Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Bishop of hope

Poor old bad losers.
Someday these lads might put their brain in gear before they open their mouths.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/mary-lou-is-my-taoiseach-isnt-a-micheal-slur-says-sf-td-thomas-gould-1008202.html

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

The IRA gave up on it, were they telling a lie when they said "Brits Out, No Surrender"? By your definition, they were telling the biggest porkies.

Sounds to me like you dont know the difference between the struggle for freedom in the north and the aspiration for a United Ireland

maccored

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Poor old bad losers.
Someday these lads might put their brain in gear before they open their mouths.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/mary-lou-is-my-taoiseach-isnt-a-micheal-slur-says-sf-td-thomas-gould-1008202.html

slow news day?

Mortelaro

Bowie wrote: »

Can you clarify something. Why are you looking to ridicule the IRA for signing up to peace? Are you just trying to get a rise or do you miss the Troubles?
Not a very moral or responsible attitude to try belittle sides took politics and peace over violence.
By the way 'No Surrender' was Paisley's line.
That's him no surrendering on the left.

He certainly didn't surrender, he got 90% of the Republic's population to amend articles 2 and 3 of its constitution removing the claim to jurisdiction over northern Ireland

JohnnyFlash

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Poor old bad losers.
Someday these lads might put their brain in gear before they open their mouths.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/mary-lou-is-my-taoiseach-isnt-a-micheal-slur-says-sf-td-thomas-gould-1008202.html

Replacing Jonathan O’Brien with Gould shows just how little effort was put into selecting SF candidates to run for election. They’ve some real mouth-breathers and knuckle-draggers in the ranks. Damage limitation will be the order of the day for Mary Lou.

Bishop of hope

maccored wrote: »

slow news day?

It is í suppose, the #not my Taoiseach should be dead and buried at this stage though don't you think?
It's childish and undemocratic at best.
Taoiseach means chief says Marylou, I'm his chief.
Jesus.

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

Can you clarify something. Why are you looking to ridicule the IRA for signing up to peace? Are you just trying to get a rise or do you miss the Troubles?
Not a very moral or responsible attitude to try belittle sides took politics and peace over violence.
By the way 'No Surrender' was Paisley's line.
That's him no surrendering on the left.

I am pointing out the ridiculous nature of Francie's definition of politicians lying. If he is correct, the IRA and Sinn Fein are the biggest liars of the lot.

The IRA should have signed up to peace 40 years before they did eventually cop on.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I am pointing out the ridiculous nature of Francie's definition of politicians lying. If he is correct, the IRA and Sinn Fein are the biggest liars of the lot.

The IRA should have signed up to peace 40 years before they did eventually cop on.

And I think the British should have capitulated 40 years earlier and removed the Unionist and Loyalist veto. A veto they had used for 80 years (with the blessing of FG and FF) to subjugate, gerrymander, and oppress our fellow Irish people.

Had the British copped on to that simple thing, say 'No' to Unionists in 1968/69 then there'd have been no violence, no conflict/war and 3000+ people would have had the chance to live out their lives in peace.

Like Michael Martin knew he would coalesce with FG if it came to it, the Brtish KNEW what the problems were in 1969 but they took a side and tried to re-oppress and re-subjugate on behalf of Unionism/Loyalism.

If you tell the story of what happened on this island and you do not put the primary blame for what happened at the door of those with the primary responsibility, then to me you are also a liar, an historian who cannot be trusted in other words.

Why would we trust a word out of yours or Michael Martin's mouth when you lie about fundamental things so easily?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And I think the British should have capitulated 40 years earlier and removed the Unionist and Loyalist veto. A veto they had used for 80 years (with the blessing of FG and FF) to subjugate, gerrymander, and oppress our fellow Irish people.

Had the British copped on to that simple thing, say 'No' to Unionists in 1968/69 then there'd have been no violence, no conflict/war and 3000+ people would have had the chance to live out their lives in peace.

Like Michael Martin knew he would coalesce with FG if it came to it, the Brtish KNEW what the problems were in 1969 but they took a side and tried to re-oppress and re-subjugate on behalf of Unionism/Loyalism.

If you tell the story of what happened on this island and you do not put the primary blame for what happened at the door of those with the primary responsibility, then to me you are also a liar, an historian who cannot be trusted in other words.

Why would we trust a word out of yours or Michael Martin's mouth when you lie about fundamental things so easily?

The veto is still there the last I checked.

