Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The FF Mafia

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    snyper wrote: »
    What damage? Ivor doesnt technically break the rules,

    Interesting additional word added so that you're "technically" correct.

    I called it morally and ethically wrong; stop rewording it in order to make it more acceptable.
    snyper wrote: »
    he is called up on the expenses and is stopped and is been held up for it.. where is the damage?

    Does anyone in FF reckon he should repay it ?
    snyper wrote: »
    What effect has it had to the running of the country on a practical level, ok so the 60k could probably have been used to heep 1 "asylum seeker" in mosney for a year.

    Since when is it €60K ? Are you deliberately lowering the amount in order to make it seem more acceptable ?

    Also, why use the asylum seeker in the patronising quote marks ?

    Why not - for example - point out that the €81,000 would almost cover the cost of a second-hand MRI scanner, or pay the wages of 2 or more Special Needs Teachers ?
    snyper wrote: »
    They're not link by bloodor emotion but they are linked by their goals. If my son was a drug dealer, yes, i would break both his legs and leave him within an inch of his life but i wouldnt kick him out of my family - he just wouldnt sell drugs anymore

    OK - but that's a massive difference to just asking him to "stop", as you suggested should apply to Callely.

    What's the "leg-breaking" equivalent in FF ?

    Plus it completely ignores anyone whose life he has made **** of before you got him to stop.

    Personally, I'd just disown him. But that's my ethics.
    snyper wrote: »
    Its a tired rebuttal i have to give you, but a valid one -there is a global recession, we were never going to avoid it, i credit the government for the degree of the fall due the over reliance on the construction industry, but to say that they are the sole responsibility is either being naive or failing to see the wood from the trees

    Why is it a "valid" rebuttal, considering you're rebutting something that no-one is suggesting ?

    Why - again - did you drop in extra words such as "sole responsibility" that no-one suggests ? Was it so that your reply could seem reasonable ? Because it's typical FF spin and it's bull......I'm surprised you didn't actually mention Lehman Bros altogether.

    No-one suggests that FF have "sole responsibility", but they made a bad situation 1,000 times worse through the "over reliance and encouragement of the construction industry" that you mentioned, fuelling the fire, and then even managed to compound that error by dealing with it in a way that wouldn't involve nationalisation, and then nationalising anyway, giving us the worst of both solutions.

    Of course, don't take my word for it......there's a few well-respected authors of banking reports that you're completely ignoring via your attempted misdirection, relying on the introduction of the word "sole".

    Between that and "technically", you're coming across as someone happy to obfuscate and excuse the inexcusable.


  • Options
    #63
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Why do some people always assume that people have to be a member of ANY party, or that criticism of FF is scoring party-political points, rather than simply being what it is - criticism based on FF actions ?

    For the record, I was never a member of a politicial party, but would have considered joining the PDs, back in O'Malley's time.

    Then they completely lost their way, both socio-economically and ethically, so I stopped voting for them.

    That's what you're supposed to do when a party goes against what's good for the country.

    What I find amusing is some posters bashing a party and then claiming they have no party affiliations. It reminds me of a person that bashed a certain party and claimed to have no political motivations. Yet the same man appeared on posters for local elections claiming they pressured him to do so. Thankfully the electorate saw through him.


  • Options
    #64
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Wide Road wrote: »
    What I find amusing is some posters bashing a party and then claiming they have no party affiliations. It reminds me of a person that bashed a certain party and claimed to have no political motivations. Yet the same man appeared on posters for local elections claiming they pressured him to do so. Thankfully the electorate saw through him.

    I'm not completely sure what you're trying to get at here ?

    I could guess, based on the fact that you quoted me, but then I might be off the mark, so I'll ask straight out : are you trying to suggest that I might have an affiliation to a particular party ?

    Then again, I might be being over-sensitive, considering I don't "bash" any particular party; I merely point out and question the available facts.


