A bit like the Cruiser.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/20/conor-cruise-obrien
http://www.counterpunch.org/meehan12222008.html

A controversial contradictory character

the ironing is delicious

I think the answer is not that people should not speak ill of the dead, but that people say something of value about them. Whether in praise or criticism of them, their work and their lives.

Horse, you got clipped because by your own admission you were not commenting on the subject in hand. Trow, I clipped yours because frankly it contained nothing but poor taste. Everything else (even your speculative reconstructions of history) stays.

Night all…

http://www.anfearrua.ie/db.asp?a=topicdisplay&tid=579005

I didn’t say I condoned it, rather that I wasn’t surprised by it. It’s not the same thing. An employee of the State should not be working for a foreign government, friendly or otherwise.

I agree with you that his support in later years for Zionism was inconsistent with his otherwise consistent opposition to nationalism.

As for speaking ill about anyone, one has to be worried about libelling the living – what puts off most publishers about printing anything ill about them – and then when they die, it’s not good form to speak about the dead’s shortcomings until they are forgotten about.

One, it seems, just cannot win!

I was no great fan of the man, but he was certainly a highly intelligent and erudite individual who had the courage of his convictions to go against popular opinion. I don’t think his obsession with media censorship while in the quaintly named position of Minister for Posts & Telegraphs acheived anything practical – and was probably counter-productive if anything,

I also feel he lost much credibility by joining the rathrer pointless UK Unionist Party, which was little more than an extension of Bob McCartney’s ego.

Still, he led a varied and prolific life and should be remembered for it.

You are wrong but let’s agree to disagree.

As regards the subject at hand, i think for the cruiser to be depicted as some towering intellectual is absurd. He let his emotional and entirely personal view of the republican movement cloud nearly everything he wrote about the north. He also wrote some remarkably fatuous nonsense about post-reunification Germany. And his rabid defence of Israel at all costs showed that his so called denunications of violence for political ends were entirely partial. Thank you for your information regarding his activities in the Congo. If there is more than a grain of truth in what you say, and i suspect that there is, then this fourth class intellectual also was a man of very dubious morals. Nevertheless he has died and i believe that this is not the day to speak ill of the dead.

Given your examples, one can say:

1. In light of Berie Ahern’s re-elections, one can use “what” as well as “which” despite the fact that you misstated “what” for “that”.

2. Regarding the interrogative you mentioned, one can use “which one” as well as “what”.

They are both relative pronouns, dummy.

And are you ever going to get your head out of your ass, and start talking about the topic of the thread???

Also do you really think The cruiser was anti-nationalist? Certainly he was a big fan of Zionism, which, regardless of its rights or wrongs is unequivocally a form of nationalism with many violent manifestations.

The song which i like the most is…(relative pronoun); you could use that here as well instead of which

Bertie Ahern was elected 3 times as Taoiseach, which was a remarkable achievement….(relative pronoun); here you cannot use that as well, as which here means which thing

Which one would you like? (interogative) here you COULD use what as well

What are you doing? (Interogative) here you cannot use which

What i would like to know is…(has the meaning of the thing, or the things which…)

WHAT CAN NEVER BE USED AS A RELATIVE PRONOUN WHICH IS AN IDIOSYNCRACY OF YOUR POSTS, TROWBRIDGE, AND CONSIDERABLY MARS WHAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE INTERESTING CONTRIBUTIONS.

I’m not suggesting documents weren’t passed. In the context I’d have been more surprised if they hadn’t been.

Jimmy, the private secretary to the head of Irish Special Branch, Chief. Superintendent John P Fleming, was arrested in the Gresham Hotel in 1972 passing state documents to an MI6 agent (who was also arrested). The British Intelligence mole within the Gardai’s chief’s office, garda sergeant Patrick Crinnion, and his handler, the MI6 agent ‘John Wyman’ of them were given a lenient prison sentence of 3 months and both left the country when released. This isn’t the fancy of Holroyd and ilk but the common practice of British intelligence in Ireland.