FG to just do nothing for the next 5 years.

Brendan Bendar

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

The trends show that when they get older they are staying with SF.

The games over, it's just a matter of time

Govt talks failed all because they refused to speak to SF. That's what the people will see

That’s not what Middle Ireland see, dude.People who have skin in the game.

What they see is what they can’t see.....the shadowy figures up on the windswept hills pulling the strings and the puppets responding to their promptings.

The game is up ,dude, the Waterford ‘deppity ‘ couldnt hold back, Middle Ireland saw what was running the party.....and stayed well away!!

Better get used to it my friend.

dundalkfc10

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

That’s not what Middle Ireland see, dude.People who have skin in the game.

What they see is what they can’t see.....the shadowy figures up on the windswept hills pulling the strings and the puppets responding to their promptings.

The game is up ,dude, the Waterford ‘deppity ‘ couldnt hold back, Middle Ireland saw what was running the party.....and stayed well away!!

Better get used to it my friend.

The people seen SF were a better option than FG. That's why they beat them in the election even after the media's attempts to keep SF votes down

You will get over it someday, more people want SF in Govt than FG. It's life, these are the times

Leonard Hofstadter

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

The people seen SF were a better option than FG. That's why they beat them in the election even after the media's attempts to keep SF votes down

You will get over it someday, more people want SF in Govt than FG. It's life, these are the times

Have you seen the last three opinion polls?

dundalkfc10

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

Have you seen the last three opinion polls?

I deal in Election results. Fact is SF got more votes than FG

efanton

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

That’s not what Middle Ireland see, dude.People who have skin in the game.

What they see is what they can’t see.....the shadowy figures up on the windswept hills pulling the strings and the puppets responding to their promptings.

The game is up ,dude, the Waterford ‘deppity ‘ couldnt hold back, Middle Ireland saw what was running the party.....and stayed well away!!

Better get used to it my friend.

But middle Ireland are only a portion of the electorate. It has to be borne in mind also that this so called 'middle Ireland' has reduced in size and is rapidly shrinking. With less and less young couples able to afford to buy their own homes, and rents beyond what is reasonable for most, it will continue to shrink rapidly.

The country has had many 'shadowy figures' in power. Recent history is littered with them, Bertie Ahern, Charlie Haughey, just to name two, but did we see the electorate refuse to support the parties the belonged to or elect them to government? How may FG TD's and councillors have been found to have accepted bribes, claimed expenses they were not due, and not declared fully their private interests(such as directorships etc) to the Oireachtas. what better definition of 'shadowy' do you require except that this is all proven fact and not conjecture.

FG supporters simply have to accept the fact that their party represents a smaller and smaller part of the electorate. If they can get enough seats in the Dail to form a government, then they should, if they dont and see other parties getting similar or greater numbers of seats in the Dail they should respect that. Those parties have the same level of support or greater support as their own.

But to dismiss other parties in the way they do, using accusations that are unproven and deliberately malicious, will only continue to diminish the support for the party they allegedly support. how anyone could imagine that using tactics like this will somehow increase support for their party beggars belief.

If you want to argue for a party or against a party then argue on it policies, because at the end of the day that the only thing people in the voting booth are interested in. That brings us back to those shadowy figures, did people honestly believe that Charlie and Bertie were whiter than white, not corrupt, not dipping their finger in the till, of course they didn't, and most didn't care because the policies that they were enacting were for most all that counted.

If you want to claim the high moral ground then you should also be attacking and calling for the removal of those that have been proven to have accepted bribes, fiddled expenses or deliberately hidden their own interests to the Oireachtas, but no doubt eliminating those particular 'shadowy figures' from politic would be a step too far for you.

If I were a FG supporter I would veer well clear of any argument that involved accusations of 'shadowy figures' especially when all you have is unproven allegations.

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

To be honest, every week it comes down to the same ol $hite repeated again and again.
It is reaching Alex Jones level of Pizzagate at this stage.

I am sure, DoB will be mentioned again in a few days time, when there can be nothing else said about FG. Everyone needs a boogyman.

