Sinn Féin's attitude toward Real IRA arrests.

Happyman42

Laminations wrote: »

So the terms of release licenses and standard recall should apply to everyone, except people who have a bloody minded terrorist group to enact revenge if they are treated the same way as everyone else? The fight for equality of treatment under the law is important, when that treatment starts to negatively impact you then you shouldn't begin a fight for inequality of the system and specialist treatment.

I really hope we don't start governing based on your threats of 'do this, or else'

All you need to do is look at this in a balanced way, and see how hypcritical the British 'ACTUALLY' are in dealing with issues affecting this island.
How many members of Orange bands are in prison for intimidation, provocation and hatemongering?
To do that will destabilise the situation we are told, minister after minister will engage in placatory rethoric and call for calm, and lamely criticise. Yet here is a situation that has the potential to pointlessly enflame and increase resentment and we can't even get clarity on her medical condition and the documents pertaining to her internment?

Laminations

Happyman42 wrote: »

All you need to do is look at this in a balanced way, and see how hypcritical the British 'ACTUALLY' are in dealing with issues affecting this island.
How many members of Orange bands are in prison for intimidation, provocation and hatemongering?
To do that will destabilise the situation we are told, minister after minister will engage in placatory rethoric and call for calm, and lamely criticise. Yet here is a situation that has the potential to pointlessly enflame and increase resentment and we can't even get clarity on her medical condition and the documents pertaining to her internment?

Except one of the most famous ulster loyalists 'Mad dog' Johnny Adair was imprisoned in 2003 after his license was revoked. Michael Stone also had his license revoked. And in 2009 Torrens Knight hashish license suspended and was jailed.

This situation will inflame and increase resentment as long as you dishonestly refer to it as internment. If you portrayed Prices case as one of thousands who have their license revoked rather than some unique example of British oppression then there'd be little to galvanise support and marches.

It is you whose actions are inflammatory.

Happyman42

Laminations wrote: »

It is you whose actions are inflammatory.

As I keep saying to you, it is not 'my' actions we should be worried about.
The point is, does diplomacy and government intervention have a role to play in easing tensions and stopping the growth of violent organisations.
My answer is yes it definately has.
Stick to your (in this case) high moral ground and take the consequences. You can have no complaints, because we all know what will happen.

Happyman42

Happyman42 wrote: »

Your comments about holding Allen to 'account' and your one above clearly indicate that you favour the suppression of any political thought other than your own. Why shouldn't SF and the SWP sign this letter with a lot of others? They have a democratic mandate just like FF, FG and Labour.
Dispute it's contents by all means.
Despite people like you, we still live in a democracy where political thought is not suppressed... allegedly.:rolleyes:

How exactly is holding someone to account the same as suppressing their opinion? Do tell.

Happyman42

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

How exactly is holding someone to account the same as suppressing their opinion? Do tell.

He is entitled to his opinion, you are not entitled to 'hold him to account' as if it was illegal to have a contrary opinion to yours, having an opinion is not something a person 'has' to 'account' for in itself. You are entitled to disagree with his opinion though.

You're confusing me with Marian Price if you think that 'hold him to account' translates into anything remotely undemocratic.

You're practically insinuating that I want him taken out and knee-capped. A few leaflets placed around the sociology corridors will suffice, so that people can have a greater sense of what this guy, whose wages we are paying, really thinks.

Happyman42

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

You're confusing me with Marian Price if you think that 'hold him to account' translates into anything remotely undemocratic.

You're practically insinuating that I want him taken out and knee-capped. A few leaflets placed around the sociology corridors will suffice, so that people can have a greater sense of what this guy, whose wages we are paying, really thinks.

:rolleyes::rolleyes: good lord, we have rattled a cage!

He is entitled to his opinion, regardless if we pay him to run a sociology dept or not. And why would you think leaflets are an appropiate way to 'hold him to account'? His opinions are public record as far as I can see. If those recieving your leaflets don't know it then they probably aren't bothered by his opinions.
The fact that you would attempt to undermine his tenure of employment because he holds a contrary opinion to you, speaks volumes about you. What you are insinuating is that he can't have that job if he holds x opinion. It's just another form of attempted suppression, not very effective or honest, but an attempt at suppression all the same.

