Taoiseach shocked and dismayed at Sinn Fein TDs tweet on IRA attacks

Hamsterchops

Feisar wrote: »

Well to be fair if we can agree that the War of Independence was legit, than any attacks on British forces on the island of Ireland must be seen as legitimate.

Legit post independence, when carried out by whom? By the Irish army, or a Terrorist group?

A terrorist group cannot attack UK forces inside the UK and not expect universal condemnation. Lord Mountbatten also died that day as did two children and their Nanny, no legitimacy about any of it, hence Stanley was made to delete and apologies for his disgusting tweet.

There is a big difference between legitimate force as used by one country against another, and Terrorist attacks which have no mandate for their actions. Irish people up and down this island were disgusted and ashamed of what the Provos did that day, same in Britain where so many decent Irish people had to explain that the Provos did not speak for the people of Ireland.

The legitimate Defence forces of this State were in a constant tussle with the illegitimate IRA during the Troubles.

batman75

Bowie wrote: »

People needed the IRA, people supported the IRA.

I'm assuming the first part of your sentence is derived from the nationalists feeling a lack of protection from the state against loyalist attacks on their communities.

The prolonged existence of the IRA proves the second half of your sentence. Logically the IRA couldn't have existed without popular support.

I have always wondered if I have been in Belfast in the early 70s would I have understood the disappearance and murder of Jean McConville. From the comfort of our peaceful 26 counties it seems a truly hideous and odious act. Even cowardly. But theoretically was Belfast a war zone at that time? Anyone living in a nationalist area had to have known that co-operating with the British Army against the IRA would have fatal consequences. All the more reckless considering she was a widow with a large young family. However if I were a child of hers I would find it baffling that Stakeknife has escaped a similar fate when you consider the fate of Denis Donaldson. Maybe Stakeknife's elimination would serve as confirmation of him being a double agent?

Thankfully now the North appears to be enjoying a long time of peace. Long may it continue.

Jinglejangle69

Is Stanley an English surname?

Hamsterchops

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Is Stanley an English surname?

Possibly, but Adams is for sure a Scottish surname

Jinglejangle69

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Possibly, and Adams is a Scottish name

Think Adams is a Scottish/English name.

D horrible English ay.

FrancieBrady

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Is Stanley an English surname?

Probably.

James Brown

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Think Adams is a Scottish/English name.

D horrible English ay.

Silly to be using the English in such a manner. It harks back to the lack of insight some commentators have regarding the situation in the north. Kindergarten 'English bad' attitude inferred on people by others with an obvious lack of knowledge on the subject.

FrancieBrady

Bowie wrote: »

Silly to be using the English in such a manner. It harks back to the lack of insight some commentators have regarding the situation in the north. Kindergarten 'English bad' attitude inferred on people by others with an obvious lack of knowledge on the subject.

The SF activists here where I am from are far and away the most active in preserving the British heritage of the area. Including all the plantation artefacts and buildings.
We were occupied by the British, they assimilated and bred with us. We married them and they us. Just like Irish people marry the new wave of immigrants.

Other than that, I'm not sure what jingle and hamster are getting at. A wee bit uptight maybe, 'don't mx with other nationalities', one pure race stuff, who knows, maybe they'd explain themselves?

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The SF activists here where I am from are far and away the most active in preserving the British heritage of the area. Including all the plantation artefacts and buildings.
We were occupied by the British, they assimilated and bred with us. We married them and they us. Just like Irish people marry the new wave of immigrants.

Other than that, I'm not sure what jingle and hamster are getting at. A wee bit uptight maybe, 'don't mx with other nationalities', one pure race stuff, who knows, maybe they'd explain themselves?

I think its easier to look at it in black and white terms. Lazy and easy. The idea that there are English people who don't think they've any business being in the North must blow their minds.

expectationlost

https://twitter.com/BrianStanleyTD/status/870697652630962180

Brian Stanley
@BrianStanleyTD
Yippee 4 d tory. it's Leo. U can do what u like in bed but don't look 4 a pay rise the next morning.

