nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

anyone here going to vote sinn féin?

shtemcguire

they have policies that want to help the poor and they are republican which is good

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Banbh

I'm not 'for' Gerry Adams or anyone else, except my family. I don't 'support' a political party the way people 'support' a football team. I vote for candidates based on their policies.

And I'm going to vote Sinn Fein as they are the only opposition to paying off the bankers. They are the only ones advocating an end to this ridiculous debt that FF/GR - with the approval of FG/LAB - have inflicted on us.

Has anyone got a short name for FF-FG-GR-LAB as I get tired typing it all out? There must be a short name for this alliance of the willing.

sharkie66

SafeSurfer,

"Until proven in a court of law or otherwise we have to take Mr Adams word. Like it or not, believe it or not! Everything else is just slander and idle gossip."

So your opinion on Bertie Ahern is valid even though he has never been convicted of an offence whereas my view on Gerry Adams is "just slander and idle gossip"?

Which is it? If Bertie Ahern can be convicted in the court of public opinion then so too can Gerry Adams.

If you have evidence to show us all here that Mr Adams was a member of that freedom fighting organization please bring it to your nearest PSNI /RUC station!

Regarding my view re Mr Ahern and the corrupt FF party being slander or idle gossip....umm just take a look around you lads and see what he and the FF mafia have done to the country. I think if you look closely you will find ample evidence that he is indeed all the above!:eek:

Adam's covered up his protection of his brother Liam after he became aware of the abuse and did nothing to help the victim Aine Tyrell.

You make another unfounded assertion here without as much as a sniff of proof to back it up. Please do now!

The tragedy that happened within a family is indeed private and spouting on about it here is taking the thread off subject.

The question is 'will you vote for Sinn Fein' and not ' Sexual Abuse in Irish families and its effect on the moral fibre of society'!

the_syco

theg81der wrote: »

Anyone who`s for Gerry Adams - one thing bothers me, you can say whatever, but would you insult him? Would you watch your words if you spoke with him?

Yes, I would, if he came up to my door. If I met him in the street, I'd still be civil, but I'd ask more questions.

=-=

I agree with SafeSurfer that as Bertie was never tried in court. Thus, by sharkie66's own logic, sharkie66 has to believe Bertie Ahern and Brian Cowen to be totally innocent...

SafeSurfer

Anyway this thread is all about voting for SF or not and we are heading off thread with this discussion. I agree to diagree with you on this point.

I dont think this is off thread. This discussion is about voting for Sinn Fein and I am giving my opinion as to what would make a difference in my decision to vote for them or not.

If you are uncomfortable defending the Sinn Fein leader's position on covering up child abuse in his family and his membership of the provisional IRA then that is a different matter.

sharkie66 wrote: »

Until proven in a court of law or otherwise we have to take Mr Adams word. Like it or not, believe it or not! Everything else is just slander and idle gossip.
If there is proof then out with it! You would have me believe the word from spooks in the same intelligence services who LIED to the world about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Sorry but I do not believe a word from any intelligence service!:eek:

Anyway this thread is all about voting for SF or not and we are heading off thread with this discussion. I agree to diagree with you on this point.:)

You cant have it both ways you say Bertie Ahern is
"A total waster and traitor to his country who has been shown as a liar and corrupt politician."

and then go on to say that claims against Gerry Adams of IRA membership and covering up child abuse are

"Until proven in a court of law or otherwise we have to take Mr Adams word. Like it or not, believe it or not! Everything else is just slander and idle gossip."

So your opinion on Bertie Ahern is valid even though he has never been convicted of an offence whereas my view on Gerry Adams is "just slander and idle gossip"?

Which is it? If Bertie Ahern can be convicted in the court of public opinion then so too can Gerry Adams.

fred252

sharkie66 wrote: »

Until proven in a court of law or otherwise we have to take Mr Adams word. Like it or not, believe it or not! Everything else is just slander and idle gossip.
If there is proof then out with it! You would have me believe the word from spooks in the same intelligence services who LIED to the world about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Sorry but I do not believe a word from any intelligence service!:eek:

Anyway this thread is all about voting for SF or not and we are heading off thread with this discussion. I agree to diagree with you on this point.:)

How is this off thread? Its an insult to everyone's intelligence to claim he was not a member of the IRA's army council. As Safesurfer said people might be more inclined to vote SF if there was a bit of honesty in this regard. McG admitting his membership doesn't seem to have affected him negatively.

theg81der

Anyone who`s for Gerry Adams - one thing bothers me, you can say whatever, but would you insult him? Would you watch your words if you spoke with him?

I know what I`d like to say to him when/if he arrives at my door but I`ve been warned not to, everyone is scared to say anything to him...why exactly is that if talk of him being a murderer (ordering murders) is wild unsubstansiated conjecture??

Can I say what I like as I did to the FF`ers that arrived on my door 2 nights ago? I like my freedom and if Sinn Fein grow (which they probably will with a load of idiots and angry young people with nothing to do) I`ll be leaving, I don`t want to raise children in that country.

sharkie66

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Thats grand you are entitled to believe what you want.

A couple of points though

The Wikileaks was not as you put it an assertion of Bertie Aherns. It is based on "rock solid evidence" a term as you will know is used by the intelligence services to mean bugged concersations etc. It is disingenuous to claim that it is based as you say on the word of a prime minister.

It was politically convenient for the British and Irish governments to turn a blind eye to Adams' membership of the IRA so they could negotiate the IRA ceasefire, Downing street agreement etc.

You say that the authors of the above links all have serious anti republican baggage?

So Brendan Hughes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Hughes an OC during the hunger strikes and former member of the army council is anti republican?

I have read Admas' autobiography Before the Dawn and you will find no mention of his father's pedophilia or his brother's sexual abuse of his niece from the age of 4.

Adam's covered up his protection of his brother Liam after he became aware of the abuse and did nothing to help the victim Aine Tyrell.

My point is that Gerry Adams is the leader of what may emerge as the third largest party in the country. He is very likely to be elected as TD for Louth. For a party that is seeking a new type of politics they could lead by example and start with a little honesty from their leader. I think the Irish people would be more receptive to all Sinn Fein candidates if their leader levelled with the Irish people and stopped hiding behind a web of spin and lies.

Until proven in a court of law or otherwise we have to take Mr Adams word. Like it or not, believe it or not! Everything else is just slander and idle gossip.
If there is proof then out with it! You would have me believe the word from spooks in the same intelligence services who LIED to the world about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Sorry but I do not believe a word from any intelligence service!:eek:

Anyway this thread is all about voting for SF or not and we are heading off thread with this discussion. I agree to diagree with you on this point.:)

sharkie66

gallinini wrote: »

Jesus you should try and live on 188 a week and see hoe you get on.....:eek:

Gallinini, if you go back and read the post where you took that quote from you will see that I did not make that statement. Max did! You could also read a few of my other posts and see that I am clearly on the side of the ordinary man and worker.

Now can you retify your error please. :cool:

SafeSurfer

sharkie66 wrote: »

Sorry SafeSurfer but all those links and wiki stuff count for nothing as not one of them is credible regarding unbiased reporting in the north. The papers you mention have a history of anti republican sentiment while the above mentioned authors also carry serious anti republican baggage. I think you are messing if you expect any student of recent Irish history to seriously believe an article from tory rags such as The Mail and Daily Telegraph. The wikileaks stuff was supplied by the one and only Honest Bertie Ahern who made the assertions without supplying a single thread of evidence for the assertion! But then again the word of a Prime Minister has a lot of weight in diplomatic circles even if it is a pack of lies! Bertie and his money on the nags, Come on really! A total waster and traitor to his country who has been shown as a liar and corrupt politician.

Until it is proven to be different then we have no choice but believe Mr Adams assertion. Like it or not. Believe it or not. Everything else is just unfounded bar stool gossip!

Thats grand you are entitled to believe what you want.

A couple of points though

The Wikileaks was not as you put it an assertion of Bertie Aherns. It is based on "rock solid evidence" a term as you will know is used by the intelligence services to mean bugged concersations etc. It is disingenuous to claim that it is based as you say on the word of a prime minister.

It was politically convenient for the British and Irish governments to turn a blind eye to Adams' membership of the IRA so they could negotiate the IRA ceasefire, Downing street agreement etc.

You say that the authors of the above links all have serious anti republican baggage?

So Brendan Hughes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Hughes an OC during the hunger strikes and former member of the army council is anti republican?

I have read Admas' autobiography Before the Dawn and you will find no mention of his father's pedophilia or his brother's sexual abuse of his niece from the age of 4.

Adam's covered up his protection of his brother Liam after he became aware of the abuse and did nothing to help the victim Aine Tyrell.

My point is that Gerry Adams is the leader of what may emerge as the third largest party in the country. He is very likely to be elected as TD for Louth. For a party that is seeking a new type of politics they could lead by example and start with a little honesty from their leader. I think the Irish people would be more receptive to all Sinn Fein candidates if their leader levelled with the Irish people and stopped hiding behind a web of spin and lies.

[Deleted User]

Surely be to God,we've moved on from the Gerry was in the Rah stuff? too'ing and fro'ing on that gets boring very quickly.
I'm satisfied that he was regardless of claims otherwise.
Non republicans would want to be fools not to believe he was and Republicans that come on fora like this trotting out the line that he wasn't...prove it etc are just going through the rings...because somehow someone in the organisation at some point suggested thats what has to be done to get on in elections in the south.
Big fecking swing,who cares,I don't anymore.

If he was convicted of killing someone,thats a different matter,he hasn't been.If he supported killers though,I'd take a dim view of that (oh wait...)

What matters is your political pedigree and your track record.
SF are very good in the parish pump sense,they are the epitome of parish pump politics as they look after their own and advocate for their own genre/social economic group for want of a better way of putting it.

What gets up my goat though is their complete air of innocence on how to run a country.
It's like they want us all to convert over to what makes their niche followers happy and feck the consequences economically.

The current mess FF have got this country in,provides a lovely backdrop for the angry unconsidered vote to move in droves SF's way.
I hope they reconsider and wait and see if the coming coalition can unravel the mess.
It won't be fixed in 5 years though but we'll have a fair idea as to how they are getting on..

gallinini

sharkie66 wrote: »

IMO the dole wasnt cut enough.

€188 per week is still WAY too high for social welfare payments.

Your words above! Sorry but with that attitude your Republican mask slipped there and shows us that you are a something very different from what a true Republican should be! Tory politics I'd be saying there Max!

Jesus you should try and live on 188 a week and see hoe you get on.....:eek:

sharkie66

SafeSurfer wrote: »

He admitted IRA membership regularly in a long running An Phoblacht column under the name "Brownie".

Adams has stated repeatedly that he has never been a member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA).[16] However, authors such as Ed Moloney, Peter Taylor, Mark Urban and historian Richard English have all named Adams as part of the IRA leadership since the 1970s.[17][18][19][20] Adams has denied Moloney's claims, calling them "libellous".[21]

(Yet has never won a libellous case disproving membership).

Adams was active in Sinn Féin at this time, siding with the Provisionals in the split of 1970.I][URL="http://www.boards.ie/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed"][COLOR=#0645ad]citation needed[/COLOR][/URL][/I In August 1971, internment was reintroduced to Northern Ireland under the Special Powers Act 1922. Adams was interned in March 1972, on HMS Maidstone, but was released in June to take part in secret, but abortive talks in London.[9] The IRA negotiated a short-lived truce with the British government and an IRA delegation met with the British Home Secretary, William Whitelaw at Cheyne Walk in Chelsea. The delegation included Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness, Sean Mac Stiofain (IRA Chief of Staff), Daithi O'Conaill, Seamus Twomey, Ivor Bell and Dublin solicitor Myles Shevlin.[11] The IRA insisted Adams be included in the meeting and he was released from internment to participate. Following the failure of the talks, he played a central role in planning the bomb blitz on Belfast known as Bloody Friday.[9] He was re-arrested in July 1973 and interned at the Long Kesh internment camp. After taking part in an IRA-organised escape attempt, he was sentenced to a period of imprisonment.

More here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/04/wiki_gerry_adams_doodah/

Here http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/former-ira-chief-claimed-gerry-adams-ordered-jean-mcconville-killing-14746206.html

Here http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gerry-adams-lsquoproudrsquo-of-his-association-with-ira-2121261.html

Here http://newswhip.ie/national-2/wikileaksnirish-government-had-rock-solid-evidence-gerry-adams-was-senior-ira-member-recently-as-five-years-ago

Here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8198164/WikiLeaks-Irish-government-had-evidence-Gerry-Adams-was-in-IRA-five-years-ago.html

Here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323729/Truth-Gerry-Adams-IRA-grave.html

I dont believe that he could have negotiated on behalf of the IRA without being on the army council.

Martin Mc Guinness has confirmed his membership and he was part of the same negotiating team.

But then again Gerry Adams has denied being a member of the parliament to which he was elected.

I am not trying to cast asperations. I believe that Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein would have more credibility if he confiremed he was a member of the provisional IRA during the armed struugle.

We are all grown ups here, no one really believes Adams never held a leadership role in the IRA anymore than they believe Bertie Ahern won the money under his bed on the gg's.

Sorry SafeSurfer but all those links and wiki stuff count for nothing as not one of them is credible regarding unbiased reporting in the north. The papers you mention have a history of anti republican sentiment while the above mentioned authors also carry serious anti republican baggage. I think you are messing if you expect any student of recent Irish history to seriously believe an article from tory rags such as The Mail and Daily Telegraph. The wikileaks stuff was supplied by the one and only Honest Bertie Ahern who made the assertions without supplying a single thread of evidence for the assertion! But then again the word of a Prime Minister has a lot of weight in diplomatic circles even if it is a pack of lies! Bertie and his money on the nags, Come on really! A total waster and traitor to his country who has been shown as a liar and corrupt politician.

Until it is proven to be different then we have no choice but believe Mr Adams assertion. Like it or not. Believe it or not. Everything else is just unfounded bar stool gossip!

sharkie66

Buceph wrote: »

Do you mean the ordinary man who borrowed for a brand new car every three years, and went on multiple holidays in one year, and raked up masses of debts on credit cards? Or do you mean the ordinary man who saved and are now riding out the tough times getting by on reduced living despite never going to excess. Because when I hear people go on about "the ordinary man" and the similar "the worker" I get very worried about who is actually being referred to.

You are right I did make a bit of a generalization and you correctly pulled me up on it.
Sorry, I meant the person who made some good/bad choices mainly based on his/her circumstances during the false dawn once known as 'The Celtic Tiger'. Why they made these choices is a matter for those people to ponder over during these difficult times. Yes many did go overboard because they fell for the big lie and the soft landing spiel of the FG/FF/Lab merchants.

My definition would be closer to the man who got by with a minimum wage and didn't go mad with credit cards. There are a lot of those type around today feeling really pissed off at the credit card spenders and the ECB, German/French banks who also went overboard on a criminal scale.

The ordinary man who went mad with cards is suffering today for his/her bad decision which is in stark contrast to the private banker thieves and their IMF/EU friends who hold power and make the rules for the rest of us.

SafeSurfer

sharkie66 wrote: »

SafeSurfer, I see your point but how can you be so sure he is lying? Can you provide links and evidence to your assertion otherwise all of us here can assume it is merely your own unsubstantiated opinion which is cool with me but counts for nothing for many here!

He admitted IRA membership regularly in a long running An Phoblacht column under the name "Brownie".

Adams has stated repeatedly that he has never been a member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA).[16] However, authors such as Ed Moloney, Peter Taylor, Mark Urban and historian Richard English have all named Adams as part of the IRA leadership since the 1970s.[17][18][19][20] Adams has denied Moloney's claims, calling them "libellous".[21]

(Yet has never won a libellous case disproving membership).

Adams was active in Sinn Féin at this time, siding with the Provisionals in the split of 1970.I][URL="http://www.boards.ie/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed"][COLOR=#0645ad]citation needed[/COLOR][/URL][/I In August 1971, internment was reintroduced to Northern Ireland under the Special Powers Act 1922. Adams was interned in March 1972, on HMS Maidstone, but was released in June to take part in secret, but abortive talks in London.[9] The IRA negotiated a short-lived truce with the British government and an IRA delegation met with the British Home Secretary, William Whitelaw at Cheyne Walk in Chelsea. The delegation included Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness, Sean Mac Stiofain (IRA Chief of Staff), Daithi O'Conaill, Seamus Twomey, Ivor Bell and Dublin solicitor Myles Shevlin.[11] The IRA insisted Adams be included in the meeting and he was released from internment to participate. Following the failure of the talks, he played a central role in planning the bomb blitz on Belfast known as Bloody Friday.[9] He was re-arrested in July 1973 and interned at the Long Kesh internment camp. After taking part in an IRA-organised escape attempt, he was sentenced to a period of imprisonment.

More here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/04/wiki_gerry_adams_doodah/

Here http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/former-ira-chief-claimed-gerry-adams-ordered-jean-mcconville-killing-14746206.html

Here http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gerry-adams-lsquoproudrsquo-of-his-association-with-ira-2121261.html

Here http://newswhip.ie/national-2/wikileaksnirish-government-had-rock-solid-evidence-gerry-adams-was-senior-ira-member-recently-as-five-years-ago

Here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8198164/WikiLeaks-Irish-government-had-evidence-Gerry-Adams-was-in-IRA-five-years-ago.html

Here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1323729/Truth-Gerry-Adams-IRA-grave.html

I dont believe that he could have negotiated on behalf of the IRA without being on the army council.

Martin Mc Guinness has confirmed his membership and he was part of the same negotiating team.

But then again Gerry Adams has denied being a member of the parliament to which he was elected.

I am not trying to cast asperations. I believe that Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein would have more credibility if he confiremed he was a member of the provisional IRA during the armed struugle.

We are all grown ups here, no one really believes Adams never held a leadership role in the IRA anymore than they believe Bertie Ahern won the money under his bed on the gg's.

lugha

sharkie66 wrote: »

SafeSurfer, I see your point but how can you be so sure he is lying? Can you provide links and evidence to your assertion otherwise all of us here can assume it is merely your own unsubstantiated opinion which is cool with me but counts for nothing for many here!

I would suggest that the quality of evidence that supports SafeSurfer's belief would be about on a par with the various assertions made by republicans in relation to things like shoot to kill policies, or collusion in the Dublin/Monaghan bombings etc. Which is to say, some evidence, but probably not enough to stand up in a court of law.

sharkie66

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I wouldnt consider voting for SF until its leader stops lying and admits that he was a member of the provisional IRA.

FF and FG have there foundations in violent struggle and it is almost 20 years since the IRA and their political wing Sinn Fein blew up those children in Warrington, so yeah I would consider it if Adams stopped lying otherwise I just cant take them seriously.

SafeSurfer, I see your point but how can you be so sure he is lying? Can you provide links and evidence to your assertion otherwise all of us here can assume it is merely your own unsubstantiated opinion which is cool with me but counts for nothing for many here!

SafeSurfer

I wouldnt consider voting for SF until its leader stops lying and admits that he was a member of the provisional IRA.

FF and FG have there foundations in violent struggle and it is almost 20 years since the IRA and their political wing Sinn Fein blew up those children in Warrington, so yeah I would consider it if Adams stopped lying otherwise I just cant take them seriously.

Buceph

sharkie66 wrote: »

At last someone who can see through the BS thrown about the media regarding the criminal backers of a criminal and punitive IMF/EU plan to make the ordinary men and women of Ireland pay the bad investments of gamblers.

Good man bearballs! We need more like you here>:)

Do you mean the ordinary man who borrowed for a brand new car every three years, and went on multiple holidays in one year, and raked up masses of debts on credit cards? Or do you mean the ordinary man who saved and are now riding out the tough times getting by on reduced living despite never going to excess. Because when I hear people go on about "the ordinary man" and the similar "the worker" I get very worried about who is actually being referred to.

sharkie66

the_syco wrote: »

Giving the IMF the two fingers now shows that the Irish will not pay the money back.

Um, look up the meaning of default. It means not to pay the loans that you signed up for. It means not paying the banks. So if the banks go belly up, where will businesses go for loans? Where will you go for a mortgage? No-one in the right mind would lend money to anyone in Ireland for a long time, as we would have shown that we will take their money, and not pay it back.

This is getting tedious at this stage.

Listen, what I am trying to say is that the private investors debt should not be paid off by the Irish people under any circumstance. It is a criminal ploy by the IMF/EU to force the Irish to take the rap for the useless regulators at the ECB and the German/French big bankers bad investment choices. Why people can't see this is beyond me! SF along with a few independents are the only ones defending the rest of us from this unbelievable act of legalized financial rape!

The consequences of the same will in the near future and right now is inflicting terrible difficulties on the ordinary person of this state. On the other hand the consequences of SF's economic policy has a certain risk I agree. By threatening the IMF/EU with the two fingers then maybe we Irish have a strong hand to play and force a rethink on their plan for Ireland. The 'if you are taking me down then you are coming with me' line of offense could work wonders! Remember their European project is at risk here and you can be sure that the masters of the EU will defend that project tooth and nail in order to protect it from ruin! Our government failed miserably on this front.

On one side we fight back and see what happens with SF's policies while on the other side we lie down we take the unjust punitive treatment meted out by the IMF/EU.
I know what side I am on.

By the way your snide remark about word definitions really wasn't necessary but that says more about you than it does about me.

[Deleted User]

sharkie66 wrote: »

No, I haven't!

But FG/Lab/FF and the greens have been very, very silent on this fact. This silence could equate to acquiesce. Simple really.:rolleyes:

in your minority opinion.

sharkie66

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you forgotten that FF are currently in charge?

No, I haven't!

But FG/Lab/FF and the greens have been very, very silent on this fact. This silence could equate to acquiesce. Simple really.:rolleyes:

sharkie66

bearballs wrote: »

I will vote for anyone who promises to take us out of Europe and stops paying of the theiving banks :):).Arrest them all!.

At last someone who can see through the BS thrown about the media regarding the criminal backers of a criminal and punitive IMF/EU plan to make the ordinary men and women of Ireland pay the bad investments of gamblers.

Good man bearballs! We need more like you here>:)

[Deleted User]

REMINDER...
Please be advised that suggesting or advocating violence on any of the Politics forums is against our charter, and against boards.ie site policy, and will not be tolerated, no matter how excited and controversial the general elections become.

Deisekickboxing

Fitzerb wrote: »

Please view enclosed attachment to see how much more trouble we could be in

I agree they should be given a "shot". Preferable an inch above the left ear.

i have seen posters banned for less ,wheres the mods on here ??

Deisekickboxing

henryporter wrote: »

After watching Pierse Doherty on Primetime on Wednesday last an emphatic NO! - I can't believe that the sum total of Sinn Fein's economic policies are to take what remains of the Pension Fund an what is on reserve in the Central Bank and use that to p!ss away on one years Public Expenditure while not having any idea what to do next year, while at the same time allowing us to become alienated by anyone willing to ever lend us money on the future (unless they're aiming to make us the first sub-prime Country!)

for the poster and everyone who thanked ,leave the gaff for a few hrs into the real world.....

caseyann

I believe i am heading in their direction.

jimmycrackcorm

sharkie66 wrote: »

Capt,

SF have been saying all along that we should default because we would still be able to get credit elsewhere. And now they admit it won't be possible.

WTF ?

When did they admit this? Can you provide evidence for this unfounded assertion. Please provide links to confirm this, otherwise I will have to treat that statement as your unsubstantiated opinion!

Here...

Second link down....

If we teel the IMF to take their mony back then we default - simple as that.

It's simply unbelievable how clueless Adams is - somehow he thinks that there will be no deficit next year nor the year after!! :eek: Does he somehow think that next year the public sector and welfare payouts will balance the national income? Or perhaps we'll have enough rich people around who will pay the extra billions next year for the deficit.

But then, given that his background is in the North where they never had to worry about a deficit because of the British bank roll, it's not surprising....

SINN FÉIN president Gerry Adams has said that telling the IMF “to go home and take their money with them” remained his party’s policy.

His said his party, in government, would close Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide, and amalgamate AIB and Bank of Ireland. Depositors would be protected by legislation.

“We would create funding to protect those who are already in employment, particularly small, native, indigenous businesses, and, also, to create new jobs,” he added.

Mr Adams said that Sinn Féin would deal with the exchequer deficit of €19 billion over six years rather than four years.

“We would argue the funds are there to run the State for the remainder of this year,” he added.

Pal

To answer the OP's question.

No.
Never ever.

Pete_Cavan

squod wrote: »

SF's plan isn't great, granted. Could someone give an answer to this though. When we default on the IMF deal (like everyone is predicting) and the country is truly bolloxed, who will we borrow from then?

The EU and IMF wont let us default on the deal, if it got to that situation they would lower the interest rate. The high interest has been set quite high (although a lot lower than the ~9% the bond markets would be charging us) is so that we do not draw down all the money. The EU/IMF are also hoping that reducing the deficit by €15bn, as per the terms of the agreement, will allow us to go back to the bond markets. The plan is that the bond market interest rate will be lower than the bailout rate so there is an incentive there for us to go to the bond markets asap and the EU/IMF are making sure they get their money back. The EU/IMF are getting the money they are giving us at around 3% so there is room for them to reduce the rate if it looks like we will default (although they will only do this as a last resort).

If we tell them to piss off, only then will we be "truly bolloxed" because we will have nowhere to turn, the IMF wont help us after we turned our backs on them, the bond markets would not touch us, and SF will have used up all the National Pension Reserve Fund in 2011. The only option then would be a €12bn budget adjustment in 2012 (compared to the €6bn adjustment this year) which would do enormous damage to our economy.

CelticRambler wrote: »

Didn't cause Iceland any great problems - they're borrowing money again, and IIRC at a lower rate than Ireland's "well-behaved-borrower" bailout.

International financiers are a greedy bunch and not as risk-averse as they're made out to be, so if they only argument against burning the bondholders is the damage to Ireland's credit rating, that argument was lost last year.

Iceland actually took an IMF bailout and this is the reason they are recovering. Anybody citing Iceland as a reason to reject the bailout is really only giving us a reason why we should keep the bailout money.

[Deleted User]

squod wrote: »

+1 on this. Hoping FF/FG can do magic tricks and economic back-flips is way outside of my comfort zone. Politicians need to outline a response to the economists who predict the default in the years to come. We can't afford it now, we can't afford it later.

When will people realise this?

The D mcwilliams link is dealt with adequately in the politics.ie thread.
Theres very few people in the land that agree with handing over money at this stage to zombie banks.
However,the only smart option left to deal with this FF car crash is to negotiate and restructure.
Thats a long way from the SF approach of **** off imf.

Most people in this country won't vote FF but even those that do are at one with the bulk of the country that won't be voting SF and that is they do realise that you cannot bite the hand that feeds you.
Untill we balance the books and get back into a current budget surplus,we'll have to play ball with the lenders.

Frankly,it's obvious that the small percentage of voters that don't realise that simple tenet will not have a say in the running of this country ever untill they come round to a more sensible way of thinking,like the majority have.
Most people aren't naive