Mortelaro wrote: » I get that you are OK with what happened Party before society Party before other bereaved Party before health These events should make most people shudder at the thoughts of SF running Ireland
maccored wrote: » now now - you'll be up at the Truthvader level of deflection mastery at this rate
Mortelaro wrote: » Glad to be of service! But honestly, this whole episode is a monumental clusterfuck, sadly with now 9 families in the middle as It cannot be easy for the Storey family to be turning on newsline and hearing all this either Another month or two and there could have been a fairer public memorial without the need for negative publicity or justifications or distractions One for the party to reflect on
FrancieBrady wrote: » Any cancellations were made by the council/crematorium not SF. They have apologised for an 'error of judgement'. Nobody sent sinister looking men to close and guard the crematorium as was being breathlessly suggested.
Yeah_Right wrote: » Going by the IRA/SF history, they probably sent the sinister men to the homes and families of the people in charge of the crematorium. To "encourage" them to close it to all but the funeral of Bobby "The Terrorist Freedom Fighter" Storey.
FrancieBrady wrote: » If only people could give this funeral the latitude other funerals breaking the same rules got...eh? But you can't be passing up chances like this.
Mortelaro wrote: » Jaysis Talk about whataboutery devotion to party! No sense of perspective or perception or good example at all
FrancieBrady wrote: » Surely it is those who watched other funerals breaking regs and said nothing that have 'no sense of perspective'? We know that breaches occurred and that the party involved have apologised for hurt caused.
Mortelaro wrote: » Thats monumental disconnect right there Francis,comparing the odd funeral down the country that might have had some extras in the grave yard as opposed to on the road to the episode in the news all week Its utter arrogance
FrancieBrady wrote: » We know you are desperately trying to hang on to a conspiracy theory of council control and the Shinners nefariously using that to close crematoriums etc etc. Take your conspiracies stuff away and you are left with breaches of social distancing rule and selfies. Stuff that has happened all over this island.They, like all the others who breached, deserve criticism for that. We are yet to know if SF were even responsible for it. The PSNI will decide that, not you and not Sam McBride nor any conspiracy theorists who once again haven't a shred of evidence to back it all up. Perspective you say? Edit and of course, if they PSNI don't fall in with the onslaught...out will come the 'It's the Peace Process conspiracy theory.
Mortelaro wrote: » The PSNI have already said contrary to what SF said,that they did not liase with SF on the funeral arrangements As regards the rest of your post Francis,I'll add delusion to the list of descriptions of your attempts to slither around the whole clusterfuck
joeguevara wrote: » Conspiracy theories are based on theories where there is no actual evidence of something happening in the past. I don't think that description fits. You then say it is up to the PSNI to decide whether there was wrongdoing unless PSNI decide that there was and then its a conspiracy theory against SF. Ah come on Francie, you must have chuckled yourself when you wrote that.
FrancieBrady wrote: » What? If the PSNI find against SF they will have to pay whatever penalty that warrants. If the PSNI find that SF are not responsible for the breaches occurring and they were down to uncontrolables and individuals, then you'll have the usuals on here pushing the favouritism from the PSNI conspiracy theory. They cannot win
FrancieBrady wrote: » You can find far better and more provable instances of trying to slither out of responsibility than what I have said here. That is criticism of SF is warranted and legitimate. But the conspiracy theories designed to try and ramp up the 'crime' here are so far - nonsense.
Bonniedog wrote: » Cancelling the cremations is the worst aspect. Same as not allowing more than tiny numbers to attend Mass and Protestant services in rural areas, it is majorly pissing people off. Especially when they have north Korean type event in the middle of it. Arrogance. And they don't even realise that is what it comes across there as they have developed the self awareness of a turnip. Any little thing that happens to them or any criticism is occasion of self pitying whinge fest. Think they can do whatever the fk they want if it benefits themselves.
Mortelaro wrote: » Its very Salient
Truthvader wrote: » Two kinds of people support Sinn Fein, firstly those fully invested in the IRA/ blood sacrifice united Ireland murder machine who will justify any behaviour or action one way or another. These are a small minority The second group, of which you seem to be a member, are prepared to forget about what they have done and who they are and focus on what they have promised you. In your case its housing; for others it is other issues. Leaving aside the reality of the likelihood of them ever delivering on their promises I believe this second group have lost their moral centre and/or are simply are too young to remember or to know what Sinn Fein/ IRA have done who they represent and who controls them. It is not OK to jettison all moral principal in the pursuit of what you want or what you are promised regardless of the source of that promise
Bishop of hope wrote: » Tbf i think its a matter of personal preference for anyone. Pearse is recommending I think. If he had it last week it might have told him, alert, you're in a dangerous situation.https://twitter.com/PearseDoherty/status/1280440979179307009?s=20
smurgen wrote: » Is there any evidence SF cancelled or controlled other events on the say or is it just implied as a slur?
Bowie wrote: » Are you suggesting people voting for various parties have various reasons and to quote the 'Life of Brian', "we are all individuals"? Say it ain't so?
Mortelaro wrote: » In the middle of a pandemic, you're belittling the gravity of the frankly insult to bereaved across the land that this event was The optics of it and the optics of excusing it
Bishop of hope wrote: » I was being incredibly magnanimous there wasn't I. But I can't help and try and save you from yourselves. I'm like the great missionaries of old in political terms. What this I hear about SF censuring their sdcc councillors today until the get further views from da leadership.
JohnnyFlash wrote: » Does everyone agree that O’Neill should issue a full and forthright apology to her assembly colleagues on behalf of the SF party? I think so. This is a would that will continue to fester unless it is cauterised.
Bowie wrote: » Somebody posted an unfounded generalisation and you kind of refuted it a bit. Well done. No. It will just give fuel, (no pun intended) to Foster so she can play DUP with other issues. Calls for an apology are for point scoring purposes. MON already apologised to anyone upset by their actions. They should apologise for not socially distancing IMO. It's already becoming old news. It's more about trying to get one over.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I'd expect the PSNI to issue fines for the social distancing issues for which those involved should apologise for. I think MOn has already said the selfie she was in was wrong. Unless SF as a party are found to have been wrong to organise the funeral I don't think anyone needs to apologise for being there.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Everybody looked the other way at other events, from drinks in the park to Garda funerals, YOU have been telling us to do just that. 'Optics' are only relevant when you have your eyes open Mort.
Bishop of hope wrote: » Tried and found wanting at least, Thought you thought she was wrong earlier? Bit of an about turn eh!
Bowie wrote: » He's quoting the Sun. It's a tad right wing. Just a tad mind.
