NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/soc/culture/celtic/8951

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-28 | 3.9 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!das.wang.com!ulowell!m2c!nic.umass.edu!noc.near.net!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!rohvm1!rbyaml
From: [e-mail] (Aengus Lawlor)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Casement update
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 26 Jan 93 19:20:42 GMT
References: <[e-mail]><[e-mail]
 c.com> <[e-mail]><[e-mail]>
Organization: Rohm and Haas Company
Lines: 71

In article <[e-mail]>, (Mark Holohan) says:
>
>   Mr. Mullethead is not only an extremist, but a British apologist.
>   Halpin, you should be a lawyer. I make a statement about frightened
>   unarmed mourners, Mullethead calls these people republican thugs,
>   but I'm to blame for driving him to this awful statement.
>
>   Watch, I'll do it again, unarmed mourners, unarmed mourners.  God
>   only knows what kind of terrible things I'll force mullethead to
>   say now.  I feel just terrible.  Now if mullethead goes and kicks
>   the wife, or kills the dog, I'll be responsible. Aren't I something.
Interesting how you dropped the "frightened" bit this time, Mark. You put
it in the first time to strengthen your case with people who haven't seen
film of the incident, but when it provokes a reaction from somebody who saw
a crowd that didn't look frightened, you quitely drop it.

Mullins views are as extremist as your's are, but he probably doesn't really
give a shit. Your postings don't make any converts to your "cause", they
just manage to piss off the sort of people who normally wouldn't bother to
express an opinion on the issue. It's a fair bet that huge numbers of readers
have put you in their kill files, and most of those have also killed this
thread. Any of these people who had the impression that the soldiers were
torn limb from limb by the crowd still have that impression, because you
pissed them off so much that they never read followup postings that dealt
with the issue.

>
>Then Aengus writes:
>|>case.  The big problems with posts like Mark Holohans is that it pushes
>|>people to refusal.
>
>   The truth sometimes has a way of pushing people to that.  But
>   I'm afraid you won't find me suger-coating it for those people.
Well, you certainly don't sugar-coat the truth. But you certainly don't
post the pure, unadulterated truth either. The people you are sugar-coating
it for probably don't read this news-group.
>
>|> And to think that somebody once accused him of being a
>|>propagandist!
>
>   I too was shocked!
>
>|>Like the British Army in Northern Ireland, Marks actions tend
>|>to have the effect of convincing "the enemy" that they were right all along.
>
>   Mullethead isn't the enemy, ignorance is the enemy.  While you and
>   your mates dance around in the grey areas, more innocent people are
>   being sentenced by British kangeroo courts for crimes they did not
>   commit.
And how exactly do you think your posts are going to change that? By informing
the British public, so that they rise up in revolt against the injustice?
And if ignorance is really the enemy, how many of your audience have come
over to your side, now that they're no longer ignorant, because you've
told them the "truth". Unfortunately, you succumbed to the temptation to
embellish just a little bit, and lots of people threw your "truth" out
with these embellishments (which they probably call "lies").
>
>                          Mark
>
>--
>  Mark Holohan, DEC, USA        "Character is what you are in the dark" - BB
>
>  The opinions expressed are not necessarily the opinions of
>  Digital Equipment Corporation.

Aengus
--
[e-mail]                    Aengus Lawlor
[e-mail]                   (who used to be [e-mail])
"How about some of that famous Dublin wit, Barman?"
"Certainly, sir. Would that be Dry or Sparkling?"