  • Options
    #65
    Shea O'Meara
    Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    snyper wrote: »
    Significant high level? Please elabourate on that by what you mean significant. Do you have any idea the number of elected members of the FF party there have been, as opposed to the few that have been seen to do wrong?
    When your defence is based on the ratio of good to bad apples per barrel you're on a loser.
    snyper wrote: »
    Very Martin Lutherish speech, but you didnt answer the question i asked, just more of the same "crooks" "tossers" and "criminal" jargon.
    Firstly, the man gave a good speech;) Thank you.
    Secondly those in question have been mentioned numerous times.
    snyper wrote: »
    Seriously, im not a member of FF, i might sound like it, but im not. Id simply love to receive a little more substance to why FF are a mafia and perhaps why Labour or FG would provide us with a better government.
    Again, why do those supporting FFail, (members or not) change topic when FFail is the thread? Start a Lab/FG/SF thread if you want to discuss other parties.
    snyper wrote: »
    If you can do that i will gladly vote for Lab / FG in the Next election
    To simplify, FFail condone and support any actions by any minister as long as they bring in votes. I am not working for Lab/FG, vote for who ever your conscience tells you to.
    snyper wrote: »
    To say then that all by association are guilty because they "supported them" is also being naive at least.
    Aiding and abetting. I believe you are very naive on this issue.
    snyper wrote: »
    losing a TD will also mean losing government..
    And that my friend is FFail in a nutshell. Hang on to power at any cost.
    snyper wrote: »
    So the next rebuttle i hear comming is that they should show some spine or moral leadership and get out of government.. well if moral leadership is what you are looking for move to Tibet and vote for the dalai lama, If you want spine, i think the one thing you can credit FF fail for is their conviction to steer this country out of recession.
    How very Pol Pot of you;) Don't misquote, I was speaking on cleaning up the party, (although this would obviously lead to a loss of seats). So you agree FFail are a party of no morals. As regards "their conviction to steer this country out of recession." :D
    snyper wrote: »
    Im not looking for moral leadership im looking for a government that makes good economic and social decisions.
    You cannot and would have no interest in making decisions for the good of others if you have no morals or a sense of public over self.
    snyper wrote: »
    Im not particularly thrilled by the currnet leadership, but any political alternative have not yet impressed me with alternative solutions
    This is the FFail/Mafia thread, go to the defenders, but not followers of the parties devoid of morals thread.


  • Options
    #66
    Shea O'Meara
    Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    Wide Road wrote: »
    What I find amusing is some posters bashing a party and then claiming they have no party affiliations. It reminds me of a person that bashed a certain party and claimed to have no political motivations. Yet the same man appeared on posters for local elections claiming they pressured him to do so. Thankfully the electorate saw through him.

    Snyper, you posted a thanks. I think he means you;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    I'm not completely sure what you're trying to get at here ?

    I could guess, based on the fact that you quoted me, but then I might be off the mark, so I'll ask straight out : are you trying to suggest that I might have an affiliation to a particular party ?

    Then again, I might be being over-sensitive, considering I don't "bash" any particular party; I merely point out and question the available facts.

    Maybe you're George Lee in disguise. He probably has no affiliations to FG anymore. Seriously though, I don't know or even care if you have any party affiliations. However, one could never accuse you of being a FF supporter. I find it amusing your claim that you don't "bash" any party.


  • Options
    #68
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Wide Road wrote: »
    Maybe you're George Lee in disguise. He probably has no affiliations to FG anymore.

    Couldn't tell ya. And despite my observations 3 or 4 years ago in relation to the economy having all (unfortunately) come true, I'm no expert commentator. So no - I'm not George Lee. In fact, I post under my own name and stand over everything I say.
    Wide Road wrote: »
    Seriously though, I don't know or even care if you have any party affiliations.

    Good, because I don't. And I'd hate you to land yourself in it by being so blatantly wrong.
    Wide Road wrote: »
    However, one could never accuse you of being a FF supporter.