Examples were requested and given. Don't let your humanity get crossed there.
I do find it funny how some folk like yourself get it spelled out to you, the facts of what goes down and then use little terms to try make the reporting of the facts sound far fetched, well they do, because it is far fetched that FG always go to the one chap and always fail the tax payer when getting into contracts.
If FG stopped using him he'd stop getting a mention, don't you think?

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

Unless we are about to embark on a national sterilisation program, those young people who grow old will be replaced by more young people.

My point exactly. Give SF a term or two in power and the youth of tomorrow will not be overly enamoured with SF. Just look at the North. More young nationalists vote for other parties than SF.

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

FG dont broker deals, the Civil Service does.
These comments alone show us all your level of ignorance and lack of basic knowledge when it comes to this 'debate'.

Was Lowry a civil servant when he got his bunce for the cell phone deal? Why was Naughten getting his meals bought for him? Beside all that, I know FG ministers don't like responsibility but the buck stops with them, even if you are genuinely so naive to believe there is no cronyism involved, outside of when they get caught out. Stop wasting our time.

FrancieBrady

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

That’s not what Middle Ireland see, dude.People who have skin in the game.

What they see is what they can’t see.....the shadowy figures up on the windswept hills pulling the strings and the puppets responding to their promptings.

The game is up ,dude, the Waterford ‘deppity ‘ couldnt hold back, Middle Ireland saw what was running the party.....and stayed well away!!

Better get used to it my friend.

At the end of the day, a pandemic saved FG here. We will quickly return to normal play when the threat from it subsides and FG/FF try to bring us out of it and the Greens satiate their holier than thou urges on the sidelines.

All good news for the SF because that is guaranteed to be a disaster.
Another thing I said after the election: SF are in a win win position here whatever way it turns out.

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

True too for the power swapping party's for the last century, who now cannot govern without each other nevermind without a wee mudwing party to prop them up.

Will Michaél still be FF leader when the govt formation talks reach their conclusion?

I would reckon the pressure is on MM to get a deal done ASAP. I think the ego on FG has them half thinking they'll return to glory if an election is called. The Greens are just the gillys of the talks which might be preferable to the roasting they'd get after dirtying themselves with FF/FG in government.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

McGuinness is a busted flush at this stage, he has made waves many times, but never stepped on to the field of play. A hurler from the ditch, able to criticise but not do.

The role of PAC chair suits that type of personality, in fact the whole committee suits the perennial whinger.

Does Brendan know you're stealing his shtick?

If I may, bit of the 'no true Scotsman' from the FG lobby as regards Guinness.

markodaly

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

The trends show that when they get older they are staying with SF.

Wait till SF get into power, there will be an awful lot of dissapointed people.

markodaly

Bowie wrote: »

because it is far fetched that FG always go to the one chap and always fail the tax payer when getting into contracts.
If FG stopped using him he'd stop getting a mention, don't you think?

Your ignorance on the topic at hand knows no bounds. FG do not choose DoB, the tendering processes does.
Your level of Trump talk on this is funny in a way, but its all smoke and mirrors.

I am sure you will retort with some hot air about, dogs and the street and populist bull**** like the Donald does all the time.

JohnnyFlash

Bowie wrote: »

Was Lowry a civil servant when he got his bunce for the cell phone deal? Why was Naughten getting his meals bought for him? Beside all that, I know FG ministers don't like responsibility but the buck stops with them, even if you are genuinely so naive to believe there is no cronyism involved, outside of when they get caught out. Stop wasting our time.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You are suggesting that FG, while in Government, somehow circumvented well-established procedures around the publishing, selection, and awarding of State contracts. This was done without the civil service, office of the comptroller and auditor general, the EU, journalists armed with the freedom of information act, or rivals of O’Briens companies being aware of how it happened, or coming up with evidence of nefarious political influence.

The reality is that you’ve been caught talking Twitter standard baloney, and have not a scrap of evidence beyond the usual ‘da Gubbermint’, Dinny, FFG type stuff you spend most of your life spouting on here. Whatever gets you through the day of course, but repeating something all the time doesn’t make it true.

Brendan Bendar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

At the end of the day, a pandemic saved FG here. We will quickly return to normal play when the threat from it subsides and FG/FF try to bring us out of it and the Greens satiate their holier than thou urges on the sidelines.

All good news for the SF because that is guaranteed to be a disaster.
Another thing I said after the election: SF are in a win win position here whatever way it turns out.

Agree there F, the Greens will bollox up all this.

They are run by skids who never paid a rial of tax in their lives, jerks who operate from colleges trying to make a name for themselves, and with the two thirds majority needed, have a way over the top influence in decision.

You are right there F, the Greens won’t achieve anything in this scenario.

Won’t work.

efanton

markodaly wrote: »

Your ignorance on the topic at hand knows no bounds. FG do not choose DoB, the tendering processes does.
Your level of Trump talk on this is funny in a way, but its all smoke and mirrors.

I am sure you will retort with some hot air about, dogs and the street and populist bull**** like the Donald does all the time.

The simple truth is the way Irish State tenders work is quite quirky.
I have experience of this, working in a team that provided IT security solutions to every county council in the country. The best price is not the only factor regarding the award of a contract. If you can offer additional support for instance any time any day for instance, or other additional benefits you could possibly still win a tender even though your price was not the lowest.

The point I am making here is simple, the more experience you have of submitting tenders, the more knowledge you have of how tenders are awarded, the better your chances are of winning a tender. If DOB has extensive prior knowledge of how the tender system works and has additional knowledge that might not be immediately apparent to others but is still available to them, it is more likely that he will win a tender than another bidder that has less experience or knowledge.

Obviously DOB has many contacts, and can draw on many knowledgeable sources within government and in the public sector. and it would not be illegal for him to be be provided additional information as long as that information was available to all other tenderer, but sometimes that information is not easy to find.

Did DOB bribe a public representative in the mobile phone license tender, of course he did, there absolute proof of that. In fact FG publicly published account show that sums of money and political donations were returned to ESAT short after that donation was paid to FG and was made public. Somehow though that donation still made it way to FG at a later stage. Michael Lowry is now a convicted criminal, due to this bribery.

Did DOB bribe is subsequent tenders? well there is no evidence of that.
Making the sort of accusations is a really silly thing to do for those that are making them. If there is no provable evidence, then you cant make the claim.

However as stated earlier with extensive knowledge of how the tendering system works, and what additional technical and after sales support offered might significantly improve the chance of success with a particular tender, there might not be a need to for bribes. Those that game the system for social welfare supports are not breaking the law they just understand the system better. The same goes for business. Those that know how to game the system, be it tenders, tax, government supports whatever have a distinct advantage, and although what they do might be considered in a grey area, it is not illegal.

Provide the evidence and you probably will see not only criminal persecutions, but political head roll and possibly a government fall. Without evidence then you are resorting to the same tactics as those that claim the IRA are somehow in control of SF, or that certain past TD's were past members of the IRA.
Its the same argument, accusations without evidence, and without evidence they simply should not be made even if you believe them to be true.

Brendan Bendar

efanton wrote: »

The simple truth is the way Irish State tenders work is quite quirky.
I have experience of this, working in a team that provided IT security solutions to every county council in the country. The best price is not the only factor regarding the award of a contract. If you can offer additional support for instance any time any day for instance, or other additional benefits you could possibly still win a tender even though your price was not the lowest.

The point I am making here is simple, the more experience you have of submitting tenders, the more knowledge you have of how tenders are awarded, the better your chances are of winning a tender. If DOB has extensive prior knowledge of how the tender system works and has additional knowledge that might not be immediately apparent to others but is still available to them, it is more likely that he will win a tender than another bidder that has less experience or knowledge.

Obviously DOB has many contacts, and can draw on many knowledgeable sources within government and in the public sector. and it would not be illegal for him to be be provided additional information as long as that information was available to all other tenderer, but sometimes that information is not easy to find.

Did DOB bribe a public representative in the mobile phone license tender, of course he did, there absolute proof of that. In fact FG publicly published account show that sums of money and political donations were returned to ESAT short after that donation was paid to FG and was made public. Somehow though that donation still made it way to FG at a later stage. Michael Lowry is now a convicted criminal, due to this bribery.

