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

Sinn Féin the most popular party in latest poll (mod warnings in OP)

Options
1…2021222426

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Godge wrote: »
    They got their answer, all will be revealed next week.
    "I'll tell you some other time about those bodies." would therefore have been a valid answer from McDonald in your eyes.


  • Options
    #693
    gladrags
    Registered Users Posts: 6,028 ✭✭✭gladrags


    "Ah yes, but that only works if there is other verifiable evidence. In Gerry's case, he told one story about when he knew about the abuse on TV and another in court. Given that it is Gerry's word against another as to which version is true, there is no possibility of a conivction for perjury as the reasonable doubt exists which is that he lied to the TV programme.
    You still don't seem to get it.."

    As you admitted in your last reponse, you are expressing your opinion, and thats all is it, and all it will ever be.

    Your opinion is clearly skewered, this individual is innocent, and like me and you, will remain innocent.

    "A car is stolen one night on Ned's road. Ned tells the neighbours that he didn't sleep well that night and that he was up several times and saw two guys steal one of the cars on the road. The gardai arrest two guys. Ned gets scared and when called to court, says in court that he slept through the whole incident and saw nothing and his conversation with the neighbours was mistaken. Now, there is no way of proving perjury in that case because it is Ned's word against the neighbours. Did Ned tell a lie or did he perjure himself?"

    Perjury, is not for me to decide, it would be arrogant to do so, and illegal.

    You are now making this up as you go along, your Ned story is fantasy, and no court of law would use this hearsay and babble.

    "Similarly, we know that Gerry Adams at the very least tells lies, and might well be a perjurer. We can't go further than that but we can go that far."

    Who is "we" ?

    You are now back full circle, making false allegations, you were forced to admit that this was just your opinion, now he "might" be a perjurer, and "at the very least" tells lies.

    I will not use your rhetoric, but you need to look at your contradictions in this thread.

    Sometimes resentment and bitterness can blind our judgements,in the rush to point the finger at others.


  • Options
    #694
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    raymon wrote: »
    The incident was carefully choreographed to generate a populist story.
    Choreographed by FG by the looks of it.
    raymon wrote: »
    Shame on Sinn Fein for denying others a chance to question the government.
    LOL, why would anybody bother when they won't answer anything anyway! No bloody loss at all!


  • Options
    #695
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,486 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Choreographed by FG by the looks of it.
    LOL, why would anybody bother when they won't answer anything anyway! No bloody loss at all!

    So riding roughshod over the democratic process of the house should be the way forward for the shinners from here on?


  • Options
    #696
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    So riding roughshod over the democratic process of the house should be the way forward for the shinners from here on?
    FG decided to do that by refusing to answer questions in the Dail, as they are required to do.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,486 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    FG decided to do that by refusing to answer questions in the Dail, as they are required to do.

    No

    Shinners did it because they didn't like the answer they got.


  • Options
    #698
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Valetta wrote: »
    Still missing the point that what she did was quite undemocratic .

    Depends on your definition of democracy. I would say protecting a Taniste and aiding her in avoiding answering precise questions was the first undemocratic event.


  • Options
    #699
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    No

    Shinners did it because they didn't like the answer they got.
    The answer was "I won't answer."
    Funny, you've been claiming SF do this and whining about it for yonks.


  • Options
    #700
    gladrags
    Registered Users Posts: 6,028 ✭✭✭gladrags


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No; we're dealing with logic. In my example, can you explain how I neither lied to the journalist nor committed perjury?

    You may be dealing with logic, and thats fine.

    Your logic has absolutely no bearing whatsoever, on the guilt or innocence of any individual.

    It has no relevance and no resemblance, to the constitutional rights of the individual to a fair trial, and to the presumption of innocence.

    Luckily


  • Options
    #701
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    So riding roughshod over the democratic process of the house should be the way forward for the shinners from here on?

    I'd argue that refusing to answer questions at question time definitely qualifies as "riding roughshod over the democratic process of the house". Sean Barrett never has any difficulty enforcing relevance when the opposition are speaking (and I have no issue with that at all, proper order) but this is completely absent when government TDs give meandering, irrelevant responses to very simple questions.

    As I said in the other thread, both in opposition and in government Joan Burton has a terrible record for this kind of stonewalling. I can't be the only one who finds it extremely irritating? The Ceann Comhairle as chair is responsible for keeping debates on topic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,486 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I'd argue that refusing to answer questions at question time definitely qualifies as "riding roughshod over the democratic process of the house". Sean Barrett never has any difficulty enforcing relevance when the opposition are speaking (and I have no issue with that at all, proper order) but this is completely absent when government TDs give meandering, irrelevant responses to very simple questions.

    As I said in the other thread, both in opposition and in government Joan Burton has a terrible record for this kind of stonewalling. I can't be the only one who finds it extremely irritating? The Ceann Comhairle as chair is responsible for keeping debates on topic.

    Was the question asked by MLmcD a question on the subject or was she just trowing questions out to suppress the topic?


  • Options
    #703
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    suppress the topic of water charges? that hardly makes any sense surely? that was the topic in question at the time.
    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Was the question asked by MLmcD a question on the subject or was she just trowing questions out to suppress the topic?


  • Options
    #704
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    So now anytime a TD thinks or believes that his/her question hasn't been answered they can pull this sort of stunt? Madness


  • Options
    #705
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    of course it was yes. They pre-planned it with Joan so they;d know she wouldnt bother answering. Yes, very likely. :rolleyes:
    raymon wrote: »
    The incident was carefully choreographed to generate a populist story.