6:44pm · 2 Jun 2017

this is apparently his version of congratulating Varadlar on winning the leadership election, why bring up the bedroom?

hatrickpatrick

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

Sinn Fein in 2020 are actively supporting schemes that are discriminatory in the priority allocation of social housing (Syrian refugee resettlement) and support a scheme to offer immediate subsidised housing to newly arrived asylum seekers (they support ending direct provision, seemingly by all means necessary as they didnt come out opposing the Catherine Day report). These two schemes intend to offer housing at monthly personal costs unimaginable to a majority of working class Irish renters / mortgage payers.

Sinn Fein have repeatedly stated that they want a return to the mass social housing programs of the early 20th century. To act as if their policy on immigration is in conflict with their domestic housing policy is ridiculous.

Regarding electoral corruption, although SF haven't nailed their colours to the mast as strongly as Labour and the PBP a betting man would guess they are very likely to row in behind the plot to overturn the decision of the citizenship referendum of 2004 without putting the question back to the public.

I haven't read up on this issue this week yet, but if a legislative change is being proposed then it's clearly not in conflict with the constitutional amendments people voted for.

Is this sort of thing only bad when the Prods do it, or am I missing something here?

What has anything you've posted got to do with anything I posted? O_o The immigration thread is a couple of threads down from this one, perhaps you got confused?

Again, SF are a banter party. It is staggering the childlike faith so many people have in them.

I have no faith in SF or any political party. All I have is slightly more hope that they'll take action to reduce the commodification of housing than that either of the other big parties will. That's all. It's irrelevant entirely to this thread.

Montage of Feck

expectationlost wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BrianStanleyTD/status/870697652630962180

did something happen at the start of june 2017

Leo infamous speech where he threatened to do something for "those who get out of bed in the morning " before backtracking and apologising or a very cack handed personal swipe?

expectationlost

Montage of Feck wrote: »

Leo infamous speech where he threatened to do something for "those who get out of bed in the morning " before backtracking and apologising?

so the U he is referring to is not Leo but the plural U everyone.... they shouldn't expect a pay rise???


remembered Varadkar he was elected leader of Fine Gael that day.


did he backtrack on that part of the speech?


"U can do what u like in bed but don't look 4 a pay rise the next morning."

hatrickpatrick

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Legit post independence, when carried out by whom? By the Irish army, or a Terrorist group?

Anyone at all. They were a force of oppression, hatred and evil, and any and all actions taken directly against them were justified. What was not justified were actions taken against civilians.

Anyone celebrating an attack which intentionally targeted innocent people, such as those which routinely targeted pubs in England for example, is a scumbag and should be called out as such. Anyone celebrating an attack which targeted either the British Army, the RUC or any of the loyalist-aligned paramilitaries is celebrating an attack against a racist, sectarian aggressor whose actions were rooted entirely in the pursuit of power over others.The British Army, the RUC, the B-Specials and any other loyalist aligned military or paramilitary organisation targeted during the troubles deserves every single bullet and every single bomb thrown their way.

If they hadn't chosen to side with a bunch of racist pr!cks in the first place, there would have been no Troubles. The Catholics could have held their civil rights marches in peace.

A terrorist group cannot attack UK forces inside the UK and not expect universal condemnation.

They can if those forces are actively engaged in enforcing apartheid politics. They obviously have not received universal condemnation, as evidenced by this thread alone in which many people including myself are actively justifying those actions.

Lord Mountbatten also died that day as did two children and their Nanny, no legitimacy about any of it, hence Stanley was made to delete and apologies for his disgusting tweet.

And these are the attacks which should be universally condemned, I absolutely agree. They were not, however, what Stanley was celebrating.

There is a big difference between legitimate force as used by one country against another, and Terrorist attacks which have no mandate for their actions. Irish people up and down this island were disgusted and ashamed of what the Provos did that day, same in Britain where so many decent Irish people had to explain that the Provos did not speak for the people of Ireland.

There is no such thing as illegitimate force against a brutal, aggressive military organisation which is actively protecting an apartheid regime. The only illegitimate force used by the IRA or any other Republican militants was that which targeted innocent civilians. RUC, British Army, SAS, B-Specials etc were legitimate targets and as far as I and many others are concerned, it doesn't matter if they're being attacked by a state military or a herd of stampeding wildebeests, what matters is that the f*ckers are being hammered in response to their repeated crimes against humanity.

The legitimate Defence forces of this State were in a constant tussle with the illegitimate IRA during the Troubles.

Criminal IRA activities in the Republic, just as IRA attacks intentionally targeting civilians, should be condemned and regularly are. They are not in the same league as IRA attacks targeting military, paramilitary, or bigot-aligned police forces.

James Brown

expectationlost wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BrianStanleyTD/status/870697652630962180

this is apparently his version of congratulating Varadlar on winning the leadership election, why bring up the bedroom?

Likely a reference to people who like to get up early? I think denying student nurses money will take over from historic tweets.

Hamsterchops

To Hatrickpatrick.

In post #165 you waffle-on at great length about which targets are acceptable terrorist targets Vs those Terrorist targets that are wrong. May I suggest that all terrorist targets are wrong.

Planting s bomb in s pub is wrong, planting a bomb on a boat is also wrong, planting a bomb in a fish & chip shop is wrong, as is planting a bomb at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday, and on it goes .....

Our Taoisesch has condemned Stanley's tweet, hence this thread, and most others would also condemn Stanley's deleted tweet. Heck, even the Shinner Goddess in all her glory gave him a rap across the knuckles for the tweet and it's contents.

Yet you waffle on at length as to way it was a legitimate tweet, and why some terrorist targets are more worthy than others, why this IRA bomb is good and that one bad, like the Provos (or any other terrorist group) had some legitimate right to bomb or shoot who they wanted.

Sounds like, if you were in a position of power, most if not all your tweets would have to be deleted - ASAP.

CountNjord

Why are the new Shinners always acting like hard men, aggressive and very SJW and love a good tantrum.

You didn't have Martin or Gerry acting out bouncing up and down like twiggly puff....

blanch152

expectationlost wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BrianStanleyTD/status/870697652630962180

this is apparently his version of congratulating Varadlar on winning the leadership election, why bring up the bedroom?

Are you surprised?

Think Catherine Murphy was on to something when she asked whether it was a one-off.

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

Likely a reference to people who like to get up early? I think denying student nurses money will take over from historic tweets.

It is another shocking tweet from a Sinn Fein public representative, a low-level dog-whistle homophobic tweet.

In my opinion, the type of person who draws attention to Varadkar's or anyone's sexual orientation in such a way or to his or their ancestral origins is just a despicable human being. Stanley has shown his true colours.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is another shocking tweet from a Sinn Fein public representative, a low-level dog-whistle homophobic tweet.

In my opinion, the type of person who draws attention to Varadkar's or anyone's sexual orientation in such a way or to his or their ancestral origins is just a despicable human being. Stanley has shown his true colours.

Where in that tweet is 'attention drawn to Varadkar's sexual orientation'?

WTF it was in response to Varadkar's 'people who get up early in the morning' gaff, that even Coveney criticised.

Cluedo Monopoly

I am astounded this clown will remain as PAC chairman. What exactly did he apologise for? He either meant the post or he didn't. I get that Kilmichael is having it's 100 year anniversary but the Warrenpoint ambush reference was random and deliberately provocative. He should have the guts to resign as chairman.

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where in that tweet is 'attention drawn to Varadkar's sexual orientation'?.

Holy cow, I've just seen it

Twitter/Brian Stanley SF.

"Yippee 4 d tory. it's Leo. U can do what u like in bed but don't look 4 a pay rise the next morning."

So Stanley is calling Leo a Tory, he then says "you can do what you like in bed", now honestly what kind of talk is that? and Sinn Fein so eager to tell everybody that they're pro choice, pro sexual orientation, pro life (that's a joke) as he celebrates murder, and now he comes out with this!

He seems like a really unpleasant person.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where in that tweet is 'attention drawn to Varadkar's sexual orientation'?

WTF it was in response to Varadkar's 'people who get up early in the morning' gaff, that even Coveney criticised.

"u (sic) can do what u (sic) like in bed"

This is the type of low-level insidious homophobia that is hard to eradicate, it is persistent and the type of thing that some refuse to see. It is the type of comment that wouldn't be made about a heterosexual man.

It is similar to a comment about a woman starting off with "you look great with your make-up on but.....".

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Holy cow, I've just seen it

Twitter/Brian Stanley SF.

"Yippee 4 d tory. it's Leo. U can do what u like in bed but don't look 4 a pay rise the next morning."

So Stanley is calling Leo a Tory, he then says "you can do what you like in bed", now honestly what kind of talk is that? and Sinn Fein so eager to tell everybody that their pro choice, pro sexual orientation, pro life (that's a joke) as he celebrates murder, and now he comes out with this!

He seems like a really unpleasant person.

He came out with it in 2017, just after Leo made his much criticised gaff about 'people who get up early in the morning'.

Let me walk you through the non homophobic version. 'you can do what you like in bed' - IE. 'You can stay in it r get out of it'.

It's not the Shinners that have hang ups about sexuality, it's you guys.

Jaysus H.

El Tarangu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He came out with it in 2017, just after Leo made his much criticised gaff about 'people who get up early in the morning'.

Let me walk you through the non homophobic version. 'you can do what you like in bed' - IE. 'You can stay in it r get out of it'.

It's not the Shinners that have hang ups about sexuality, it's you guys.

Jaysus H.

It wouldn't be the first dog-whistle from a sitting SF representative about Varadkar's sexuality.

FrancieBrady

El Tarangu wrote: »

It wouldn't be the first dog-whistle from a sitting SF representative about Varadkar's sexuality.

If you see homophobia because somebody mentioned 'bed' in reply to somebody talking about 'people who get up early in the morning' tis you guys need help tbh.

Hoboo

blanch152 wrote: »

"u (sic) can do what u (sic) like in bed"

This is the type of low-level insidious homophobia that is hard to eradicate, it is persistent and the type of thing that some refuse to see. It is the type of comment that wouldn't be made about a heterosexual man.

It is similar to a comment about a woman starting off with "you look great with your make-up on but.....".

Why wouldn't it be said about a hetro man? I've heard that saying plenty of times, my grandad used it all the time. Maybe he was homophobic and thought the whole family was gay.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you see homophobia because somebody mentioned 'bed' in reply to somebody talking about 'people who get up early in the morning' tis you guys need help tbh.

Just read the replies to his tweets, have a bit of cop-on, and keep the head down for the rest of the day.

Stanley won't last long if this hits the mainstream media.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Just read the replies to his tweets, have a bit of cop-on, and keep the head down for the rest of the day.

Stanley won't last long if this hits the mainstream media.

Just read the 'replies' that like Hamster think he has just published the tweet?

The replies that are ignorant of the context...those replies?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Just read the 'replies' that like Hamster think he has just published the tweet?

The replies that are ignorant of the context...those replies?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/varadkar-claims-sinn-fein-supporters-are-targeting-him-for-homophobic-abuse-39820352.html

"Fine Gael MEP Maria Walsh has asked Mr Stanley to explain a Twitter comment he made when Mr Varadkar was elected Fine Gael leader.

In the post on June 2, 2017, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chairperson wrote: “Yippie 4 d tory. it’s Leo. U can do what you like in bed but don’t look 4 a pay rise in the morning.”

The comment was made just after Mr Varadkar said his successful election showed “prejudice has no hold on this republic”.

Ms Walsh, who is a prominent LGBTI campaigner, asked why Mr Stanley was connecting the Tánaiste’s “sexual orientation and his democratically elected position”. “Is it just another flippant straight comment or is there a more sinister meaning behind the tweet?” she asked.

Sinn Féin did not respond to requests for comment."


It seems that your comment on context is just distraction and a disgusting attempt to deflect. The comment was made after Leo became leader of Fine Gael, and not in the context you referenced.

It also seems I am not alone in concern about the tweet, and my concern is shared by a prominent LGBTI campaigner. Are you suggesting she is seeing something that isn't there as well?

Time for Stanley to crawl back under his rock.