Did DOB bribe is subsequent tenders? well there is no evidence of that.
Making the sort of accusations is a really silly thing to do for those that are making them. If there is no evidence, then you cant make the claim.

However as stated earlier with extensive knowledge of how the tendering system works, and what additional technical and after sales support offered might significantly improve the chance of success with a particular tender, there might not be a need to for bribes. Those that game the system for social welfare supports are not breaking the law they just understand the system better. The same goes for business. Those that know how to game the system, be it tenders, tax, government supports whatever have a distinct advantage, and although what they do might be considered in a grey area, it is not illegal.

Provide the evidence and you probably will see not only criminal persecutions, but political head roll and possibly a government fall. Without evidence then you are resorting to the same tactics as those that claim the IRA are somehow in control of SF, or that certain past TD's were past members of the IRA.
Its the same argument, accusations without evidence, and without evidence they simply should not be made even if you believe them to be true.

Start a thread on DOB dude, stop boring people here with horse schidt.

What has DOB been convicted of.

Spill that out or GTFO of here.

Thanking you.

Podge_irl

efanton wrote: »

The simple truth is the way Irish State tenders work is quite quirky.
I have experience of this, working in a team that provided IT security solutions to every county council in the country. The best price is not the only factor regarding the award of a contract. If you can offer additional support for instance any time any day for instance, or other additional benefits you could possibly still win a tender even though your price was not the lowest.

The point I am making here is simple, the more experience you have of submitting tenders, the more knowledge you have of how tenders are awarded, the better your chances are of winning a tender. If DOB has extensive prior knowledge of how the tender system works and has additional knowledge that might not be immediately apparent to others but is still available to them, it is more likely that he will win a tender than another bidder that has less experience or knowledge.

Sure, I agree with that but I'm not quite following what point you are making? Its perfectly logical that price should not be the only consideration (I believe it is "best value" that is the ultimate consideration) and its obvious that someone with more experience of tenders is more likely to win more. I'm sure help could be put in place to try and ameliorate this but its a pretty inevitable outcome of any process no?

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

Your ignorance on the topic at hand knows no bounds. FG do not choose DoB, the tendering processes does.
Your level of Trump talk on this is funny in a way, but its all smoke and mirrors.

I am sure you will retort with some hot air about, dogs and the street and populist bull**** like the Donald does all the time.

Hey, I'm not buying your holier than thou party line. I think even FG ministers would snigger at your protests. Cronyism is there, always.
Even when he's given preferred bidder status I'd imagine. Even when we sell him the company so we can give him the contract, certainly
I'm no fan of Trump. You must be thinking of Varadkar who will do him a solid calling Clare Co. Co. for him and has his book.

All I've ever claimed is FG award Mr. O'Brien a lot of contracts and it's generally a bad deal for the tax payer. This is a matter of record. The only topic up for debate is why?

James Brown

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You are suggesting that FG, while in Government, somehow circumvented well-established procedures around the publishing, selection, and awarding of State contracts. This was done without the civil service, office of the comptroller and auditor general, the EU, journalists armed with the freedom of information act, or rivals of O’Briens companies being aware of how it happened, or coming up with evidence of nefarious political influence.

The reality is that you’ve been caught talking Twitter standard baloney, and have not a scrap of evidence beyond the usual ‘da Gubbermint’, Dinny, FFG type stuff you spend most of your life spouting on here. Whatever gets you through the day of course, but repeating something all the time doesn’t make it true.

Facts dude, facts. Dude. You don't think he got the cell contract, sitserv deal, metering deal, broadband, beds? Matter of record dude.
I think FG played a role, most certainly. Why else was Lowry paid off? Why was Naughton brought out for meals? It stinks dude.

Nope, reality is it's a sore spot for the law and order party.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Start a thread on DOB dude, stop boring people here with horse schidt.

What has DOB been convicted of.

Spill that out or GTFO of here.

Thanking you.

Talk to Johnny Flash, he asked for examples and then the boys tried to make a big deal of it.

Brendan Bendar

Bowie wrote: »

Facts dude, facts. Dude. You don't think he got the cell contract, sitserv deal, metering deal, broadband, beds? Matter of record dude.
I think FG played a role, most certainly. Why else was Lowry paid off? Why was Naughton brought out for meals? It stinks dude.

Nope, reality is it's a sore spot for the law and order party.

Horse up all the evidence of your allegations, the convictions which accrued or start a thread on them dude.

Otherwise FO outa here.

Mortelaro

Bowie wrote: »

Facts dude, facts. Dude. You don't think he got the cell contract, sitserv deal, metering deal, broadband, beds? Matter of record dude.
I think FG played a role, most certainly. Why else was Lowry paid off? Why was Naughton brought out for meals? It stinks dude.

Nope, reality is it's a sore spot for the law and order party.

So no evidence then as usual
I see

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Horse up all the evidence of your allegations, the convictions which accrued or start a thread on them dude.

Otherwise FO outa here.

You're making claims up Bren. A whiff of Maria Bailey and Alan Farrell off your comment.
My allegations are FG award D.O'B a lot of contracts and they generally end up being a bad deal for the tax payer.
I don't know why they do it, I only know they do and they are bad at it.

Mortelaro wrote: »

So no evidence then as usual
I see

See above, (also try google. Was in all the papers).
Trying to make claims that aren't justified seems to be a FG trait.

Brendan Bendar

Bowie wrote: »

You're making claims up Bren. A whiff of Maria Bailey and Alan Farrell off your comment.
My allegations are FG award D.O'B a lot of contracts and they generally end up being a bad deal for the tax payer.
I don't know why they do it, I only know they do and they are bad at it.



See above.
Trying to make claims that aren't justified seems to be a FG trait.

Can’t back up the auld rhetoric.....good lad...

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Can’t back up the auld rhetoric.....good lad...

Such as?
They don't do business with him?

efanton

Podge_irl wrote: »

Sure, I agree with that but I'm not quite following what point you are making? Its perfectly logical that price should not be the only consideration (I believe it is "best value" that is the ultimate consideration) and its obvious that someone with more experience of tenders is more likely to win more. I'm sure help could be put in place to try and ameliorate this but its a pretty inevitable outcome of any process no?

The point I'm making is there are too many posts making claims that simply have no evidence.

While personally I dont like DOB or what he represents, I'm certainly not going to accuse him of illegality in his subsequent tenders after ESAT mobile, nor should anyone else.

It get a bit boring on here at times, instead of debating the real issues some people seem to want to debate imaginary perceived issues.

If FG feck up then yes lets debate that, if SF feck up then yes lets debate that as well, but does anyone enjoy having to wade through pages of posts everyday to actually see if someone has made a post of any relevanc

All that happens with these wild allegations is that they diminish any argument that might be made.
DOB to my knowledge is not currently breaking the law so what relevance does it have?
It's the same the the guys that immediately revert to wild allegations about SF and the IRA being in control, no evidence, no relevance and very little to do with current issues anyway.

efanton

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Start a thread on DOB dude, stop boring people here with horse schidt.

What has DOB been convicted of.

Spill that out or GTFO of here.

Thanking you.

If you actually read what I have said, I am not accusing DOB of anything. In fact that was my point, there is no evidence of DOB currently doing anything wrong , and if there is no evidence there's no point making wild allegations.

Mortelaro

Bowie wrote: »

See above, (also try google. Was in all the papers).
Trying to make claims that aren't justified seems to be a FG trait.

No specific's given by you
Please state the evidence for your allegations
Have you any at all
Otherwise I'm the queen of sheba
Theres no evidence but I am

JohnnyFlash

Funny how the 'All Day Crew' around here are so quick to ask for evidence when someone suggest Adams was top dog in the IRA, or that SF owning 50 properties and having 200 staff might be a bit suspicious, but when asked for evidence themselves they start humming, hawing, and trying to do the online equivalent of 'look over there, it's a lion!'.

They are hopping mad these days. Class to see. :cool: