Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

Options
1…184185187189190…334

Comments

  • Options
    #5582
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,964 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    grayzer75 wrote: »
    It's just another DUP deflection because they are under the spotlight themselves:

    https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/weeks-vast-secretive-donation-dup-vote-leave-chief-noted-dup-ability-spend-ps700k-2933146

    That is definitely old news. It describes the £435,000 received by the DUP as the biggest donation in Northern Ireland. However, that is dwarfed by the £4m that Sinn Fein got from the weird old man.


  • Options
    #5583
    grayzer75
    Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    blanch152 wrote: »
    That is definitely old news. It describes the £435,000 received by the DUP as the biggest donation in Northern Ireland. However, that is dwarfed by the £4m that Sinn Fein got from the weird old man.

    But it hasn't gone away, the new book by Peter Geoghegan's new book has thrown it straight back into the spotlight as many questions still remain unanswered.

    Fair play to that auld boy for leaving SF £4m.


  • Options
    #5584
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    That is definitely old news. It describes the £435,000 received by the DUP as the biggest donation in Northern Ireland. However, that is dwarfed by the £4m that Sinn Fein got from the weird old man.

    August 2020 is 'old news'? :):)


  • Options
    #5585
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Definitely agree with this. However, do you think that SInn Fein have a major issue, and why do you thing they are paying for things out of different accounts but are careful enough to have donations only going into NI accounts.

    Well Mary Lou when questioned on this, challenged anyone who wanted to have a look and make an accusation to go ahead. Everything was done to the letter of the law.

    I agree with the Business Post, there is not a hope in hell any of them are telling the whole truth about finances. They may be within the law though.


  • Options
    #5586
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Well Mary Lou when questioned on this, challenged anyone who wanted to have a look and make an accusation to go ahead. Everything was done to the letter of the law.

    I agree with the Business Post, there is not a hope in hell any of them are telling the whole truth about finances. They may be within the law though.

    So you are admitting that Mary Lou is lying about the legitimacy of the 4m lodgment?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5587
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,273 ✭✭✭jh79


    joeguevara wrote: »
    The Mi5 is a weird one. DK is one of record as is the boxing company. Very little said about it.

    The Mi5 rumor is lifted straight from a plotline from The Wire. DK is protected by Mi5 because he has contacts in Afghanistan and might have info on the Taliban.


  • Options
    #5588
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blanch152 wrote: »
    That is definitely old news. It describes the £435,000 received by the DUP as the biggest donation in Northern Ireland. However, that is dwarfed by the £4m that Sinn Fein got from the weird old man.

    That's lovely.


  • Options
    #5589
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,273 ✭✭✭jh79


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Well i mean,we had some conspiracy flying about kinihans and mi5 aswell the other day....guess anything goes?

    The Hutch side are also claiming the will money actually came from DK. His father is being done for passport fraud. He exploited vulnerable men to get passports.

    https://www.thesun.ie/news/5983105/christy-kinahan-homeless-man-world-fake-passport/


  • Options
    #5590
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    jh79 wrote: »
    The Mi5 rumor is lifted straight from a plotline from The Wire. DK is protected by Mi5 because he has contacts in Afghanistan and might have info on the Taliban.

    DK is a client of a SF MP. Why try to go rogue with strange postings to try and stop an actual issue being discussed.

    Again, this is raised after a question asked about MLM and SF FInances. Strange, seems to be from some sort of policy on how to get something ot.


  • Options
    #5591
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    jh79 wrote: »
    The Hutch side are also claiming the will money actually came from DK. His father is being done for passport fraud. He exploited vulnerable men to get passports.

    https://www.thesun.ie/news/5983105/christy-kinahan-homeless-man-world-fake-passport/

    Its not really appropriate to raise rumours from a scumbag family about another person (alleged background or not).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5592
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    joeguevara wrote: »
    So you are admitting that Mary Lou is lying about the legitimacy of the 4m lodgment?

    No. I take the word of SIPO. This was 100% within the laws of both jurisdictions.


  • Options
    #5593
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No. I take the word of SIPO. This was 100% within the laws of both jurisdictions.

