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

Would you consider voting a Majority Fianna fail for the next government?

Options
1…1718202223…25

Comments

  • Options
    #572
    Srianadh
    Registered Users Posts: 48 ✭Srianadh


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Yes, and if you read my reply:

    No you're not reading me. These were not "Vote Labour into a majority" campaign promises; these were "If you vote Labour into coalition with FG we will do this" promises (which they made in the last week when it was looking like an FG majority). That's a blatant lie from Labour and they will be rightly crucified for it. There's no way to spin it Anynama. A lie is a lie is a lie.


  • Options
    #573
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    yermanoffthetv wrote: »
    Your the one deflecting mr no opinion. If you dont like con men, conspiracy theorists and serial liars then obviously you dont vote for any party! oh wait thats right you dont because then youd be a hypocrite if you did. You dont say what you are, thats the problem so how can we have a constructive discussion. You little snipes indirectly calling DDI supporters nutters and deluded doesnt help the case. You have nothing but your own negativity.

    Edit: Im in Australia, you want to call me tomorrow at a reasonable hour ill pm you my number im going to bed now.

    [slaps forehead]

    Name another conspiracy theorist politician in Ireland.

    Name another Freeman politician in Ireland.

    What do you want me to say, what party I support?

    I literally don't support any.

    If an election was held next week I'd have to bust my ass learning everything I could about the individual politicians in my area.

    That's my honest answer.

    --

    If you wanna Skype on Monday I'll happily do that. I don't think I can afford phone calls to Australia!


  • Options
    #574
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    Srianadh wrote: »
    No you're not reading me. These were not "Vote Labour into a majority" campaign promises; these were "If you vote Labour into coalition with FG we will do this" promises (which they made in the last week when it was looking like an FG majority). That's a blatant lie from Labour and they will be rightly crucified for it. There's no way to spin it Anynama. A lie is a lie is a lie.
    Which is why I said what I said. If you expect perfection from politicians, you are goosed. The best you can hope for is that they are mostly competent and are not corrupt.

    Is there a party out there that you would rely on to not break a single campaign promise? In this country, or any other?


  • Options
    #575
    solas111
    Registered Users Posts: 399 ✭✭solas111


    I have long since stopped believing anything that is said by Irish politicians and political parties. If there was an election tomorrow I could say for certain that I would not vote for FF, FG, Labour, Sinn Fein or the despicable Green Party.

    I knew little or nothing about DDI until I saw them mentioned on this thread and while I would be somewhat sceptical about how their model of democracy would work in practice, I also believe that they are worth a second look. Ben Gilroy was also an unfamiliar name until recent days. Since seeing his name mentioned here I have followed some of the links and have watched the u-tube videos. He comes across as a bit ‘off the wall’ and I’m not sure that I would like to depend on his support in a fight against the Courts and Bankers Club but having said that, the guy does make some valid points regarding the constitution and how these sheriffs, bailiffs, receivers etc. think that they are the law.

    Ben Gilroy has been called some pretty unpleasant names by one or two posters on this forum but apart from the name-calling I don’t see any specific charges laid against him. I don’t know the guy from Adam so will someone please explain why he is suspected as being the anti-Christ whose coming heralds the end of the world?


