The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Really?

More lies Francie.

Not sure what you are getting at here.

Can you explain to me how 'Yiphee for D Tory' is a 'reference to Varadkar's sexuality?

I see no reason to disbelieve that it was a reaction to Varadkar bigging up the 'Ireland without prejudice' thing and what Stanley said here:

“The point I made was, it’s great that we’ve got gay rights and women and yipee to this point. The missing piece for me was trying to get workers’ rights to promote and improve. ” their terms.

“Leo Varadkar was the head of government at the time and there has been a backlash against conditions for workers and workers’ income etc.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not sure what you are getting at here.

Can you explain to me how 'Yiphee for D Tory' is a 'reference to Varadkar's sexuality?

I see no reason to disbelieve that it was a reaction to Varadkar bigging up the 'Ireland without prejudice' thing and what Stanley said here:

You just described it as a silly and crass insult. Now you're quoting Stanley who's describing it as a celebration of gay rights.

You claim you accept his explanation, then denied you said it, then quoted him saying it was a reference to Leo being a gay taoiseach but have no idea what it has to do with Leo's sexuality?

Give me a shout when you unwind yourself.

Kraftwerk wrote: »

You just described it as a silly and crass insult. Now you're quoting Stanley who's describing it as a celebration of gay rights.

You claim you accept his explanation, then denied you said it, then quoted him saying it was a reference to Leo being a gay taoiseach but have no idea what it has to do with Leo's sexuality?

Give me a shout when you unwind yourself.

Yipee for the D Tory....has nothing to do with anyone's sexuality. The contentious phrase is the next bit.

Which Stanley explained.
Given his track record I see no reason to disbelieve that it was a reference to right's achieved and rights that helped to end the 'prejudice' Leo was talking about. 'Prejudice' Stanley had fought harder than some others in his career.

Which may be crass, vulgar and ugly etc etc but is far from being homophobic.

rdwight

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because he was clumsily referencing Varadkar's 'Ireland without prejudice' leader's address.

It could, it is so ambiguous, also be referencing 'the early risers' gaff which is what I originally thought.

Ah jaysus Francie, even you dropped that line about 500 (of your) posts ago. "can do what u like in bed" is a clearly reference to sexual activity not to getting up to go to work

The only ambiguity in the tweet arises from accepting that Stanley's intention was not homophobic. I suppose it is possible to have a track record of supporting gay rights and yet, when looking to get a dig in at a politician who happens to be gay, be clumsy enough to refer to his sexuality.

Again, music to the ears of those who listen for dog whistles.

Kraftwerk wrote: »

You just described it as a silly and crass insult. Now you're quoting Stanley who's describing it as a celebration of gay rights.

You claim you accept his explanation, then denied you said it, then quoted him saying it was a reference to Leo being a gay taoiseach but have no idea what it has to do with Leo's sexuality?

Give me a shout when you unwind yourself.

Fogive, but you are doing what Stanley's biggest mistake was: not being clear.

You have gone around in circles here in one post I have no idea whatyou are accusing me off.

If you can clearly point out what is homophobic in pointing out that we have gay rights.

If Enda Kenny stood up and talked about an 'Ireland without predjudice' and Stanley tweeted:
'Yiphee for D Tory, It's Enda, you can do what you want in bed but what about workers rights' there wouldn't have been a word about this tweet.

The faux outraged woke brigade though who are so uptight about something that should be normal can't see that though.

rdwight wrote: »

Ah jaysus Francie, even you dropped that line about 500 (of your) posts ago. "can do what u like in bed" is a clearly reference to sexual activity not to getting up to go to work

The only ambiguity in the tweet arises from accepting that Stanley's intention was not homophobic. I suppose it is possible to have a track record of supporting gay rights and yet, when looking to get a dig in at a politician who happens to be gay, be clumsy enough to refer to his sexuality.

Again, music to the ears of those who listen for dog whistles.

Which is why I said it was what I originally thought and that I was wrong. I wasn't the only one...the new hero of the anti SF crowd, the ex Shinner, Christian O'Mahony also thought he was referencing it originally. Why don't you pile-on to twitter and take her to task for getting something wrong, shock horror?

At least I can admit I was wrong unlike the those happy to lie about 'Heavies'.

rdwight

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Fogive, but you are doing what Stanley's biggest mistake was: not being clear.

You have gone around in circles here in one post I have no idea whatyou are accusing me off.

If you can clearly point out what is homophobic in pointing out that we have gay rights.

If Enda Kenny stood up and talked about an 'Ireland without predjudice' and Stanley tweeted:
'Yiphee for D Tory, It's Enda, you can do what you want in bed but what about workers rights' there wouldn't have been a word about this tweet.

The faux outraged woke brigade though who are so uptight about something that should be normal can't see that though.

Francie, just stop. I know you're anxious to hit the 40k mark before the year end but just stop.

Referring to another TD's sexuality is not normal. When it is in reference to the most prominent gay politician in the country it is borderline dangerous.

rdwight wrote: »

Francie, just stop. I know you're anxious to hit the 40k mark before the year end but just stop.

Referring to another TD's sexuality is not normal. When it is in reference to the most prominent gay politician in the country it is borderline dangerous.

That is just more evidence that you are uptight about him being gay. People's hetrosexuality is mentioned all the time, with no issue...it is perfectly normal thing to do.
As I pointed out...change the target of his tweet to Enda Kenny and it is completely without homophobic inference.

Varadkar's sexuality therefore is incidental. That's my opinion. I have seen nothing only undue sensitivity and hangup to dispute it. Varadkar is gay - so what?

Francie,kenny isn't gay
Vradakar is
Thats the problem
The two statements don't compare

All politicians need to be careful now

Woke is a very new concept,so Stanley needs to forcibly point this out in his speech
Why was there no uproar at the time of the tweet
He needs to push that point

Politicians and journalists need a fix of scandal to write about
This one is the flimsiest yet
He shouldn't have said what he said and it does speak to latent prejudice, that's true
But the way he addresses it on Tuesday is going to be key to his future
He needs to hold his hands up,apologise, recognise it was wrong ie do the exact opposite of what those with the knives out expect
I'd reiterate too that SF can take a lead on how not to inadvertently offend by holding workshops for their members with talks on how not to accidentally do this when you don't mean it
The obvious working assumption being no one fit for office means it

Nobotty wrote: »

Francie,kenny isn't gay
Vradakar is
Thats the problem
The two statements don't compare

All politicians need to be careful now

Woke is a very new concept,so Stanley needs to forcibly point this out in his speech
Why was there no uproar at the time of the tweet
He needs to push that point

Politicians and journalists need a fix of scandal to write about
This one is the flimsiest yet
He shouldn't have said what he said and it does speak to latent prejudice, that's true
But the way he addresses it on Tuesday is going to be key to his future
He needs to hold his hands up,apologise, recognise it was wrong ie do the exact opposite of what those with the knives out expect
I'd reiterate too that SF can take a lead on how not to inadvertently offend by holding workshops for their members with talks on how not to accidentally do this when you don't mean it
The obvious working assumption being no one fit for office means it

Ha ha Nobotty...you proved my point.
The faux woke generation should not win here IMO.

It is ridiculous to try to achieve an 'Ireland without prejudice' then round on somebody with a 'prejudiced' point of view: i.e. - that because they happened to mention something related to gay rights in the same sentence as they mention the name of somebody who is gay is somehow 'homophobic'.

It is ridiculous that somebody who considers gay sexuality as normal and who has worked for it to be considered normal has to self censor in that way.

Anyway: that is where I stand on this. We have been over and over it. Let's see what happens next. Not giving it anymore oxygen.

rdwight

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is just more evidence that you are uptight about him being gay. People's hetrosexuality is mentioned all the time, with no issue...it is perfectly normal thing to do.
As I pointed out...change the target of his tweet to Enda Kenny and it is completely without homophobic inference.

Varadkar's sexuality therefore is incidental. That's my opinion. I have seen nothing only undue sensitivity and hangup to dispute it. Varadkar is gay - so what?

Not sure where to start with this.

No, a reference to Kenny's sexual life wouldn't be homophobic. Why? Because he's not gay.

I asked a long time ago in this thread for examples of politicians referencing one another's sexual actiivity on social media. There don't appear to be any apart from Stanley's reference to our most prominent gay politician.

So no, referencing Varadkar's sexuality is not "a perfectly normal thing to do"

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ha ha Nobotty...you proved my point.
The faux woke generation should not win here IMO.

All woke is here,so deal with it we must

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yipee for the D Tory....has nothing to do with anyone's sexuality. .

Not according to Stanley. His explanation was that "yippee" was a celebration of gay rights and the fact we have a gay taoiseach. Stanley himself said it was a reference to his sexuality. You say its a crass insult. Yet you said you believe his explanation.

You believe him but completely disagree with what he said? Each time you get called out you start contracting yourself. This wouldn't happen if you took a reasonable view from the start rather than blindly trying to defend SF.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ha ha Nobotty...you proved my point.
The faux woke generation should not win here IMO.

It is ridiculous to try to achieve an 'Ireland without prejudice' then round on somebody with a 'prejudiced' point of view: i.e. - that because they happened to mention something related to gay rights in the same sentence as they mention the name of somebody who is gay is somehow 'homophobic'.

It is ridiculous that somebody who considers gay sexuality as normal and who has worked for it to be considered normal has to self censor in that way.

Anyway: that is where I stand on this. We have been over and over it. Let's see what happens next. Not giving it anymore oxygen.

It wasn't something related to gay rights, that is the problem.

It is over to Stanley now. A fulsome apology to Varadkar together with a commitment from McDonald to stamp out the bile that regularly pours out on social media from her followers are the minimum required.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because he was clumsily referencing Varadkar's 'Ireland without prejudice' leader's address.

It could, it is so ambiguous, also be referencing 'the early risers' gaff which is what I originally thought.

You were singularly alone in originally thinking that.

I think there was one other poster who followed your lead on that, but that is all.

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Not according to Stanley. His explanation was that "yippee" was a celebration of gay rights and the fact we have a gay taoiseach. Stanley himself said it was a reference to his sexuality. You say its a crass insult. Yet you said you believe his explanation.

You believe him but completely disagree with what he said? Each time you get called out you start contracting yourself. This wouldn't happen if you took a reasonable view from the start rather than blindly trying to defend SF.

Final word on this.

Not according to Stanley. His explanation was that "yippee" was a celebration of gay rights and the fact we have a gay taoiseach.

Where did he mention - 'the fact we have a gay Taoiseach'?

Here is his statement to PAC reported in a few places and he never says the words 'gay Taoiseach' at all.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sinn-fein-td-brian-stanley-refuses-to-apologise-to-lgbti-community-over-tweet-about-leo-varadkar-39822390.html

https://mmo.aiircdn.com/277/5fc8f42d029c5.mp3

https://www.thejournal.ie/brian-stanley-delete-twitter-facebook-5288468-Dec2020/

You are projecting something he never actually said. No surprise there.

McMurphy

Why was Stanley's tweet not picked up upon, and deemed "offensive/homophobic" whatever when it was originally tweeted back in June 17 has anyone been able to answer?

Seems like 3½ years is an awful long time for a penny to drop.

blanch152 wrote: »

You were singularly alone in originally thinking that.

I think there was one other poster who followed your lead on that, but that is all.

It was literally being interpreted all over social media that way until Stanley gave his take on it.
WHEN he did I accepted and SAID I was wrong.

https://twitter.com/williamhboney1/status/1334556782132408323
https://twitter.com/sorcham12/status/1334790458426482688
https://twitter.com/bar_bte/status/1334373269164740609
https://twitter.com/latte_elitist/status/1334538520585777153
https://twitter.com/Ogie_Halfhand/status/1334700981720854530

WE are STILL waiting for you to accept you were totally wrong in your 'heavy' pile-on.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Final word on this.

Where did he mention - 'the fact we have a gay Taoiseach'?

Here is his statement to PAC reported in a few places and he never says the words 'gay Taoiseach' at all.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sinn-fein-td-brian-stanley-refuses-to-apologise-to-lgbti-community-over-tweet-about-leo-varadkar-39822390.html

https://mmo.aiircdn.com/277/5fc8f42d029c5.mp3

https://www.thejournal.ie/brian-stanley-delete-twitter-facebook-5288468-Dec2020/

You are projecting something he never actually said. No surprise there.

More lies by Francie. No surprise there.

"Mr Stanley said that the word "yippee" was a celebration of gay rights, given that Ireland had a gay taoiseach."

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2020/1204/1182305-brian-stanley-tweet/

Even in the links you referenced he clearly says it was said in relation to gay rights:

" “‘Yippee’ meant I celebrate the fact we got so far in terms of the rights for gay people,” he added."

Seems your research wasn't very thorough.

Kraftwerk wrote: »

More lies by Francie. No surprise there.

"Mr Stanley said that the word "yippee" was a celebration of gay rights, given that Ireland had a gay taoiseach."

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2020/1204/1182305-brian-stanley-tweet/

Even in the links you referenced he clearly says it was said in relation to gay rights:

" “‘Yippee’ meant I celebrate the fact we got so far in terms of the rights for gay people,” he added."

Seems your research wasn't very thorough.

Bull****. That is a journalist making the same mistake you are. NOTe; there are no quote tags on the sentence.

The tweet sent by Mr Stanley following Mr Varadkar's election as leader of Fine Gael read "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".

Mr Stanley said that the word "yippee" was a celebration of gay rights, given that Ireland had a gay taoiseach.

Mr Donohoe said Mr Stanley "could not be making those comments in that kind of tone about anybody".

Stanley has only spoken about this to PAC, which is what all the reports are quoting from.
The sound file is there...HE DOES NOT mention a 'gay Taoiseach'.
You are projecting. And like blanch did with the 'heavy' stuff, that becomes a lie if you keep insisting on it when you know you are wrong.

Stanley doesn't need to convince SF
He needs to convince the deputy chair of PAC who is no lover of FG but she does put most other politicians support for gay rights in the halfpenny place
She is utterly convinced of what the tweet meant
I am too but I think its just the type of thing that's legacy in country brains and Stanley unfortunately blurted it out

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Bull****. That is a journalist making the same mistake you are. NOTe; there are no quote tags on the sentence.

Stanley has only spoken about this to PAC, which is what all the reports are quoting from.
The sound file is there...HE DOES NOT mention a 'gay Taoiseach'.
You are projecting. And like blanch did with the 'heavy' stuff, that becomes a lie if you keep insisting on it when you know you are wrong.

What a vulnerable young woman thinks in her Stockholm Syndrome state is of interest but is not decisive. The Sinn Fein heavies called to her door to silence her. Not a word of a lie in that.

What is a lie is a claim that there was no reference to Varadkar's sexuality in the tweet, a claim that you have yet to withdraw (unless I missed it somewhere in the hundreds of posts on the issue).

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Bull****. That is a journalist making the same mistake you are. NOTe; there are no quote tags on the sentence.

Stanley has only spoken about this to PAC, which is what all the reports are quoting from.
The sound file is there...HE DOES NOT mention a 'gay Taoiseach'.
You are projecting. And like blanch did with the 'heavy' stuff, that becomes a lie if you keep insisting on it when you know you are wrong.

This is rather pathetic. He sent the tweet when Leo was elected FG leader. And is on record speaking to the committee as explaining it by saying "I said yippie in relation to what we've achieved for gay rights".

And still you're trying to contradict him on what he meant and trying to claim it had nothing to do with Leo's sexuality or Leo's position? Despite all your "research" you seem to have missed the basic details of the story.

Embarrassing stuff.

Nobotty wrote: »

Stanley doesn't need to convince SF
He needs to convince the deputy chair of PAC who is no lover of FG but she does put most other politicians support for gay rights in the halfpenny place
She is utterly convinced of what the tweet meant
I am too but I think its just the type of thing that's legacy in country brains and Stanley unfortunately blurted it out

It is not just a legacy in country brains.

When Francie talks about "the faux woke generation" and not letting them win, he is actually correct, but the faux woke generation are actually people like Brian Stanley. They are the people who say all the right things about gay rights, about women, about racism etc. but deep down they don't believe it. When handed the opportunity to throw a homophobic or racist (or more usually in Sinn Fein, a sectarian) dart at a person or community that they hate, the mask slips and the faux woke sheepskin hiding the wolf falls away. Thus we had Holohan, we had the Kingsmill bread incident, and now we have Stanley.

blanch152 wrote: »

What a vulnerable young woman thinks in her Stockholm Syndrome state is of interest but is not decisive. The Sinn Fein heavies called to her door to silence her. Not a word of a lie in that.

What is a lie is a claim that there was no reference to Varadkar's sexuality in the tweet, a claim that you have yet to withdraw (unless I missed it somewhere in the hundreds of posts on the issue).

He referenced the success of achieving gay rights in relation to getting workers rights.
Varadkar's sexuality was incidental. As shown by transposing Enda Kenny as the target of the tweet, it still makes sense further underlining that.

That is my view of it and until somebody can credibly show me why a person who has the track record he has would suddenly lash out a homophobic tweet that remains my view.

Lying about 'heavies' or adding things he didn't say, isn't helping and I further believe those pile-ons, have taken the sting out of this. People know what the umbrage and outrage really are.

blanch152 wrote: »

It is not just a legacy in country brains.

When Francie talks about "the faux woke generation" and not letting them win, he is actually correct, but the faux woke generation are actually people like Brian Stanley. They are the people who say all the right things about gay rights, about women, about racism etc. but deep down they don't believe it. When handed the opportunity to throw a homophobic or racist (or more usually in Sinn Fein, a sectarian) dart at a person or community that they hate, the mask slips and the faux woke sheepskin hiding the wolf falls away. Thus we had Holohan, we had the Kingsmill bread incident, and now we have Stanley.

I disagree
Most people who retain gay as a slave are decent people who don't want to harm
But they do and need outgrain the ingrained thought process as it is harmful

Kraftwerk wrote: »

This is rather pathetic. He sent the tweet when Leo was elected FG leader. And is on record speaking to the committee as explaining it by saying "I said yippie in relation to what we've achieved for gay rights".

And still you're trying to contradict him on what he meant and trying to claim it had nothing to do with Leo's sexuality or Leo's position? Despite all your "research" you seem to have missed the basic details of the story.

Embarrassing stuff.

Back to my quesation:

Are you saying that you cannot reference gay rights in a tweet that also mentions somebody who happens to be gay...even if they are, in your eyes, depriving workers of rights?

*Are you withdrawing the claim that he used the words 'because we have a gay Taoiseach' BTW? Or are you like others just going to slide away from it?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He referenced the success of achieving gay rights in relation to getting workers rights.
Varadkar's sexuality was incidental. .

You're a liar. And you're making an absolute fool of yourself.

[Deleted User]

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He referenced the success of achieving gay rights in relation to getting workers rights.
Varadkar's sexuality was incidental. As shown by transposing Enda Kenny as the target of the tweet, it still makes sense further underlining that.

That is my view of it and until somebody can credibly show me why a person who has the track record he has would suddenly lash out a homophobic tweet that remains my view.

Lying about 'heavies' or adding things he didn't say, isn't helping and I further believe those pile-ons, have taken the sting out of this. People know what the umbrage and outrage really are.

Mary Lou tried the same on twitter. She posted a video of him talking about LGBQT rights and was slated. One poster pointed out that the very people that bullied him would all wear rainbow colours on Pride Day.

SF practice "centralised democracy", you don't know what his true feelings are.