The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

The interview is getting a right panning on Twitter from all quarters (apart from the SF bots).

MLMD had a mare of an interview. Waffling away and not answering the questions put to her.

Welcome to Senior Hurling!

Which question dis she not answer?

As to getting a panning...to be expected from those who don't want to face our divided past with honesty.

I think she was brilliant and resolute on that. The conversation that needs to be had again.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which question dis she not answer?

As to getting a panning...to be expected from those who don't want to face our divided past with honesty.

I think she was brilliant and resolute on that. The conversation that needs to be had again.

I don't accept there is a divided history. There are people who want to paint terrorism in some hallowed light, but no decent person buys that.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Thank you for posting another clear example of Sinn Fein online bullying.

Your minor pedantic point of whether he was a "friend" or a "neighbour" gets lost in the context of what was said and done online to her - including on here.

Blows your nonsense out of the water though blanch. He WAS a friend even up to the point she named him...something she feared losing HIS FRIENDSHIP over.
One would have thought the friendship would have been gone if he was abusive or threatening. Embarrassed a bit for you on that.

I condemned anyone who was abusive on Twitter before...from any party position. Any there is plenty of that on social media.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't accept there is a divided history. There are people who want to paint terrorism in some hallowed light, but no decent person buys that.

:D:D:D

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As to getting a panning...to be expected from those who don't want to face our divided past with honesty.

You mean people who want to swallow the SF line of revisionist history?

Even Diarmuid Ferriter who would be very sympathetic to Republican causes called bull**** on that many times.

The modern-day version of history by SF is bull$hit. SF is like a cult, trying to spread their version of the truth to all would-be believers. Just leave your brain at the door.

Bonniedog

I have little sympathy with the little woke persons who were happy enough to go along with the Shinners intimidating members of long standing who were opposed to the denial of a debate or free vote as in other parties on abortion. Some of the same twittering enragés were tweeting about Toibín and others in similar way three years ago. Sauce for the goose, etc, etc..

They might also thank themselves lucky not to have suffered the fate of former members who were forced out of their homes in Belfast and elsewhere because they were opposed to becoming part of Stormont Executive. Not only that but were then accused totally wrongly and with severe implications for them, of supporting one or other of the micro would be armed groups.

Family in Derry who had been about for generations had their house smashed up by Shinner scum who hit a 6 year old girl with a baseball bat. Family supported ceasefire but not what followed.

So, suck it up newbies.

grayzer75

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't accept there is a divided history. There are people who want to paint terrorism in some hallowed light, but no decent person buys that.

Of course there is divided history, just very recently some of you people wanted to commemorate the Tans and everybody else didn't because they are despised by most.

Sir Oxman

Bonniedog wrote: »

Francie, as a Shinner, do you agree with your TDs being forced to make grovelling apologies for stating the bloody obvious about transgender athletes?

Pathetic to see someone - who i wouldn't vote for in a blue fit but who was democratically elected unlike anyone from Transgender Equality Network - being humiliated over stating that truth?

Of course, this extends across every party represented in the Dail. Every single one.
It's cowardice of the highest order bowing down to piles on in real life or the virtual space anyone who dares raise a viewpoint which is not 100% compliant with the theory.

Ironically, this extends to heroine of the hour and free speech proponent ex-SF member & ex-UCD SF office holder Christine who boasted of cutting off all contact with a cousin of hers (via Twitter of course) - who knows how she conducted herself against that person in real life with real consequences - for daring to voice the exact same opinion that ya know, maybe there's something to discuss on the subject of women's sports vs identity theory.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

You mean people who want to swallow the SF line of revisionist history?

Even Diarmuid Ferriter who would be very sympathetic to Republican causes called bull**** on that many times.

The modern-day version of history by SF is bull$hit. SF is like a cult, trying to spread their version of the truth to all would-be believers. Just leave your brain at the door.

Diarmuid, who's interview yesterday I heard, said very clearly, that all parties are trying to write history from their perspective. And he also said the day is coming when all are going to have to arrive at a narrative everybody can live with.