  • Options
    #576
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    solas111 wrote: »
    but having said that, the guy does make some valid points regarding the constitution and how these sheriffs, bailiffs, receivers etc. think that they are the law.
    The point is that they are NOT good points - he's talking out of his ass. You may agree with the sentiment that people should be allowed to live in property that they are not paying for, but the facts of his arguments are all nonsense.
    solas111 wrote: »
    Ben Gilroy has been called some pretty unpleasant names by one or two posters on this forum but apart from the name-calling I don’t see any specific charges laid against him. I don’t know the guy from Adam so will someone please explain why he is suspected as being the anti-Christ whose coming heralds the end of the world?
    Look into the Sovereign/Freeman cult - he's one of them.
    Freeman on the land, also known as FMOTL, FOTL, Footle or simply freeman,[1] is a form of pseudolegal woo in various English-speaking countries. Freemen believe they can opt out of being governed, and that what normal people understand to be "laws" are merely a form of "contract" that applies only if people consent to it.[2]
    Freemen hold that we are all subject to a massive international legal conspiracy perpetrated for the profit of the elites, but you can hack the system if you just use the right form of words.[3] They believe only in their version of natural law, which they call "common law." In practical terms, they believe this means they do not have to pay taxes, debts, mortgages, etc. because we were all deceived and if you say the right form of words this fact will be accepted.
    Freemen believe they can declare themselves independent of government jurisdiction using the concept of "lawful rebellion": that all statute law is contractual and therefore only applicable if an individual consents to it. They assert that what everyone else regards as "the law" doesn't apply to them as they have not consented to a contract with the state,[4] even going so far as to claim they have a lawful right to refuse arrest if they do not consent. They insist that the government is a corporation, are obsessed with maritime law, and call themselves things like "John of the family Smith." Essentially, they're hilarious and somewhat less threatening sovereign citizens.
    No freeman arguments have ever succeeded in court; some have even explicitly ruled that the term "freeman on the land" has no legal significance when the argument is raised.[5] Actually using the arguments gets people into worse trouble, including fines, asset seizures, contempt convictions and criminal records. However, this doesn't stop freemen from claiming that it works.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #577
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,652 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Which is why I said what I said. If you expect perfection from politicians, you are goosed. The best you can hope for is that they are mostly competent and are not corrupt.

    Is there a party out there that you would rely on to not break a single campaign promise? In this country, or any other?

    That's a cop-out. Loads of corruption going on.
    They told lies and made promises they obviously had no intention of keeping.
    Then they gave their families and friends handy jobs which is cronyism and nepotism. Didn't the Labour leader's wife even get fixed up with a 90+ k paying job?


  • Options
    #578
    solas111
    Registered Users Posts: 399 ✭✭solas111


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    The point is that they are NOT good points - he's talking out of his ass. You may agree with the sentiment that people should be allowed to live in property that they are not paying for, but the facts of his arguments are all nonsense.

    Whether I agree or disagree with what Ben Gilroy says is not the issue. I have stated that he has made some (to me) valid points about the constitution and the receivers etc. You have replied that they are not good points and you could be right or wrong about that but you have not put forward any evidence to support your case.

    Stating that “he's talking out of his ass” and “the facts of his arguments are all nonsense” proves nothing. I don’t know the guy and know nothing about him so I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until there is evidence or at least some allegation that would stand up against him. The jury seems to be still out on his connection with the Freemen.

    There seems to be a cosy cartel of solicitors, barristers, judges, accountants and a few more of the chosen few running the show in this country so anyone who challenges them gets my attention. Until the cartel is broken, voting for FF, FG, Labour, Sinn Fein or the Green Party will be as effective as pissing against the wind.


  • Options
    #579
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    solas111 wrote: »
    Whether I agree or disagree with what Ben Gilroy says is not the issue. I have stated that he has made some (to me) valid points about the constitution and the receivers etc. You have replied that they are not good points and you could be right or wrong about that but you have not put forward any evidence to support your case.
    To be honest, I'm not here to spend all my time educating anyone. The information is all out there for you - just make sure you are looking at reliable sources. Ben Gilroy, DDI, Peopleforeconomicjustice and all his other groups are NOT reliable sources. I and others didn't arrive at our conclusions at random.

    Have a look at the Freeman megamerge thread on this site, or the Freeman thread on www.thepropertypin for further insights. I believe Gilroy features in both.
    solas111 wrote: »
    Stating that “he's talking out of his ass” and “the facts of his arguments are all nonsense” proves nothing. I don’t know the guy and know nothing about him so I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until there is evidence or at least some allegation that would stand up against him. The jury seems to be still out on his connection with the Freemen.
    Look up the Freeman stuff I linked to. Then look up Gilroy's words and deeds. If you have eyes, you will be convinced.
    solas111 wrote: »
    There seems to be a cosy cartel of solicitors, barristers, judges, accountants and a few more of the chosen few running the show in this country so anyone who challenges them gets my attention. Until the cartel is broken, voting for FF, FG, Labour, Sinn Fein or the Green Party will be as effective as pissing against the wind.
    There will always be an educated elite in any system. There was an elite in Soviet Russia FFS, the difference is that if you have some wit and study in school and college here, you can join them.

    I have issues with the big 4 accountancy firms, the Law Society and just about everything else in this country. That doesn't mean that voting for a loon/crook/liar is the solution either, except possibly as a protest vote.


  • Options
    #580
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    tayto lover wrote: »
    That's a cop-out. Loads of corruption going on.
    Such as? I suggest you report it to the Gardaí if you have any information.
    tayto lover wrote: »
    They told lies and made promises they obviously had no intention of keeping.
    Then they gave their families and friends handy jobs which is cronyism and nepotism. Didn't the Labour leader's wife even get fixed up with a 90+ k paying job?
    Yup. Nasty stuff, I agree. Worse than Fianna Failure? Don't be ridiculous.


  • Options
    #581
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,652 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Such as? I suggest you report it to the Gardaí if you have any information.

    Yup. Nasty stuff, I agree. Worse than Fianna Failure? Don't be ridiculous.

    Fianna Fail should never be allowed run the country again.
    BUT FG/Labour are not far behind in many people's opinions. Not ridiculous at all.
    Are you denying the cronyism and nepotism?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #582
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Are you denying the cronyism and nepotism?
    Do you see a denial? :confused:


  • Options
    #583
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Why is Gilroy trying to keep the Irish people in the dark about his Sovereign Citizen/Freeman beliefs?

    Why don't you ask him?


  • Options
    #584
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Phoebas wrote: »
    'Suspending' bailout loan repayments is most definitely a default. But, I must say I find it amusing that you criticise the current lot for not giving the people a direct say on the bailout and at the same time you excuse DDI for acting in the same manner, even though giving the people a direct say is their main policy plank.

    And you failed to answer the question - while they 'suspend' repayments, should they also suspend drawing down and spending bailout loans?

    Well, if that situation arose, whereby there would be a legal review, then it would become a legal matter, so that would be for the legal people to negotiate. I would'nt be educated enough to give you a definitive answer to that.


  • Options
    #585
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Why don't you ask him?
    Because he isn't to hand in the first place, and I've already see him lie to the public about his sovereign/Freeman leanings, so I've little faith that he'd tell me the truth anyway.


  • Options
    #586
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    If Bertie Ahern said in an interview that he was completely honest, in spite of a mountain of evidence, would you believe him? :confused:

    You say, in spite of a mountain of evidence. Now, I'm not saying you're right or I'm not saying you're wrong, but this evidence that you mention, is it evidence of bribery and/or corruption while in office, and if so, why was he not arrested (like Ray Burke). Now, if we had direct democracy in this country, and if a politician was found to be corrupt or taking bribes, would'nt it follow that if the authorities were found to be turning a blind eye, then the people have the power to ensure that the authorities aswell as the politician in question are held to account.


  • Options
    #587
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Well, if that situation arose, whereby there would be a legal review, then it would become a legal matter, so that would be for the legal people to negotiate. I would'nt be educated enough to give you a definitive answer to that.
    It's not that complicated DH - if you don't pay the money on the day it is due, you are in default. That's all there is to it.


  • Options
    #588
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    darkhorse wrote: »
    You say, in spite of a mountain of evidence. Now, I'm not saying you're right or I'm not saying you're wrong, but this evidence that you mention, is it evidence of bribery and/or corruption while in office, and if so, why was he not arrested (like Ray Burke). Now, if we had direct democracy in this country, and if a politician was found to be corrupt or taking bribes, would'nt it follow that if the authorities were found to be turning a blind eye, then the people have the power to ensure that the authorities aswell as the politician in question are held to account.
    But that is the responsibility of the judiciary, not the legislature. You are getting your branches of government mixed up. Presumably the people become the legislature, and you still need an executive and a judiciary?

    (of course it's a scandal that he isn't thoroughly investigated under the current system, which does not exactly fortify my general position)


  • Options
    #589
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    These guys REFUSE to answer any questions but demand endless answers. It's basic trolling.

    Darkhorse has dodged a simple question for 24 hours.

    Which one did I not answer, as you were like a detective with all the questions? It was'nt purposely, if I missed answering one of them. By the way, you really did give me the impression that you were a Psychic when you came out with that prediction stuff, and to be honest, that is a pet hate of mine. Anyway, thats a different story. But if you want to ask the question that I did'nt answer, then I will endeavour to answer it for you.


  • Options
    #590
    TheConway2
    Registered Users Posts: 3 ✭TheConway2


    I'd rather clean my balls with industrial grade heavy duty sand paper then waste a single vote on Fianna Fail.


