blanch152 wrote: » Thank you for posting another clear example of Sinn Fein online bullying. Your minor pedantic point of whether he was a "friend" or a "neighbour" gets lost in the context of what was said and done online to her - including on here.
blanch152 wrote: » I don't accept there is a divided history. There are people who want to paint terrorism in some hallowed light, but no decent person buys that.
FrancieBrady wrote: » As to getting a panning...to be expected from those who don't want to face our divided past with honesty.
Bonniedog wrote: » Francie, as a Shinner, do you agree with your TDs being forced to make grovelling apologies for stating the bloody obvious about transgender athletes? Pathetic to see someone - who i wouldn't vote for in a blue fit but who was democratically elected unlike anyone from Transgender Equality Network - being humiliated over stating that truth?
markodaly wrote: » You mean people who want to swallow the SF line of revisionist history? Even Diarmuid Ferriter who would be very sympathetic to Republican causes called bull**** on that many times. The modern-day version of history by SF is bull$hit. SF is like a cult, trying to spread their version of the truth to all would-be believers. Just leave your brain at the door.
markodaly wrote: » I said it before and Ill say it again, SF supporters by and large are Irelands answer to Trump MAGA wearing supporters.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Here she is talking about how 'naming him' would probably ruin her 'friendship' with him.Her words not mine. And no mention of 'intimidation'. In fact her main concern is for her parents being involved and trying to isolate in a pandemic. You are the one looking a bit desperate in your portrayal of this. Do what I try to do in all of these situations...stick to the known facts.https://twitter.com/christineomg5/status/1334967574828879872
IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: » All the crying about 'mainstream media bias' is just an attempt to shut down any debate. Make a Venn Diagram about the traits of MAGAists/Brexiteers/Shinners and you'll end up with a solitary circle.
Nobotty wrote: » Arlene has no interest in a UI Her one purpose is to smash sinn féin She won't be getting into any conversation
FrancieBrady wrote: » Blows your nonsense out of the water though blanch. He WAS a friend even up to the point she named him...something she feared losing HIS FRIENDSHIP over. One would have thought the friendship would have been gone if he was abusive or threatening. Embarrassed a bit for you on that. I condemned anyone who was abusive on Twitter before...from any party position. Any there is plenty of that on social media.
Solutionking wrote: » It really is disgusting the lies you will tell to protect SF.
IAMAMORON wrote: » Nice " Friends " by the sound of it. Are you needing a shovel?
Solutionking wrote: » "Clearly your brain is not living in the Real World but carry on" That was part of the Tweet he sent her. Not sure what goes on in SF but in the Real World that is no friend. Yes you are embarrassing yourself as usual. Quit with the lies
FrancieBrady wrote: » What lie? It's all there in her own words...he was a friend and she hoped naming him wouldn't 'ruin' that friendship. Doesn't sound to me like she had just been intimidated, threatened or bullied by a 'heavy'.
Solutionking wrote: » Yes whatever.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Diarmuid, who's interview yesterday I heard, said very clearly, that all parties are trying to write history from their perspective. And he also said the day is coming when all are going to have to arrive at a narrative everybody can live with. I totally agree and I am delighted MLMD is not going to shy away from that conversation TBH. As I said before, I hoped Stanley would not reverse away from his Kilmichael/Narrow Water comments. The 'conversation' that needs to be had. Delighted too that Arlene is getting involved, because this needs to be addressed ahead of a UI conversation. That way we can arrive at an accommodation for Unionist views too. No leaning over backwards to appease triumphalism from that quarter for the sake of appeasement, but finding a place where they can also commemorate and even celebrate their past. Inclusive, not exclusive.
Hubertj wrote: » I don’t think the perspective on history of a terrorist organisation stands up to scrutiny. The fact that supporters of murdering terrorists defend theor actions tells a lot about their character, or lack of. You can throw all the whataboutery you want but the IRA was and is a terrorist organisation. SF defends the killing of innocent women and children. Mad stuff altogether.
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » Wow. She is having to defend a lot of stuff here. Not a good look. Someone turned up at this girls door and told her not to criticise SF. Indefensible.
Kraftwerk wrote: » Her words were "a senior member of SF called to the house. He said he got a phone call from head office and that she needs to remove the posts. It was inappropriate". But because he was a neighbour she was friendly with you're claiming there was no SF pressure, head office made no call, he acted on his own as a friend and she didn't feel pressured or intimated? Even though this visit to her house caused her to leave the party? And even though SF have apologised to her and a SF spokes person has said that Stanley made colossal errors of judgement that resulted in causing a lot of hurt you refuse to accept that any of this is true and no judgement can be made on Stanley until he makes a statement. You're living in a different dimension Francie. The ironic thing is that your antics here trying to defend SF to the last is making shinners look like bigger fools than ever before. The smart ones have apologised and said inappropriate tweets and behaviour is not acceptable. While you (a floating voter) have dedicated your life to defending the indefensible. I hope you're getting well paid because if you're not it's the most pathetic thing I think I've ever witnessed.
landofthetree wrote: » Trumps view on trade is the same as SF. They both hate free trade.
jm08 wrote: » The facts are: 1. She was an office holder in Ogra Sinn Fein. 2. She received messages from other members of Ógra Sinn Féin stating that a cornerstone of the functioning of the party was to have discussions that were kept internal and that adhered to the principles of “democratic centralism”. 3. She was told that “going after” the party would only serve Sinn Féin detractors. She was also told that both senior and junior members of the party had raised concerns about social media posts in recent days. She was told “sensitive matters” must be kept internal and online messages, which contradicted this, would have to be taken down. 4. “He came to my house and I was upstairs in the middle of a lecture,” she said. Her parents answered the door and she said he told her parents “that he got a phone call from head office about my tweet and I can’t be criticising the party especially as a member and a PRO [public relations officer], I can’t be criticising the party online. He wanted me to delete my tweets immediately and contact him.” Her reaction: “But this is my platform. I can write about what I want. You can’t censor me just because I am criticising the party.“ Being an office holder in any organisation isn't for her I think.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I have said Stanley's tweet on Kilmichael/Narrow Water was insensitive and he was right to apologise for that. Triumphalism is wrong. There was no 'intimidation' or 'heavy's' at her door is what I am claiming. But a friend, who left the house STILL a friend. I fully respect her right to think it was wrong that he came to the house, but as others have pointed out, she doesn't seem to understand what being a member of an organisation is. That's a different issue.
