Media Omerta and Sinn Fein

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Twitter? Full of shills from every party, why would you put any faith in anything you see on Twitter?

Because I can spot a shill a mile off, here and on twitter and in real life.

There are loads of brilliant contributions made to Twitter every hour from genuine journalists and commentators, never mind days.

Stop moaning ffs

blanch152 wrote: »

Twitter? Full of shills from every party, why would you put any faith in anything you see on Twitter?

Why should we put any faith in you?
Your entire history here is an inability to understand what’s being said to you, a refusal to consider the other point of view and an inexplicably rabid obsession with attacking SF in every thread theyre mentioned in.

They’re not even that big a feature in Irish life or politics or culture but you’re in every thread every time they get mentioned. And don’t even bring up United Ireland

It makes talking with you difficult and renders most of your posts just a waste of time to read.

Stop moaning ffs

** although I have a feeling that’s the entire point.

Fr Tod Umptious

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Personally I am fecking delighted that both McGuinness and Adams were there to lead SF through the peace process. If that had failed, if they hadn't been able to keep people on side through it all, where would we be?

What does your last sentence mean? You think they will shut down voting and democracy if they get into power?

Exactly
Look at the way the people take leadership roles in their own party.
There was no contest to replace either McGuinness or Adams, both ladies were elected unopposed

Read the article on OP
The deputy leadership (O'Neill's position) "election" was held completely in private.

Do you recall the FG leadership contest between Covney and Varadkar ?
Compare that to the SF leadership changes.
Compare the 2010 FG heaves against Kenny to SF.
Compare the FG heaves of decades ago compared to SF.

Why would they do anything different if they had real power?
If they don't see the value in openness in their own party how on Earth would they see value in it if they controlled the national stage.

Stop moaning ffs

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/B]

Exactly
Look at the way the people take leadership roles in their own party.
There was no contest to replace either McGuinness or Adams, both ladies were elected unopposed

Read the article on OP
The deputy leadership (O'Neill's position) "election" was held completely in private.

Do you recall the FG leadership contest between Covney and Varadkar ?
Compare that to the SF leadership changes.
Compare the 2010 FG heaves against Kenny to SF.
Compare the FG heaves of decades ago compared to SF.

Why would they do anything different if they had real power?
If they don't see the value in openness in their own party how on Earth would they see value in it if they controlled the national stage.

You clearly haven’t a notion.

Coveney was the pick for grassroots FG members.

But somehow SF are going to be some SS ****ting down all votes and thought?

Please grow up.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

So DUP do the same? More evidence for those two parties being the joint lowest of the low in my opinion. Have to laugh at someone using the DUP’s behaviour to defend SF?

Is it supposed to be a completely transparent, books open, recorded for public consumption, process? If it is then fair enough, they both need to change. I don't know how internal political parties operate.

FrancieBrady

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/B]

Exactly
Look at the way the people take leadership roles in their own party.
There was no contest to replace either McGuinness or Adams, both ladies were elected unopposed

Read the article on OP
The deputy leadership (O'Neill's position) "election" was held completely in private.

Do you recall the FG leadership contest between Covney and Varadkar ?
Compare that to the SF leadership changes.
Compare the 2010 FG heaves against Kenny to SF.
Compare the FG heaves of decades ago compared to SF.

Why would they do anything different if they had real power?
If they don't see the value in openness in their own party how on Earth would they see value in it if they controlled the national stage.

So you are saying they would remove the vote from the people and subvert democracy?

*BTW a SF member here explained the leadership election process here at lengthy and while it is different to other parties there is nothing to suggest it is anti-democratic.
Mary Lou explained that the deputy leader was an internal process..like every other party has. See Maria Bailey for instance.

Stop moaning ffs

Can we see the secrets ballot FG took on Maria Bailey that brought about her dismissal? At top and local levels?

No? Why?

It’s a far far bigger deal that’s actually affects us all than SF having a leadership dust up.

Fr Tod Umptious

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

You clearly haven’t a notion.

Coveney was the pick for grassroots FG members.

But somehow SF are going to be some SS ****ting down all votes and thought?

Please grow up.

I'm sorry can you elaborate on that point please.

Do you recall the leadership elections that have taken place innFF, FG Labour over the past few decades ?

