FrancieBrady wrote: » It was stated there was something unique about this being a SF issue. Far as I can see, SF fronted up and accepted blame and apologised and put systems in place to stop it happening again.
James Brown wrote: » I didn't sell anyone's baby. I didn't send a Garda with the local priest to take a rape victim to a home to be mentally abused for the rest of her life, why was Martin apologising on my behalf? Was his party and Fine Gael's assisted and turned a blind eye and covered. The public knew what they were told and told what was acceptable. So how come the modern FF/FG are still putting up roadblocks to the survivors? It was private individuals and survivors brought and dragged the state into where we are.
markodaly wrote: » I am sure it is something to do with anything but the topic at hand. When supporters of the SF/PIRA are on the back foot the general tactic, is to not talk about the actual points raised, but to divert attention to something else. Usually in this order: FG Leo Maria Cahil Da Brits Leo Maria Cahil Flanagan FG FF Covid Housing Leo Leo Leo FG FF Eoin Murphy Da Brits Boris DUP The Greens Leo Leo etc... God forbid they have to defend the actual record of SF/PIRA without having to do a 'Look over here!'
blanch152 wrote: » Yes, they announced that they had put systems in place after the Mairia Cahill events. In fact, someone here once produced a Sinn Fein Ard Fheis motion that was passed in this regard. Those systems were so good that when another incident happened - Paudie McGahan - the systems were immediately activated and the victim was protected and looked after...............oh, I see. Yes, the policies and procedures were ignored and another kangaroo court was held. Beneath the tacky facade, there is nothing to Sinn Fein's protection of the victims of their party's child abuse. To this day, their supporters harass and harangue women like Mairia Cahill, victims of Sinn Fein.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Mairia was a victim of a 'member' of Sinn Fein allegedly, there is actually documentation that shows that members of SF tried to help her in the days when she anti the police. It's important that you tell these stories correctly as the M&B victims are pointing out.
blanch152 wrote: » As the M&B victims are pointing out, it is important that you tell the story from the victim's viewpoint. You are once again denigrating Mairia Cahill's version of the story, you are doing the same thing that you are accusing the Commission of doing to the M&B victims. That you can't see it, tells an awful lot.
FrancieBrady wrote: » SF members produced letters that advised MC to go to police. That was a fact of the case. You are surely not advising us to cover up facts are you?
blanch152 wrote: » Just like the Mothers and Baby Home Commission produced the documentation in the face of the witness statements?
FrancieBrady wrote: » You are the one trying to suggest that mentining a fact of the case is 'denigrating' Mairia Cahill. How does the truth denigrate anyone? The M&B Commission destroyed people's versions of their own truths. Ignoring the fact that SF members tried to help MC makes victims of them.
blanch152 wrote: » Just like Sinn Fein continues to attempt to destroy Mairia Cahill's version of her own truths. Nauseating that you paint SF members as victims in the Mairia Cahill case.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I didn't paint them as victims. I said they are victims if what they tried to do is ignored and they are convicted of a cover-up. YOU blanch have made the case that telling the truth and producing the documentation to back it up is 'denigrating Mairia Cahill'. You are as bad as any kangaroo court or Diplock court ever was. The truth always matters.
blanch152 wrote: » Yes, Francie, the Sinn Fein truth is that the Mothers and Baby home victims are telling the truth, but Mairia Cahill, the victim, isn't. Pretty much have it there, don't need to say anything else.
Deleted User wrote: » Where have they said she isnt telling truth....anything ive seen acknowledges she is saying truth?
James Brown wrote: » More dishonesty off you. Didn't explain away anything. Didnt defend anything. A comparison was made and rebutted. You cannot compare Adams allegedly covering for his brother and putting it on SF with the industrial abuse over decades metered out under FF/FG/church. Your comment here and twisting is whats shameful. Not beyond you to use victims for a win. Are you paying Maria Cahill royalties for using her name so much? The woman is more than a victim to be used when convenient. She was (is?) a dissident/senator, but you're only interested in using her as a victim.
Whatisthisnow wrote: » Well thats just not true. You are a troll
James Brown wrote: » I think you missed this: What has the mother and baby homes got to do with you rolling out Maria Cahill again?
blanch152 wrote: » (1) The Commission independently investigated the evidence and reached its conclusion. (2) Sinn Fein denigrated Mairia Cahill with its twisted version of events. (1) has far more credibility than (2).
blanch152 wrote: » Well, Mairia Cahill agrees with me. You wouldn't want to dis a victim, would you?
blanch152 wrote: » You are correct. "You cannot compare Adams allegedly covering for his brother and putting it on SF with the industrial abuse over decades metered out under FF/FG/church." What Adams did was his personal responsibility and was far far worse.
James Brown wrote: » So tell us all how mentioning Varadkar in a current affairs forum about things he's currently doing as reported in the media is obsession? But go on, Maria Cahill.....
James Brown wrote: » Nor does it cancel out the mother and baby homes. You said it couldn't be compared then compared them. As with most things its not an either or. Both can have their time to be taken on board. Changing the subject is changing the subject.
blanch152 wrote: » This is the Sinn Fein thread. Leo isn't relevant, but Mairia Cahill is still getting dog's abuse on social media from Sinn Fein members, that makes her relevant. An inconvenient truth that won't go away.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Can you back this up?
blanch152 wrote: » Follow her on social media and you will see for yourself.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Where have SF said Mairia Cahill isn't telling the truth about her abuse? Far as I can see, correct me if I am wrong, actual evidence in the form of the letters prove that SF members did try and help her by advising her to go to the police. Which was at a time when she was anti the police force and mistrustful of them. Those letter would have been presented in the court case that never happened. You really should stop convicting on the foot of allegations alone blanch.
blanch152 wrote: » You want the truth?https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/report-says-sinn-fein-members-did-not-cooperate-with-police-in-mairia-cahill-abuse-probe-37540133.html?fbclid=IwAR0aA5037VbZDubeFXOtwXy38H0vogudtZP5iZ6vUh43owg0c5ZPMnzjCSg "A Police Ombudsman's report has revealed that Sinn Fein members "did not cooperate" fully with police on their investigation into the sexual abuse case of IRA victim Mairia Cahill." End of.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Can YOU back it up. Show that they are 'members'...or is this your version of the 'truth' again?
