John Lennon ,Yoko Ono-The Luck of the Irish

Comments on 'John Lennon ,Yoko Ono-The Luck of the Irish'

1. No point, i put him in his place and he is gone.
2. Oliver1649 all commanders are responsible for the actions of
   their troops, Cromwell is no different. Can everyone just
   ignore him hes a sad little man whos been trolling this vid
   for months.
3. Oliver1649, cromwell was a fanatical religous barbarian
   responsible for the deaths of countless amounts of the Irish
   population, so your question is meaningless and the facts
   stand up against your nonsense.
4. Oliver1649, what i do know are these facts, under cromwell
   100s of thousands of civilians were expelled from their land
   "to hell of connact" thousands of men women & children were
   sent to the west indies and america as slaves, he burned
   towns like wexford to the ground and he denied food to 1000s
   by burning farms. Can you deny this ?
5. Oliver1649, Your repetition of the question is irrellivant
   and ive been sunk nowhere, im not a historian or an expert
   of british colonialism or state terrorism.
6. colmmernagh, For someone so convinced of his 'case' it
   seems strange (even funny) that you cannot sustain the
   slightest of challenges. Sunk by one simple question no
   less! Let me know when you have something better to offer.
7. colmmernagh, "i have never attacked you or demeaned you in
   any way"? Are you sure? Didn't you offer up the
   following?: "you....are a condisending sack of dog crap" "A
   condescending attitude from a tori boy" "You must be a
   retard" "try reading a book by an Irish man and not that
   crap youve learned in school" My friend not only did you
   write all of the above, you couldn't even spell or punctuate
   it correctly....lol.
8. this song would be good if yoko dint sing parts. but i
   respect her cuz john did.
9. I forgot smug, pompas, ignorant, biggot, and Irish holocaust
   deniar.
10. Also i have never attacked you or demeaned you in any way,
    how dare you say i have, liar. But you on the other hand are
    a condisending sack of dog crap and anyone can see that!
11. I have givin the sources he choose to ignore and discredit,
    he only used sources that backed up his wild ideas about
    cromwell. Also i care not for all the names you throw my
    direction. For all the names you throw i can throw equal
    back, so i wont waste my time. Cromwels name is in the dirt
    and will continue to draged through the dirt until the end
    of time, as long as there are irish people cromwell will be
    known as the demon he was. And you havent got a hope a
    turning anyone around.
12. colmmernagh, What next? Reilly, author of 7 books on the
    subject, is a fool? McKeiver, an award winning
    international historian, is 'trainspotter'? Morrill, the
    foremost authority on the period and an Uxbridge scholar, is
    an idiot? Priceless....lol.
13. colmmernagh, My friend, like all those who either don't
    have or can't make a case, you can only resort to attacking
    the messengers because you simply can't handle the
    message. Cough up something relevant and maybe I might sit
    up.
14. colmmernagh, Death is not proof of murder or even
    complicity in murder. I'm not sure you've grasped the
    concept. It's hilarious.
15. repetition
16. colmmernagh, What evidence did Tom Reilly ignore? His
    views are echoed in "A New History of Cromwell's Irish
    Campaign" by Philip McKeiver. Also, John Morrill, Professor
    of History at the University of Cambridge and the foremost
    authority on the period has supported Reilly's claims.
17. Lol @ "burden of proof" You are the one protesting his
    innocence agianst hundreds of Irish people on here who
    believe otherwise. My proof lies in population statistics
    during cromwells reign, newspaper accounts, and diarys from
    people of the day, and the undeniable fact of scorched earth
    policies, yours is a book by a discreded author, repetion of
    unanswerable question and words of the religous nutball
    himself.
18. colmmernagh, Perhaps you remember my post on evidence and
    the burden of proof? Innocent until proven guilty.... You
    have admitted you cannot prove guilt. All the available
    eyewitness evidence suggests Cromwell did not order the
    deaths of non-combatants. You are wasting court time again
    it seems.
19. colmmernagh, My friend you have provided nothing.
    Nothing. It is laughable. At least you have admitted that
    you cannot provide any eyewitness accounts to support your
    claims. Also, eyewitness Dean Nicholas Bernard was the
    preacher of St Peter's church in Drogheda. Lol....please
    explain how he can be considered an accomplice of Cromwell.
20. Dont think so !
21. lol, "The Sunday Times" do you think the sunday times done
    there research like professor Jason Mc Elligott St John's
    College Cambridge
22. I have addmitted i dont know of any eyewitnesses, but then,
    like you, im not a historian. Now, without using the words
    of the accused and his accomplices, can you provide evidence
    of cromwells innocence as i have provide evidence to his
    guilt.
23. colmmernagh, "Tom Reilly's work....humbles us all....this
    is an important book. He is scrupulous in his examination
    of evidence, he has the necessary scepticism, he is
    assiduous in his research and he quotes primary sources
    extensively". The Sunday Times, 1999.
24. All meaningless and sounds to me like "off topic" jibberish.
    This does nothing to disprove his guilt, and, are you not
    coming from a traditional historical perspective also ?
25. Because tom reilly choose to ignored evidence, such as diary
    accounts and news papers of the time his theories are
    irrelivent.