Sinn Féin the most popular party in latest poll (mod warnings in OP)

efb

Tinkersbell wrote: »

Jesus, do I have to always finish your sentences for you?

Served their time??? Do you think that was long enough for killing a Garda at point blank range and throwing a party is acceptable???

Banjo String

Godge wrote: »

Banjo, now that you accept what the Indo has to say, I presume you also accept that whatever they say about Gerry and Padraig Wilson and the rest is also true.

Glad that you have seen the light.

Right........

So because I accept what the Indo has to say, about an incident in today's Dail, that can be backed up by video evidence, widely available to anyone....

Means I must also accept any other story in the paper that doesn't have any evidence, be it video, pictorial or otherwise, but coming from 'a source close to' or 'unconfirmed reports' or sometimes with no reference whatsoever as to where the stories/accusations, and in some cases blatant lies come from......

Did you even think about that before you posted it

duckcfc

efb wrote: »

Their are rules to war you know

This is the most laughable thing I've ever read on the internet lol. What do you think their doing, sitting over a board game with rules etc...

If there are rules to war, go tell that to the afganastans/Iraqis/and Palestinian's, there are rules to war lol

Tinkersbell

efb wrote: »

Served their time??? Do you think that was long enough for killing a Garda at point blank range and throwing a party is acceptable???

I wasn't the judge who sentenced them.
Ask him.

efb

Tinkersbell wrote: »

I wasn't the judge who sentenced them.
Ask him.

I'm asking you

efb

duckcfc wrote: »

This is the most laughable thing I've ever read on the internet lol. What do you think their doing, sitting over a board game with rules etc...

If there are rules to war, go tell that to the afganastans/Iraqis/and Palestinian's, there are rules to war lol

Alright then...

duckcfc

efb wrote: »

Served their time??? Do you think that was long enough for killing a Garda at point blank range and throwing a party is acceptable???

No, I think they served to much time!! They should have been let out in the good Fri agreement with all the others.

efb

duckcfc wrote: »

No, I think they served to much time!! They should have been let out in the good Fri agreement with all the others.

Even though SF denied it was an official IRA activity...

Dan_Solo

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Your, ahem "contributions" to this thread would indicate quite the exact opposite.

duckcfc

efb wrote: »

Alright then...

Think about it thou. You said there are rules to war. Do you not think this is laughable. And this was a guerrilla war up north and in uk

duckcfc

efb wrote: »

Even though SF denied it was an official IRA activity...

How do you know it wasn't!

Tinkersbell

efb wrote: »

I'm asking you

They were convicted of manslaughter by the courts of this country. (due process)
They served over 75% of their sentences behind bars.
So, if we believe in the rule of law, due process and all that, then my answer is yes.

efb

Tinkersbell wrote: »

They were convicted of manslaughter by the courts of this country. (due process)
They served over 75% of their sentences behind bars.
So, if we believe in the rule of law, due process and all that, then my answer is yes.

Well I don't think they should get a celebration on release it's an insult to the widow Anne Ferris. I would understand the sentencing if IRA had admitted to the offence up front

efb

duckcfc wrote: »

How do you know it wasn't!

If it wasn't they wouldn't qualify under GFA

Godge

Banjo String wrote: »

Right........

So because I accept what the Indo has to say, about an incident in today's Dail, that can be backed up by video evidence, widely available to anyone....

Means I must also accept any other story in the paper that doesn't have any evidence, be it video, pictorial or otherwise, but coming from 'a source close to' or 'unconfirmed reports' or sometimes with no reference whatsoever as to where the stories/accusations, and in some cases blatant lies come from......

Did you even think about that before you posted it

Apparently it is not backed up by the Dail record, which is the official account.

Sounds just like the situation where we have a video of Gerry Adams lying through his teeth but he hasn't been convicted in a court.

I accept the evidence that Eric Byrne made a very stupid remark, despite the fact that it hasn't been officially recordeded. Do you accept the evidence that Gerry Adams is either a liar or a perjurer even though it hasn't been proved in court?

Did you think of that before you posted?

Godge

duckcfc wrote: »

No, I think they served to much time!! They should have been let out in the good Fri agreement with all the others.

They should never have been let out. Killing a member of AGS should mean life without parole.

Banjo String

Godge wrote: »

Apparently it is not backed up by the Dail record, which is the official account.

Sounds just like the situation where we have a video of Gerry Adams lying through his teeth but he hasn't been convicted in a court.

I accept the evidence that Eric Byrne made a very stupid remark, despite the fact that it hasn't been officially recordeded.

My understanding is that the official transcripts from the Dail usually do not include every jeer, heckle, cough and fart made in the Dail, and I'm surprised at you if you thought it would.

Godge wrote: »

Do you accept the evidence that Gerry Adams is either a liar or a perjurer even though it hasn't been proved in court?

What evidence are you referring to?

Godge wrote: »

Did you think of that before you posted?

Unfortunately for you, very much so.

My name is URL

Barely There wrote: »

Don't the Shinners run a personalised taxi service for Cop Killers?

Horrible little people.

Any predictions for the next opinion poll?

Your last attempt at telling the future was quite a let down

Dan_Solo

My name is URL wrote: »

Any predictions for the next opinion poll?

Your last attempt at telling the future was quite a let down

Really? I found it to be most entertaining myself.

Dan_Solo

efb wrote: »

If it wasn't they wouldn't qualify under GFA

Which is it then? If it was IRA sanctioned then they have to be let out, if not then they stay in jail.
Let me guess, you want to blame the IRA but still keep them in jail, right?

Barely There

I look forward to future Mary Lou sit ins every time a politician fails to answer a question fully.

She'll be worn out just from her own party leader.



Listening to Matt Cooper on the way home this evening, they mentioned that her party colleagues were able to bring her in a few snacks to keep her going during her 4hr ordeal today

*snigger*

duckcfc

Godge wrote: »

They should never have been let out. Killing a member of AGS should mean life without parole.

Well our government doesn't agree with you on this one.

duckcfc

efb wrote: »

If it wasn't they wouldn't qualify under GFA

They didn't, sure they didn't walk like rest of prisoners

Godge

duckcfc wrote: »

Well our government doesn't agree with you on this one.

Great, that means nobody can call me a FG shill anymore, doesn't it?:D:D

Godge

Banjo String wrote: »

My understanding is that the official transcripts from the Dail usually do not include every jeer, heckle, cough and fart made in the Dail, and I'm surprised at you if you thought it would.
.

And not every murderer, psychopath, rapist and child abuser gets convicted, but that doesn't mean they were innocent. I'm surprised at you if you thought otherwise.

Just like O.J., we can know who is guilty of what without a court conviction, and we can know who said what, without a Dail record.

Banjo String wrote: »

What evidence are you referring to?

.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fintan-o-toole-tough-questions-for-adams-on-child-protection-1.1970440


Plenty of others have analysed the TV programme and court transcript and come to the same conclusion. You can review the evidence yourself if you think differently.

efb

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Which is it then? If it was IRA sanctioned then they have to be let out, if not then they stay in jail.
Let me guess, you want to blame the IRA but still keep them in jail, right?

They initially denied it- then used ut for early release

Dan_Solo

efb wrote: »

They initially denied it- then used ut for early release

It doesn't matter whether they denied it, they were convicted as IRA members and therefore subject to he GFA.
SF didn't have to do anything.

Godge

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether they denied it, they were convicted as IRA members and therefore subject to he GFA.
SF didn't have to do anything.

Well, it just demonstrates once again that SF/IRA are pathological liars so we don't have to believe anything they say.

gladrags

Does anyone know whe the next poll is,and what paper.?

Thanks

Busted Flat.

Godge wrote: »

Well, it just demonstrates once again that SF/IRA are pathological liars so we don't have to believe anything they say.

Would you put the FG/LP in the same boat with their election promises.

Godge

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Would you put the FG/LP in the same boat with their election promises.

FG/Labour had to compromise on their respective election promises to form a coalition.

SF/IRA disgustingly lied and covered-up child abuse and abused the people who came forward to reveal it.

One is around 10 on the disgusting liar scale, the other 1.

efb

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether they denied it, they were convicted as IRA members and therefore subject to he GFA.
SF didn't have to do anything.

It had to be related the IRA activities, being convicted of rape wasn't subject to the GFA

Dan_Solo

efb wrote: »

It had to be related the IRA activities, being convicted of rape wasn't subject to the GFA

Nice deflection.
Nobody said it wasn't and we were discussing an IRA member convicted of killing a Gardai.
But feel free to blurt out any irrelavnt stuff if you need to get it off your chest.

yipeeeee

Godge wrote: »

They should never have been let out. Killing a member of AGS should mean life without parole.

Because a member of AGS life is more important than an ordinary citizen???


Riiiiiight..

Banjo String

Godge wrote: »

FG/Labour had to compromise on their respective election promises to form a coalition.

SF/IRA disgustingly lied and covered-up child abuse and abused the people who came forward to reveal it.

One is around 10 on the disgusting liar scale, the other 1.

If you replace compromise with blatantly lie, this post still makes little sense.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

And not every murderer, psychopath, rapist and child abuser gets convicted, but that doesn't mean they were innocent. I'm surprised at you if you thought otherwise.

