Toireasa Ferris again refuses to condemn Jerry McCabes killers

Raiser

Well Kerrys answer to Sharon Stone was on the radio again this morning and again saw no reason to condemn the thieving, scumbag criminals who in the process of botching a robbery shot dead a married father of five children in cold blood as he attempted to carrying out his professional duties.

- Running for a local seat in case she flops as a Euro Candidate and running for Europe in case the locals see through her, Toireasa is covering all the bases but what can this election Candidate offer anyone from such an incredibly dilapidated, rotten, indefensible moral platform?

turgon

Yeah shes just a run of the mill Shinner - and me saying that makes me a West Brit I suppose or something.

Good post here by Liam Byrne on Ferris' elector letter.

walshb

They aren't still harassing her for condemnation of an event that happened
when she herself was very young. This has been done to death. I remember a few years ago this was brought upon her!

The girl is a politician and if this is the best they can come up with
to discredit her, then it's sad!

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

They aren't still harassing her for condemnation of an event that happened
when she herself was very young.

"They" wouldn't be harassing her for a condemnation, if she'd just do what any right-thinking person would do and condemn it.

This has been done to death.

An unfortunate turn of phrase.

partyguinness

This is old news.

It says a lot more about the poor quality of Kerry Radio that they would bring this old chestnut up again. What about dealing with the real issues of this election. Were they that stuck for questions. Voters of Sein Fein know the position so there really is no point..it will not make one fecking difference. Just some cheap point scoring.

I wish people would get off over with their false indignation. The same people who stayed silent for years while, attended Sunday Mass and turned a blind eye to the abusers in the Church.

Get real people.

walshb

oscarBravo wrote: »

"They" wouldn't be harassing her for a condemnation, if she'd just do what any right-thinking person would do and condemn it. An unfortunate turn of phrase.

There have been hundreds of deaths due to the IRA and the Loyalists. What do you want here? And hundreds of times, both sides refused to condemn. Can we move on!
The girl was only a youngster when this happened. Why does she even have to comment
on something that she had NO part in?

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

There have been hundreds of deaths due to the IRA and the Loyalists. What do you want here?

An unequivocal condemnation of every murder by every murderer of any political persuasion.

It's not a lot to ask of someone who's supposedly committed to democracy. Think of it as an absolute minimum standard that I'd expect from anyone looking for my vote.

partyguinness

oscarBravo wrote: »

An unequivocal condemnation of every murder by every murderer of any political persuasion.

It's not a lot to ask of someone who's supposedly committed to democracy. Think of it as an absolute minimum standard that I'd expect from anyone looking for my vote.

Then don't vote for them.

The position of Sein Fein in relation to this matter is crystal clear and will not change.

Get over it.

oscarBravo

partyguinness wrote: »

I wish people would get off over with their false indignation. The same people who stayed silent for years while, attended Sunday Mass and turned a blind eye to the abusers in the Church.

Let's turn that around. What would you say if I criticised some of the people who are currently expressing anger at the church, on the grounds that they "stayed silent for years" on the subject of paramilitary violence?

There's a lot of anger being directed at certain quarters who are trying to downplay the horror of the current child abuse scandal. Why is it a problem if some of us are angry at those who would downplay the horror of a garda murdered in cold blood?

Liam Byrne

partyguinness wrote: »

Voters of Sein Fein know the position so there really is no point

But other voters who might be tempted to vote for someone who condones murdering our law enforcement officers might decide differently if they know about it.

It's amazing, really.....people demand answers to where candidates stand on abortion or divorce or whatever, and vote if someone condones abortion or otherwise.

Why the hell can't they do that if someone condones murder ?

Why shouldn't Radio Kerry ask ?

walshb wrote: »

They aren't still harassing her for condemnation of an event that happened when she herself was very young.

By that reckoning, if she was asked if she condemned the Holocaust or 9/11 and said that she wouldn't, you'd complain about the "before-her-time" question rather than the answer too ?

partyguinness wrote: »

I wish people would get off over with their false indignation. The same people who stayed silent for years while, attended Sunday Mass and turned a blind eye to the abusers in the Church.

WTF ? Most people going to Sunday Mass knew nothing about the level of abuse!

And ironically, if they knew they might have made an informed decision.

Which the people of Kerry might do now.

jimmmy

walshb wrote: »

There have been hundreds of deaths due to the IRA and the Loyalists. What do you want here? And hundreds of times, both sides refused to condemn.

