Sinn Fein Omerta

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Not sure what you are trying to say, other than avoiding an answer when your posts have been shot down.




Disclaimer: Sorry for the inappropriate analogy about shooting in a thread about Sinn Fein who have no link whatsoever to shooting of any kind

If you wish to discuss the government's current predicament, there are threads for that. Pretty simple point.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you wish to discuss the government's current predicament, there are threads for that. Pretty simple point.

No, I am not discussing the government's current predicament, I am highlighting how the IMC report that you claim exonerates and excuses the IRA could be paraphrased to exonerate and excuse the current government in their current predicament.

To me, that language is equally unacceptable in both cases (and in one case, Dara Calleary and others have suffered the consequences). To you, operating with a duality of morality, one is excusable (the Sinn Fein/IRA one) and the other isn't.

Simple as.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

No, I am not discussing the government's current predicament, I am highlighting how the IMC report that you claim exonerates and excuses the IRA

The IMC says the IRA as an organisation were not involved. If they were involved then the Irish government and the British government have reneged on their duties to the GFA.

If you wish to debate hypocrisy debate the hypocrisy there.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The IMC says the IRA as an organisation were not involved. If they were involved then the Irish government and the British government have reneged on their duties to the GFA.

If you wish to debate hypocrisy debate the hypocrisy there.

Well, yes, the Irish government and the British government gave the IRA a pass on the Paul Quinn murder for political reasons so as not to damage Sinn Fein's involvement in the peace process.

It was wrong, it is still wrong, and I disagree with it.

Ultimately, though, it is a tiny wrong compared to the wrong of what was done to Paul Quinn by the terrorist organisation that you express sympathy and support for on a continual basis.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, yes, the Irish government and the British government gave the IRA a pass on the Paul Quinn murder for political reasons so as not to damage Sinn Fein's involvement in the peace process.

It was wrong, it is still wrong, and I disagree with it.

Ultimately, though, it is a tiny wrong compared to the wrong of what was done to Paul Quinn by the terrorist organisation that you express sympathy and support for on a continual basis.

So now you are saying that the killing was a cover-up by the Irish and British government assisted by the Independent Monitoring Commission and you have the evidence that the IRA as an organisation was responsible.

So show us what evidence you base this on?

*btw you are saying pretty much what Willie Frazier was saying. So you aren't alone, I'll give you that. He was a bit short in the evidence department though too.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, yes, the Irish government and the British government gave the IRA a pass on the Paul Quinn murder for political reasons so as not to damage Sinn Fein's involvement in the peace process.

It was wrong, it is still wrong, and I disagree with it.

Ultimately, though, it is a tiny wrong compared to the wrong of what was done to Paul Quinn by the terrorist organisation that you express sympathy and support for on a continual basis.

Conspiracy theories forum is over there blanch. >>>>>>

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Who is hiding people?
The Gardai, The PSNI and the IMC know who killed Paul Quinn. The evidential strength of what they know is strong enough for them to say to governments that the IRA as an organization was not involved. It was a local dispute with no little connection to illegal activity.

Is there any poster here who can get it into Francies head that beating a boy to death with crowbars is "not unconnected to illegal activity". He keeps posting the same edited extract (leaving out the bit about Provos being involved) as if the murder might not be illegal if Gerry authorised it.

FrancieBrady

Truthvader wrote: »

Is there any poster here who can get it into Francies head that beating a boy to death with crowbars is "not unconnected to illegal activity". He keeps posting the same edited extract (leaving out the bit about Provos being involved) as if the murder might not be illegal if Gerry authorised it.

If you cannot get it into your head that I view the murder as obscence and completely unjustified and that those responsible should never see the light of day again then I can't help you. I have said it often enough.

I know that members of the IRA were involved apparently without the sanction or approval of the IRA.



Is there anything else I 'need to get into my head'?

grayzer75

I think this thread has run it's course lads.

Have a good weekend one and all.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you cannot get it into your head that I view the murder as obscence and completely unjustified and that those responsible should never see the light of day again then I can't help you. I have said it often enough.

I know that members of the IRA were involved apparently without the sanction or approval of the IRA.



Is there anything else I 'need to get into my head'?

Yet you'll vote for the party that invites the very same murderers to party functions?

In your opinion are SF beholden to these criminal gangs ?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Yet you'll vote for the party that invites the very same murderers to party functions?

In your opinion are SF beholden to these criminal gangs ?

I have already answered you on this jh79.

The thread is not about me or an interrogation of me.

mynamejeff

great to see the sneer smear and attention diverting is still going on

makes it so easy to spot those nasty little shinnerbots who aren't following party orders

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have already answered you on this jh79.

The thread is not about me or an interrogation of me.

Francie, you hardly expect your anything goes attitude to SF to go without comment?

atticu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I know that members of the IRA were involved apparently without the sanction or approval of the IRA.

You have been posting for the last while that there was no IRA involvement.
Now you claim that members of the IRA were involved.

Which is it?

Truthvader

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you cannot get it into your head that I view the murder as obscence and completely unjustified and that those responsible should never see the light of day again then I can't help you. I have said it often enough.

I know that members of the IRA were involved apparently without the sanction or approval of the IRA.
G


Is there anything else I 'need to get into my head'?

Plenty. For a start it would still have been obscene and completely unjustified even if your heroes in the IRA "approved" it.

James Brown

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Shinnerbots online: There are no “shadowy figures” running the show behind the scenes.

Sinn Fein: There is no IRA and they, certainly, don’t control anything to do with the “party”

Máirtín Ó Muilleoir MLA: Meets with, “former” senior IRA member, Ted Howell seeking approval on decisions to be made within government.

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, is it?

They aren't shadowy but former IRA members are in SF. This isn't hidden. Saying 'shadowy' implies it is but is not the reality. To quote Leonard Cohen, 'Everybody knows'.
Sadly for the civil war status quo considering its all they have to try deflect from the crony ineptitude we see on a daily basis from FF/FG.

EmmetSpiceland

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Who is hiding people?
The Gardai, The PSNI and the IMC know who killed Paul Quinn. The evidential strength of what they know is strong enough for them to say to governments that the IRA as an organization was not involved. It was a local dispute with no little connection to illegal activity.

Just to come back to this, F.

If everyone knows who committed this vile “act” but no one is doing anything about it, would it be too much of a “stretch” to believe that those involved would be British informants?

I mean, if you consider that it’s estimated half of the top IRA lads were informers during the organisation’s more “active” years, it has to be a possibility, nach ea?

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

They aren't shadowy but former IRA members are in SF. This isn't hidden. Saying 'shadowy' implies it is but is not the reality. To quote Leonard Cohen, 'Evefybody knows'.
Sadly for the civil war status quo condidering its all they have to try deflect from the crony ineptitude we see on a daily basis from FF/FG.

So, let me clarify this, you are saying that any former IRA members now in Sinn Fein have declared their former membership of the IRA to all and sundry. Any other alternative implies something shadowy.

Pretending that there isn't something shadowy about IRA connections in Sinn Fein is just silly nonsense.

mynamejeff

Bowie wrote: »

They aren't shadowy but former IRA members are in SF. This isn't hidden. Saying 'shadowy' implies it is but is not the reality. To quote Leonard Cohen, 'Evefybody knows'.
Sadly for the civil war status quo condidering its all they have to try deflect from the crony ineptitude we see on a daily basis from FF/FG.

why don't these former IRA members come forward and admit who they are and what they have done . I ve never seen that just ones that have been convicted of horrible acts pushed to the background .

that one part of the GFA sickens many people , knowing that murdering scum are walking the streets free and many more will never be punished for killing innocents

FrancieBrady

atticu wrote: »

You have been posting for the last while that there was no IRA involvement.
Now you claim that members of the IRA were involved.

Which is it?

We have known since 2008 that members or former members of the IRA were involved. This is not a secret and certainly not denied by me.

Read the report of the IMC, it is all there.

Shefwedfan

If it was former members of the PIRA. And Sinn Fein have no involvement with the PIRA

Why is Sinn Fein protecting these people?

Story falls apart straight away doesn't it?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So now you are saying that the killing was a cover-up by the Irish and British government assisted by the Independent Monitoring Commission and you have the evidence that the IRA as an organisation was responsible.

So show us what evidence you base this on?

*btw you are saying pretty much what Willie Frazier was saying. So you aren't alone, I'll give you that. He was a bit short in the evidence department though too.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you cannot get it into your head that I view the murder as obscence and completely unjustified and that those responsible should never see the light of day again then I can't help you. I have said it often enough.

I know that members of the IRA were involved apparently without the sanction or approval of the IRA.



Is there anything else I 'need to get into my head'?

The only difference between you and I is that I believe the local organisation of the IRA was deeply involved in the killing of Paul Quinn. I fully accept that it wasn't ordered by Bobby Storey or Gerry Adams in Belfast, but it was still organised and carried out by a unit of the IRA. You yourself admit that the members of the IRA carried it out.

I am not saying that it was a cover-up by the governments, that is a silly debating tactic of misrepresentation that you continually use on here. They were given an excuse to ignore it by the mealy-mouthed explanation of the IMC which is deeply shameful of them, not the governments.

atticu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We have known since 2008 that members or former members of the IRA were involved. This is not a secret and certainly not denied by me.

Read the report of the IMC, it is all there.

So, is it your position now that the IRA were involved?

FrancieBrady

atticu wrote: »

So, is it your position now that the IRA were involved?

Jaysus.

The organisation were not involved.

My local FG councillor glassed a guy in the face, a FG member was involved but FG weren't.
Another one was nvolved in extorting money for planning favours - a FG member was involved but FG weren't.

Can I or the IMC be any fecking clearer about this?

If you or anyone else has evidence to the contrary, then present it.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The only difference between you and I is that I believe the local organisation of the IRA was deeply involved in the killing of Paul Quinn. I fully accept that it wasn't ordered by Bobby Storey or Gerry Adams in Belfast, but it was still organised and carried out by a unit of the IRA. You yourself admit that the members of the IRA carried it out.

I am not saying that it was a cover-up by the governments, that is a silly debating tactic of misrepresentation that you continually use on here. They were given an excuse to ignore it by the mealy-mouthed explanation of the IMC which is deeply shameful of them, not the governments.

You are not saying it was a cover-up and then you volte face and say it was in the same sentence. Ignore = cover-up in my book. You abdicate your responsibility by ignoring.

Again, jaysus! the twisting going one is fabulous to behold.

atticu

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jaysus.

The organisation were not involved.

My local FG councillor glassed a guy in the face, a FG member was involved but FG weren't.
Another one was nvolved in extorting money for planning favours - a FG member was involved but FG weren't.

Can I or the IMC be any fecking clearer about this?

If you or anyone else has evidence to the contrary, then present it.

So, now your position is that there was no IRA involvement.

FrancieBrady

atticu wrote: »

So, now your position is that there was no IRA involvement.

Your inability here is your own.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are not saying it was a cover-up and then you volte face and say it was in the same sentence. Ignore = cover-up in my book. You abdicate your responsibility by ignoring.

Again, jaysus! the twisting going one is fabulous to behold.

Again, they were told by the experts in the IMC that there was no IRA involvement, they had no choice but to ignore it.

The fact that neither I nor the dogs in the street nor anyone with a brain believes the IRA were not involved is separate.

JohnnyFlash

I wonder who replaced Bobby Storey on the Army Council? Has it ever had a female member?????

You’d also hope it has at least a few ‘Free Staters’ on it. Not cool that a load of Ballymurphy Butchers are dictating the strategy of the largest opposition party in the Republic. A sobering thought I’m sure everyone can agree.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Again, they were told by the experts in the IMC that there was no IRA involvement, they had no choice but to ignore it.

The fact that neither I nor the dogs in the street nor anyone with a brain believes the IRA were not involved is separate.

Yes, well that is were you, those dogs and I differ.

I need more than an allegation before calling the hangman, you invariably don't with SF. You believe Gerry was in the IRA, ordered murders etc on foot of allegations. You believe that a man raped a woman on foot of an allegation etc.

Whenever you have the evidence to refute what the IMC said and not just a feeling in your water get back to me.

And on that note I will also opt out of this as we are going around in circles. If something new comes up - happy to respond.