I totally agree and I am delighted MLMD is not going to shy away from that conversation TBH. As I said before, I hoped Stanley would not reverse away from his Kilmichael/Narrow Water comments. The 'conversation' that needs to be had.
Delighted too that Arlene is getting involved, because this needs to be addressed ahead of a UI conversation. That way we can arrive at an accommodation for Unionist views too. No leaning over backwards to appease triumphalism from that quarter for the sake of appeasement, but finding a place where they can also commemorate and even celebrate their past. Inclusive, not exclusive.

Nobotty

Arlene has no interest in a UI
Her one purpose is to smash sinn féin
She won't be getting into any conversation

IRISHSPORTSGUY

markodaly wrote: »

I said it before and Ill say it again, SF supporters by and large are Irelands answer to Trump MAGA wearing supporters.

All the crying about 'mainstream media bias' is just an attempt to shut down any debate.

Make a Venn Diagram about the traits of MAGAists/Brexiteers/Shinners and you'll end up with a solitary circle.

Danzy

Whatever one's position on the war in the North or SF, woke people are a problem for everyone.

The whole point of it is to fall out with people and present that as you being defiant in the face of great wrong, context is irrelevant.

It's an outlook for narcissistic personality types.

Avoid people like that for working with, friends with etc.

SF have really pushed a lot of these loopers to the fore and it will damage them long-term.

They haven't the manner in the door, they have too many hand ups in dealing with people and too many of them are always looking for the big scene stand.

When SF are in office and comprising is on the cards, they'll largely walk away from the party.

Long way from being chased by the special branch in the 90s for canvassing, knowing you'd get a beating if caught to people leaving over tweets from years ago.

What ever your politics these types will be a problem.

Danzy

Whatever one's position on the war in the North or SF, woke people are a problem for everyone.

The whole point of it is to fall out with people and present that as you being defiant in the face of great wrong, context is irrelevant.

It's an outlook for narcissistic personality types.

Avoid people like that for working with, friends with etc.

SF have really pushed a lot of these loopers to the fore and it will damage them long-term.

They haven't the manner in the door, they have too many hand ups in dealing with people and too many of them are always looking for the big scene stand.

When SF are in office and comprising is on the cards, they'll largely walk away from the party.

Long way from being chased by the special branch in the 90s for canvassing, knowing you'd get a beating if caught to people leaving over tweets from years ago.

What ever your politics these types will be a problem.

Solutionking

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here she is talking about how 'naming him' would probably ruin her 'friendship' with him.


Her words not mine. And no mention of 'intimidation'. In fact her main concern is for her parents being involved and trying to isolate in a pandemic.

You are the one looking a bit desperate in your portrayal of this. Do what I try to do in all of these situations...stick to the known facts.



https://twitter.com/christineomg5/status/1334967574828879872

It really is disgusting the lies you will tell to protect SF. You are insulting this poor lady just because she spoke out against SF.

landofthetree

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

All the crying about 'mainstream media bias' is just an attempt to shut down any debate.

Make a Venn Diagram about the traits of MAGAists/Brexiteers/Shinners and you'll end up with a solitary circle.

Trumps view on trade is the same as SF. They both hate free trade.

FrancieBrady

Nobotty wrote: »

Arlene has no interest in a UI
Her one purpose is to smash sinn féin
She won't be getting into any conversation

Michale Martin is keen to have a conversation with her about State collusion with the IRA. Fair play I say, time it was all in the open.

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Blows your nonsense out of the water though blanch. He WAS a friend even up to the point she named him...something she feared losing HIS FRIENDSHIP over.
One would have thought the friendship would have been gone if he was abusive or threatening. Embarrassed a bit for you on that.

I condemned anyone who was abusive on Twitter before...from any party position. Any there is plenty of that on social media.

Nice " Friends " by the sound of it.

Are you needing a shovel?

FrancieBrady

Solutionking wrote: »

It really is disgusting the lies you will tell to protect SF.

What lie? It's all there in her own words...he was a friend and she hoped naming him wouldn't 'ruin' that friendship.

Doesn't sound to me like she had just been intimidated, threatened or bullied by a 'heavy'.

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Nice " Friends " by the sound of it.

Are you needing a shovel?

He's her friend...not mine. Are you abusing her for her choice of friends?

Solutionking

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Blows your nonsense out of the water though blanch. He WAS a friend even up to the point she named him...something she feared losing HIS FRIENDSHIP over.
One would have thought the friendship would have been gone if he was abusive or threatening. Embarrassed a bit for you on that.

I condemned anyone who was abusive on Twitter before...from any party position. Any there is plenty of that on social media.

"Clearly your brain is not living in the Real World but carry on"
That was part of the Tweet he sent her. Not sure what goes on in SF but in the Real World that is no friend.
Yes you are embarrassing yourself as usual. Quit with the lies

FrancieBrady

Solutionking wrote: »

"Clearly your brain is not living in the Real World but carry on"
That was part of the Tweet he sent her. Not sure what goes on in SF but in the Real World that is no friend.
Yes you are embarrassing yourself as usual. Quit with the lies

What?

Solutionking

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What lie? It's all there in her own words...he was a friend and she hoped naming him wouldn't 'ruin' that friendship.

Doesn't sound to me like she had just been intimidated, threatened or bullied by a 'heavy'.

Yes whatever.

FrancieBrady

Solutionking wrote: »

Yes whatever.

Good, glad to see you had a re-read and realised your boo boo.

Hubertj

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Diarmuid, who's interview yesterday I heard, said very clearly, that all parties are trying to write history from their perspective. And he also said the day is coming when all are going to have to arrive at a narrative everybody can live with.

I totally agree and I am delighted MLMD is not going to shy away from that conversation TBH. As I said before, I hoped Stanley would not reverse away from his Kilmichael/Narrow Water comments. The 'conversation' that needs to be had.
Delighted too that Arlene is getting involved, because this needs to be addressed ahead of a UI conversation. That way we can arrive at an accommodation for Unionist views too. No leaning over backwards to appease triumphalism from that quarter for the sake of appeasement, but finding a place where they can also commemorate and even celebrate their past. Inclusive, not exclusive.

I don’t think the perspective on history of a terrorist organisation stands up to scrutiny. The fact that supporters of murdering terrorists defend theor actions tells a lot about their character, or lack of. You can throw all the whataboutery you want but the IRA was and is a terrorist organisation. SF defends the killing of innocent women and children. Mad stuff altogether.

FrancieBrady

Hubertj wrote: »

I don’t think the perspective on history of a terrorist organisation stands up to scrutiny. The fact that supporters of murdering terrorists defend theor actions tells a lot about their character, or lack of. You can throw all the whataboutery you want but the IRA was and is a terrorist organisation. SF defends the killing of innocent women and children. Mad stuff altogether.

Join the conversation...your voice is as valid as anyone else's.

By the way, I thought Mary Lou's comment about car bombs was really really welcome and honest. The mythical white bearded men in the Hills of Antrim will be coming down from the mountains to depose her shortly if a few posters around here are to be believed.

jm08

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Wow.

She is having to defend a lot of stuff here.

Not a good look.

Someone turned up at this girls door and told her not to criticise SF.

Indefensible.

The facts are:


1. She was an office holder in Ogra Sinn Fein.

2. She received messages from other members of Ógra Sinn Féin stating that a cornerstone of the functioning of the party was to have discussions that were kept internal and that adhered to the principles of “democratic centralism”.
3. She was told that “going after” the party would only serve Sinn Féin detractors. She was also told that both senior and junior members of the party had raised concerns about social media posts in recent days. She was told “sensitive matters” must be kept internal and online messages, which contradicted this, would have to be taken down.
4. “He came to my house and I was upstairs in the middle of a lecture,” she said. Her parents answered the door and she said he told her parents “that he got a phone call from head office about my tweet and I can’t be criticising the party especially as a member and a PRO [public relations officer], I can’t be criticising the party online. He wanted me to delete my tweets immediately and contact him.”