The Unionist part and the DUP ( like most parties worldwide ) always condemned murders of innocent people, the murders of people doing their job as employed by the elected government ( eg the police etc ). Its incorrect to say " both sides refused to condemn ".

turgon

walshb wrote: »

Can we move on!

I think Ferris is the one who needs this advise.

walshb

oscarBravo wrote: »

An unequivocal condemnation of every murder by every murderer of any political persuasion.

It's not a lot to ask of someone who's supposedly committed to democracy. Think of it as an absolute minimum standard that I'd expect from anyone looking for my vote.

Did Ferris murder Jerry?

The woman doesn't have comment on this matter, like I said, she was
a child and had ZERO to do with it. Where does it end? Is this woman
expected to condemn any act that was committed by persons
within the IRA? What has it got to do with her?

Maggie Thatcher did quite well in Britain and I don't recall
her ever condemning the deaths of Irish men or women.

Ferris has nothing to be ashamed of and has the right to remain
silent when pressed by a couple of journos trying to
make a name for themselves

Sure she sank a ship in the Falklands without breaking sweat

oscarBravo

partyguinness wrote: »

Then don't vote for them.

The position of Sein Fein in relation to this matter is crystal clear and will not change.

Absolutely. And as long as their position remains as it is, there's not the faintest hope in hell that any member of Sinn Féin will ever get my vote for anything whatsoever.

Get over it.

Nope. Their position is unacceptable. When they change that position, I'll reconsider my view of them.

walshb

jimmmy wrote: »

The Unionist part and the DUP ( like most parties worldwide ) always condemned murders of innocent people, the murders of people doing their job as employed by the elected government ( eg the police etc ). Its incorrect to say " both sides refused to condemn ".

Innocent people YES, unless those "innocent" people happened to be Catholic or Nationalist or Irish or IRA members or Sinn Fein members!

And, fake condemnation IMO is a whole lot worse than NO condemnation!

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

The woman doesn't have comment on this matter, like I said, she was
a child and had ZERO to do with it.

She's standing for election as a member of a political party which actively supported people who murdered a member of this state's police force, and she continues to tacitly express that support.

I think the public are entitled to know whether a candidate will side with the state's law enforcement officers, or with those who would murder them.

walshb

BTW, Jerry was carrying out his duties, and one of them was to shoot to death the robbers if need be!
The robbers shot Jerry before he could shoot them. Sad, but true.

Liam Byrne

Let's just suppose for a second that Bertie lost the rag with the tribunal judge and shot him.....

Would you expect Cowen to have an opinion on it ?
Would you expect Cowen to evict him ?
Would Cowen's opinions and comments on it make you judge him ?

walshb wrote:

like I said, she was a child and had ZERO to do with it. Where does it end? Is this woman expected to condemn any act that was committed by persons
within the IRA? What has it got to do with her?

I assume she's had ZERO to do with the corruption in FF, either, but that doesn't stop her having an opinion on that, does it ?

jank

oscarBravo wrote: »

An unequivocal condemnation of every murder by every murderer of any political persuasion.

It's not a lot to ask of someone who's supposedly committed to democracy. Think of it as an absolute minimum standard that I'd expect from anyone looking for my vote.

Oscar didnt you say that us Irish never get over the past?;)
Maybe you should take a leaf from your own phrase.

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

BTW, Jerry was carrying out his duties, and one of them was to shoot to death the robbers if need be!
The robbers shot Jerry before he could shoot them. Sad, but true.

The "robbers" (how much did they get away with, again?) rammed Det Gda McCabe's car from behind, and riddled him with bullets while he sat stunned in his seat. He never reached for his gun.

Disgusting, disgraceful, sickening. But true.

walshb

It's old news. Sinn Fein never publicly condemned IRA actions.

Now, we're asking a woman who had NOTHING to do with Sinn Fein or the IRA when
Jerry was shot to comment on it. All for a story or to gain points?

Change the record. The same people who are asking for condemnation
couldn't give a toss and are simply trying to create a story and make a name for themselves

oscarBravo

jank wrote: »

Oscar didnt you say that us Irish never get over the past?;)
Maybe you should take a leaf from your own phrase.

That's a fair point, on the face of it. But I'm not talking about dragging up ancient history - I'm talking about the current Sinn Féin party, whose current stance seems to be that it's not a big problem to execute members of the state's police force.

Like I said - minimum standards.

partyguinness

Liam Byrne wrote: »

But other voters who might be tempted to vote for someone who condones murdering our law enforcement officers might decide differently if they know about it.