    Shame on Sinn Fein for denying others a chance to question the government.


  • Options
    #706
    raymon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,774 ✭✭✭raymon


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Choreographed by FG by the looks of it.
    LOL, why would anybody bother when they won't answer anything anyway! No bloody loss at all!


    Joan Burton is FG ? Thanks for that Dan !


  • Options
    #707
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    maccored wrote: »
    of course it was yes. They pre-planned it with Joan so they;d know she wouldnt bother answering. Yes, very likely. :rolleyes:

    No, her refusal to leave the chamber was the stunt. Not the questioning of Burton.


  • Options
    #708
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    walshb wrote: »
    So now anytime a TD thinks or believes that his/her question hasn't been answered they can pull this sort of stunt? Madness

    If they wish and see the issue as being important (and it is the most important political issue atm), yes.


  • Options
    #709
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    If they wish and see the issue as being important (and it is the most important political issue atm), yes.

    That's a super idea, not. The system will soon collapse.


  • Options
    #710
    raymon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,774 ✭✭✭raymon


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    If they wish and see the issue as being important (and it is the most important political issue atm), yes.

    Or if you need to deflect some recent bad press about abuse cover ups and need a bit of cheap publicity ( now that you cant print publicity leaflets with swiped printer cartridges)


  • Options
    #711
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    walshb wrote: »
    That's a super idea, not. The system will soon collapse.
    The system of the government not answering anything and making an utter mockery of the principle of being answerable the people?
    Well R.I.P. in that case.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    just like last month when she was kicked out since she apparently pulled a stunt then too. Seriously folks, buy a dictionary. anytime anyone makes any kind of stand, its a 'stunt'.
    walshb wrote: »
    No, her refusal to leave the chamber was the stunt. Not the questioning of Burton.


  • Options
    #713
    BlutendeRabe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 192 ✭✭BlutendeRabe


    DazMarz wrote: »

    FG: 50-55 seats
    FF: 30-35 seats
    SF: 20-25 seats
    Lab: 10-15 seats
    Oth/Ind: 20-30 seats

    Think FG could be on the low 40s while labour probably won't have enough TDs to form a Dail group. SF could be up in the 30s - they missed out narrowly on 4 seats in 2011. They're in the running for far more now.

    About right for FF and Indos.


  • Options
    #714
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    raymon wrote: »
    Or if you need to deflect some recent bad press about abuse cover ups and need a bit of cheap publicity ( now that you cant print publicity leaflets with swiped printer cartridges)
    So let's get this straight, if you ask questions about the topic under discussion and they refuse to answer, that's a deflection?
    By who exactly?


  • Options
    #715
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    raymon wrote: »
    Joan Burton is FG ? Thanks for that Dan !
    FG/Lab. Only goldencirclebots could possibly say there is any meaningful difference.


  • Options
    #716
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    raymon wrote: »
    Or if you need to deflect some recent bad press about abuse cover ups and need a bit of cheap publicity ( now that you cant print publicity leaflets with swiped printer cartridges)

    If you could provide us with some evidence that shows current members of SF refusing to show up for questioning on the Mairia Cahill issue in the Dail, you might have a point. I saw them listening to rants and insinuations for 5 hours of Dail time that achieved nothing and added nothing to the debate, except more allegations and dubious claims of possession of 'knowledge'.
    The IW issue is the key political issue of the moment, bringing 100's of thousands of citizens onto the streets on a number of occasions.
    An opposition TD not asking questions in the Dail while that issue is being discussed would be failing in his/her job and mandate imo.


  • Options
    #717
    raymon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,774 ✭✭✭raymon


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    So let's get this straight, if you ask questions about the topic under discussion and they refuse to answer, that's a deflection?
    By who exactly?

    Standing up and mouthing her gob off when another TD is trying to speak (Maureen O Sullivan TD ) is the stunt. The "sit in" was another part of the choreography.

    Does she plan to apologise to Deputy O Sullivan?


  • Options
    #718
    raymon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,774 ✭✭✭raymon


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    If you could provide us with some evidence that shows current members of SF refusing to show up for questioning on the Mairia Cahill issue in the Dail, you might have a point. I saw them listening to rants and insinuations for 5 hours of Dail time that achieved nothing and added nothing to the debate, except more allegations and dubious claims of possession of 'knowledge'.
    The IW issue is the key political issue of the moment, bringing 100's of thousands of citizens onto the streets on a number of occasions.
    An opposition TD not asking questions in the Dail while that issue is being discussed would be failing in his/her job and mandate imo.

    Prove this , prove that , prove the other ....

    What do you want proof on and why do you want the proof from me ?

    Im very confused!


  • Options
    #719
    Tinkersbell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭Tinkersbell


    raymon wrote: »
    Joan Burton is FG ? Thanks for that Dan !

    He meant FG's bitch...


  • Options
    #720
    Tinkersbell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭Tinkersbell


    raymon wrote: »
    ( now that you cant print publicity leaflets with swiped printer cartridges)

    LOL. Pathetic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    Chuckieawrlaw
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 46 ✭Chuckieawrlaw


    raymon wrote: »
    Standing up and mouthing her gob off when another TD is trying to speak (Maureen O Sullivan TD ) is the stunt. The "sit in" was another part of the choreography.

    Does she plan to apologise to Deputy O Sullivan?

    she doesnt owe her an apology for nothin, Mary lou was dead right


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement