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

Dudess wrote: »

If Sinn Fein espouses something, I literally cannot bring myself to back them, even if I agree with it. And as I said, those neo unionist types down here give me a pain in the tits too - it looks as if, in places on this thread, a rejection of SF's proposal is being viewed as simply going along with Eoghan Harris/Ruth Dudley Edwards/CCOB type muck, but that's certainly not my take, and it's doing a disservice to the victims of the paramilitary campaign to view it that way. I cannot detach what SF is connected to... until it renounces all of that, I would not be able to back anything it proposes with a clear conscience. I take into consideration all the "Time to move on" stuff, but to me, that means balls-all until SF acknowledges that moving on is a two-way street and renounces provo terrorism.

phantom_lord wrote: »

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people here see SF as a serious alternative.

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people don't see them as a serious alternative. It seems to come from people who were brought up in comfortable middle class circumstances, had no direct connection with the troubles, yet still feel the need to bring up past horrors that the direct victims have realised must be moved on from if there is to be any hope for the future. I would have a lot more faith in the purity of the motives of Adams,Paisley,McGuinness and Robinson than I would in FF,FG or Labour. I may not agree with a lot of their actions but I would acquit them of getting into politics for no other reason than their own financial gain. I also respect the fact that they risked (and continue to risk) their lives in pursuit of their ideals. They believe in (and back up with actions) the rights of the ordinary workers and try to give a voice to the most vulnerable in our society. Compare Gerry Adams, who believes that TDs should accept the average industrial wage while trying to defend the minimum wage, with Ruairi Quinn who had to be beaten into giving up one of his huge pensions (while also receiving a massive salary); and tell me who more closely represents the ideals of James Connolly.
This ccountry was founded by a handful of brave men and women who fought a social revolution against landlordism,feudal privilege and slavery, a model that the three main parties have tried to bring back.

As to those people who say they couldn't vote for Sinn Fein as it would be disrespectful to the victims of Omagh, Enniskillen etc., I think they should remember that it was a war and ugly things happen in war; there were atrocities and horrendous casualties on both sides and, both sides have agreed to move forward. It seems a bit childish of those who were not involved and didn't lose relatives, to cling onto prejudices inherited from their parents.

Also, I would be interested to know who they do intend to vote for. It seems they have no problem voting for the three parties who between them (and purely from cowardice and material greed) have had no problem, protecting established privilige at all costs.

But perhaps they feel that the victims of suicide, organised child abuse, Hepatitis C and slavery are less worthy of their consideration than the victims of the troubles?

AskMyChocolate wrote: »

Finding it a bit disturbing how more and more people don't see them as a serious alternative. It seems to come from people who were brought up in comfortable middle class circumstances, had no direct connection with the troubles

Not really sure what makes all that relevant to the current situation. edit: actually that's one thing that annoys me about SF supporters, how backward thinking and stuck in the past they seem to be.

But the reason I wouldn't vote for them is because I don't really have much time for left wing nationalist politics.

Dionysus wrote: »

Such as who? I can't see anybody in this thread expecting Sinn Féin to win anything near enough seats to be the dominant party in government

I certainly hope not. People turn to more extreme parties in times of trouble, the fact that seems to happening here is troubling.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

That pack of bedwetters will do nothing about the bailout.
I'll support Labour (won't vote for them though) when they decide to grow a spine and take practical steps to opposing the bailout instead of giving weak tea condemnations. SF may have been a pack of terrorist sympathisers but at least they are putting their money where their mouth is and seeking a legal challenge against the government.

Too little too late. If they wanted to oppose something of substance they should have gone after the initial bank guarantee. Rather than thinking about taking on this fruitless challenge.

Opposing the bailout is like opposing having an ambulance called after you've been hit by a car.

I wonder what Gerry Adams needs to do to gain the acceptance in public opinion that Nelson Mandela managed so easily to achieve, after all Mandela co-founded Umkhonto we Sizwe, an organisation which had a campaign of indiscriminate bombings against civilians and people associated with the military, using the despicable weapon which is landmines (they only stopped using these because they weren't killing enough white civilians), and routinely torturing and executing their victims. I never hear Irish people cry for the victims of Mandela's organisation when they praise him to the hilt yet these same people have no trouble bringing up the victims of the Troubles when they want to criticise Adams.

Yet today Mandela is viewed by so many people both here and abroad as one step short of a saint yet Gerry Adams is about on a par with Satan incarnate. It must be the beard...

Dudess wrote: »

It's not high and mighty to hate people being bombed and shot - no matter who does the killing. It's pretty shocking how people are failing to grasp this.

It's the preserve of the middle to upper classes to care about that sort of thing don't you know. Life is cheap for the riff-raff.

gonedrinking wrote: »

Yes they should, if we go down we bring the rest of Europe with us, it was in their interests to offer us a deal we could afford. Instead they got greedy and made a bad decision in making an example of us, and that will come back to haunt them if this bailout goes through.

...and of course the tax payers there will be only too delighted to hand over billions in a risky deal, to cover the costs of banking institutions. I seem to remember that isn't too popular here.

Dionysus wrote: »

That's really a matter of perspective, isn't it. If the targeted bombing of civilian areas in Basra, the massacre of civilians on roads, bombing hospitals and torturing human beings (to name some of very many actions) can be classified as part of a "war" then the meaning of the word is, I suggest, far less black and white than you appear to propose.

:rolleyes: Yeah I thought so.

Dionysus wrote: »

How about allowing the problems which private German, British and French financial institutions have with the loans they made to private financial institutions in Ireland to be the lenders' problem?

...and possibly sinking the Euro and the banking system across Europe? Yay let's do that! It would be up to the Irish government to decide to start cutting the Irish banks and their debts loose/renegotiate with bondholders etc. This should be done over an extended period of time and bit by bit.

Dudess wrote: »

Makes me so angry... :mad:

I didn't know disgust at kids being bombed to smithereens and people being shot had a class bias?

It doesn't. However, using it as a reason to castigate a party and not vote for them while tacitly (and conveniently) being willing to forgive and forget the Ryan report smacks of a moral superiority and double standard I would normally associate with middle-class (of which I am one) Labour voters (with their own mind) whose parents voted Fine Gael/ Fianna Fail. Forgive me if I'm wrong on this Dudess but you didn't answer my question as to who you intend to vote for.

I'm astounded you can speak for the victims. And does one have to be directly connected to have any real understanding of the implications of kids being bombed to smithereens and people being shot?

I didn't speak for the victims. You did. I responded to your post.
One does not have to be directly connected, no, but I would assume that Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness have a better understanding of what went on and the motives for same, than you or I given their involvement for the past forty years.

Financial gain, murdering people - they're all pretty bad. Hilarious here how paramilitary violence is actually being considered as kinda not as bad as FF's greed.

I believe that those involved in paramilitary violence were acting in what they believed to be a just cause. The fact that I, personally, don't agree with their actions (as stated in my previous post) does not change the fact that they were acting on principle. I would be interested to know what principles FG/FF/Labour were acting on when they tried to cover up the Hepatitis C scandal, resulting in the needless deaths of several innocent people, and then tried to intimidate victims on their deathbed into dropping their cases. I would also like to know what principle they were acting on when they decided that theit cosy relationship with the catholic church was more important than standing up for children being scalded with boiling water.
Or, perhaps you think that doctors and priests should be judged by different standards than paramilitaries as they're good important people?

Great things - then cancelled out by what they were connected to.

By that logic, you would be obliged to call Cowen/Kenny/Gilmore murderers and torturers for allowing Shannon airport to be used during the Iraq war. Is this your position on these three men or is it just Adams who is a murderer?

See above.

Ah yes, "It was a war, children die in a war". I did not inherit a "prejudice" from my parents - I have my own mind. I don't like people being murdered is all. It's really quite simple - not "childish". And yes, the "there was another side too" line: there most certainly was. And?

Who's "they"? "It seems"? I really fail to see where I and others indicated we have no problem with greed etc...

Given your stance, and that of the other anti-shinners, it is a fair inference to assume that you hold the belief that the murder of innocent Irish children is worse than the wholesale slaughter of innocent Iraqi children. Otherwise you would have pointed out in your posts the moral culpability of FF/FG/Labour in allowing America to use Irish Airbases to murder people for money/oil.

Again... huh? Hilarious how a disgust at organised murder must = the above.

Mother of Jesus...

What, in my post, led you to believe that I am a Sinn Fein supporter or that I have ever condoned the actions of the PIRA? I amn't. I will be voting People Before Profit/Socialist Party/ National forum in the next election. I don't like Gerry Adams but I don't like double standards either.
I would be interested to know where you stand on Nelson Mandela, or is the fact that he's a black terrorist and you prefer his cause a mitigating factor?

AMC

Are we still friends? I like debating with you.:)