All have had multiple candidates, we have seen public debate between them, it's been very much an open process.

And take for example the challenges to leadership in other parties.
Haughey was regularly challenged.
Kenny was in 2010
Others resigned after bad elections, government collapses etc

None of that happened or happens in SF.
Adams lasted over 30 years through all sorts of scandals without even the hint of a challenge to him.

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Is it supposed to be a completely transparent, books open, recorded for public consumption, process? If it is then fair enough, they both need to change. I don't know how internal political parties operate.

Both are products of the North, and completely different to the openness in the South. I posted earlier on the FG leadership election, and how open that was.

LoughNeagh2017

Hatred towards Sinn Fein is just an excuse to hate on northern Gaels (I don't mean GAA member, the GAA have hijacked that term), I mean people of Gaelic-Irish ancestry. The IRA and northern Gaels come hand in hand to a variable extent, even if you weren't in IRA you would have attended IRA member funerals like my father did. Supporting a northern nationalist party is like supporting the IRA in southeners eyes, I love it though, I thrive upon negative energy and being hated.

FrancieBrady

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm sorry can you elaborate on that point please.

Do you recall the leadership elections that have taken place innFF, FG Labour over the past few decades ?

All have had multiple candidates, we have seen public debate between them, it's been very much an open process.

And take for example the challenges to leadership in other parties.
Haughey was regularly challenged.
Kenny was in 2010
Others resigned after bad elections, government collapses etc

None of that happened or happens in SF.
Adams lasted over 30 years through all sorts of scandals without even the hint of a challenge to him.

Have to ask here, so what?
So what if he lasted 30 years? It was a party in the middle of a conflict/war, hadn't you noticed that? The continuity of leadership was a massive plus for this country. If SF had fractured during the process we'd be in a really bad place. How long did DeValera sit at the top? Through similar times as well.

Stop moaning ffs

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm sorry can you elaborate on that point please.

Do you recall the leadership elections that have taken place innFF, FG Labour over the past few decades ?

All have had multiple candidates, we have seen public debate between them, it's been very much an open process.

And take for example the challenges to leadership in other parties.
Haughey was regularly challenged.
Kenny was in 2010
Others resigned after bad elections, government collapses etc

None of that happened or happens in SF.
Adams lasted over 30 years through all sorts of scandals without even the hint of a challenge to him.

Referring to my reply. You haven’t a clue. Fg grass roots wanted coveney as leader. Not Varadkar.

The rest of your post is just waffle and hot air. And completely irrelevant to this topic.

Fr Tod Umptious

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Referring to my reply. You haven’t a clue. Fg grass roots wanted coveney as leader. Not Varadkar.

The rest of your post is just waffle and hot air. And completely irrelevant to this topic.

Have a look at the Wikipedia page for the 2017 FG leadership election.

Its broken-down exactly how the leader was elected.

And you are correct, Covney got twice as many votes from the membership tha Varadkar.

But who got what votes from where is not the point.

The point is that there is a certain level of transparency there.

There is no such transparency in SF.
Heck there isn't even a contest.

Stop moaning ffs

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Have a look at the Wikipedia page for the 2017 FG leadership election.

Its broken-down exactly how the leader was elected.

And you are correct, Covney got twice as many votes from the membership tha Varadkar.

But who got what votes from where is not the point.

The point is that there is a certain level of transparency there.

There is no such transparency in SF.
Heck there isn't even a contest.

Tell us how many votes Varadkar won by. Despite Simon being the leader the party elected.

What’s the word?

Democracy?

Fr Tod Umptious

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Tell us how many votes Varadkar won by. Despite Simon being the leader the party elected.

What’s the word?

Democracy?

Are you deliberately missing the point or just not able to understand it ?

But I'll explain it just one more time.

FG have a process for electing a leader.
That process is well defined and transparent.
The candidates and the voters know that process.
We on the outside know that process.
And Varadkar was elected using that process.

With SF all there is is the elevation of a individual to the leadership no election.
And when there is a challenge, as was the case recently and as alluded to in the article, the outcome is just given, nothing more.

The way you harp on about Covney and the grassroots is a bit like the way people harp on about Clinton winning the popular vote in 2016 or NI as a whole voting Remain in 2016.
None of it matters because that's not how the process works.

FrancieBrady

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Are you deliberately missing the point or just not able to understand it ?

But I'll explain it just one more time.

FG have a process for electing a leader.
That process is well defined and transparent.
The candidates and the voters know that process.
We on the outside know that process.
And Varadkar was elected using that process.

With SF all there is is the elevation of a individual to the leadership no election.
And when there is a challenge, as was the case recently and as alluded to in the article, the outcome is just given, nothing more.

The way you harp on about Covney and the grassroots is a bit like the way people harp on about Clinton winning the popular vote in 2016 or NI as a whole voting Remain in 2016.
None of it matters because that's not how the process works.

Do you know the process of electing the SF leader?

As I said it was explained here by a SF member and IT IS A PROCESS. Different to how other party's do it, but a perfectly democratic one imo.

Can't be bothered going looking for it, but then neither can you by the looks of it,

JohnnyFlash

Poor old SF are suffering from a real identity crisis these days.

They made a concerted effort to move away from the whiff of sulphur that surrounded the party. The old 'we haven't gone away you know' appealed to a solid 17-21% of the populace.

They've now positioned themselves in between the Labour Party and the alphabet crew. That's poor land for gaining votes. ML was on the TV last Saturday going on about houses for all, a living wage, and an increase in social welfare rates. Gavin and Emma Taxpayer know that's complete horseshít - pie in the sky stuff.

They've also alienated a substantial portion of that 17-21% of the populace who would be sympathetic to the cause by espousing policies that just don't resonate with their core voting pool - immigration being the most obvious one. Nationalists are nationalist by nature. SF cannot continue to ignore this reality - their low income core support just don't like immigration.

They've also played weak cards on Brexit - the direct rule from London suits both themselves and the DUP at the moment. Real hurlers on the ditch. ML had a potshot at FG and FF during her speech - saying come up here and represent yourselves during the elections. Facile sort of argument. Represent the nationalist community is the one second obvious answer.

SF are polling at about 8-9% in opinion polls being taken in marginal constituencies around the country at the moment. Going to be a terrible general election for them. Cork, Louth, Dublin are all looking nasty for them.

What do they stand for is the question people are asking. FG have done more for Irish unity during the Brexit negotiations than 15 SF working groups could ever possibly imagine.

That's tough for the hardcore Shinner.

sabat

I was making the same point here around the time of MLMcD's anointment but the mainstream media were still holding her up as a golden girl so didn't query it, whilst the SF fanboys here just employed their usual deflection tactics. The fact is that they were "elected" by a group of men called "P O'Neill" who should probably be in prison, sitting around a table in a Belfast backroom.

FrancieBrady

sabat wrote: »

I was making the same point here around the time of MLMcD's anointment but the mainstream media were still holding her up as a golden girl so didn't query it, whilst the SF fanboys here just employed their usual deflection tactics. The fact is that they were "elected" by a group of men called "P O'Neill" who should probably be in prison, sitting around a table in a Belfast backroom.

You forgot...'they were drinking whiskey and playing cards'. John Ford does Irish politics.

sabat

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You forgot...'they were drinking whiskey and playing cards'. John Ford does Irish politics.

Seeing as you're here responding on SF/IRA's behalf, would you happen to know what happened to all of their "legitimate businesses" following the ceasefire? You know, the ones built up or "acquired" through violence, racketeering, intimidation, money laundering etc? I don't recall any of those being surrendered voluntarily at the time.

Stop moaning ffs

sabat wrote: »

Seeing as you're here responding on SF/IRA's behalf, would you happen to know what happened to all of their "legitimate businesses" following the ceasefire? You know, the ones built up or "acquired" through violence, racketeering, intimidation, money laundering etc? I don't recall any of those being surrendered voluntarily at the time.

Wow. Just wow.

sabat

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Wow. Just wow.

Fantastic response. I personally know of two IRA owned businesses in Dublin that were running long before the ceasefire and continue to operate today. Do you think I'm holding my potential heads of government to too high a standard to question their connections to what is- without the veneer of "freedom fighters"- a mafia?

Stop moaning ffs

sabat wrote: »

Fantastic response. I personally know of two IRA owned businesses in Dublin that were running long before the ceasefire and continue to operate today. Do you think I'm holding my potential heads of government to too high a standard to question their connections to what is- without the veneer of "freedom fighters"- a mafia?

For clarification for the mods I think and just to know you know, you’re talking absolute bollox.
You can’t verify that here, which is in the charter, you also are making other baseless claims which are irrelevant? Good luck tho

Hardman ‘ I know the RA’ is always a bit sad.

sabat

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

For clarification for the mods I think and just to know you know, you’re talking absolute bollox.
You can’t verify that here, which is in the charter, you also are making other baseless claims which are irrelevant? Good luck tho

Hardman ‘ I know the RA’ is always a bit sad.

I was obviously doing the complete opposite of the "I know the RA" bit. It is a fact that the same people who decided that Mary Lou McDonald would be leader of SF are the same people who are ultimately in charge of this business empire.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ira-owns-up-to-20-pubs-in-the-republic-1.55148?mode=amp

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/ira-secret-agents-in-civil-service-keep-republicans-in-business-31580211.html

FrancieBrady

sabat wrote: »

Fantastic response. I personally know of two IRA owned businesses in Dublin that were running long before the ceasefire and continue to operate today. Do you think I'm holding my potential heads of government to too high a standard to question their connections to what is- without the veneer of "freedom fighters"- a mafia?

If you are not going to present your evidence of this who is? If it is even illegal/a mafia.

I know FG and FF owned businesses and even a soldier in the army who has a florist business.

That is what CAB are for you know?

FrancieBrady

sabat wrote: »

I was obviously doing the complete opposite of the "I know the RA" bit. It is a fact that the same people who decided that Mary Lou McDonald would be leader of SF are the same people who are ultimately in charge of this business empire.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ira-owns-up-to-20-pubs-in-the-republic-1.55148?mode=amp

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/ira-secret-agents-in-civil-service-keep-republicans-in-business-31580211.html

So this is all based on a 'pending' article from the Irish Times and classic 'sources say' filler article from the Indo.

If the 'IRA' are operating businesses and channeling money back to an organisation engaging in illegal operations, then I want to know about it and I think others do too.

That Indo article dates to 2015, has anybody been arrested and gone to jail for these crime? I mean if you can spot 2 IRA businesses operating, why can't the Gardai and CAB?

BQQ

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Poor old SF are suffering from a real identity crisis these days.

They made a concerted effort to move away from the whiff of sulphur that surrounded the party. The old 'we haven't gone away you know' appealed to a solid 17-21% of the populace.

They've now positioned themselves in between the Labour Party and the alphabet crew. That's poor land for gaining votes. ML was on the TV last Saturday going on about houses for all, a living wage, and an increase in social welfare rates. Gavin and Emma Taxpayer know that's complete horseshít - pie in the sky stuff.

They've also alienated a substantial portion of that 17-21% of the populace who would be sympathetic to the cause by espousing policies that just don't resonate with their core voting pool - immigration being the most obvious one. Nationalists are nationalist by nature. SF cannot continue to ignore this reality - their low income core support just don't like immigration.

They've also played weak cards on Brexit - the direct rule from London suits both themselves and the DUP at the moment. Real hurlers on the ditch. ML had a potshot at FG and FF during her speech - saying come up here and represent yourselves during the elections. Facile sort of argument. Represent the nationalist community is the one second obvious answer.

SF are polling at about 8-9% in opinion polls being taken in marginal constituencies around the country at the moment. Going to be a terrible general election for them. Cork, Louth, Dublin are all looking nasty for them.

What do they stand for is the question people are asking. FG have done more for Irish unity during the Brexit negotiations than 15 SF working groups could ever possibly imagine.

That's tough for the hardcore Shinner.

I think you’ll find that FG are the anti-immigrant party

The bare-facedness of this with Verona Murphy all over the news is unreal

I almost have to admire the sturdiness of your neck

steddyeddy

No research went into that article whatsoever. You'd have to be an idiot to find some common ground with it.

Odhinn

blanch152 wrote: »

Not one single poster has addressed in detail any of the issues raised in the article.

That'd be because its blatantly untrue. If you want to talk about things the media don't chase, you might get back to me on my earlier post in the thread.