FrancieBrady wrote: » Like you did with Brian Stanley and 'heavies' you had to lie and invent a homophobic narrative around that to make your case. I simply accepted the explanation given as there was no other evidence in the slightest that the poster was homophobic. Maybe take some time off going on crusades and people might find one of them credible. Typical you, that rather than criticising the poster dragging someone's personal life out for public ridicule and scrutiny, that you would use it to personally attack other posters.
blanch152 wrote: » I happen to agree with you guys, bringing up someone’s partner to target them is a no-no. Imagine somebody took the username PearseMcAuley and spent all of their time attacking Pauline Tully and Sinn Fein. You would think that disgraceful, wouldn’t you? Except you don’t, when the shoe is on the other foot.There is a very well-known example on here where the partner of a politician was targeted like that, and worse, with homophobic connotations. You did nothing about it, you said nothing about it. You condoned it, you laughed at people who raised it, you accused them of homophobia rather than the person who adopted the username, you defended it, you gloried in it, Well, excuse me, if I don’t accept your bona fides on this one.
blanch152 wrote: » Don't have any issues with his sexuality, might even change my username to "Fintan Warfield's Partner" to prove that I have no issues with his sexuality
smurgen wrote: » Another FG official account looking for violence.https://twitter.com/FG_DublinBay/status/1337737680197705735?s=19 Christ what happened to this party?!
blanch152 wrote: » So targeting a partner is ok then, which is it? You hypocrisy is exposed for all to see.
FrancieBrady wrote: » 'Targeting'? 'Heavies'? Man you love the sensationalism.
markodaly wrote: » OK, would you rather, "IRA/Sinn Fein man who partook in a robbery of a Post Office which resulted in the murder of a Garda" More accurate? Convicted by the Special Criminal Court, no wonder SF hate it.
ChristineO'Mahony wrote: Re: Mail on Sunday article - yes he was a provo but is my neighbour so wasn't a threatening man - he was jailed when we was 21... He 60 now - if you read it goes into more details of why I resigned, it wasn't just because of a knock on the door - fine gaelers calm down pls!!
FrancieBrady wrote: » How about we revert to the girl herself. There's a message at the end for you mark.
blanch152 wrote: » There is a bigger message for Sinn Fein in her comment. She didn’t resign because of a knock on the door. She resigned because of the unchecked homophobia within the party, a fact that is repeatedly denied on here.
FrancieBrady wrote: » So according to Mary Lou this AM Stanley will not be resigning from PAC. He will give an account of himself in the Dáil and unless others want to make more of it, that will be that. FG made a bit of a mess of this one as they forgot about the original tweet and went for what they thought was paydirt with the big scary 'heavy' pile-on not realising the girl at the centre would embarrass them so thoroughly.
tikkahunter wrote: » Don’t know who you are trying to kid , well actually nothing surprises me in this thread . Her comments after are the equivalent of a star witness turning up in court and then claiming that they seen nothing. If there was no problem in a neighbour calling round for a “chat” then she wouldn’t have made such an issue of it in the first place.
Hamsterchops wrote: » This could very well be a seminal moment in Irish politics, Irish history, and political landscape of this country, why? Because if Stanley is not faced up to by the PAC or the Dail, then his (bombing) tweet will have officially got through the net, the sentiments and the Pro-Provo message will not have been stamped out, and the whiff of sulphur & the actions of the Provos will have been allowed to be acceptable in an official capacity. This changes history, indeed it turns history on its head, whereby the actions of the Provos (previously Terrorist crimes) somehow become acceptable and official, ergo Sinn Fein take their mantal of Republicanism (including their Provo legacy) while Fianna Fail get overshadowed and end up the same way as Irish Labour! If the other members of the PAC have any backbone or morals they should demand he steps down as chairperson, he should also be lambasted and made to answer questions in the Dail about his tweets, and what he really believes re Provo bombs (good, bad, justified)? What will he say? That bedroom tweet needs to be scrutinised too.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I.E. 'You speak our version of history and no-one else's.' The British and Unionists tried to silence them, FF and FG etc will try but fail too. And what happens when Unionists want to tell their version? What will happen here is FF FG will slither away muttering insults and insinuations. They are not ready yet to talk about the past and the different versions of it.
Bishop of hope wrote: » You and me mightnt like the provo link, but I think it's, dead in the water with the younger voters certainly. Also it's history now even for some who would have resented it in the past. Many years of peace now and no real threat of a violent return. FG FF and Lab have burned a lot of votes and the alternative is this new SF that a high percentage of voters are turning to. Labour are a fringe party now, like pbp and sds and Greens. These party's are mere coalition fodder at best to the larger party's. We now have FG SF and FF as major party's with FF in danger of falling off a cliff if polls are an indication of what's ahead. We need politicians to start accepting this new reality and stop living in the past. Deal with the now, because SF are dealing with current issues while FG and FF are muckraking from years ago and it's not working and won't imo.
Hamsterchops wrote: » How many versions do you think there are? I only know one, the version as it happened, within living memory. The version where the Provisional IRA and it's actions were outlawed. Are you now saying there is another version of history, whereby the Provos were legitimately acting on behalf of Ireland and the Irish people? Is that your version?
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Don’t know how you figure SF are dealing with current issues Hundreds of goons in white shirts marching in Belfast doesn’t strike this poster as “dealing with current issues” .
Bowie wrote: » Any quotes or are you making inferences based on fantasy? Never seen any comments on any politicians partner myself. .
FrancieBrady wrote: » Never commented on anyones choice of partner ever, to score a point Brendi. Not my medicine. You FG lads have no boundaries or ethics when a political party frighten you. Are youse planning to go much lower?
McMurphy wrote: » Why though? What difference does it make?
blanch152 wrote: » Let's go back over this. A number of posters commented on the unacceptability of commenting on a politician's choice of partner. I agreed that it was unacceptable, and gave a hypothetical example of that unacceptability whereby someone would adopt a username of a politician's partner and attacking that politician relentlessly and asked whether they would support such an approach. They never really answered it, but maybe you could tell us whether that is an example of commenting on a choice of partner that is unacceptable. Or maybe you think such activity is all just a bit of a laugh?
Bishop of hope wrote: » They're showing up FG mostly for their behaviour and Leo, Helen and Charlie have been to the fore of their ire. Wasting time in the Dail maybe, but bringing faux pas to the news and putting them out in public view where opinions are formed. Everyone has seen golf gate, the Séamus Woulfe saga, the judge appointment of a former Charlie Flannigan associate etc etc as this cosy cartel of being in the inner circle can do no wrong. All these things are easily defeated Dail wise with votes in there, but stick in voters minds come election time. If you're making life easy for the opposition by constantly throwing out these gaffes you're feeding the hysteria. Forget the IRA, it's over and we need to move on from it. Start actually delivering on your govt pledges and quit with the tit for tat boloxology replies to twitter and social media.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I accept the posters explanation. I know the posters posting history. They don't lie nor are they hung up about the fact that somebody is gay, as some seem to be and demand special treatment for them. Being gay is normal blanch, this is 2020.
blanch152 wrote: » That one is still running. Heads to roll yet in the PSNI over the Storey funeral.
blanch152 wrote: » Leave aside the gay part, Francie. You made a big thing yesterday about attacking a politician's partner being unacceptable. Would you accept that it is perfectly normal to adopt the username "PearseMcAuley" and spend the whole time attacking Pauline Tully? A simple yes or no. Once you have answered, apply that to every other situation. This isn't about any other poster, it is about your hypocritical post calling out attacking a politician's partner when you have defended it in the past.
FrancieBrady wrote: Just how much control of people do you guys want? Scary when a person's choice of partner is used against them.
theballz wrote: » Mary Lou giving Stanley the week off lol Imagine Leo had of done that? Terrorists think they can do what they like