It's amazing, really.....people demand answers to where candidates stand on abortion or divorce or whatever, and vote if someone condones abortion or otherwise.

Why the hell can't they do that if someone condones murder ?

Why shouldn't Radio Kerry ask ?



By that reckoning, if she was asked if she condemned the Holocaust or 9/11 and said that she wouldn't, you'd complain about the "before-her-time" question rather than the answer too ?



WTF ? Most people going to Sunday Mass knew nothing about the level of abuse!

And ironically, if they knew they might have made an informed decision.

Which the people of Kerry might do now.

Okay. Sein Fein IMO will never exceed 10-12% of the vote. They will always hit that celing and will not break through it.

The people who vote Sein Fein are not ignorant as the politcial situation over the last 40 years or indeed the killings of Jerry McCabe. They know this.

You seem to be worred that people will vote for Sein Fein not realising that they not condemn the murder of Jerry McCabe and that this it is important that everyone is made aware of the postion.

Come on give the people some credit...:rolleyes:

Liam Byrne

walshb wrote: »

BTW, Jerry was carrying out his duties, and one of them was to shoot to death the robbers if need be!
The robbers shot Jerry before he could shoot them. Sad, but true.

This has got to be one of the most sickening posts I have read on boards.

Jerry was carrying out his duties on OUR behalf. LEGALLY.

The scumbag robbers were acting on their own behalf. ILLEGALLY.

There is NO comparison. :mad:

walshb

oscarBravo wrote: »

The "robbers" (how much did they get away with, again?) rammed Det Gda McCabe's car from behind, and riddled him with bullets while he sat stunned in his seat. He never reached for his gun.

Disgusting, disgraceful, sickening. But true.

Yes, but what the **** has this to do with Ferris?
She didn't do it, so why harass her to comment?

I do believe she and Sinn Fein regret the loss
of innocent persons in the conflict

partyguinness

oscarBravo wrote: »

She's standing for election as a member of a political party which actively supported people who murdered a member of this state's police force, and she continues to tacitly express that support.

I think the public are entitled to know whether a candidate will side with the state's law enforcement officers, or with those who would murder them.

Come on now..OscarB..you make it sound like some mass cover up to hide the truth.

As I have said above, the people who vote Sein Fein or ar likely to vote Sein Fein are well aware of their position. Give them some credit...

walshb

Liam Byrne wrote: »

This has got to be one of the most sickening posts I have read on boards.

Gerry Jerry was carrying out his duties on OUR behalf. LEGALLY.

The scumbag robbers were acting on their own behalf. ILLEGALLY.

There is NO comparison. :mad:

Calm down fella. Simply put, those men were scum. I know this, but
in the real world, they acted and acted before Jerry acted. They preserved
their lives. Jerry was there to intercept and protect our lives; in doing this he
had to be prepared to kill. Now, if I was a robber and armed and a scumbag. I would shoot to death a copper who could possibly shoot to death me.

Don't be making out I am saluting these criminals. I am not. I am pointing
out the reality of the situation!

P. Breathnach

walshb wrote: »

... I do believe she and Sinn Fein regret the loss
of innocent persons in the conflict

Might they be persuaded to go so far as to regret the killing of them?

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but what the **** has this to do with Ferris?
She didn't do it, so why harass her to comment?

She represents a political party whose official position is that the murder of a police officer is not something they're prepared to condemn.

If a representative of the Purple Party was running in my constituency, and that party's stated policy was that the priests who perpetrated the disgusting abuse of children over several years should not be condemned, I wouldn't vote for them either.

I do believe she and Sinn Fein regret the loss
of innocent persons in the conflict

Regretting the loss of someone, while tacitly condoning their murder, doesn't cut it for me.

Liam Byrne

partyguinness wrote: »

You seem to be worred that people will vote for Sein Fein not realising that they not condemn the murder of Jerry McCabe and that this it is important that everyone is made aware of the postion.

Less of the rolleyes, please; while you can choose to read it that way, I'd MUCH prefer if it went the other way.

That people condemned what should be condemned and therefore showed themselves to be true politicians and democrats.

That all candidates were above board morally and ethically - be that SF condemning and weeding out murderers and criminals, or FF condemning and weeding out corruption - and that we could concentrate on the policies and needs of the country without having to take into account the distracting sideshows.

THEN we could move on - and maybe even vote for the new, improved Sinn Fein, breaking that 10-12% ceiling.

But as you said yourself, they're stuck at that limit because most people - thankfully - don't agree with their self-inflicted stance.

