Up the rebels?

smurgen

Hurrache wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is just head in the sand stuff to be honest.
You don't have a party leader panicking and telling his TD's to highlight a 'whiff of sulphur' if they are not scared about the rise of a party.

Mary Lou used a decades old SF slogan and on comes somebody to open a thread inferring something sinister. Usual pathetic stuff really.

It's head in the stand stuff to think their well known phrase has anything other than sinister connotations these days. Her first day of leader and she already isolated moderates who may have voted for them as a 'new' party.

Yer scared and trying to tarnish a new era in the party.i'm glad to see it.there's and inevitable change coming and FG/FF better be ready for it.suck it up.

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It means Our Day Will Come btw.

You actually thought people on this thread don't know that?

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

You actually thought people on this thread don't know that?

I never over estimate when it comes to this thread tbh.

smurgen

Hurrache wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It means Our Day Will Come btw.

You actually thought people on this thread don't know that?

You're making it sinister.are you saying an phrase is sinister cause it's irish?

Hurrache

smurgen wrote: »

Yer scared and trying to tarnish a new era in the party.i'm glad to see it.there's and inevitable change coming and FG/FF better be ready for it.suck it up.

I've no idea why or what you think I'm scared of, I'm simply pointing out that in a bid to be populist with the hardcore SF republicans she made a balls of ushering in this new era.

I'm flattered that you believe I, a randomer on the internet, has the power to tarnish a political party, albeit minor one, all by myself.

Guy:Incognito

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Mary Lou used a decades old SF slogan and on comes somebody to open a thread inferring something sinister. Usual pathetic stuff really.

Its the sf of a few decades ago that was supposed to be gottsn rid of. Remember those ones? With the bombings and killings and whatnot?

cycle4fun

smurgen wrote: »

are you saying an phrase is sinister cause it's irish?

No, because it was associated with the PIRA.

If a Unionist leader from a Unionist mainstream party ever said "Up the UVF. No surrender" I'd be equally critical.

Hurrache

smurgen wrote: »

You're making it sinister.are you saying an phrase is sinister cause it's irish?

IRA members made it sinister when they shouted it during and after the murder of people.

FrancieBrady

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Its the sf of a few decades ago that was supposed to be gottsn rid of. Remember those ones? With the bombings and killings and whatnot?

What?

cycle4fun

Hurrache wrote: »

IRA members made it sinister when they shouted it during and after the murder of people.

Correct. And I was hoping SF had moved on from those days, especially with a new leader.

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

IRA members made it sinister when they shouted it during and after the murder of people.

Did she murder someone before she said it?

It has been used by SF for decades. Typical that there is now faux outrage about it being used by a new leader.

The whiff of sulphur has been found. Enda would be so proud.

Guy:Incognito

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

I'm assuming everyone has a grasp of English. The words all make sense in the order they are in. Or is one typo in gotten throwing you that much.

FrancieBrady

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I'm assuming everyone has a grasp of English. The words all make sense in the order they are in. Or is one typo in gotten throwing you that much.

I was questioning the sense of those words actually.

smurgen

cycle4fun wrote: »

smurgen wrote: »

are you saying an phrase is sinister cause it's irish?

No, because it was associated with the PIRA.

If a Unionist leader from a Unionist mainstream party ever said "Up the UVF. No surrender" I'd be equally critical.

It's not equivalent to up the UVF.If she said up the IRA you'd have a point but alas you don't.

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Did she murder someone before she said it?

It has been used by SF for decades. Typical that there is now faux outrage about it being used by a new leader.

The whiff of sulphur has been found. Enda would be so proud.

Your attempts at discourse is laughable, move the goalposts, oops, score by the opposition, quick, move them again and pretend it never happened. Oh dear, no point moving the goalposts again, just pretend it's a game that doesn't involve them.

Faux outrage? There is none, just revelling at an amateur own goal on opening day when they could have moved beyond their history and be all the better for it.

Guy:Incognito

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I was questioning the sense of those words actually.

Is sf striving to be the same party they were while the ira was "disappearing " people for them? Or are they claiming to have moved on and progressed?

The leader using an obviously provocative term thats synonymous with murderers doesnt scream the latter.

Odhinn

cycle4fun wrote: »

If a Unionist leader from a Unionist mainstream party ever said "Up the UVF. No surrender" I'd be equally critical.

No, there's no evidence to support that at all.

And I was hoping SF had moved on from those days, especially with a new leader.

I doubt that as well.

Beechwoodspark

Yeah I saw that and had a wee chuckle to myself last night. Not even a hint, It was a clear message to the Ra that Mary Lou is “one of them”.

Plus ça change...

smurgen

Hurrache wrote: »

smurgen wrote: »

You're making it sinister.are you saying an phrase is sinister cause it's irish?

IRA members made it sinister when they shouted it during and after the murder of people.

Was it sinister when James Joyce created it? It's sinister in your mind because that suits your political agenda.i feel sorry for you compadre.

Hurrache

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Yeah I saw that and had a wee chuckle to myself last night. Not even a hint, It was a clear message to the Ra that Mary Lou is “one of them”.

Plus ça change...

During one of the speeches someone said she was proud of her history, her Fianna Fail history?

Hurrache

smurgen wrote: »

Was it sinister when James Joyce created it? It's sinister in your mind because that suits your political agenda.i feel sorry for you compadre.

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word sinister and how something becomes sinister. It's like you claiming murderous clowns can't be sinister as they were meant to bring joy.

Are you from the northern Mexican branch amigo? Maybe it's because English is not your first language then but you can be critical of any political party without having a political agenda.

McMurphy

Hurrache wrote: »

2016 was a disappointing election for them, Adam's can shoulder much of that blame with his shoddy media performances and grasp of economics.

Aha. You're of the goalposts shifting brigade I see.

You asked 'what rise' and when given their seat increase figures go off on a different tangent.

As you were.

Hurrache

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Aha. You're of the goalposts shifting brigade I see.

You asked 'what rise' and when given their seat increase figures go off on a different tangent.

As you were.

They're down in the polls.

Jimbob1977

I think it was a bad move from a political perspective.

When you want to extend an olive branch to Unionists to restart the Stormont Assembly, it was almost a taunt.

She was playing to her electorate at the Ard Fheis.

Fr_Dougal

Gas thing is that the party supporters have lapped up her spiel, they actually think that they have something in common with the privately schooled Shinner(ex-FF) from Rathgar.

FrancieBrady

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Is sf striving to be the same party they were while the ira was "disappearing " people for them? Or are they claiming to have moved on and progressed?

The leader using an obviously provocative term thats synonymous with murderers doesnt scream the latter.

How in god's name could they be the 'same' party?

Did you miss the achievement of the GFA?

SF have always used the slogan and continued to use it after the GFA because it is an innocuous political slogan.

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

During one of the speeches someone said she was proud of her history, her Fianna Fail history?

Which is also a 'rebel' history or are you gonna, like Michael when it suits him, airbrush that out?

McMurphy

Hurrache wrote: »

They're down in the polls.

Aaaaand the tangent changes again.

As I demonstrated to srameen earlier - opinion polls are rather meh in this country - because dependent on various polls, any one can run with figures to suit their own argument.

Simplified further - opinion polls are polls of an opinion.


You asked earlier "what rise"? When another poster said the big 2 (Ff/Fg) were getting nervous at their rise.

Hurrache wrote: »

What rise?

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

2007 4 seats.

2011 14 seats.

2016 23 seats.



No rise at all.

I make a jump from 4 to 23 a 475% increase. I suspect that's the rise people were referring to.

**awaits another deflection or tangent**

Odhinn

I remember when it was "they'll never win a seat down here".

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which is also a 'rebel' history or are you gonna, like Michael when it suits him, airbrush that out?

Again, I've no idea what the point is relative to what we're discussing. I know you're not so naive as to believe yourself that there's no connotations, so the only conclusion is that you're heroically batting for your side in the face of an oncoming hurricane.

SF supporters seem to be a touchy lot in the face of any sort of honest criticism. Might be one of the reasons they're going to stagnate, get offended when those on the outside point out what they see wrong with the party rather than take it onboard with a view to broadening their potential voter base.

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

Again, I've no idea what the point is relative to what we're discussing. I no you're not so naive as to believe yourself that there's no connotations, so the only conclusion is that you're batting for you're heroically batting for your side in the face of an oncoming hurricane.

Oh no, not another hurricane.


We were all rebels, at one time. Why is it wrong for a party to see themselves as rebels?

Because the people they were rebelling against might get upset?

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Oh no, not another hurricane.


We were all rebels, at one time. Why is it wrong for a party to see themselves as rebels?

Because the people they were rebelling against might get upset?

Nobody but you are explicitly talking about rebels.

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

Nobody but you are explicitly talking about rebels.

So you have a problem with an Irish phrase/slogan that SF have used for decades?

That this phrase which means 'Our Day Will Come' indicates that ML was talking about the RA?

This just gets better.

Hurrache

This is your modus operandi isn't it? Post irrelevant nonsense, pretend you don't know why just the issue is, and then hope a poster gives up while you imagine yourself getting a virtual pat on the back from Parnell Square?

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

This is your modus operandi isn't it? Post irrelevant nonsense, pretend you don't know why just the issue is, and then hope a poster gives up while you imagine yourself getting a virtual pat on the back from Parnell Square?

Oh dear, the 'Parnell Sq' reference. You know an argument has completely crashed when we get to this stage.

Savage Tyrant

Up the Rebels, Our Day Will Come.... Absolutely heinous. :rolleyes:

Personally, I don't think she is the right choice to lead the party, but I hope she proves me wrong. I look forward to seeing where she can bring the party, and the cause to end partition as a whole.
Her sign off is the cause of all this outrage? She gave a nod toward a decades old slogan, and yes, a nod toward the former military wing of the party.
Not everyone will like it or agree with it but the fact of the matter is, yes, absolutely SOME of us have reason to be thankful to the P.I.R.A.... And your, or anyone else's opinion doesn't actually change that fact.

Up the Rebels. Our day WILL come.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Aha. You're of the goalposts shifting brigade I see.

You asked 'what rise' and when given their seat increase figures go off on a different tangent.

As you were.

The only party that lost votes between the European Elections and the last Dail election was Sinn Fein.

Even Labour, in the midst of their biggest ever meltdown in terms of Dail elections managed to actually do better than their Euro performance.

Hurrache

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Oh dear, the 'Parnell Sq' reference. You know an argument has completely crashed when we get to this stage.

Oh, it's something people have said to you before? Unsurprising.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So you have a problem with an Irish phrase/slogan that SF have used for decades?

That this phrase which means 'Our Day Will Come' indicates that ML was talking about the RA?

This just gets better.

"Tiocfaidh ar La" is now a phrase with sectarian connotations thanks to the work of SF/IRA in the past. Repeating it today with the wounds unhealed is a typical example of the insensitivity of the current SF leadership.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

"Tiocfaidh ar La" is now a phrase with sectarian connotations thanks to the work of SF/IRA in the past. Repeating it today with the wounds unhealed is a typical example of the insensitivity of the current SF leadership.

The national anthem can have sectarian connotations if you are so inclined. ~

FrancieBrady

Hurrache wrote: »

Oh, it's something people have said to you before? Unsurprising.

Oh it has and I am amazed at how quickly you learned.

timthumbni

I’m glad to see Mary lou starting off as she means to go on... reaching out to unionists as they like to peddle.

She is carrying on where Adams left off. Bravo. Maybe she will take Liam on long walks on the beach too..

FrancieBrady

timthumbni wrote: »

I’m glad to see Mary lou starting off as she means to go on... reaching out to unionists as they like to peddle.

She is carrying on where Adams left off. Bravo. Maybe she will take Liam on long walks on the beach too..

Jaysus Tim. That the best you can stoop to? :rolleyes:

Odhinn

cycle4fun wrote: »

Her (.............) words?

If mary lou dropped her phone in the jacks you'd be saying she wasn't fit to run the country.

timthumbni

FrancieBrady wrote: »

timthumbni wrote: »

I’m glad to see Mary lou starting off as she means to go on... reaching out to unionists as they like to peddle.

She is carrying on where Adams left off. Bravo. Maybe she will take Liam on long walks on the beach too..

Jaysus Tim. That the best you can stoop to? :rolleyes:

You are a sf cheerleader and you ask someone else how low they can stoop to?? Now that is funny. Mary Lou is perfect for the job as sf supreme leader. She is about as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit. All she needs is a pair of bolt cutters in the boot and she is set. Go Mary Lou.... I await the unveiling of her mural in Republican west Belfast.

10000maniacs

She is leading a republican party. If there were no rebels, Stormont would still be Unionist gerrymandering headquarters up in Norn Iron.
If there were no rebels there would be no Fine Gael or Fianna Fail.
I see no issue with this slogan.

timthumbni

She should have just went full provo and shouted “up da ra” at the end. I’m sure it would have went down well with the typical sf voter.

FrancieBrady

timthumbni wrote: »

She should have just went full provo and shouted “up da ra” at the end. I’m sure it would have went down well with the typical sf voter.

She did not have to. There are plenty here who seem to have heard that.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Phrases can become sinister when in history they have been linked to violence or violent organisations.

If you want to keep things in isolation then a phrase like "work will set you free" or "arbeit macht Frei" is not sinister either. In isolation there is no threat in that phrase but in context many know it's place in history.

But it's all about context isn't it.

FrancieBrady

Malia Delightful Stipulation wrote: »

Phrases can become sinister when in history they have been linked to violence or violent organisations.

If you want to keep things in isolation then a phrase like "work will set you free" or "arbeit macht Frei" is not sinister either. In isolation there is no threat in that phrase but in context many know it's place in history.

But it's all about context isn't it.

Yes. And those who hear it need to know the context 20 years on from the end of a conflict/war.