Just like O.J., we can know who is guilty of what without a court conviction, and we can know who said what, without a Dail record.





http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fintan-o-toole-tough-questions-for-adams-on-child-protection-1.1970440


Plenty of others have analysed the TV programme and court transcript and come to the same conclusion. You can review the evidence yourself if you think differently.

I have asked you on another thread for a link to original sources here, but you declined to post them. Just because another kneejerk anti-republican chimes in with your argument proves nothing. He is wrong about a few things in that article and I suspect he is selectively listening to this fabled interview. Please post it for us all to listen to.
If Adams broke the law why isn't he being charged, shouldn't your beef be with the upholders of the law?

Arsemageddon

yipeeeee wrote: »

Because a member of AGS life is more important than an ordinary citizen???


Riiiiiight..

Murder of a guard, soldier or prison officer while they are on duty gets an automatic 40 year sentence rather than the standard life sentence of 25 years.
This is because it is viewed as being an attack on the state as well as being an attack on them as an individual.

Happyman42

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Murder of a guard, soldier or prison officer while they are on duty gets an automatic 40 year sentence rather than the standard life sentence of 25 years.
This is because it is viewed as being an attack on the state as well as being an attack on them as an individual.

The charge was 'manslaughter' I think.

maccored

Godge wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fintan-o-toole-tough-questions-for-adams-on-child-protection-1.1970440


Plenty of others have analysed the TV programme and court transcript and come to the same conclusion. You can review the evidence yourself if you think differently.

hahaha - you called that 'evidence'. I think you need to look up the meaning of that word.

gladrags

Happyman42 wrote: »

If Adams broke the law why isn't he being charged, shouldn't your beef be with the upholders of the law?

He cannot answer that question,because there is no evidence.

No one has been charged,and no one will be.

You might see a token gesture by the Gardai or PSNI, but there will be no charges.

The best option now is to sit back and watch,while witnessing the breakdown of democracy and justice,by an hysterical mob baying for blood.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

I have asked you on another thread for a link to original sources here, but you declined to post them. Just because another kneejerk anti-republican chimes in with your argument proves nothing. He is wrong about a few things in that article and I suspect he is selectively listening to this fabled interview. Please post it for us all to listen to.
If Adams broke the law why isn't he being charged, shouldn't your beef be with the upholders of the law?

He didn't break the law if he lied to a TV programme and told the truth in court. That makes a prosecution impossible as there are no witnesses as to which version of the story is true. I have explained this many many times to you.

People therefore have to exercise their judgment as to whether he lied to the TV programme or he committed perjury. Simple. The fact that so many of you refuse to face up to that exposes the cult-like adoration of the Dear Leader Gerry. I mean, all you have to say is that he lied to the TV programme and then provide a reasonable excuse for his lies. But you can't say he isn't a liar or a perjurer.

maccored

I think you should just post his 'lies' from the tv program and then post the 'truth' he told in court. Then we'd all know whatever it is you are going on about. I find the cult accusations absolutely hilarious considering SF is the most uncult like grouping of people you'll find. go to one of their ard fheis - you'll see and hear that shinners have various views on various things and have no problems expressing them, regardless of what the leadership thinks or says. Then again, its probably easier just repeating what you read in the papers, yes? Saves with all that pesky thinking etc.

Godge wrote: »

He didn't break the law if he lied to a TV programme and told the truth in court. That makes a prosecution impossible as there are no witnesses as to which version of the story is true. I have explained this many many times to you.

People therefore have to exercise their judgment as to whether he lied to the TV programme or he committed perjury. Simple. The fact that so many of you refuse to face up to that exposes the cult-like adoration of the Dear Leader Gerry. I mean, all you have to say is that he lied to the TV programme and then provide a reasonable excuse for his lies. But you can't say he isn't a liar or a perjurer.

Godge

maccored wrote: »

I think you should just post his 'lies' from the tv program and then post the 'truth' he told in court. Then we'd all know whatever it is you are going on about. I find the cult accusations absolutely hilarious considering SF is the most uncult like grouping of people you'll find. go to one of their ard fheis - you'll see and hear that shinners have various views on various things and have no problems expressing them, regardless of what the leadership thinks or says. Then again, its probably easier just repeating what you read in the papers, yes? Saves with all that pesky thinking etc.

I don't know which was lies and which was truth, there is a difference so one was lies. Nobody can tell objectively which one was untrue but one of the accounts has to be because they contradicted each other.

The articles I have posted quote directly from the TV programme and from the court transcript. Given that the authors did their homework, there is no need for me to repeat their work. If you want to produce links to transcripts that show he told the same story both times, by all means go ahead, but you do know that is impossible.

I still don't see any writ issued against Fintan O'Toole.

gladrags

Godge wrote: »

People therefore have to exercise their judgment as to whether he lied to the TV programme or he commited perjury.

"People exercising their judgement" on the guilt or innocence of an individual!!!

He is innocent in the eyes of the law.

You are proposing a" Kangaroo court" style of justice.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

He didn't break the law if he lied to a TV programme and told the truth in court. That makes a prosecution impossible as there are no witnesses as to which version of the story is true. I have explained this many many times to you.

People therefore have to exercise their judgment as to whether he lied to the TV programme or he committed perjury. Simple. The fact that so many of you refuse to face up to that exposes the cult-like adoration of the Dear Leader Gerry. I mean, all you have to say is that he lied to the TV programme and then provide a reasonable excuse for his lies. But you can't say he isn't a liar or a perjurer.

Are you going to post the source for your detective work or not? What is the problem posting it? Does it exist at all, because I can't find it. Is there even anywhere that he was asked to explain it by one of our 'balanced and fair' journalist class?

Godge

gladrags wrote: »

"People exercising their judgement" on the guilt or innocence of an individual!!!

He is innocent in the eyes of the law.

You are proposing a" Kangaroo court" style of justice.

What a stupid contribution to this debate.

I am prepared to fully accept that he is innocent of perjury if that is your position, no problem with that. The consequences of that is that he told barefaced lies to the TV programme. That is not a crime, he can't be charged with anything for lying to a TV programme but a person with half a brain, when faced with the evidence that he told two different stories can conclude that he is a liar.

When can people get it into their head that it is not a crime to tell a lie to a TV programme but it can get you labelled as a liar.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

What a stupid contribution to this debate.

Can you post a shred of irrefutable evidence that SF covered-up anything?

If you can't then what happened and what has been happening is a 'kangaroo court' because as far as I can see SF have been convicted of this cover-up without any evidence of any kind.
If there was a 'cover-up' can you tell us all how this got into a court of law, promptly, when the complaint was eventually made BY THE ONLY PERSON WHO COULD MAKE IT and with the prosecution apparently happy to proceed until THE ONLY PERSON WHO COULD PROVE THE CASE abandoned the case?

Your definition of a 'cover-up' needs clarifiction from mine.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Are you going to post the source for your detective work or not? What is the problem posting it? Does it exist at all, because I can't find it. Is there even anywhere that he was asked to explain it by one of our 'balanced and fair' journalist class?

I have posted it many times, you just choose to ignore it, here are just two of the many, many articles that set out the circumstances. I can post some from the Indo as well if you like, it was also in the Examiner. The Sunday Tribune did a big expose of his lies but I can't find that anywhere.


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fintan-o-toole-tough-questions-for-adams-on-child-protection-1.1970440


http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/liam-adams-sordid-episode-has-left-sinn-fein-president-gerry-adams-politically-toxic-29626240.html

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Can you post a shred of irrefutable evidence that SF covered-up anything?

If you can't then what happened and what has been happening is a 'kangaroo court' because as far as I can see SF have been convicted of this cover-up without any evidence of any kind.
If there was a 'cover-up' can you tell us all how this got into a court of law, promptly, when the complaint was eventually made BY THE ONLY PERSON WHO COULD MAKE IT and with the prosecution apparently happy to proceed until THE ONLY PERSON WHO COULD PROVE THE CASE abandoned the case?

Your definition of a 'cover-up' needs clarifiction from mine.

You are mixing yourself up.

My post related to the Gerry Adams lies as exposed by numerous newspaper articles, most recently by Fintan O'Toole. I am posting the article again for you in case you missed it.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fintan-o-toole-tough-questions-for-adams-on-child-protection-1.1970440


He can't be convicted in a court of law of being a liar, so demanding I withdraw what I am saying because he hasn't been convicted is a silly contribution at best.

What is most chilling about this article is the following:

"If Enda Kenny, Micheál Martin, Joan Burton or Peter Robinson had this abysmal record on child protection and this history of evasive answers, we know what Sinn Féin would have to say about it.
That not one of the party’s strong-minded women can manage to say it about Gerry Adams is deeply creepy. If you think ordinary cronyism is bad, consider what this party will do to protect one of its own."

gladrags

Godge wrote: »

What a stupid contribution to this debate.

I am prepared to fully accept that he is innocent of perjury if that is your position, no problem with that. The consequences of that is that he told barefaced lies to the TV programme. That is not a crime, he can't be charged with anything for lying to a TV programme but a person with half a brain, when faced with the evidence that he told two different stories can conclude that he is a liar.

When can people get it into their head that it is not a crime to tell a lie to a TV programme but it can get you labelled as a liar.

"People therefore have to exercise their judgment as to whether he lied to the TV programme or he committed perjury. Simple."


I quote exactly what you said above.

Perjury?????

Can you explain how you have a right to decide if someone has commited Perjury?

Thank you so much.