Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Breaking news: 'Sinn Féin may take Govt to court over bailout deal'

13567…10

Comments

  • #62
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    Can't see how it would tbh.

    Seeing as you obviously have such high regard of your own interpretation of constitutional law, how do you feel about the High Court upholding Sinn Fein's objection to the delay of the Donegal SW by-election?

    And seeing as such a respected person as the High Court President Mr. Justice Nicholas Kearns ruling, that despite the Constitution not having in it, an explicit time period to hold a by-election, the delay "offended the terms and spirit of the Constitution and its framework for democratic representation".

    Is it possible, in your esteemed view, that despite the constitution not being explicit in it's definition of "an international agreement", it could also be offending the spirit of the constitution to not put, what everyone agrees is an event of pretty serious national importance, to the Dáil?


  • #63
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,702 ✭✭✭squod


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    So what is their great plan then? Come February when the country has run out of money, how do they propose to pay the teachers, nurses, firemen, garde etc?

    Many economists are predicting jobless growth in the medium term anyway. How do you propose we pay them then? It's the old IMF perpetual debt trick they've played over and over again........... why don't you see that.


  • #64
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    Seeing as you obviously have such high regard of your own interpretation of constitutional law, how do you feel about the High Court upholding Sinn Fein's objection to the delay of the Donegal SW by-election?

    And seeing as such a respected person as the High Court President Mr. Justice Nicholas Kearns ruling, that despite the Constitution not having in it, an explicit time period to hold a by-election, the delay "offended the terms and spirit of the Constitution and its framework for democratic representation".

    Is it possible, in your esteemed view, that despite the constitution not being explicit in it's definition of "an international agreement", it could also be offending the spirit of the constitution to not put, what everyone agrees is an event of pretty serious national importance, to the Dáil?

    They're not comparable. Look at the number of relevant articles for the first case and how they support that conclusion.

    It's very different to this scenario particularly when you look at what has been deemed to be covered by the this provision prior to now.


  • #65
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    They're not comparable. Look at the number of relevant articles for the first case and how they support that conclusion.

    It's very different to this scenario particularly when you look at what has been deemed to be covered by the this provision prior to now.

    They're not comparable? That's your answer? :rolleyes:

    I asked what you thought about the ruling, and I asked is it possible that a similar interpretation could be had?

    It's the last time the Sinn Fein used an issue of constitutionality to object to the government's behaviour, and you feel it's not comparable?!! Laughable...


  • #66
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    They're not comparable? That's your answer? :rolleyes:

    I asked what you thought about the ruling, and I asked is it possible that a similar interpretation could be had?

    It's the last time the Sinn Fein used an issue of constitutionality to object to the government's behaviour, and you feel it's not comparable?!! Laughable...

    Yes they're two very different scenarios. That's why the first one was upheld and this one has no basis.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    Yes they're two very different scenarios. That's why the first one was upheld and this one has no basis.

    lol, no doubt you were of the opinion that Sinn Fein had no basis for their action in the Donegal SW case too?!! :rolleyes:


  • #68
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    lol, no doubt you were of the opinion that Sinn Fein had no basis for their action in the Donegal SW case too?!! :rolleyes:

    Well since that's the direct opposite in what I said in my first reply to you...?


  • #69
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    Well since that's the direct opposite in what I said in my first reply to you...?

    Well since your first reply was a dodge of my question about how you felt AFTER the ruling in that case and my question above is speculating how you felt BEFORE the action...?


  • #70
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    Yet again Sinn Fein are the only ones to stand up to this disgrace of a government.

    Sinn fein were also the only party to stand up against Lisbon (Apart from a few independents and back benchers)

    Look at the right mess we are in now and where are all those fcuking jobs?


  • #71
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    It's the last time the Sinn Fein used an issue of constitutionality to object to the government's behaviour, and you feel it's not comparable?!! Laughable...

    Maybe it's not clear but I was comparing the two cases on their basis since I thought that was what you were asking me to do. The fact that it's SF taking another challenge hardly means much does it?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    Well since your first reply was a dodge of my question about how you felt AFTER the ruling in that case and my question above is speculating how you felt BEFORE the action...?

    I think you can work from that answer how I felt before the action. They're two very different cases though.


  • #73
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Notorious97 wrote: »
    People will still drag them back to the troubles
    Notorious97 wrote: »
    all the purely anti republicans / anti irish this site seems to breed
    You'd swear the Troubles was just a minor little glitch - and it's not anti republican/anti Irish to reject Sinn Féin and any of its agendas.
    My name is URL wrote: »
    +1.. I'd say SF are a lot less likely to just huff & puff than the other main parties are. I don't agree with pretty much any of their policies but some of the posts in this thread just show the idiocy of people.. those who would rather allow things to stagnate and become impossible to change than they would to show agreement with someone regardless of how much sense it makes.. simply because of who they are
    Well who they are is key for me - I'm not on the "Let's bash and ridicule even moderate, anti violence republicanism to show how progressive we are" bandwagon at all, but morally and ethically I cannot bring myself to be supportive of anything espoused by Sinn Féin - how could I after Omagh, Enniskillen, Warrington, Guildford, Birmingham, Jerry McCabe and everything else?


  • #74
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    Maybe it's not clear but I was comparing the two cases on their basis since I thought that was what you were asking me to do. The fact that it's SF taking another challenge hardly means much does it?


    Are you being deliberately obtuse?

    I'll make it easy for you, I'm asking you the following;
    1. Did you feel BEFORE Sinn Fein took the case in Donegal, that they had a valid case?
    2. How did you feel AFTER their objection was upheld?
    3. In your opinion, is it possible that a court could find that the government are acting against the spirit of the constitution?


  • #75
    Chucky the tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,320 ✭✭✭✭Chucky the tree


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Sinn fein were also the only party to stand up against Lisbon (Apart from a few independents and back benchers)

    Look at the right mess we are in now and where are all those fcuking jobs?


    Why are we in a mess because of Lisbon?


  • #76
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    I think you can work from that answer how I felt before the action.

    I can't and I would like you to tell me how you felt about it.
    phantom_lord wrote: »
    They're two very different cases though.

    They're two different cases, no doubt, but not very, in my opinion.


  • #77
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    Are you being deliberately obtuse?

    I'll make it easy for you, I'm asking you the following;
    1. Did you feel BEFORE Sinn Fein took the case in Donegal, that they had a valid case?
    2. How did you feel AFTER their objection was upheld?
    3. In your opinion, is it possible that a court could find that the government are acting against the spirit of the constitution?

    I've already answered these questions but ok.

    1. Yes.
    2. Not sure why you're asking me. But it seemed to be the reasonable outcome.
    3. I think you misunderstood in the judgement in the other case and I think it's affecting how you view this. To answer your question I think it's highly unlikely that that would be the outcome.


  • #78
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,305 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Sinn fein were also the only party to stand up against Lisbon (Apart from a few independents and back benchers)

    Look at the right mess we are in now and where are all those fcuking jobs?

    So, how did Lisbon cause this right mess?

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #79
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,702 ✭✭✭squod


    Dudess wrote: »
    You'd swear the Troubles was just a minor little glitch - and it's not anti republican/anti Irish to reject Sinn Féin and any of its agendas.

    Well who they are is key for me - I'm not on the "Let's bash and ridicule even moderate, anti violence republicanism to show how progressive we are" bandwagon at all, but morally and ethically I cannot bring myself to be supportive of anything espoused by Sinn Féin - how could I after Omagh, Enniskillen, Warrington, Guildford, Birmingham, Jerry McCabe and everything else?

    Classic case of ''taking one to know one''. We have ex-paramilitary members facing down the financial terrorists. About fuking time, me thinks.
    The IRA should be hanging all bankers and treasonous politicians in a town square; a message needs to be sent before this contagion hits everywhere; and yes, that includes the US.
    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/olli-rehn-no-haircuts-senior-bondholders


  • #80
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    They're two different cases, no doubt, but not very, in my opinion.

    Even though they're about two totally different areas, and have completely
    different basis and likely out come they're not very different? Ok so.


  • #81
    gizmo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Sinn fein were also the only party to stand up against Lisbon (Apart from a few independents and back benchers)

    Look at the right mess we are in now and where are all those fcuking jobs?
    Yea, come to think of it, where is my free abortion and cushy job in the EU military too! :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    I've already answered these questions but ok.

    1. Yes.
    2. Not sure why you're asking me. But it seemed to be the reasonable outcome.
    3. I think you misunderstood in the judgement in the other case and I think it's affecting how you view this. To answer your question I think it's highly unlikely that that would be the outcome.

    Thank you.

    Would you care to tell me how, you think, I misunderstand the ruling?
    Just to be clear, I think the pertinent issue in the ruling is the finding that it was against the spirit of the constitution. Was that not the crux of the ruling?


  • #83
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    The Dagda wrote: »
    Thank you.

    Would you care to tell me how, you think, I misunderstand the ruling?
    Just to be clear, I think the pertinent issue in the ruling is the finding that it was against the spirit of the constitution. Was that not the crux of the ruling?

    Why do you think that ruling is applicable and related to the current challenge being considered?


  • #84
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,192 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Well if Sinn Fein are against this I'm going to have to support the deal.


  • #85
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Dudess wrote: »
    You'd swear the Troubles was just a minor little glitch - and it's not anti republican/anti Irish to reject Sinn Féin and any of its agendas.

    Well who they are is key for me - I'm not on the "Let's bash and ridicule even moderate, anti violence republicanism to show how progressive we are" bandwagon at all, but morally and ethically I cannot bring myself to be supportive of anything espoused by Sinn Féin - how could I after Omagh, Enniskillen, Warrington, Guildford, Birmingham, Jerry McCabe and everything else?

    What does that have to do with the constitutionality of the credit agreements though? The things you've mentioned most certainly should not be ignored but showing support to one idea does not tacitly imply that you support every other idea or agenda of the persons expressing it.

    If Gerry Adams said that left was right would you drive on the other side of the road just to uphold your own moral ideals? It shouldn't matter who is espousing this.. it makes sense and historical differences should be set aside in order to do something about the current issue.


  • #86
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    K-9 wrote: »
    So, how did Lisbon cause this right mess?
    The EU has got us in a right mess now, I blame the EU for a large part of this economic mess on several counts, allowing a flood of immigrants, allowing foreign whole sale banks to lend in this country with ridiculous low interest rates on 95% loans knowing that this was a bubble and not reality. The Government, banks ,developers and financial regulator were equally responsible.

    We were promised job prospects in the Lisbon mandate. How the fcuk can any Government stimulate an economy with its hands tied behind its back for at least the next decade with crippling interest rates and at the same time being kicked on the ground by fellow EU bullies trying to force us to lose our 12% corporation tax?


  • #87
    iamstop
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 13,475 Mod ✭✭✭✭iamstop


    K-9 wrote: »
    So, how did Lisbon cause this right mess?

    Perhaps not directly but is a blatant example of the lies we are continually fed.

    https://open.spotify.com/album/69JKwCcZGdLqX4Upj3DwP7



  • #88
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    Why do you think that ruling is applicable and related to the current challenge being considered?

    Well seeing as you have not challenged me on my assertion that the core issue in the ruling was that the High Court found the government's actions were against the "spirit of the constitution", I'll assume you concur with that analysis.

    With that in mind, and seeing that it's generally accepted that there is no clear definition of an "international agreement" in the constitution, it's my assertion that it's not impossible to imagine a member of the justice being of the opinion that this bailout does indeed constitute an "international agreement".

    If it cannot be shown that it is in fact an "international agreement", I believe it's not impossible to imagine a court finding, that despite the lack of an explicit definition of an "international agreement" that the government's actions in regards to this bailout are also against the "spirit of the constitution".

    Seeing as this is the first time the IMF (or exterior bodies that are dictating policy) have been required in Ireland, then similarily to the Donegal case, there is no precident, and as such, it is open to interpretation.

    You see, it's not a huge stretch, I'm surprised you can't see it actually...


  • #89
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    iamstop wrote: »
    Perhaps not directly but is a blatant example of the lies we are continually fed.

    No doubt. None of that "No side" scaremongering stuff came true.


  • #90
    iamstop
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 13,475 Mod ✭✭✭✭iamstop


    I hate how so many people complain about how sh1t FF is but are all 'but sure no one else is any better'.

    What a defeatist attitude. I'm WAAAAYYYY on for giving anyone else a chance, if they are sh1t too then we can just get rid of them soon enough and try thr next lot.

    https://open.spotify.com/album/69JKwCcZGdLqX4Upj3DwP7



  • Advertisement
  • #91
    OPENROAD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,692 ✭✭✭✭OPENROAD


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    The EU has got us in a right mess now, I blame the EU for a large part of this economic mess on several counts, allowing a flood of immigrants, allowing foreign whole sale banks to lend in this country with ridiculous low interest rates on 95% loans knowing that this was a bubble and not reality. The Government, banks ,developers and financial regulator were equally responsible.

    We were promised job prospects in the Lisbon mandate. How the fcuk can any Government stimulate an economy with its hands tied behind its back for at least the next decade with crippling interest rates and at the same time being kicked on the ground by fellow EU bullies trying to force us to lose our 12% corporation tax?

    and we borrowed it we didn't have to you know


Advertisement
Advertisement