    Thankfully; I'd take it as an insult. Or maybe laugh my head off. Depends on the mood.
    Wide Road wrote: »
    I find it amusing your claim that you don't "bash" any party.

    Why ? The word "bash" is subjective. It implies an element of unfairness, or "just for the sake of it".

    Any opinion I have of FF is based on their corruption and incompetence and arrogance.

    So no - I'm not "bashing" them. I'm objecting to their many unacceptable actions.

    Even if you'd been objective and said "always critical / sceptical", you might (indeed, would) have had a point.

    But "bashing" ? No - you're wrong.


  • Options
    #69
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Shea O'Meara wrote: »
    Snyper, you posted a thanks. I think he means you;)

    No Shea, wrong again. On the law of averages you will get one right soon.


  • Options
    #70
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Liam, I know you choose to disect each post that you selectively answer, and you do it very well I must add. However something keeps coming to the surface. If you are so exact on your beliefs, I don't think there is a party for you. The one thing is that you are very interested in politics but What Do You Believe In?


  • Options
    #71
    Gravy Fanatic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭Gravy Fanatic


    Fianna Fail have done a good job, theres too much blueshirt and communist propoganda out there now against the boys since the recession came in. Sure would the others have done any better at all? I wouldnt think so now.

    A bit of a hit this recession this is, but the boys are working hard to get back and track and will be rewarded like they deseve to be by getting elected. If anything FG and Labour are more akin to the mafia.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Wide Road wrote: »
    Liam, I know you choose to disect each post that you selectively answer, and you do it very well I must add. However something keeps coming to the surface. If you are so exact on your beliefs, I don't think there is a party for you. The one thing is that you are very interested in politics but What Do You Believe In?

    Good question. And I'll respect it by giving an answer (although mods, feel free to move this elsewhere if it's going too far off topic).

    I believe in ethics, fairness, consistency, honesty, accountability and giving everyone the means to have a life (both financially and socially), working hard and being rewarded for same (up to a point - I have no interest in millionaires or profiteering). I also believe in encouraging entrepreneurship (the current approach in Ireland being that if you take a chance on working for yourself and it doesn't work out then you get no dole or benefits whatsoever).

    I believe that there should be price controls to avoid profiteering on things that everyone NEEDS (basic food requirements, transport, insurance, heating, accomodation, education).....these should be provided on a non-profit basis, with people earning their living by providing them at a "make a living" charge.

    Anything else is a luxury, and can be charged at market rates.

    I believe in voting with your conscience and conviction, and abandoning the party whip crap; by all means negotiate or make a judgement call, but vote on the topic, not because you're handcuffed.

    I strongly disagree with corruption, stroke-pulling, rip-off, gambling that affects others who didn't sign up, lying, waste, anti-social behaviour (which includes the non-standard working 20 hours a day while ignoring your family) and paying people for doing nothing whatsoever. I also disagree with subsidising lifestyle choices like having children that you can't afford (either financially or time-wise) so I wouldn't have the state subsidise that to the extent that it does.

    I believe in sustainable green issues, but not the current government's approach of taxing the bollox out of everything before providing an alternative.

    And I disagree with quangos and stroke-pulling and "jobs for the boys".....everyone should get opportunities based on their ability and track record and nothing else.

    So you're right; there is no party that suits me. Unfortunately. But having said that, I don't think I'd survive a party whip anyway.


  • Options
    #73
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Liam, judging on the last few weeks, you're more of a Tommy Broughan than a George Lee. I believe you are too honest for politics.


  • Options
    #74
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Wide Road wrote: »
    Liam, judging on the last few weeks, you're more of a Tommy Broughan than a George Lee. I believe you are too honest for politics.

    Not sure what the Tommy Broughan reference is about, but thanks (I think).