Exactly, he has put his position behind this public statement, and what i can do is facilitate his message to the students, and let them make up their own mind.

Where is the problem there?

Happyman42

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Exactly, he has put his position behind this public statement, and what i can do is facilitate his message to the students, and let them make up their own mind.

Where is the problem there?

Which is not 'holding him to account'. :rolleyes: You hold someone 'to account' for a wrong doing. Which is impossible in this instance no matter how much you desire it. All you can do is disagree.
His opinion is out there for you and his students to disagree with or agree with. Otherwise get on with your studies.

Well, sounds like you'd better get onto oxford about your new *definitive* definition of being held to account.

Happyman42

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, sounds like you'd better get onto oxford about your new *definitive* definition of being held to account.

Nah, I'll just print some leaflets, to tell people about something that was well known in the first place, that ought to do it. :rolleyes:

Fenian Army

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

From what I can find, it's all Eirigi, SF, and other assorted dirtbags who are calling for her release. Can you point me to the press releases etc of any other party that you claim, FF etc, are supporting her relief.

The Dublin City Council motion means nothing. It was put forward by SF and sponsored by the aforementioned bags of dirt.

I also see that a whopping 40 people turned up to a demonstration for her in Dublin - i.e. she has no support. In fact, I'm sure more people could have been mobilized to march so that she stays in jail!

This country has moved on. Why can't you, or Marian for that matter?

You should really get your facts right.

There was over a thousand at the recent march in Dublin. It was not a SF motion. I showered this morning, I'm not a dirtbag.

I'm not here to spoon feed, a quick google should tell you what you need to know.

Laminations, it takes a certain amount of arrogance to label the many many people who disagree with you as misled, hoodwinked. They have the same facts you do, they came to a different conclusion.

Funny how your hatred for SF and republicans shines through - when they want marian released they are evil bastards but others who agree (as I've said previously includes Nobel peace prize winers as well as many political parties, from the SDLP to FF) are poor little fragile minded souls who got hoodwinked. Come on.

Fenian Army

Laminations wrote: »

Except one of the most famous ulster loyalists 'Mad dog' Johnny Adair was imprisoned in 2003 after his license was revoked. Michael Stone also had his license revoked. And in 2009 Torrens Knight hashish license suspended and was jailed.

This situation will inflame and increase resentment as long as you dishonestly refer to it as internment. If you portrayed Prices case as one of thousands who have their license revoked rather than some unique example of British oppression then there'd be little to galvanise support and marches.

It is you whose actions are inflammatory.

Why were those people returned to jail... Let me guess(well, its not really a guess), it was for committing crimes?

Stone tried to murder lots of people in the assembly... hardly comparable to being at a speech

JustinDee

Fenian Army wrote: »

Stone tried to murder lots of people in the assembly... hardly comparable to being at a speech . . .

. . . condoning "murder lots of people" to such a degree, even holding the slip of paper for out-of-shape balaclava-clad to read from.

They didn't lick it off a stone.

Fenian Army

Fenian Army wrote: »

You should really get your facts right.

There was over a thousand at the recent march in Dublin. It was not a SF motion. I showered this morning, I'm not a dirtbag.

I'm not here to spoon feed, a quick google should tell you what you need to know.

Laminations, it takes a certain amount of arrogance to label the many many people who disagree with you as misled, hoodwinked. They have the same facts you do, they came to a different conclusion.

Funny how your hatred for SF and republicans shines through - when they want marian released they are evil bastards but others who agree (as I've said previously includes Nobel peace prize winers as well as many political parties, from the SDLP to FF) are poor little fragile minded souls who got hoodwinked. Come on.

My mistake, it was Eirigi that put forward the motion. One and the same anyway.

Also, do you have any evidence of this 1000 strong march? I would have trouble counting even 40 marchers on the street. There are far more people simply looking on with bemusement.



On a lighter note, it's good to see this newfound love affair between the republican faithful and Fine Fail in this thread. Although, I've yet to see any sort of press release or statement by FF who, going by this thread, seem to have turned into the Free Marian Price Party.