Delighted to be compared to Micheal Martin, me an anonymous boards poster that you put up there in the same category of the Taoiseach.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The veto is still there the last I checked.

Even though that is another lie and typical misrepresentation, I am sure most here know that you would be perfectly happy if the Unionists could still legally subjugate, oppress and gerrymander our fellow Irish citizens.

Pretending their petty use of the Petition Of Concern is the same as the Unionist Veto that was removed with the Anglo Irish Agreement is the kind of ****ty triumphalism I would expect from you to be honest.

You tell lies about people and events in the hope that those not informed enough will believe you and cheer you on.

Exactly the kind of stuff our new Taoiseach engages in.

Bonniedog

No harm to you but you clearly do not understand what the "veto" is.

It is not some esoteric ritual, it is simply that a united Ireland would require the consent of a majority in 6 counties.

That is in Sunningdale, Hillsborough AND the GFA.

Only difference is that SF now accept the "veto"/consent clause.

Not only that, but they are happy to sit in Stormont running the place on behalf of London.

Now, if you think that is remotely near republicans having achieved their objective then good luck to you.

Seems that current pipe dream is based on winning the sectarian riding stakes at some stage in the future.

Which ironically is much less likely given the shinners' support for abortion!

James Brown

Mortelaro wrote: »

He certainly didn't surrender, he got 90% of the Republic's population to amend articles 2 and 3 of its constitution removing the claim to jurisdiction over northern Ireland

Sorry horse, there was a question in there based on a previous comment. It's about a peace being important not scoring points or dismissing an end to violence to try get a little dig in.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

I am pointing out the ridiculous nature of Francie's definition of politicians lying. If he is correct, the IRA and Sinn Fein are the biggest liars of the lot.

The IRA should have signed up to peace 40 years before they did eventually cop on.

Well you need edit you comment. It reads as if you are ridiculing the people on both sides who signed up to peace. The IRA signed up when it was right for the IRA I'd imagine.

FrancieBrady

Bonniedog wrote: »

No harm to you but you clearly do not understand what the "veto" is.

It is not some esoteric ritual, it is simply that a united Ireland would require the consent of a majority in 6 counties.

That is in Sunningdale, Hillsborough AND the GFA.

Only difference is that SF now accept the "veto"/consent clause.

Not only that, but they are happy to sit in Stormont running the place on behalf of London.

Now, if you think that is remotely near republicans having achieved their objective then good luck to you.

Seems that current pipe dream is based on winning the sectarian riding stakes at some stage in the future.

Which ironically is much less likely given the shinners' support for abortion!

I told you before that that is not the Unionist Veto, that is an agreed principle of consent included in the GFA.
If you won't educate yourself, there isn't much anyone can do. Again here is John Hume (written 9 YEARS before the GFA) discussing it when writing about the Anglo Irish Agreement, the 'Agreement' Unionists are most bitter about and which spelt the end of the Veto they had on any policy relating to the British running of the north.

John Hume wrote:

The fundamental change that has taken place as a result of the Anglo-Irish Agreement is a change that is deeply and fully understood by every Unionist. What it means is that their exclusive hold on power has gone and is not coming back. The power of veto on British policy which they have always had, and which goes to the heart of our problem here, has gone and is not coming back. The loss is uncomfortable for their leaders, for while they held that privileged position they never had to be politicians or exercise the art of politics, which is the art of representing one’s own view while treating others with fairness.

For traditional Unionism in Northern Ireland, other points of view have never actually existed. To this day, as they boast about the proposals which they have placed before the British Government about the future of Northern Ireland – the future of us all – the insult which their behaviour represents doesn’t seem to have occurred to them. Not only have they not presented these proposals to those of us who represent other views – views which must be accommodated if we are to have a future: they haven’t even published them for the information of their own followers. They are still oligarchs. The faithful will line up when the drums beat. The other points of view, to which lip-service is publicly paid, don’t really count.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v11/n03/john-hume/john-hume-on-the-end-of-the-unionist-veto-in-ulster

Your lack of education on this point is your responsibility, not mine.

FrancieBrady

Bowie wrote: »

Well you need edit you comment. It reads as if you are ridiculing the people on both sides who signed up to peace. The IRA signed up when it was right for the IRA I'd imagine.

We all know at this stage that partitionists probably preferred the pre conflict/war arrangements in northern Ireland. They seem to have the view that nationalists should have lain down and accepted their lot until the British got around to being democrats.

maccored

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Your lack of education on this point is your responsibility, not mine.

to many reading one liners off the internet thinking that means they understand it. funnily enough they seem to congregate in the same SF threads they create a lot of the time

maccored

Bishop of hope wrote: »

It is í suppose, the #not my Taoiseach should be dead and buried at this stage though don't you think?
It's childish and undemocratic at best.
Taoiseach means chief says Marylou, I'm his chief.
Jesus.

ah now - we both know its basically a declaration of allegiance by a new SF TD to impress the party president. nothing more evil than that

landofthetree

The scum breaking the C19 rules as per usual.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1150536/

maccored

landofthetree wrote: »

The scum breaking the C19 rules as per usual.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1150536/

says more about yourself that post than anything

landofthetree

Bishop of hope wrote: »

It is í suppose, the #not my Taoiseach should be dead and buried at this stage though don't you think?
It's childish and undemocratic at best.
Taoiseach means chief says Marylou, I'm his chief.
Jesus.

Many voters struggle with numeracy issues.

That's why they will keep it up.

1 in 4 people will struggle to understand why the biggest party isn't in power.

25% or 1 in 4 Irish adults score at or below level 1 for numeracy. At this level a person may have problems doing simple math calculations. 42% of Irish adults score at or below level 1 on using technology to solve problems and accomplish tasks.

landofthetree

maccored wrote: »

says more about yourself that post than anything

A large group breaking the rules.

What else are they but scum?

Tens of thousands of people haven't got to go to funerals because of restrictions. Yet SF just ignore the rules.

JohnnyFlash

I think the answer to the opening question is that most of them are up in Belfast today. Thousands of them.

neris

landofthetree wrote: »

The scum breaking the C19 rules as per usual.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1150536/

Just doing what the rest of the UK are doing

maccored

landofthetree wrote: »

A large group breaking the rules.

What else are they but scum?

Tens of thousands of people haven't got to go to funerals because of restrictions. Yet SF just ignore the rules.

as I say - says more about yourself. Everyone there in those images are from SF according to you. Says a lot.

FrancieBrady

landofthetree wrote: »

The scum breaking the C19 rules as per usual.
https://www.rte.ie/amp/1150536/

It is a break of the rules, no doubt about it and they deserve criticism for it. But 'scum'?

Does that apply to anyone breaking the rules?

Bonniedog

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We all know at this stage that partitionists probably preferred the pre conflict/war arrangements in northern Ireland. They seem to have the view that nationalists should have lain down and accepted their lot until the British got around to being democrats.

SF are partitionists. They accepted partition in 1998 and now they administer it.

The unionist veto is about blocking Irish unity.

The fact that it is now used to refer to the veto both tribes have through blocking certain things in Stormont is nothing to do what the veto was and is about:

A majority in the artificially created north eastern state was allowed veto the democratic decision of the majority of the Irish people, and is still allowed hold what is in effect a double veto:
Firstly, that there is no provision under GFA for a democratic all Ireland vote on unity, and;

Secondly, that a decision within 6 counties requires a majority consent, which is and will remain for the foreseeable future a unionist majority - including a not insignificant pro union support among Catholics, even if they ever do succeed in out breeding "them uns."

Thats what the shinners accepted and administer.

JohnnyFlash

A lot of the SF ‘top brass’ in that photo. Some of them mightn’t be household names though....

Bonniedog

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A lot of the SF ‘top brass’ in that photo. Some of them mightn’t be household names though....

Including the current head of the Stormont milice

FrancieBrady

Bonniedog wrote: »

SF are partitionists. They accepted partition in 1998 and now they administer it.

The unionist veto is about blocking Irish unity.

Good lord, even when it is spelt out in black and white you still won't accept you are wrong. The Unionists DO NOT have a veto on a UI if a majority vote for it. READ the GFA.

gormdubhgorm

I don't think SF has just vanished. I think SF as being varnished while vanished. I believe SF will now be seen by some as a much better player than they actually are when left out of the first team. Think of recent soccer players Andy Reid and Wes Hoolahan. Going to those Republican funerals and Mary Lou calling the dead man 'a great republican' hardly helps them bring in new voters though - so I don't get that.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0621/1148763-bobby-storey/

Plus the irony is not lost on me that there appears to be no social distancing and Bobby Storey died of a failed lung transplant. So I assume he had respiratory problems?