    I've been told to consider it, but the above has been mentioned (I will admit that I'm no saint, although "too honest for politics" does leave a LOT of scope for being less-than-perfect) and the other issue is that I probably WOULD end up like George Lee through frustration at the status quo and unwillingness to rock the boat.....I'd get no support from many of the self-interested and would probably be ostracised and voted against for suggesting less holidays, less pay and expenses and no pensions-while-working.

    As I said, Shane Ross is the only politician I'd actually admire, followed (with a few reservations) by Pat Rabbitte.


  • Options
    #75
    Shea O'Meara
    Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    Wide Road wrote: »
    No Shea, wrong again. On the law of averages you will get one right soon.

    That was a joke, which goes for yourself, no affiliations but quick to defend. I am discussing the party currently in power based on the thread topic.
    Show me one incorrect post I have made? Based on the ethics of FFail I believe them corrupt. You can disagree, but in my view I'm not wrong.


  • Options
    #76
    paddyland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 932 ✭✭✭paddyland


    Wide Road wrote: »
    Liam, judging on the last few weeks, you're more of a Tommy Broughan than a George Lee. I believe you are too honest for politics.

    I am presently reading 'Bertie Ahern and the Drumcondra Mafia' by Michael Clifford and Shane Coleman.

    I always knew Bertie Ahern was his own man, before he was Fianna Fáil, and that he shafted his own as well as everyone else. What I didn't realise, is just how many of his own Fianna Fáil party he shafted ruthlessly in his grasp for power. He systematically tore asunder Fianna Fáil in Dublin, to establish himself as grandmaster. His own party. His own colleagues.

    When you are faced with a machine as ruthless and unprincipled as Bertie Ahern's, how can you possibly maintain standards of decency and fairness and honesty? Tony Gregory could have attested to that, or even George Colley, who was Tánaiste in the Fianna Fáil government when Ahern deliberately and systematically demolished him.

    It is impossible to stand before the electorate on a platform of honesty and integrity, because the various mafia, in particular the FF mafia, will use every dirty trick in the book to undermine you. In such a case, it is the political system itself which is inadequate, but it remains in the power of those same mafia to protect that.

    There is very much an appetite in this country for honesty and integrity. Fianna Fáil do not offer that, and stand in the way of any change to the political system that might deliver it. All that remains is to use the media, the tribunals, Dáil committees, whatever there is, to relentlessly expose the realities of Fianna Fáil, and hope to undermine the lies that wins them power time and time again. They seem to have a stranglehold on this country, a kind of self-ordained grandfather rights, and until that is broken and exposed, we cannot change the political system to prevent as much as possible it's subversion by mafia-styled outfits, who would sell the country and it's people down the river for their own short term political survival.


  • Options
    #77
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    paddyland wrote: »
    There is very much an appetite in this country for honesty and integrity. Fianna Fáil do not offer that, and stand in the way of any change to the political system that might deliver it.

    To be fair, I don't think FF have a monopoly on this aspect. Witness the supposed "objections" to the long holidays amid the laughing and joking. Witness the general unwillingness to implement a proper expenses system or pay cuts.

    Plus the fact that the Greens and the Independents all voted with the Government, putting on record their "confidence" in O'Donoghue, O'Dea and Cowen. They're not FF, so they're far from blameless when it comes to retaining the status quo.

    Yes, FF are by far the most corrupt, but in terms of the true honesty and integrity that this country needs, there are a lot more who talk the talk and yet refuse to back it up.


  • Options
    #78
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Paddy, what has my quote on Liam Byrne got to do with your last post?


  • Options
    #79
    paddyland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 932 ✭✭✭paddyland


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    To be fair, I don't think FF have a monopoly on this aspect. Witness the supposed "objections" to the long holidays amid the laughing and joking. Witness the general unwillingness to implement a proper expenses system or pay cuts.

    Plus the fact that the Greens and the Independents all voted with the Government, putting on record their "confidence" in O'Donoghue, O'Dea and Cowen.

    Yes, FF are by far the most corrupt, but in terms of the true honesty and integrity that this country needs, there are a lot more who talk the talk and yet refuse to back it up.

    Everyone in the Dáil is playing the same game, on the same board. It is the Fianna Fáil game. If there were a general election tomorrow, and a FG/Lab coalition came to power, there would be minimal change. Because there would be new players, but the game would be the same. Fianna Fáil created the game, wrote the rules, and everyone is afraid to substitute a new game.

    Unless politics, as established by a succession of predominantly FF governments is turned on it's head by an incoming party, and a whole new game, a whole new understanding of what politics means is introduced, that does not have a single fingerprint of FF on it, then we go nowhere. As I mentioned in the OP, the deck is loaded, and throwing out the jokers makes no difference. We need to throw out the whole loaded deck, and that means the whole political game as established and upheld by FF since the time of de Valera.

    Politics is for the people, not for an elite group of people who enroll themselves to the profession of politics, whatever party they belong to. Would Fine Gael or Labour throw out the deck, and start afresh? Or are they too tied to the Fianna Fáil way of doing things, too afraid of politics for people? Too many people have a vested interest in the status quo. The question is, do a majority have an interest in maintaining the staus quo? Are there enough people in the country to stand behind a complete overhaul of the political system? Because that is the risk a new government faces in bringing in the necessary changes.


  • Options
    #80
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    To be fair, I don't think FF have a monopoly on this aspect. Witness the supposed "objections" to the long holidays amid the laughing and joking. Witness the general unwillingness to implement a proper expenses system or pay cuts.

    Plus the fact that the Greens and the Independents all voted with the Government, putting on record their "confidence" in O'Donoghue, O'Dea and Cowen. They're not FF, so they're far from blameless when it comes to retaining the status quo.

    Yes, FF are by far the most corrupt, but in terms of the true honesty and integrity that this country needs, there are a lot more who talk the talk and yet refuse to back it up.

    To whom do you refer to Liam?


  • Options
    #81
    paddyland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 932 ✭✭✭paddyland


    Wide Road wrote: »
    Paddy, what has my quote on Liam Byrne got to do with your last post?

    Read it and see.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Wide Road wrote: »
    To whom do you refer to Liam?

    I would have thought that was relatively obvious ?

    All the Greens who voted for bailouts and NAMA and voted confidence in Cowen
    All the Independents who did likewise

    PLUS

    Anyone in FG or Labour or whoever that gave the soundbite of objection safe in the knowledge that nothing would change, but hypocritically wanted the opposite to their objection, maintaining the status quo.

    I don't know individually how many or who the above applies to, but I've no problem being consistent in criticising / objecting to it.
    paddyland wrote: »
    Everyone in the Dáil is playing the same game, on the same board. It is the Fianna Fáil game. If there were a general election tomorrow, and a FG/Lab coalition came to power, there would be minimal change. Because there would be new players, but the game would be the same. Fianna Fáil created the game, wrote the rules, and everyone is afraid to substitute a new game.

    Sorry, paddyland, but that's a cop-out.

    I'll be consistent and say that anyone who "plays FF's game" from within FF and supports and condones the corruption is the most to blame.

    But you cannot have that stance and then completely absolve anyone from outside FF who "plays FF's game".

    Yes, those in FF are more culpable, because they have the power to change. They can directly vote against their corrupt leaders and change from within if they wish.

    Those outside FF can't do that, so they're not as bad. But in terms of maintaining the indirect "status quo", those outside FF who choose to play along are almost as bad.

    You either have ethics or you don't. And if you don't, you should be judged accordingly.


  • Options
    #83
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    paddyland wrote: »
    Read it and see.

    Paddy, I did read it. I said A poster on this site was more like Tommy Broughan than George Lee. You then talk about Bertie. Please explain.


  • Options
    #84
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Wide Road wrote: »
    I said A poster on this site was more like Tommy Broughan than George Lee.

    And I'm still waiting for an explanation of what that comparison means! ;)


  • Options
    #85
    paddyland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 932 ✭✭✭paddyland


    In this thread, I am pointedly not referring to corruption of individuals in politics, but rather the general corruption of the political process, where votes are a kind of reward for political favouritism, leading to elections becoming auctions, based around unreasonable and unsustainable promises, and at worst, outright lies.

    All the parties practice this, but I see it as a process orchestrated and dominated by FF, and played by the other parties too simply to keep up as much as possible with the FF 'machine.' It would be interesting to see, if FF were gone tomorrow, would FG, Labour and the others, continue to play the game in the same manner, or would there be an appetite for a more accountable and honest form of politics.

    Fianna Fáil have a monopoly on protecting corrupt individuals within their party ranks, but all parties play their part in maintaining a political system which has proven itself inadequate for the people of Ireland. Who among them will stand up and make the necessary shift that makes politics more people centred and less party centred?


  • Options
    #86
    paddyland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 932 ✭✭✭paddyland


    Wide Road wrote: »
    Paddy, I did read it. I said A poster on this site was more like Tommy Broughan than George Lee. You then talk about Bertie. Please explain.

    Sigh.

    You suggested Liam Byrne was 'too honest for politics.'

    I gave an example of why honesty cannot survive under the current political system. How could you maintain a platform of honesty, when faced, for example, with the political machine of Bertie Ahern?

    My whole purpose in this thread is to try to highlight, in my own awkward and meandering way, how I see the whole political system as corrupted, and how I see one party in particular as responsible for maintaining that, while all parties are tied into it, whether willingly or unwillingly.

    You also suggested that there is no party for Liam Byrne to support. I too, have no party to support. Failing that, I would vote for whichever party would move towards political reform, the reform which might help to prevent mafia parties like FF from subverting this country.


  • Options
    #87
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Shea O'Meara wrote: »
    Show me one incorrect post I have made? I'm not wrong.

    I was not quoting Snyper as you claim. Now leave it at that. There is more important issues I want to post on. I can't be any nicer to you.


  • Options
    #88
    Shea O'Meara
    Closed Accounts Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Shea O'Meara


    Wide Road wrote: »
    I was not quoting Snyper as you claim. Now leave it at that. There is more important issues I want to post on. I can't be any nicer to you.

    Misread and misquoted. I say again:
    Shea O'Meara wrote: »
    That was a joke, which goes for yourself, no affiliations but quick to defend. I am discussing the party currently in power based on the thread topic.
    Show me one incorrect post I have made? Based on the ethics of FFail I believe them corrupt. You can disagree, but in my view I'm not wrong.

    Senator Ivor Callely has insisted that his principle residence is in West Cork, even though he is registered to vote - and receives his postal correspondence to his family home in Dublin.

    And the beat goes on....


  • Options
    #89
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Shea O'Meara wrote: »
    Misread and misquoted. I say again:


    Senator Ivor Callely has insisted that his principle residence is in West Cork, even though he is registered to vote - and receives his postal correspondence to his family home in Dublin.

    And the beat goes on....

    Now Ivor is on the scene. Look if it makes you happy fine post away whatever pleases you. Just leave me out of it.


  • Options
    #90
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    freewheeler wrote: »
    Yeah i've already read it..didnt take long at all actually..quite simple stuff really..the usual deflection from the topic which is 'THE FF MAFIA' I know it probably makes for uncomfortable reading for such as yourself, but there is actually quite a lot to be learned from the original thread..if you don't understand the points being made, maybe you could get someone to explain them to you?

    I asked but no answers from you or others. Have you explained Sean Barrett, Ml Noonan, FG debts being repaid, Enda changing party donations etc. No. Now please take as much time as you need, but next time try and give some answers please.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Wide Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 412 ✭✭Wide Road


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    And I'm still waiting for an explanation of what that comparison means! ;)

    I meant that you don't like being influenced by a party whip system hense the Tommy Broughan comparison. George didn't want to be in politics at all.


Advertisement