  • Options
    #591
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Fair enough, but I'm not a political party and it's not election time! :p

    I'm all for constitutional reform and I'm pretty annoyed with the government that they seem to have walked away from it, but I think Direct Democracy couldn't work in practice at a nation state level. We need to take influence out of the hands of gombeens like Phil Hogan.

    OK, with this in mind, part of the Direct Democracy ideals is the recall system in respect of politicians who promise one thing to the people who vote them in, then do the opposite. This has to be a good thing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #592
    April O Neill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,305 ✭✭✭April O Neill


    hfallada wrote: »
    and FG who were promising the Celtic tiger again within 6 month of power

    No they weren't.


  • Options
    #593
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    He doesn't just post it on his door, he makes it available as a temple on his website and encourages people to use it.

    I'm not being, Milan, but could you give me a link to his website, (I have a good few drinks in me, so fingers not working too well).:eek:


  • Options
    #594
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    The merger of FF and FG will happen at some point imo, coupled with controlled democracy. The pure version is 'beautiful in theory, however in practice it's a fallacy.'


  • Options
    #595
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    solas111 wrote: »
    I have long since stopped believing anything that is said by Irish politicians and political parties. If there was an election tomorrow I could say for certain that I would not vote for FF, FG, Labour, Sinn Fein or the despicable Green Party.

    I knew little or nothing about DDI until I saw them mentioned on this thread and while I would be somewhat sceptical about how their model of democracy would work in practice, I also believe that they are worth a second look. Ben Gilroy was also an unfamiliar name until recent days. Since seeing his name mentioned here I have followed some of the links and have watched the u-tube videos. He comes across as a bit ‘off the wall’ and I’m not sure that I would like to depend on his support in a fight against the Courts and Bankers Club but having said that, the guy does make some valid points regarding the constitution and how these sheriffs, bailiffs, receivers etc. think that they are the law.

    Ben Gilroy has been called some pretty unpleasant names by one or two posters on this forum but apart from the name-calling I don’t see any specific charges laid against him. I don’t know the guy from Adam so will someone please explain why he is suspected as being the anti-Christ whose coming heralds the end of the world?

    Or, heralds the end of cronyism and nepotism in Irish politics?


  • Options
    #596
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    I don't think there's any suggestion whatsoever that Inda is racist.

    Except if yer black, maybe.


  • Options
    #597
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,131 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    There are plenty of valid reasons to take issue with the way FG have run the country in the last two years.

    However, it utterly baffles me that anyone thinks there is a single party or person that could have negotiated the last two years in government without instigating any cuts or austerity. We let FF run this country into the ground for 30 years and yet somehow blame FG and Lab for not completely fixing the problem painlessly in two years.


  • Options
    #598
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Well, if that situation arose, whereby there would be a legal review, then it would become a legal matter, so that would be for the legal people to negotiate. I would'nt be educated enough to give you a definitive answer to that.
    What a cop out.
    You're 'educated' enough to determine that we should suspend bailout repayments pending a legal review, but not educated enough to determine if we should suspend spending bailout money pending the same legal review.


  • Options
    #599
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    darkhorse wrote: »
    I'm not being, Milan, but could you give me a link to his website, (I have a good few drinks in me, so fingers not working too well).:eek:

    Teach a man to fish darkhorse...


    however, if you wanna answer the question you refuse to answer, I'll happily post that link.


  • Options
    #600
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Which one did I not answer, as you were like a detective with all the questions? It was'nt purposely, if I missed answering one of them. By the way, you really did give me the impression that you were a Psychic when you came out with that prediction stuff, and to be honest, that is a pet hate of mine. Anyway, thats a different story. But if you want to ask the question that I did'nt answer, then I will endeavour to answer it for you.

    This is a lie ^^^

    I have explicitly asked the question and re-quoted for darkhorse on numerous occasions....

    There's a REASON he won't answer it, btw.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #601
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    darkhorse wrote: »
    OK, with this in mind, part of the Direct Democracy ideals is the recall system in respect of politicians who promise one thing to the people who vote them in, then do the opposite. This has to be a good thing.

    Why is this a good thing?

    What if they did the opposite because it was the right thing to do?

    And what if the candidate you replaced them with was much worse?

    Recall them?

    It's a silly idea.


Advertisement