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

Now, if I was a robber and armed and a scumbag. I would shoot to death a copper who could possibly shoot to death me.

And if a politician refused to condemn your actions in doing so, they wouldn't deserve a vote. Wouldn't you agree?

partyguinness

Liam Byrne wrote: »

This has got to be one of the most sickening posts I have read on boards.

Jerry was carrying out his duties on OUR behalf. LEGALLY.

The scumbag robbers were acting on their own behalf. ILLEGALLY.

There is NO comparison. :mad:

So its okay for Sein Fein to be in government in the North with Unionists...

After all we spent years asking the Unionists to go into Government with Sein Fein..we even voted overwhelming for the Good Friday Agreement to allow power sharing with Sein Fein.....without any public condemnations may I add.

But when Jerry McCabe is shot dead..we all of a sudden get all high and mighty about a refusal to condemn killing in Limerick.

Talk about double standards...

Raiser

Shinners wrote:

WE DIDN'T PERSONALLY PULL THE TRIGGER AND IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO - SURE TOIREASA WAS ONLY IN HER COT

Flirting with Godwin's Law here......

But the Holocaust happened a "long time ago" also - find me any individual who refuses to condemn that and then try to argue out your flawed rationale of "aw sure it happened ages ago" and "wasn't me Chief - we all busy singing RA songs in the pub that day"......

Fact is that a Garda was murdered by two-bit thieves and you can't ever defend the indefensible to a morally sound audience......

jank

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a fair point, on the face of it. But I'm not talking about dragging up ancient history - I'm talking about the current Sinn Féin party, whose current stance seems to be that it's not a big problem to execute members of the state's police force.

Like I said - minimum standards.

Unfortunately Oscar it is still the past so my point still stands. This happened about 13 years ago, not ancient history but not last year either. Everyone knows what happened. What is the purpose of bringing this up yet again yet to have another "those shinners" never learn rant? Everyone knows what they stand for...

You know very well what way this thread is going. GuanYin wont be happy!:pac:

partyguinness

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Less of the rolleyes, please; while you can choose to read it that way, I'd MUCH prefer if it went the other way.

That people condemned what should be condemned and therefore showed themselves to be true politicians and democrats.

That all candidates were above board morally and ethically - be that SF condemning and weeding out murderers and criminals, or FF condemning and weeding out corruption - and that we could concentrate on the policies and needs of the country without having to take into account the distracting sideshows.

THEN we could move on - and maybe even vote for the new, improved Sinn Fein, breaking that 10-12% ceiling.

But as you said yourself, they're stuck at that limit because most people - thankfully - don't agree with their self-inflicted stance.

I am entitled to use the emoticons I wish as they can be better at expressing an emotion then any sentence. Your sensitivity is duly noted.

turgon

The event happened years ago, but the standards still remain.

These standards are what we are voting on.

Liam Byrne

walshb wrote: »

I do believe she and Sinn Fein regret the loss
of innocent persons in the conflict

To the neutral observer, there is no reason to believe this.

You can believe all you want, but if Ferris wants votes she has to convince us.

As I said earlier, people will want to know where she stands on abortion, divorce, health services, etc, and she'll have an opinion on those......even though she had nothing to do with them, either.

She mightn't even use them, but is putting herself forward for election to provide services and govern for the good of the people, so the people need to know that she'll represent them.

If Europe's anti-terrorism committee were voting on a policy of some sort, how would you trust her to vote for the common good if she's not prepared to stand up for law and order ?

If Ireland was introducing witness protection, how would you know that her stance on it wouldn't be affected as her party's stance on releasing the scum involved in this from jail ?

Or that she wouldn't view them as "informers", rather than people doing their civic duty ? After all, if she's OK with Gardai doing their duty being murdered, how could you trust her to support your interests if you did your duty ?

So it IS relevant.

partyguinness

Are people honestly suggesting that they would vote for Sein Fein if only they would condemn the murders of Jerry McCAbe or the deaths of innocent people during the Northern conflict?

That is not credible IMO.

oscarBravo

jank wrote: »

Unfortunately Oscar it is still the past so my point still stands.

Only if you refuse to accept that there can never be any shades of grey; that if you hold a position then you must cleave resolutely to its most extreme edge.

If your position is that we must either cling to every vestige of the past, or put it entirely behind us, then we should either break off diplomatic relations with Denmark because of the Vikings, or forget about the abuse of children in care because it was "in the past".

In reality, you draw lines. For some people, perfidious Albion must never, ever be forgiven for 800 years of sins. I think that's a line too far.

This happened about 13 years ago, not ancient history but not last year either. Everyone knows what happened. What is the purpose of bringing this up yet again yet to have another "those shinners" never learn rant? Everyone knows what they stand for...

Yes, and it appears that they stand for murderers over and above law enforcement.

Why does this keep getting brought up? Because it's their current position. When they decide that they will support the forces of law and order rather than those who would murder them - then it's in the past.

partyguinness

I have always been curious about Sein Feins stance on this issue.

The men who carried out the killing were not acting in any official capacity or sanction from the IRA.

They were on a solo trip for personal gain (an ordinany decent criminal expediation to use an unfortunate phrase) so I am perplexed why Sein Fein would stand behind this. Obviously more to it behind the scenes.

Liam Byrne

partyguinness wrote: »

So its okay for Sein Fein to be in government in the North with Unionists...

After all we spent years asking the Unionists to go into Government with Sein Fein..we even voted overwhelming for the Good Friday Agreement to allow power sharing with Sein Fein.....without any public condemnations may I add.

There were two sides in the North. There were no sides in Adare.

In fact, it was in a different country. Same island, different country. As walshb indicated above, stating the facts doesn't mean that it's necessarily my preference, but it's still the facts (if you want to add the "sad, but true", fire away).

partyguinness wrote: »

But when Jerry McCabe is shot dead..we all of a sudden get all high and mighty about a refusal to condemn killing in Limerick.

Talk about double standards...

How, exactly is this related ? One was a robbery by thugs in our country that even Sinn Fein and the IRA disowned for a while as "unauthorised", the other was what we are continuously told was a struggle for the purposes of freeing the country; one was loads of accidental deaths and injuries caused by the "authorities not responding to warnings" (if you choose to believe the guff), the other was a deliberate shooting of someone who still had his gun in his holster for the purposes of stealing money.

These facts have been done to death - let's not re-hash them here again.

oscarBravo

partyguinness wrote: »

Are people honestly suggesting that they would vote for Sein Fein if only they would condemn the murders of Jerry McCAbe or the deaths of innocent people during the Northern conflict?

That is not credible IMO.

Speaking for myself: no, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying there's not a snowball's chance in hell that I'd even consider a Sinn Féin candidate on his or her merits, as long as he or she belongs to a party that tacitly condones murder.

When the party distances itself from that stance, I will begin to consider its candidates on their merits.

Liam Byrne

partyguinness wrote: »

I have always been curious about Sein Feins stance on this issue.

The men who carried out the killing were not acting in any official capacity or sanction from the IRA.

They were on a solo trip for personal gain (an ordinany decent criminal expediation to use an unfortunate phrase) so I am perplexed why Sein Fein would stand behind this. Obviously more to it behind the scenes.

Not only did they stand behind it, they stood with them for photos in jail and campaigned for their release.

NOT the type of behaviour you'd expect from law-abiding citizens.

RedPlanet

They certainly were wrong to kill the garda.
I don't know why they didn't get ejected from the PIRA, afterall there is fairly long-standing rule (order number 8 i believe) that says a volunteer should not use arms against forces of The Free State.
Regardless, it's history now.
Unfortunately the Irish government has refused to bring these PIRA prisoners under the terms of the GFA, of which the Irish government is a signatory. So they are in the wrong too.

And a suggestion to moderators: Can you just create a handy thread called "Bash SF" and just lump all these types of threads there? It'd make moderation easier and it'd make it easier for everyone else to ignore it.

Liam Byrne

RedPlanet wrote: »

Unfortunately the Irish government has refused to bring these PIRA prisoners under the terms of the GFA, of which the Irish government is a signatory. So they are in the wrong too.

No they're not, because it was claimed that this was an "unauthorised" operation. Using the word "unfortunately" shows your true colours there. The GFA was a "get out of jail free" for political prisoners, not a general pardon for everything you've ever done.

Afterwards, when SF & Co realised they could maybe use a backdoor to get the scum out of prison, they re-claimed it, but the Government didn't fall for it.

By your reckoning, a Christian Brother who happened to be a member of the IRA wouldn't be in jail for abusing kids :rolleyes:

RedPlanet wrote: »

And a suggestion to moderators: Can you just create a handy thread called "Bash SF" and just lump all these types of threads there? It'd make moderation easier and it'd make it easier for everyone else to ignore it.

Stating facts and wanting answers isn't "bashing SF".

oscarBravo

RedPlanet wrote: »

And a suggestion to moderators: Can you just create a handy thread called "Bash SF" and just lump all these types of threads there? It'd make moderation easier and it'd make it easier for everyone else to ignore it.

You want me to make a special case for the criticism of one political party?

Do you think Sinn Féin should be immune from criticism for their policies and positions?

RedPlanet

oscarBravo wrote: »

You want me to make a special case for the criticism of one political party?

Do you think Sinn Féin should be immune from criticism for their policies and positions?

On the first question: no.
If there are numerous threads running like a broken record all bashing the FF party and it's positions, or the Green party and it's positions, then certainly case can be made that they deserve their own thread too.
One the 2nd question: no.
But that is obvious.

oscarBravo

RedPlanet wrote: »

On the first question: no.
If there are numerous threads running like a broken record all bashing the FF party and it's positions, or the Green party and it's positions, then certainly case can be made that they deserve their own thread too.
One the 2nd question: no.
But that is obvious.

It seems you feel that criticism of a political party because of its refusal to condemn criminal behaviour is unwarranted criticism. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

walshb

Why is Ferris being targeted to condemn the killings?

This is not the first time. I'd be curious as to the motives
of those who are seeking this condemnation.

It's not like she condoned the act. She refused to condemn it. Big deal.
She is simply following party practice on the issue. She is
acting under orders from a rule that she herself did not make up!

What is so special about HER having to condemn an action she
had nothing to do with? It's old and sad to be
harping on about this.

partyguinness

Liam Byrne wrote: »

There were two sides in the North. There were no sides in Adare.

In fact, it was in a different country. Same island, different country. As walshb indicated above, stating the facts doesn't mean that it's necessarily my preference, but it's still the facts (if you want to add the "sad, but true", fire away).



How, exactly is this related ? One was a robbery by thugs in our country that even Sinn Fein and the IRA disowned for a while as "unauthorised", the other was what we are continuously told was a struggle for the purposes of freeing the country; one was loads of accidental deaths and injuries caused by the "authorities not responding to warnings" (if you choose to believe the guff), the other was a deliberate shooting of someone who still had his gun in his holster for the purposes of stealing money.

These facts have been done to death - let's not re-hash them here again.

I will tell you exactly how they are related. Although I thought my point was very clear:

1. We/our Government via ongoing and protracted peace talks and referenda voted and faciliated a peace process on this island of Ireland whish included Sein Fein. To paint a picture that it is somehow unconnected with down here is nonsense.

2. There were 3 sides in the North.

But the UUP or the DUP have no paramilitary affiiliations (officially at least). Indeed their parties contained members who lost family and friends to the IRA. A peace process was started we bent over backwards to move the situation forward to have all party inclusive dialogue and to sit down in Gov with Sein Feini..without the need for Sein Fein condemnations.

We had no problem or even thought twice about the need for Sein Fein in Government in the North but when there is a killing on our back door it's very different isn't it?

3. Sein Fein are an All Ireland party (and so are the GAA and think of the response you would get if you told GAA HQ that they sldnt fly the tricolour at GAA games in the North as its a "different country"..we are not talking about Somalia).

So to say that it was a different country and by implication nothing to do with the south is not a serious proposition. Attempts to compartmentalise the situaion is not realistic and that legitimises double standards.

So when Bertie Ahern said that he cld never go into Government with Sein Fein because of its paramilitary affiliations, can you imagine how laughable that was when he travelled to Belfast trying to convince Ian Paisley to enter Government with Sein Fein. Almost like we can cherry pick the bits we like.

Its all or nothing. Good enough for you but not us.

That my friend is the double standard.

oscarBravo

walshb wrote: »

Why is Ferris being targeted to condemn the killings?

I'm guessing geographical proximity. I'd be more inclined to ask why every SF candidate isn't constantly asked to condemn it, until they are pressured to change their stance.

This is not the first time. I'd be curious as to the motives
of those who are seeking this condemnation.

Again guessing: to keep the fact that the party tacitly condones murder in the public eye. I don't see that as a bad thing.

It's not like she condoned the act. She refused to condemn it. Big deal.
She is simply following party practice on the issue. She is
acting under orders from a rule that she herself did not make up!

Refusal to condemn a criminal act is tacitly condoning it.

Again: if a candidate refused to condemn the systemic abuse of children in institutions, would you say "big deal"?

What is so special about HER having to condemn an action she
had nothing to do with? It's old and sad to be
harping on about this.

Every member of her party should be asked to condemn it, until they do. That's how they'll make the issue go away.