    You said that you don't believe anyone is telling the truth. Ipso facto, MLM according to yourself is lying about the 4m. Just give an opinion Francie, its what a discussion board is for.


  • Options
    #5594
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,964 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No. I take the word of SIPO. This was 100% within the laws of both jurisdictions.

    When did SIPO get jurisdiction over the UK?


  • Options
    #5595
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,512 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    joeguevara wrote: »
    You said that you don't believe anyone is telling the truth. Ipso facto, MLM according to yourself is lying about the 4m. Just give an opinion Francie, its what a discussion board is for.

    Very murky stuff there, any chance the Village will delve into that stuff.


    Two chances, in this posters opinion.


  • Options
    #5596
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    joeguevara wrote: »
    You said that you don't believe anyone is telling the truth. Ipso facto, MLM according to yourself is lying about the 4m. Just give an opinion Francie, its what a discussion board is for.

    Feck me Joe. You seem to have a problem with reading. Here is what I said.
    I agree with the Business Post, there is not a hope in hell any of them are telling the whole truth about finances.

    SIPO have found no issue with the 4m donation in relation to the laws as they currently stand.
    Therefore on that, Mary Lou seems to be telling the truth. They have done nothing illegal.

    I did, as blanch pointed out, claim the UK standards agency had no issue with it either, but I cannot back that up and withdraw it. They haven't as yet taken any action on it.

    That all said, I don't think any of them are 100% honest about their finances. Creative accountancy possibly.


  • Options
    #5597
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,273 ✭✭✭jh79


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Its not really appropriate to raise rumours from a scumbag family about another person (alleged background or not).

    In my opinion as long as SF defend the likes of "Slab" and have MLAs that have personal relationships with people the likes of "One Shot" then all links to criminality no matter how tenuous are fair game. (Unless a mod says otherwise).


  • Options
    #5598
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,964 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Feck me Joe. You seem to have a problem with reading. Here is what I said.



    SIPO have found no issue with the 4m donation in relation to the laws as they currently stand.
    Therefore on that, Mary Lou seems to be telling the truth. They have done nothing illegal.

    I did, as blanch pointed out, claim the UK standards agency had no issue with it either, but I cannot back that up and withdraw it. They haven't as yet taken any action on it.

    That all said, I don't think any of them are 100% honest about their finances. Creative accountancy possibly.

    There may also be an issue with the execution of the will, if there is an interested party to challenge it.


  • Options
    #5599
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Feck me Joe. You seem to have a problem with reading. Here is what I said.



    SIPO have found no issue with the 4m donation in relation to the laws as they currently stand.
    Therefore on that, Mary Lou seems to be telling the truth. They have done nothing illegal.

    I did, as blanch pointed out, claim the UK standards agency had no issue with it either, but I cannot back that up and withdraw it. They haven't as yet taken any action on it.

    That all said, I don't think any of them are 100% honest about their finances. Creative accountancy possibly.

    You said that none of them are telling the whole truth but now you are saying that MLM is telling the truth based on an initial review by SIPO who have no jurisdiction over a UK lodgment and therefore cant really say anything,.

    It appears that you have a problem reading what I am saying. You said thaey are not telling the truth, so therefore you are saying that MLM is lying. Its pretty simple reading comprehension. You said this, not me.


  • Options
    #5600
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    jh79 wrote: »
    In my opinion as long as SF defend the likes of "Slab" and have MLAs that have personal relationships with people the likes of "One Shot" then all links to criminality no matter how tenuous are fair game. (Unless a mod says otherwise).

    It is too easy to drag a discussion off course if based on rumours. If stick to facts, it can have the same desired outcome. Obviously, not saying you cant say what you want.


  • Options
    #5601
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,512 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Feck me Joe. You seem to have a problem with reading. Here is what I said.



    SIPO have found no issue with the 4m donation in relation to the laws as they currently stand.
    Therefore on that, Mary Lou seems to be telling the truth. They have done nothing illegal.

    I did, as blanch pointed out, claim the UK standards agency had no issue with it either, but I cannot back that up and withdraw it. They haven't as yet taken any action on it.

    That all said, I don't think any of them are 100% honest about their finances. Creative accountancy possibly.

    Hmmm.....lot of ifs,buts and maybes there.....what’s it called..... leaving the door open, I think.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5602
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,964 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Brendan Bendar wrote: »
    Hmmm.....lot of ifs,buts and maybes there.....what’s it called..... leaving the door open, I think.

    Interesting isn't it, Seamus Woulfe did not break the law but he should resign and/or be impeached. SF may or may not have broken the law, certainly engaged in some dodgy financial shenanigans moving money between jurisdictions, but there is nothing to see.


  • Options
    #5603
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Brendan Bendar wrote: »
    Hmmm.....lot of ifs,buts and maybes there.....what’s it called..... leaving the door open, I think.

    Yes Brendan.

    I am not one of the cohort who think that an 'allegation' or a 'feeling in my water' is enough to convict.

    And as to the 'withdraw' remark...never afraid to admit I may have been wrong about something.


  • Options
    #5604
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Interesting isn't it, Seamus Woulfe did not break the law but he should resign and/or be impeached. SF may or may not have broken the law, certainly engaged in some dodgy financial shenanigans moving money between jurisdictions, but there is nothing to see.

    Never asked for Woulfe's resignation blanch and never said 'nothing to see here' either. In fact, quite the opposite, I said 'maybe it is time to look at all party's and how they finance themselves as Business Post journalists are also proposing.

    Misrepresenting again?


  • Options
    #5605
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Never asked for Woulfe's resignation blanch and never said 'nothing to see here' either. In fact, quite the opposite, I said 'maybe it is time to look at all party's and how they finance themselves as Business Post journalists are also proposing.

    Misrepresenting again?

    How do you think SF would fare in such an exercise? Who do you think would be in the firing line if there is creative accounting?


  • Options
    #5606
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    joeguevara wrote: »
    How do you think SF would fare in such an exercise? Who do you think would be in the firing line if there is creative accounting?

    No idea to the first part and whoever is responsible for the second.


  • Options
    #5607
    grayzer75
    Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Interesting isn't it, Seamus Woulfe did not break the law but he should resign and/or be impeached. SF may or may not have broken the law, certainly engaged in some dodgy financial shenanigans moving money between jurisdictions, but there is nothing to see.

    The financial shenanigans are no worse than that of Denis O'Brien, Dermot Desmond, Michael Smurfit, JP McManus, Larry Goodman or that Dutch band U2. If they can do it 'legally' then so can SF or anybody else. Although the only time you cry about it is when it's not a FFG backer doing it.


  • Options
    #5608
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No idea to the first part and whoever is responsible for the second.

    Do you see an issue with lodging money to the north to evade republic rules but paying for events from an Irish account?


  • Options
    #5609
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 8,074 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    grayzer75 wrote: »
    The financial shenanigans are no worse than that of Denis O'Brien, Dermot Desmond, Michael Smurfit, JP McManus, Larry Goodman or that Dutch band U2. If they can do it 'legally' then so can SF or anybody else. Although the only time you cry about it is when it's not a FFG backer doing it.

    Is Denis O'Brien, Dermot Desmond, Michael Smurfit, JP McManus, Larry Goodman or that Dutch band U2 in the thread title?


    ALl of the above has on this thread, being called crooks and said they should all be in jail. So, is that what should happen with SF now?


  • Options
    #5610
    grayzer75
    Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Is Denis O'Brien, Dermot Desmond, Michael Smurfit, JP McManus, Larry Goodman or that Dutch band U2 in the thread title?


    ALl of the above has on this thread, being called crooks and said they should all be in jail. So, is that what should happen with SF now?

    Sorry for using those names as a direct comparison to what SF are doing Mr Moderator...........


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5611
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 69,018 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Do you see an issue with lodging money to the north to evade republic rules but paying for events from an Irish account?

    Not for an all island party. They didn't impose partition, and as I said before, there is no republican I know that would allow partition to disadvantage them. Within the law of course.
    If there were rules broken in paying for stuff from the wrong account, then they should pay whatever penalty there is for that.

    Not sure what the interrogation is about here Joe.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement