Sinn Féin-the southern elete and the biased media

gandalf

Ulster9 wrote:

I was merely responding to a poster who was stating blatant inaccuaracies.Go back and read the post.I m not in a corner if you think that.Its clear you dont know what you are talking about.I know many IRA actions were indefenceable but if people want to be selective about things that happened then i m entitled to make my arguements. When someone continues to bring up emotive subjects do i not have the right to bring a bit of balance to the debate?
I live a couple of mile from the border and have my reasons for feeling strongly about these issues.Trying to blame the IRA for all the troubles is ridiculous.All sides kept it going and this State included.

Never tried to blame the IRA for all the troubles, point out where I or anyone else did.

My problem is simple. I can separate what happened in the past from more recent actions. In more recent times it is clear the IRA became a Mafia type organisation acting like criminals rather than "freedom fighters" the only redeemig factor they have is they didn't get involved with drugs like the INLA and the Loyalists. Having a political party that are so closely tied with this criminal enterprise is disturbing and it will take them to prove themselves before alot of us would ever consider voting for them. Also there is a fear down here that Sinn Fein holding the balance of power will make politics more Northern Centric than they should be.

BTW the answer is 32 loyalists to 140 Republicans according to CAIN http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html

LuckyLloyd

Tristrame wrote:

Thats as bad as voting for personalities though isn't it ...

Me-I'll look at the policies.
Theres one particular politician local to me from one of the big parties that does a lot of good work locally BUT on principle I'd not vote for him as I disagree with a lot of his parties policies.

lol. I expected someone to say that. If you review my train of thought you will see that I don't find any of the partie's policies to be worthy of support.

On the same token, I don't believe that there is any single politician who is as good locally as Crowe is. So, upon combining the two I feel comfortable giving him my first preference.

GabharBrean

Oh what a banal debate. All sides seem to rely on tired cliches and arguments. In my humble opinion: Completely superficial analysis. So many statements are just riddled with factual error.

Not all people's experiences during the war in the North were the same. Many in North Antrim & Down would tell you there was no war. Many in West Belfast and other areas would disagree. Experiences vary over even such a small geographical area.

As far as I'm concerned, the grand coalition scheme emerged after the first Massticht (spelling?) treaty vote and Gerry Adams's speech to Southern Business leaders. SF was the only party actively opposed to the treaty. The government expected acquiesence by the Irish voting public for the pro side. It sent shock waves through the establishment when the vote came back as a no.

Secondly, within weeks of Adams's espousal of a fairer tax system delivered in a speech to the Southern business community, Stormont was brought down three months early amidst what turns out to be spurious spy-ring allegations. Probably just a happy coincidence but it left open the flood gates of allegation.

A grand coalition would seem to be a fair outcome from what I've read on this forum. The vast majority of parties have essentially the same policies. It will reflect a right of center solely economic oreintated agenda. The margins of society will continue to be ignored.

Middles ages syllogism:

All Republicans are terrorists
SF is supported by Republicans
Therefore SF are terrorists

This is rhetorical analysis put forward by the DUP to justify the exclusion of SF and its electorate in Nothern politics. They seem ready to leave it behind. This exclusionist tripe has been picked up with gusto in the South. I'll give odds it lasts longer here.

brianthebard

UnLuckyLloyd wrote:

I personally feel that Sean Crowe fits the bill on those particular points. He does a lot of decent work in the Tallaght area.

Ok that's cool. That didn't come across in your earlier posts but at least you have thought about that.

Schuhart

Ulster9 wrote:

when people attack Sinn Fein regarding their role in the Norths troubles they should ask themselves why it is that the majority of nationalists put their trust in Sinn Fein by voting for them?

People in the North may well have reasons for voting Sinn Fein. But we're in a different situation. We're trying to choose representatives for a Parliament and Government that actually has to manage our affairs and do things like work out how to levy taxes on the economy to pay for services. They're just effectively picking advocates to staff a sort of political workfare scheme.

SF simply hasn't engaged with the reality of participating in an election that selects a real Government and parliament. I'm not even convinced that such intellectual luminaries as Aengus O'Snodaigh even know what that entails.

I can't honestly see the point of voting SF as a protest again the unattractive choices we're faced with. Why pick a gang of complete spacers who get into bed with gunmen in preference to politicians who are merely corrupt and inept? Do we want to send out the message that we want our representatives to be complete gob****es - like when Donegal elected a TD to uphold their right to pirate UK television signals?

Dontico

Ulster9 wrote:

The man who killed Robert McCartney was a thug who happened to have been in the IRA.

Thats the funniest qoute in the whole thread.

A thug in the IRA? heavens no!

If in 20 years time, there criminal links are gone, I still wouldnt vote for a socialist party.

GabharBrean

Schuhart wrote:

I'm not even convinced that such intellectual luminaries as Aengus O'Snodaigh even know what that entails.

God bless him, but Bertie ain't exactly an advert for mensa. I expect all parties with a substantial number of representatives have a wide ranging spectrum of intellectual capabilities. This is why governments empoly civil servants and why political parties employ overpaid spin doctors.

SF's reps also show this demographic but as a collective have shown themselves more than capable at all levels of government. Less rant, please, and give us tangible examples of SF governmental mismanagement.

is_that_so

GabharBrean wrote:

Less rant, please, and give us tangible examples of SF governmental mismanagement.

You can't mismanage what you have never done.

Schuhart

is_that_so wrote:

You can't mismanage what you have never done.

Nail on the head. The call to choose SF as a protest vote amounts to saying 'None of the options are especially attractive. Why not show your contempt of the whole process by voting for some people with absolutely nothing going for them.'

oscarBravo

UnLuckyLloyd wrote:

I personally feel that Sean Crowe fits the bill on those particular points. He does a lot of decent work in the Tallaght area.

So persuade him to run for South Dublin County Council, and vote for him there.

GabharBrean wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, the grand coalition scheme emerged after the first Massticht (spelling?) treaty vote and Gerry Adams's speech to Southern Business leaders. SF was the only party actively opposed to the treaty. The government expected acquiesence by the Irish voting public for the pro side. It sent shock waves through the establishment when the vote came back as a no.

Um. You do realise that there was only one vote on the Maastricht Treaty, and the answer was yes, don't you?

GabharBrean

is_that_so wrote:

You can't mismanage what you have never done.

Beg to differ. SF has run numerous councils including those of Derry & Belfast. It also rans ministries in Stormont with budgets, made decisions which are still in force til this day, etc., etc. etc.

GabharBrean

[/QUOTE] Um. You do realise that there was only one vote on the Maastricht Treaty, and the answer was yes, don't you?[/QUOTE]

I sit corrected. Twas the Nice Treaty. Sloppy on my part.

is_that_so

GabharBrean wrote:

Beg to differ. SF has run numerous councils including those of Derry & Belfast. It also rans ministries in Stormont with budgets, made decisions which are still in force til this day, etc., etc. etc.

You can differ from me all you want. Ministries are extremely easy to run when you have as much cash as you want. I'd also challenge you to document said councils, especially in this jurisdiction.
Sinn Fein have a perception problem beyond their constituency. Simple as that and regrettably their supporters don't seem to accept this and take any observation about them as an affront or conspiracy or anything you like.

Ultimately they will have to prove that they are worth voting for, and given the monotonous regularity of slanging matches here(me included) that is some way off.

GabharBrean wrote:

Middles ages syllogism:

All Republicans are terrorists
SF is supported by Republicans
Therefore SF are terrorists

Don't knock them. They are far more likely to go out and vote.

johnnyskeleton

I apologise if I am covering points already made, but I think it is important to make it clear that it is not simply a few people who consider southern SF to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but quite a lot of people.

GabharBrean wrote:

As a lifelong SF voter (I belong to no political party), I think the petty carping by non-SF'ers is just humorous. As Repulicans we were told to by the southern ruling elite to accept British rule. Forget the injustices; forget the repression; forget the isolation.

Belittling any criticism of SF will only alienate people further. I also think you are misrepresenting history.

GabharBrean wrote:

If we wanted to change things, we had to organise politically and vote for change. So we did. And we learned to do it well. Now the ruling eco-political elite in the south want no part with us. Why? What are they afraid of?

Are you suggesting that the Republic’s government does not want to deal with the Northern government because SF are in power? If so I do not agree. Or are you suggesting that the government parties in the Republic do not want to deal with SF TDs? If so it is because they don’t need to, or want to. Are the "ruling elite" also afraid of the Greens? Of course not, because the Greens are peace loving hippies.

GabharBrean wrote:

The "Irish" media continually spin news stories and selective history snippets to dampen the growth of SF. So what. We who have come from marginalisation to equity know only too well how propoganda is used to narrow political ends. Our British peace keepers have been doing it for decades.

Should journalists give the complete history of SF every time they print a story? One of the most effective types of propaganda is to dismiss your critics as using propaganda. If something is printed which is untrue and unfair, SF should take legal action against the paper.

GabharBrean wrote:

Hopefully, we have broken the cozy political mold in the North (as indeed have the DUP). Are the Southern elite afraid of this process? Will SF stay the course and continue to shaken up the cozy elites? Hopefully, they will.

I like the way at the start you said that you belong to no policitical party (which I assume includes SF unless you don’t recognise them as such) but now you have started to refer to SF as “we”. Which is it?

If you(i.e. SF) or anybody else proposes to break the democratic mould then yes, I think people in the South (be they elite or otherwise) have a right to criticise and oppose you.

Overall, I think arguments like this don’t help to legitimise SF; instead of focusing on their political mandate, they cite history, propaganda, the fact that they are underdogs, etc.

GabharBrean wrote:

No doubt the media will continue to highlight what the Republican baddies did. (I'm sure they're hoping and praying that somebody with a tenuous or otherwise link to Republicanism does something naughty during the near future). It can then lump all Republicans together as vile, mean people. Sure, what other large section of the Irish community can be so sterotyped? On what other section can such select prejudices be practised?

SF don’t have a monopoly on Republicanism.

GabharBrean wrote:

Some of the same people who take the high moral ground about violence in Iraq and other places seem to think it was alright for Republicans to have violence used against them. Sure, didn't Republicans bring it upon themselves. Everything would have been so much easier if they had just accepted Northern laws at any price.

History is replete with people who stood up to oppression but didn’t use violence to achieve their ends. No one is suggesting that nationalists/republicans in the North should have accepted oppression, but by violently opposing it they lost any claim to the high moral ground.

After the Civil war in the Southern counties, the former SF members made a clean break with new parties. I believe that this was because SF stood for nothing more than an independent Irish republic. There was no disrespect to the past, but the SF party and what it stood for was no longer needed in the South.

GabharBrean wrote:

I would like a party to publish it ideas and then, if in government, fulfill them. I feel the present government has hidden agendas.

What is published by SF that makes you vote for them? Do you believe that SF have no hidden agendas? Not even minor hidden agendas like increasing the stamp duty on credit cards?

GabharBrean wrote:

The countryside is a sterilised dormitory. Drugs and random attacks in small towns are the norm. Are the media going to press these issues? Not likely. Or, if they do, we'll be told we need more police; better security systems; more restrictive legisilation. We'll be encouraged to isolate ourselves. We will be encouraged to identify ourselves with our material status. If somebody identifies themselves as Republican, well, that's just subversive.

I don’t agree, unless you are talking about a different country. People don’t think all republicans/nationalists are subversive. If SDLP were active in the south, people wouldn’t be afraid of them like they are of SF.

GabharBrean wrote:

SF was the only party actively opposed to the treaty

Since this is a question of FACT, and not of OPINION, I can categorically state that you are wrong. The Green party, the Socialist Workers and many other groups (including large farmer’s associations) were against it. And if you are claiming that the no vote was due to SF, I think that you’re way off.

ulster9 wrote:

Speaking for myself, I dislike Sinn Féin's continued inability to distance themselves completely from violence. When they fully embrace democratic politics, and unequivocally reject violence, I'll start to evaluate them solely on their merits as a political party.

But havent they already done this?If not what do you require to be satisfied?Sinn Fein has commited itself to peaceful and democratic means.The present leadership has brought its grassroots further towards constitutional politics than any other republican leader in Irish history.Sinn Fein has delivered on its commitments regarding decommisioning despite Loyalist continuing to hold weapons, British army activity(although in recent months they made great progress in demilitarisation), signed up to policing while question marks still remain over Inteligence interference in civic policing.You see they have unequivocally rejected violence.The IRA has also asked all its members to engage in purely peacefull activities.
You see i think some people will always try to link Sinn Fein with violence because of IRA activity throughout the troubles without understanding or recognising the context of it.Some people will even use selective attrocities to score cheap political points.

There is a distinction, which you haven’t addressed, between the political violence in the North, and the criminal violence in the North and the South.

ulster9 wrote:

They are an efficently run organisation that is why they have strong resources.There best resources are their people not money.

They sure are a lean, mean…electioneering…machine.

ulster9 wrote:

War is hell, dont think it was all clean and civil.The naivety on here.

Oh, that’s alright then. Why didn’t you say…carry on then, I suppose.

ulster9 wrote:

The IRA killed 1,821 people throughout the conflict of these 1013 were members of the security forces.621 were civilian.
Loyalists killed 1021 many assisted with collusion from RUC and 368 killed by security forces directly.

Go Team!

UnLuckyLloyd wrote:

- How many votes up and down the country will be cast on the redundant reasoning that "I like xxx - always seemed like a decent fella to me"?

More, I would sincerely hope, than those who say “I like yyy – always seemed like not as bad a murderer as some other people, and I’d love to see how the squares react to him sitting in the Dáil grinning manically”

UnLuckyLloyd wrote:

- but I don't believe that the likes of Trever Sargeant has the neccesary credentials and competence to run a government.

So, even though you will vote SF hoping that they will not get into government (presumably because you don't think they would be good in government), you wont vote for the Greens, (which would be a similar protest vote) because you don’t think they would be good, if they were in government.

_________________________________________________________________

A big problem with these arguments is that they seem to say 1) southerners don’t care about the issues in northern Ireland and 2) SF have reformed their ways in the north. If 1) is true, then 2) is irrelevant. So if you want to know why people don’t vote SF in the ROI, confine your argument to the republic and whether SF are good or bad here.

As to the general question of why I (as a floating voter) do not vote for SF, I don’t see the need, I don’t think they stand for anything in particular other than an United Ireland, I simply prefer other parties (such as Labour, or more recently, the Greens). They also seem dead against the EU, a view which I don’t agree with.

As to why I (as a citizen) am afraid of SF, it is because there is a question of violence and criminal activity about them, and while it is no more than a question, it raises the possibility of further violence and criminal activity if they were in power.


Also, none of their candidates impresses me much. One TD in particular considered it appropriate to amend the criminal justice bill, 2007 with a section which read:

Part 3 of this Act shall not come into operation until the constitutionality of
the minimum sentencing provisions contained in section 24 is tested by Presidential
referral of the Bill to the Supreme Court under Article 26 of the 1937 Constitution
…

You might consider this an example of the “governmental mismanagement” to come. It suggests to me his disrespect for our system of government and the separation of powers and a failure to understand the constitution/legislative process, and a desire to add an unnecessary provision to an already ridiculous and lengthy bill. Plus, he wasted valuable dáil time asking why his amendments were ruled out of order (which they were for other reasons).

I should state that this seems to be ignorance of the process rather than wilful contempt, but in any event I would not vote for someone who doesn’t understand something as basic as the separation between legislative, executive and judicial functions. I would view a doctor with the same scepticism if he didn't know what aspirin was for.

Moreover, as someone who thinks that the CJB 2007 is a spurious political ploy on the part of the PDs, I think opposition TDs should criticise the bill, not just lazily ask that it be sorted out by the courts. If the bill makes it to the courts it will have gone much further than it should have done.

jahalpin

What exactly does the OP think that the papers should be reporting about Sinn Fein? That they brought about peace in Ireland?? That they are responsible for the Republic's economic success? Etc.

If they attributed the above achievements to Sinn Fein they would indeed be being very biased.

Why would anyone in their right mind vote for Sinn Fein?

They openly supported the i.r.a.'s terrorist activities for decades and many of their leaders are rumored to have been members of the i.r.a. army council. They have also supported bigotry against any non-Catholics in both the Republic and Northern Ireland (I am Catholic myself by the way).

As for Sinn Fein's latest tactic of saying that they support the security forces in Northern Ireland, I didn't hear anything from any of their elected representatives about the people who attacked the ambulances they were attending to the helicopter crash near Newry a few months ago, if they really supported law and order they would have pushed for the scum that attacked the ambulances to be severely punished, in my opinion the P.S.N.I. and the army did not use enough force to protect themselves from attack, if this happened to a U.S. helicopter on U.S. soil the soldiers would have shot dead anyone who attempted to impede the rescue of their personnel.

The membership of Sinn Fein is usually made up of people from "working class" areas that are usually poorly educated and are brain-washed into believing that the British government is somehow responsible for all the problems in Irish society. These poeple believe that they should spend every waking minute telling anyone that will listen to them that the British should leave Northern Ireland, some of these "brave"?????? people also resort to terrorising innocent people in England by planting bombs and disrupting peoples lifes as much as possible. If they were really as committed as they claim they would be willing to die for their beliefs or at least pay for their crimes when caught and they would not try to get out of paying for their cowardly crimes by claiming to be "political prisioners" and not the murdering corardly scum they really are.

Most civilized people in the Republic don't really care about what happens in Nothern Ireland anyway as they have more important things to think about. The Republic has flourished in recent years with no help from the likes of Sinn Fein, they may actually have hindered the economic development of the Republic by continuing their campaign of hate and mis-information, many foreign investors would have been unwilling to invest here as they believed that the country was still in the middle of a civil war.

If Sinn Fein ever got into government, it would be a disaster for the Republic of Ireland, it would threaten the economic stability of the country and would de-stabilise the democratic freedom that we are all so proud of.

PS: The official name of this country is the Republic of Ireland not Southern Ireland, would it really kill people to refer to it as such and not as the “South”??????????.

GabharBrean

jahalpin wrote:

Why would anyone in their right mind vote for Sinn Fein?

Tens of thousands of citizens from a broad spectrum of the population of Ireland do.

jahalpin wrote:

(I am Catholic myself by the way).

Big deal. You may want to dwell up sectarainism, I don't. I know many Protestants who vote for SF.

jahalpin wrote:

The membership of Sinn Fein is usually made up of people from "working class" areas that are usually poorly educated and are brain-washed ...

This rant, intolerance and sterotypical generalisation against any other Party or section of society would be at the very be least frowned upon in this forum and elsewhere. It seems to be alright if your views are considered to be in the majority.

jahalpin wrote:

Most civilized people in the Republic don't really care about what happens in the North.

I'm sure alot of the "uncivilized" people don't care as well. It is easier to ignore what is feared and and not easily understand. When such a subject intrudes into the comfortable certainties, it is easier to repond with bile and diatribe.

jahalpin wrote:

PS: The official name of this country is the Republic of Ireland not Southern Ireland, would it really kill people to refer to it as such and not as the “South”??????????.

Pedantic

Ulster9

Most civilized people in the Republic don't really care about what happens in the North anyway as they have more important things to think about.

You call it the North.

PS: The official name of this country is the Republic of Ireland not Southern Ireland, would it really kill people to refer to it as such and not as the “South”??????????.

But you dont like being called the South

The membership of Sinn Fein is usually made up of people from "working class" areas that are usually poorly educated and are brain-washed into believing that the British government is somehow responsible for all the problems in Irish society. These poeple believe that they should spend every waking minute telling anyone that will listen to them that the British should leave Northern Ireland, some of these "brave"?????? people also resort to terrorising innocent people in England by planting bombs and disrupting peoples lifes as much as possible. If they were really as committed as they claim they would be willing to die for their beliefs or at least pay for their crimes when caught and they would not try to get out of paying for their cowardly crimes by claiming to be "political prisioners" and not the murdering corardly scum they really are.

Clearly you dont know what you re talking about

As for Sinn Fein's latest tactic of saying that they support the security forces in Northern Ireland, I didn't hear anything from any of their elected representatives about the people who attacked the ambulances they were attending to the helicopter crash near Newry a few months ago, if they really supported law and order they would have pushed for the scum that attacked the ambulances to be severely punished, in my opinion the P.S.N.I. and the army did not use enough force to protect themselves from attack, if this happened to a U.S. helicopter on U.S. soil the soldiers would have shot dead anyone who attempted to impede the rescue of their personnel.

If people in the "South" new what it was like to have the British army camped in their backyards maybe they would think different, but then you ve probably never been to Crossmaglen.

jahalpin

GabharBrean, you have obviously already been brain-washed into believing that anything that Sinn Fein says has to be right and must be followed without question. You have also been brain-washed into believing that you must speak fluent irish to be a real republican.

There are also rumours that Sinn Fein's electoral campaigning leaves a little to be desired with residents of certain areas being afraid to even talk to candidates from other parties for fears of reprisals from their "loyal republican" neighbours.

Sinn Fein currently have 5 TD's in the Republic of Ireland, 2 of which are in areas where a hat stand could get elected to the Dail if you put a Sinn Fein rosette on it!!! (Louth and Cavan \ Monaghan)

In my pervious post I said that Sinn Fein supported bigotry and I stand by this (I certainly don't support it), however I will qualify this by saying that both major parties in the North support bigotry of other religions (DUP and Sinn Fein).

The last thing we need in the Republic is for a party that is so stuck in the past that most members probably believe that it is still 1916 to gain more seats in the next election. This would be bad for the economic stability of the Republic and would send us hurtling back into the depths of economic depression last seen in the eighties.

As for you saying that I was being padantic for metioning that the Republic of Ireland should be referred to as such and not as Southern Ireland, it was a simple statement of fact that any child in Junior Infants could confirm!!!!

jahalpin

Ulster9 wrote:

If people in the "South" new what it was like to have the British army camped in their backyards maybe they would think different, but then you ve probably never been to Crossmaglen.

There is an Irish Army base in Cavan and in the Currah, yet I don't hear the local residents complaining. Any state has the right to locate a military base anywhere on their soverign land. The British Army was needed in Northern Ireland to protect the population from each other and to restore some sort of stability to the provence. I also believe that they were in the process of dismantaling the army base \ watchtower at the time of the accident

Zebra3

oscarBravo wrote:

Speaking for myself, I dislike Sinn Féin's continued inability to distance themselves completely from violence. When they fully embrace democratic politics, and unequivocally reject violence, I'll start to evaluate them solely on their merits as a political party.

And I'll do the same with FF and PD for their complicity in US war crimes in Iraq.

The reason the Indo is against SF so much is because their policies are not in the interests of the rich. This effects the owner of the Indo and their advertisers.

Time Magazine

jahalpin wrote:

PS: The official name of this country is the Republic of Ireland not Southern Ireland

No it's not. The official name of this country is Ireland. "Republic of Ireland" is an acceptable, legal description of the state; it is not its name.

Zebra3 wrote:

And I'll do the same with FF and PD for their complicity in US war crimes in Iraq.

oscarBravo has stated on this website that he will not be voting for the incumbents in the up-coming General Election so this is a moot point. Furthermore, yet again, the Shinners are justifying their policies relative to other wrongs and not by their own merits. Why the hell can't you guys come up with a reasonable rebuke other than "others do bad things too"?

Oh yeah, there isn't a reasonable rebuke...

Lemming

Ibid wrote:

No it's not. The official name of this country is Ireland. "Republic of Ireland" is an acceptable, legal description of the state; it is not its name.

No, the official name of this country is the "Republic of Ireland".

The geographic name of this land-mass is Ireland, part of the British Isles, in turn a part of Europe. Much the same way that land-mass that constitutes the countries of Canada & the USA is known as "North America".

Time Magazine

Lemming wrote:

No, the official name of this country is the "Republic of Ireland".

The geographic name of this land-mass is Ireland, part of the British Isles, in turn a part of Europe. Much the same way that land-mass that constitutes the countries of Canada & the USA is known as "North America".

You're wrong.

Article 4, Bunreacht na h&#201 wrote: »

The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland

Section 2, The Republic of Ireland Act, 1948 wrote:

It is hereby declared that the description of the State shall be the Republic of Ireland.

The constitution says that the name of country (in English) is Ireland. Statute says that the description or our country is the Republic of Ireland.

Lemming

Ibid wrote:

You're wrong.

Eh ... no. Both are correct, therefore both have merit. The description of the state is an accurate term of reference for the state.

Tell you what ... go have a look at what is the recognised name of the state by the UN. I can't be arsed because I have, quite frankly, better things to do with my time.

GabharBrean

jahalpin wrote:

you have obviously already been brain-washed . . .

Very opened minded opinion.

jalhalpin wrote:

There are also rumours that Sinn Fein's electoral campaigning . . .

Rumours: put about by those who can or will not marshall their arguments rationally. Dealing in rumours is nothing more than pernicious scare mongering.

jahalpin wrote:

Sinn Fein currently have 5 TD's in the Republic of Ireland, 2 of which are in areas where a hat stand could get elected to the Dail if you put a Sinn Fein rosette on it!!! (Louth and Cavan \ Monaghan)

Very open minded opinion of people in these counties. Add parts of Dublin, Kerry, Cork, Donegal and others to your list.

Time Magazine

Lemming wrote:

The description of the state is an accurate term of reference for the state.

I completely agree. However I quoted someone stating that its official name is ROI and should be referred to as such.

Tell you what ... go have a look at what is the recognised name of the state by the UN. I can't be arsed because I have, quite frankly, better things to do with my time.

But you don't have better things to do than reply to me when "we both have merit"? . It doesn't matter what the UN think we're called seeing as we name ourselves in the Constitution and the UN can call us Ballyporeen if they see fit. Nonetheless, it's still Ireland.

It's amazing the effect the name of the national football team can have to a country's opinion of its own name.

GabharBrean

is_that_so wrote:

I'd also challenge you to document said councils, especially in this jurisdiction.

Challenge accepted: Monaghan, Cavan and Louth that I know of. Though why, for the life of me, the councils run in conjunction with other parties in the North have to be differentiated is beyond me.

jahalpin

GabharBrean it is a fact that most members of Sinn Fein would be from more "working class" areas. It is also a fact that most of the border counties are economically disadvantaged, so it is easier for a party like Sinn Fein to gain support in areas where there is high unemployment and the related social problems. In recent years several of these border towns have become Dublin commuter towns and so the balance of power in these areas will probably shift away from the likes of Sinn Fein and towards more mainstream parties such as FF and the PD's.

It is well known that Sinn Fein intimidates people into voting for them and their activists threaten and intimidate canvessers from other parties to stay out of their areas.

is_that_so

GabharBrean wrote:

Challenge accepted: Monaghan, Cavan and Louth that I know of. Though why, for the life of me, the councils run in conjunction with other parties in the North have to be differentiated is beyond me.

Fair enough, but all of these councils are a long way from Dublin which you threw in as an example earlier.
The same point that applies to Northern ministries applies to councils as well. Not really that hard to do when such huge handouts are available.
TBH you keep missing the point in all of this and in many of the posts about SF; you and other SF supporters may be convinced of them, but there are large part of the country that remain unconvinced. And they will continue to be that way for some time to come.

GabharBrean

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Should journalists give the complete history of SF every time they print a story? One of the most effective types of propaganda is to dismiss your critics as using propaganda. If something is printed which is untrue and unfair, SF should take legal action against the paper.

Since when did propoganda have anything to do with fairness or truth. Proganda is selective use of facts, images, etc. to portray people (groups, etc.) in a favourable or unfavourable light. I have seen the same news story shown on both the BBC and RTE on the same day; using the identical footage. Watched BBC story first. Turned over to RTE who had just begun the story. RTE had chopped and changed the sequence of the footage and commentary leading to starkly different conclusions.

johnnyskeketon wrote:

I like the way at the start you said that you belong to no policitical party (which I assume includes SF unless you don’t recognise them as such) but now you have started to refer to SF as “we”. Which is it?

I refer to the broader Republican family. I don't, have not in the past, nor am I likely to belong in the future to any party. If other or all other Republicans disagree with me, so be it.

johnnyskeleton wrote:

If you(i.e. SF) or anybody else proposes to break the democratic mould then yes, I think people in the South (be they elite or otherwise) have a right to criticise and oppose you.

Hell yeah. I would like to see a break in the politics of apathy, alienation and spin. I would like to see open, accountable and transparent government. The elected parties putting into laws the agendas for which the electorate voted. If you're implying that I am (or people like me are) subversively trying to undermine democrary, the people of the South can stand down now.

johnnyskeleton wrote:

What is published by SF that makes you vote for them? Do you believe that SF have no hidden agendas? Not even minor hidden agendas like increasing the stamp duty on credit cards?

Does this include silver, gold, and ones with pretty colours too?

johnnyskeleton wrote:

I don’t agree, unless you are talking about a different country. People don’t think all republicans/nationalists are subversive. If SDLP were active in the south, people wouldn’t be afraid of them like they are of SF.

I said "countryside", i.e., grass, cows, tractors, etc.

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Since this is a question of FACT, and not of OPINION, I can categorically state that you are wrong. The Green party, the Socialist Workers and many other groups (including large farmer’s associations) were against it. And if you are claiming that the no vote was due to SF, I think that you’re way off.

You think I'm way off or is it a fact I'm way off. I believe your right about the Green Party. I remember some of their posters. I also remember the SF posters, SF party press releases, and numerous media references to SF during the Nice II campaign.

johnnyskeleton wrote:

There is a distinction, which you haven’t addressed, between the political violence in the North, and the criminal violence in the North and the South.

Would you be referring to the Tribunals and collusion?