Who, exactly, do you think you are fooling?


Also, now that I am home, I see that the letter of support for Marian was from June. Not today, as implied.

Fenian Army

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

My mistake, it was Eirigi that put forward the motion. One and the same anyway.

Also, do you have any evidence of this 1000 strong march? I would have trouble counting even 40 marchers on the street. There are far more people simply looking on with bemusement.

On a lighter note, it's good to see this newfound love affair between the republican faithful and Fine Fail in this thread. Although, I've yet to see any sort of press release or statement by FF who, going by this thread, seem to have turned into the Free Marian Price Party.
Who, exactly, do you think you are fooling?
Also, now that I am home, I see that the letter of support for Marian was from June. Not today, as implied.

I was at the march at saw it for myself - there was easily a thousand who marched. You sure we are talking about the same one?

Yes the letter is from a while ago, new people are signing it all the while. As I said, google the bloody thing. FF tds have submitted parliamentary questions on her behalf, as have ULA and SF tds. Eamon O Cuiv has done a good bit of work. SDLP have released tons of statements and met with people. Other parties have done similar. I'm not here to spoonfeed you.

Its clear you arent interested in engaging in a sensible discussion given your inability to grasp basic facts and insistence on flaming and perpetuating untruths such as eirigi being the same as SF.

You're the one fooling yourself.

Fenian Army

JustinDee wrote: »

. . . condoning "murder lots of people" to such a degree, even holding the slip of paper for out-of-shape balaclava-clad to read from.

They didn't lick it off a stone.

Massive difference between trying to force your way into the chamber with weapons to kill people and holding a piece of paper with a speech

One is a crime, the other is not (charges were dismissed).

Fenian Army

Fenian Army wrote: »

I was at the march at saw it for myself - there was easily a thousand who marched. You sure we are talking about the same one?

Yes the letter is from a while ago, new people are signing it all the while. As I said, google the bloody thing. FF tds have submitted parliamentary questions on her behalf, as have ULA and SF tds. Eamon O Cuiv has done a good bit of work. SDLP have released tons of statements and met with people. Other parties have done similar. I'm not here to spoonfeed you.

Its clear you arent interested in engaging in a sensible discussion given your inability to grasp basic facts and insistence on flaming and perpetuating untruths such as eirigi being the same as SF.

You're the one fooling yourself.

This is literally the most populated picture I could find, taken from an angle which can only be described as flattering:



I am going to go out on a limb here and call you a liar, sir.

Fenian Army

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

This is literally the most populated picture I could find, taken from an angle which can only be described as flattering:



I am going to go out on a limb here and call you a liar, sir.

tbh I really don't care if you believe me or not... I was there, I marched and I know how many people were there. People were still marching down the left hand side of O Connell street when the band and the front of the march had stopped at the GPO.

Your basis for saying there was only 40 people is a picture which shows more than 40 marching, and thats only a small section of the march. I dont think I am the one speaking mis-truths.

Fenian Army

Fenian Army wrote: »

tbh I really don't care if you believe me or not... I was there, I marched and I know how many people were there. People were still marching down the left hand side of O Connell street when the band and the front of the march had stopped at the GPO.

Your basis for saying there was only 40 people is a picture which shows more than 40 marching, and thats only a small section of the march. I dont think I am the one speaking mis-truths.

Surely you can find a more accurate pictorial representation then? I don't really see more than around 40 people - there are two single-file lines of people along a stretch of O'Connell street that is about 20 meters long.


Is this the band you're talking about? Numbering about 10?



Note that there are far more people looking on than marching.

JustinDee

Fenian Army wrote: »

Massive difference between trying to force your way into the chamber with weapons to kill people and holding a piece of paper with a speech

One is a crime, the other is not (charges were dismissed).

Both sets of whackos represented. When some obese anonymous wally in fatigues needs somebody else to hold a sheet of paper, they are both threatening the people they allegedly are 'fighting' for. All for the self-serving cause of an illegal organisation ignorant to the will of the majority.

