In this case the ‘victim’ is a pol, so he knows that his views won’t please everyone, thats the risk he takes all the time. No reason to hassle him though, no matter who he is. I don’t think, from what I’ve heard/seen that he was actually assaulted, he fell and then he was assaulted, perhaps. Either way, no way to treat another person, regardless of their age.

Bye, Barry

In no way was he trying to show both the MSM story and the online content and get to the truth. He is a hater of the aged and his blog has revealed his deep, dark, sick soul.

Well done Mulley, without you we would never have known that by linking all the content it would so clearly demonstrate Fealty’s hate of pensioners that was only cloaked by his now unachievable blood lust for reporting the north’s conflict.

(seriously what a load of crap)

Have you got a link to the admission? I’m afraid I can’t see the sitting on him.

What struck me at the time was the obvious disparity with the Irish Times report that said he was allegedly attacked outside Liberty Hall. The video indicates (though doesn’t prove) that he fell over inside the building. That’s the reason I thought it worth blogging.

I added the question mark to the title (shortly after) to beef up my original caveat about the editing and the dark in the text of the blog. The nearest thing to a conclusion I ventured was that the disparity was embarrassing.

As my colleague on the Telegraph Shane Richmond has said, http://url.ie/aal:

“The internet removes the time barrier. Without it, we never stop, and still we’re never completely right. But everything can be changed. Publish what you know now; learn more, add more. It’s never finished and it’s never completely right.”

Now it seems that you’ve hit upon new information which has arisen (I linked to CL’s piece, again very shortly after the original piece went up), ie that he was then sat upon by his interrogators: although a link or a source would be handy to take this further.

I’ll update Slugger with a link to this thread.

As he said on his own site, When fear of losing the debate over-rides the concept of the original plan to have an open exchange of thoughts or ideas with others, isn’t it amazing how personalities, backgrounds, or beliefs creep in?

Indeed it is, Caoimhín. Amazing.

Indeed it is.

They sat on him for crying out loud. They admit to sitting on him. You don’t just go and sit on people. How can anyone justify sitting on someone because they won’t answer a bloody question. I can’t imagine Paxman trying that one on Michael Howard.