's very unfair to charge them more just because of
>their success.
What is unfair is that some of these top executives get bumper
bonuses, huge share options, massive severance pay-offs, whether
they deserve it or not. The chairman of M&S was offered a £500,000
plus annual bonus even though the company hadn't shown much of an
improvemnet on the previous year, ffs! To his credit he turned this
bonus down, but it is an example of how the fat cats keep getting
fatter, even when they are failing to "earn" what they do!
Marty
Moody Marco
> > > Marco, is that the bird on the pc offering her services to the group
> > again.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hi Ally, this is Amanda, and no, not the whole group, just you (and
maybe
> > Mark if he's good)
> >
>
> Did Mark tell on me for slagging you again Amanda?
>
> (or is Amanda out for the night and Marks got her tights on again?)
>
>
I have, but I'm in practice for a panto I'm starring in...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.247 / Virus Database: 120 - Release Date: 06/04/01
The Bhoyo
"gonnyno" <noda...@ctf.com> wrote in message
news:bc84ftk0la9mb01q5...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 3 May 2001 01:51:03 +0100, "Jim Monaghan"
> <J...@monaghans3.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >>any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only
> >know
> >>of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by
the
> >>ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations.
> >
> >The provos also contain both denominations and in fact are far less
> >influenced by religion, being a marxist group, then previous
incarnations.
> >Ther's that Original IRA again, now I see you mean the IRA before the
split
> >in 69/70. If you consider a bunch of communist intelectuals in Dublin
> >theorising while a group of thugs in London and Belfast extort protection
> >money from their own people in the name of their cause a gthing worth
> >singing about then I would suggest you go back to UNi and read the books
> >again. In fact, many of the songs sung bt Celtic fans are about the
> >Provisional IRA and I am sure that most who sing the songs supported the
> >provos and would not agree with your version of events.
>
> are not and have never been a Marxist organisation. Under the
> influence of Roy Johnson in the late 1960's the Official IRA were a
> Marxist organisation. They copied the Russian strategy at Warsaw in
> 1944 by refusing to defend the North in 1969 thereby hoping a
> Nationalist slaughter would bring World opinion firmly on the side of
> the Republicans. Unfortunately for them, the Provos appeared with
> machine guns at the Battle of St Matthews and stopped the planned
> genocide.
>
> (I'm sure you knew that and might have been quoting someone else's
> post. It just wasn't very clear.)
The main point being a slaughter would have occurred. Later actions can
never detract from the heroics of this period.
The Bhoyo
Ally Dunn
> On Thu, 3 May 2001 18:21:47 +0100, "Moody Marco" <ma...@zoom.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Marty" <mart...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:3af18b92....@news.demon.co.uk...
> >> On Thu, 3 May 2001 17:41:19 +0100, "Moody Marco" <ma...@zoom.co.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >No, it wouldn't, you're right. What *is* wrong is that they should have
to
> >pay a higher percentage than anyone else.
>
> But contributing through a higher tax bracket *is* the way to give a
> bit back. Do you think if they were on the same rate as everyone else
> they'd voluntarily donate cash to the govt?!
>
they contribute extra through the fact they earn more and so their
percentage represents a higher figure.
Moody Marco
> But contributing through a higher tax bracket *is* the way to give a
> bit back. Do you think if they were on the same rate as everyone else
> they'd voluntarily donate cash to the govt?!
>
But if *everyone* was taxed at, say, 25% those earning £1,000 a month would
be paying £250, those earning £10,000 would pay £2,500 and those earning
£1,000,000 would pay £250,000. So those who earn more *are* paying more
than those who earn less, and no need for a higher bracket.
Come on the Hoops
> >Provisional IRA and I am sure that most who sing the songs supported the
> >provos and would not agree with your version of events.
- Sorry, I was only stating an opinion and I know of no songs sung by Celtic
support which are based around the Provos. Only songs I hear are about the
original IRA and speak about a free Ireland.
-COTH
Ross a.f.c
dominic.sut...@ntlworld.commmmmmm says...
>
> > Ross
> > afc
>
> Sounds more like a fucking concert!! ;)
We carry a large of support of musical and lyrical geniuses you know :-)
Ross
afc
Ally Dunn
what about GOHBSGOH?
Old Father Tim
Come on the Hoops wrote ...
> All of you who persistently bleat on about Celtic fans singing republican
> songs at away games are missing the point.
> If Celtic fans, the majority of whom have some form of Irish ancestry
> running in their family choose to sing songs about hoping for a united
> Ireland and an Ireland which was fought for by Men, women and children of
> both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (the original IRA) then so be it
Except for the fact that we are a football club. Not a political rally.
oft
Old Father Tim
Moody Marco wrote ...
> The point is though that the guy who earns £1 million a year does just
> that - he *earns* it.
Does he? So there is a direct connection between how hard you work and the
money you receive then?
oft
Old Father Tim
Come on the Hoops wrote ...
>
> slagging what I'm about to say but one of my subjects for my MA degree was
> Celtic history.
I have an MA degree in modern Celtic History from Harvard. I also have a PhD
in Irish Studies and I have done extensive research into Scotland's
influence on the Irish Nation so don't show yourself up.
Oh - and I have a big red racing car.
oft
Moody Marco
"Old Father Tim" <the.eg...@the.end.of.tim> wrote in message
news:9sCI6.21908$Kt2.2...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
And a monkey.
Jim Monaghan
The Bhoyo wrote in message ...>news:9cq9ts$a4e$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> >any songs which glorify the terrorists i.e. the Provisional IRA. I only
>> know
>> >of republican songs which romanticize and glorify the troubles faced by
>the
>> >ORIGINAL IRA which was indeed comprised both denominations.
>>
>> The provos also contain both denominations and in fact are far less
>> influenced by religion, being a marxist group, then previous
incarnations.
>> Ther's that Original IRA again, now I see you mean the IRA before the
>split
>> in 69/70. If you consider a bunch of communist intelectuals in Dublin
>> theorising while a group of thugs in London and Belfast extort protection
>> money from their own people in the name of their cause a gthing worth
>> singing about then I would suggest you go back to UNi and read the books
>> Provisional IRA and I am sure that most who sing the songs supported the
>> provos and would not agree with your version of events.
>>
>Provisionals were too busy fighting a war to extort money from anyone, if
>that's who you mean by thugs.
Read me again, it is you who suggested that the 'original' IRA were
preferable to the provos, and that it was now more religious base. I was
referring to your 'originals' the official IRA pre-1969. The provos are
Northern-based the officials in that day were Dublin-based and seen as
deatched from the struggle in the North.
>
>The Bhoyo
>
>
Jim Monaghan
>Jim, you're not being too clear in the above post. The Provisionals
>are not and have never been a Marxist organisation. Under the
>influence of Roy Johnson in the late 1960's the Official IRA were a
>Marxist organisation. They copied the Russian strategy at Warsaw in
>1944 by refusing to defend the North in 1969 thereby hoping a
>Nationalist slaughter would bring World opinion firmly on the side of
>the Republicans. Unfortunately for them, the Provos appeared with
>machine guns at the Battle of St Matthews and stopped the planned
>genocide.
>
>(I'm sure you knew that and might have been quoting someone else's
>post. It just wasn't very clear.)
Sorry gonny, you are off course right. I was trying to make a point to the
original poster who suggested that he only sings songs about the 'original'
IRA who contained both denominations. I was asking if by 'original' he
meant the official IRA, and expressed my opinion of them. At the same time
I was attempting to point out that if he is talking about an older
incarnation of the IRA then his point about denominations is wrong as
religion became less of an influence in the movement as the century moved on
not more of an influence. I can see now that it was jumbled and hope you
get my point. Assuming this is any clearer!
Jim Monaghan
Come on the Hoops wrote in message ...
But that is my point! The 'original IRA' that you speak about? Who are
they? If you are talking about the official IRA then the comments from me
and the history lesson fron gonnyno are more accurate description of them
than the romantic idea you may have got from songs.
My objection to the singing od the songs is based mainly on this. That the
majority of those singing do not know what they are talking about. They
don't sing songs about their history, they get their history from the words
of songs!
>
>
>
Tameside Emerald CSC
But do you really need to know the exact details of everything you are
singing just to sing a bloody song?
Can we not have this romantic ideal that we sing about without knowing the
entire history of it?
I like the songs I sing, whether I know every detail of why I'm singing it
or not...
Willie.
Jim Monaghan
gonnyno wrote in message ...
>the Provos for Marxists. By 'original IRA', does he mean the American
>Civil War veterans who invaded Canada under that name, in 1867?
Fuck knows? Did they use IRA as their name for their failed invasion of
Canada? I think he means the IRA that exists in the songs as opposed to any
real original IRA. You know the one, the one poor farmer armed only with a
battered old gun who has to fight the might of the British Empire to protect
his stash of 4 turnips which had been blessed by the local priest, and, of
course, he would have had a sweetheart waiting for him when he defeated the
evil enemy.
Come on the Hoops
"Jim Monaghan" <J...@monaghans3.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9d1iko$j56$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
history from singing. After all, my point was that the songs do not glorify
murder, only the struggle for a United Ireland. I know that you may add that
murder was carried out to effect the cause, but the songs do not speak of
it.
COTH
> >
>
>
Come on the Hoops
COTH
Come on the Hoops
"David H" <m...@at.home> wrote in message
news:42abftcj6jjqbnfjj...@4ax.com...
> You have a great nym and l know a lot of people who would love to.
eh??
COTH
Old Father Tim
Moody Marco wrote ...
>
> "Old Father Tim" wrote ...
> > Oh - and I have a big red racing car.
> >
> > oft
> And a monkey.
>
oft
Come on the Hoops
COTH
"David H" <m...@at.home> wrote in message
news:836dfts5tvg00pm9f...@4ax.com...
> Think about it man
Moody Marco
"Old Father Tim" <the.eg...@the.end.of.tim> wrote in message
Admit it - it's his car, he just lets u in it.
ZB
the hoops, does that make it any easier for you? Frankie Goes to Hollywood
anyone?
ZB.
Tameside Emerald CSC
ZB <z...@sodoffspammers.net> wrote in message
news:fvFJ6.8598$7_1.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Just leave it Zaid, DH isn't worth the time!
Willie.
Come on the Hoops
"ZB" <z...@sodoffspammers.net> wrote in message
news:fvFJ6.8598$7_1.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
>
COTH