Her reaction:



“But this is my platform. I can write about what I want. You can’t censor me just because I am criticising the party.“


Being an office holder in any organisation isn't for her I think.

Kraftwerk

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What lie? It's all there in her own words...he was a friend and she hoped naming him wouldn't 'ruin' that friendship.

Doesn't sound to me like she had just been intimidated, threatened or bullied by a 'heavy'.

Her words were "a senior member of SF called to the house. He said he got a phone call from head office and that she needs to remove the posts. It was inappropriate".

But because he was a neighbour she was friendly with you're claiming there was no SF pressure, head office made no call, he acted on his own as a friend and she didn't feel pressured or intimated? Even though this visit to her house caused her to leave the party?

And even though SF have apologised to her and a SF spokes person has said that Stanley made colossal errors of judgement that resulted in causing a lot of hurt you refuse to accept that any of this is true and no judgement can be made on Stanley until he makes a statement.

You're living in a different dimension Francie. The ironic thing is that your antics here trying to defend SF to the last is making shinners look like bigger fools than ever before. The smart ones have apologised and said inappropriate tweets and behaviour is not acceptable. While you (a floating voter) have dedicated your life to defending the indefensible.

I hope you're getting well paid because if you're not it's the most pathetic thing I think I've ever witnessed.

FrancieBrady

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Her words were "a senior member of SF called to the house. He said he got a phone call from head office and that she needs to remove the posts. It was inappropriate".

But because he was a neighbour she was friendly with you're claiming there was no SF pressure, head office made no call, he acted on his own as a friend and she didn't feel pressured or intimated? Even though this visit to her house caused her to leave the party?

And even though SF have apologised to her and a SF spokes person has said that Stanley made colossal errors of judgement that resulted in causing a lot of hurt you refuse to accept that any of this is true and no judgement can be made on Stanley until he makes a statement.

You're living in a different dimension Francie. The ironic thing is that your antics here trying to defend SF to the last is making shinners look like bigger fools than ever before. The smart ones have apologised and said inappropriate tweets and behaviour is not acceptable. While you (a floating voter) have dedicated your life to defending the indefensible.

I hope you're getting well paid because if you're not it's the most pathetic thing I think I've ever witnessed.

I have said Stanley's tweet on Kilmichael/Narrow Water was insensitive and he was right to apologise for that. Triumphalism is wrong.

There was no 'intimidation' or 'heavy's' at her door is what I am claiming. But a friend, who left the house STILL a friend.

I fully respect her right to think it was wrong that he came to the house, but as others have pointed out, she doesn't seem to understand what being a member of an organisation is. That's a different issue.

jm08

landofthetree wrote: »

Trumps view on trade is the same as SF. They both hate free trade.

There is no such thing as 'free' trade.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

The facts are:


1. She was an office holder in Ogra Sinn Fein.

2. She received messages from other members of Ógra Sinn Féin stating that a cornerstone of the functioning of the party was to have discussions that were kept internal and that adhered to the principles of “democratic centralism”.
3. She was told that “going after” the party would only serve Sinn Féin detractors. She was also told that both senior and junior members of the party had raised concerns about social media posts in recent days. She was told “sensitive matters” must be kept internal and online messages, which contradicted this, would have to be taken down.
4. “He came to my house and I was upstairs in the middle of a lecture,” she said. Her parents answered the door and she said he told her parents “that he got a phone call from head office about my tweet and I can’t be criticising the party especially as a member and a PRO [public relations officer], I can’t be criticising the party online. He wanted me to delete my tweets immediately and contact him.”


Her reaction:



“But this is my platform. I can write about what I want. You can’t censor me just because I am criticising the party.“


Being an office holder in any organisation isn't for her I think.

Shoot the whistleblower time again.

I don't know of any other organisation that polices its members in that way. I know that for many Sinn Fein members this is hard to understand because it is what they are used to, but no normal voluntary organisation behaves like that.