Now tell me Sinn Féin aren't thugs

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

manonthemoon

Just wondering if any of the Sinn Feiners have any comments.
Fianna Eireann etc.

It appears yous are gone very quiet

SHhh

Shh

manonthemoon

Check out the tread titles "Sinn Fein"

bonkey, Chaos-Engine, Typedef

Had some very interesting views regarding SF

Do they still stand?

Do they agree with intimidation, punishment beatings?

gandalf

My view is simple. As long as they support the IRA, an illegal second army in Ireland they should not be allowed to run for election.

As long as there is suspicion that they are involved in vigilantism they should not be allowed to run for office in the Dail, CC or Town Councils.

After looking at Fianna Eireanns links it has hardened my attitude to people who support violence and who do not give the instruments of the law in the Republic of Ireland the respect and co-operation that every citizen of this country is obliged to.

Gandalf.

bonkey

Originally posted by manonthemoon
bonkey, Chaos-Engine, Typedef

Had some very interesting views regarding SF

Do they still stand?

Do they agree with intimidation, punishment beatings?

Yes - my opinions still stand.

Why?

Any individual engaged in illegal activity should be censured as such. However, if we are to brand all of Sinn Fein because of the actions of one (or a few) of their members, then we should apply the same criteria to all political parties in Ireland.

The upshot of which would be that you would have to censure most of them.

Fianna Fail, in particular, have a nicely coloured history, which would pretty much guarantee that they should be cast out. Any party who has had a member found guilty of taking illegal payments, as per the recent tribunal, should also be cast out.

That doesnt leave very many of them.

My basic stance is simple - if you want to apply rules, you apply them equally to all parties. If you wish to condemn any one party for the acts of individuals, but do not extend the same approach over others, then you are being discriminatory - which is unjust.

jc

manonthemoon

Whatever the Sfeiners, I think after this mornings revelation about Ferris, it is clear (Although we all knew) that SF are involved with intimidation/ punishment beatings.

They are bullys. But even worse than bullies, they are cowardly bullies. The young lad who was assaulted by SF cronies in Kerry fit the usual portrait. Young impressionable, probably started using drugs in a recreational manner, and possibly started dealing in a small way. 4 guys armed with hammers/sticks against one skinny, spotty teenager. Oh yes, hard man alright

How come these bullies dont go after the big boys bringing in large quantities of drugs. Its not as if they dont know who they are?
They are in the Sunday World every week.

Yes, oother political parties take bribes, swindle cash etc. but and they are wrong for these things , but at least they dont go after some kid with hammers/ sticks because they are dealing hash to their friends

Pathetic

scojones

Originally posted by manonthemoon
Yes, oother political parties take bribes, swindle cash etc. but and they are wrong for these things

um yeah. It's illegal.

Hobbes

personally all parties are as bad as each other. However... by the train of thought on this thread it means that everyone in the UK labour party are taking kickbacks?

Victor

Originally posted by manonthemoon
Yes, oother political parties take bribes, swindle cash etc. but and they are wrong for these things , but at least they dont go after some kid with hammers/ sticks because they are dealing hash to their friends

I think there is a difference between minor transgressions (Harney flying to Sligo, Coveney canvassing for his family firm), inappropriate behavior (Healy-Rae promoting people to ignore the planning laws), the occassional rogue (Lowry and Keating in FG, or Cooper-Flynn in FF), an abuse pattern (the 6-8 members suspended from / thrown out of FF, a large section of SF's membership involved in dubious activity) and systematic abuse (Lawlor, Haughey, particular sections of SF).

The above are example and I don't mean to pick on anyone in particular.

Slutmonkey57b

If this were merely a case of one individual happening to blacken a party's name then that would be one thing, but it isn't.

SF is trying to position itself as the party of "law and order". It is actually managing to succed thanks to its accomplished media manipulation skills. The idea that it is actually a party of law and order when so many of its members are former criminals, murderers, thugs, robbers, and racketeers is a joke. It's record of stamping out crime in the areas it has been elected into up north for decades is non - existant, because SF is all about stamping out crime - provided it's not crime that finances or is perpetrated by party faithful. If SF were a law and order party there wouldn't be nearly so many kneecappings up north would there? Or would the idea that the perpetrators of such crimes might come under the protection of the political leaders of the community dissuade people from testifying against them? Hmmm.

If in the 20's you had attempted to link Hitler, the leader of the National Socialists with a rabid gang of thugs that just happened to follow the party around and happened to beat and threaten those who disagreed with the party you would have failed. The link was there all right as history proved but at the time...

Other parties might waste money. They might even take bribes. Or give their friends plum jobs. But people don't end up getting their kneecaps blown off simply for questioning them.

Boston

in fairness, sin fein in the south is mostly made up of FF wanabes and i doubt very many of them are this hard liner