Quit trying to alleviate any of their delusions or make them out to be innocents just having a chin-wag in the open. They were doing everything but.
Thankfully not everyone is as quite literally stupid enough to align with the organisation in question.

You're done. No reply needed. You won't be changing anyone's mind, proving them wrong or otherwise.

Fenian Army

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Surely you can find a more accurate pictorial representation then? I don't really see more than around 40 people - there are two single-file lines of people along a stretch of O'Connell street that is about 20 meters long.


Is this the band you're talking about? Numbering about 10?



Note that there are far more people looking on than marching.

The picture you linked - see the van in the background? (you can just see the top of it - thats the Garda van that was at the rear of the parade), there was also lots more not pictured.

Why would I bother? I was there, I know how many marched. If you don't believe me, I dont really care.

Fenian Army

JustinDee wrote: »

Both sets of whackos represented. When some obese anonymous wally in fatigues needs somebody else to hold a sheet of paper, they are both threatening the people they allegedly are 'fighting' for. All for the self-serving cause of an illegal organisation ignorant to the will of the majority.

Quit trying to alleviate any of their delusions or make them out to be innocents just having a chin-wag in the open. They were doing everything but.
Thankfully not everyone is as quite literally stupid enough to align with the organisation in question.

You're done. No reply needed. You won't be changing anyone's mind, proving them wrong or otherwise.

What she did, was not a crime.

Laminations

Fenian Army wrote: »

What she did, was not a crime.

It didnt need to be for her to be imprisoned on standard recall. That's been pointed out to you many times.

Laminations

Fenian Army wrote: »

Laminations, it takes a certain amount of arrogance to label the many many people who disagree with you as misled, hoodwinked. They have the same facts you do, they came to a different conclusion.

Funny how your hatred for SF and republicans shines through - when they want marian released they are evil bastards but others who agree (as I've said previously includes Nobel peace prize winers as well as many political parties, from the SDLP to FF) are poor little fragile minded souls who got hoodwinked. Come on.

They were not presented with an even-handed summary of the facts at DCC. Louise Minehan portrayed Marian as some sick frail woman who couldn't hurt a fly being subject to British internment for doing nothing.

She did far from nothing.

And I include SFers in my list of the misguided, just not the ones on this thread who maintain the fallacy that she committed no crime therefore shouldn't be in jail. She was recalled after her release license was revoked, a situation which happens to thousands per year who don't commit 'criminal' offences or have charges dropped. She is unique only in the support she garners

Seaneh

Laminations wrote: »

She was re imprisoned for breaking the terms of her release license.

Only problem being she wasn't released under licence, she was pardoned.

The pardon then disappeared and a licence was invented.

So in essence, she is being held without trial for breaking a crime she isn't liable for.

Laminations

Seaneh wrote: »

Only problem being she wasn't released under licence, she was pardoned.

The pardon then disappeared and a licence was invented.

So in essence, she is being held without trial for breaking a crime she isn't liable for.

ALL early releases from life sentences are on license. It was reported in the papers at the time that she was released on license. Cite me some reports of this pardon and what it related to? Where is Prices evidence of the pardon? Why would an unrepentant terrorist witch of a woman get a complete pardon? If she got a pardon it was for the shorter concurrent 20 year sentence. There is far more likelihood that the pardon was invented then the release license since release licenses are common practice in these cases.

Has her solicitor from the time corroborated her story? Has anyone?

Fenian Army

http://www.anphoblacht.com/contents/22263

Only a matter of time one hopes

Laminations

Fenian Army wrote: »

http://www.anphoblacht.com/contents/22263

Only a matter of time one hopes

“It is clear once again that Marian Price is unfit to stand trial and should be released immediately

What is she standing trial for? She breached her license, she didn't commit a crime.

I've said I accept her release on humanitarian grounds but not an unconditional release into the community. An eating disorder should not erase the crimes she committed (originally) nor excuse her dissident behaviour.

Would you accept her release into hospital in-patient treatment for her mental issues and anorexia, to stabilise her weight, followed by an extended period of house arrest?

And possibly some anger management therapy.

So would you accept her release with conditions?

Fenian Army

No, and I believe she will get an unconditional release in the near future.