FF/FG/Green Government - part 2

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Michael D chickening out of challenging the Bill, you mean. The DPC gave him an opportunity, if he thought there was anything to it, he would have referred it.

Most likely, he thinks, as I do, that the law is more vulnerable to a challenge from someone who gave evidence and believes the anonymity they were promised has been compromised.

He didn't chicken out.
He can only send it to the Supreme Court if he thinks it is unconstitutional, NOT if he thinks it is wrong or bad law.
He made it clear what he was doing, because had he sent it to the SC then nobody would have been able to challenge it.
The President, in as far has he can legally go, has told the government what he thinks of their bad/wrong law.

Nobotty

smurgen wrote: »

800 bodies dumped in a septic tank and you're throwing out insinuations of homophobia. There's no depths that the government supporters won't reach.

Heretics and criminals
#notrealcatholics #notrealchristians

The current pope when he was here described them as Dirt in Spanish

smurgen

Nobotty wrote: »

Heretics and criminals
#notrealcatholics #notrealchristians

The current pope when he was here described them as Dirt in Spanish

For folks that go on about hearing victims voices before the election in reference to the troubles they're now asking victims of state and church abuse to share their own story now in the most cynical way. Absolutely disgusting.

Nobotty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He didn't chicken out.
He can only send it to the Supreme Court if he thinks it is unconstitutional, NOT if he thinks it is wrong or bad law.
He made it clear what he was doing, because had he sent it to the SC then nobody would have been able to challenge it.
The President, in as far has he can legally go, has told the government what he thinks of their bad/wrong law.

He was obviously advised not to send it to the supreme Court because if they ruled it constitutional, a quirk of that ruling is no court could rule on it for anything else
He wanted to leave that door open
Thats why he put out the statement
One of the doors left open is for an individual to ask a court to unlock their story as told for example if they want to

What the fg boys and girls here don't get is,survivors don't want to retell their story again
Thats too traumatic
But they do want journalists,book writers and historians to have access to it,in the same way the account of a court case is
NOW we don't know if any of them will want to do that,I'm not a legal expert but if permission giving is the legal point indeed,that would IMO be a constitutional rights issue for the supreme Court
That door is now open

FrancieBrady

Nobotty wrote: »

He was obviously advised not to send it to the supreme Court because if they ruled it constitutional, a quirk of that ruling is no court could rule on it for anything else
He wanted to leave that door open
Thats why he put out the statement
One of the doors left open is for an individual to ask a court to unlock their story as told for example if they want to

What the fg boys and girls here don't get is,survivors don't want to retell their story again
Thats too traumatic
But they do want journalists,book writers and historians to have access to it,in the same way the account of a court case is
NOW we don't know if any of them will want to do that,I'm not a legal expert but if permission giving is the legal point indeed,that would IMO be a constitutional rights issue for the supreme Court
That door is now open

Yes, contrary to what many suggested during his campaign the President has defied the government and very clearly taken a side here. And he has done it legally.

Fair play to him.

McMurphy

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Jesus, one lad called himself matt Barrett for a time. Same lad wanted rid of O Gorman.

And what about it? Can you go over the same users posting history and pick out one single example of them posting anything which could come within a fanny hair of being able to be described as "homophobic"?

That's pretty low ball Bishop, in fact it's absolutely shameful that you lads are able to throw around such thinly veiled accusations around nilly willy, if it's not the homophobic insinuations it's racist accusations or the xenophobic ones.

It's a farce, and it really shows some of you up for the low levels you're willing to stoop to, personally I think you (tbf, there's a few of you in it) should all be ashamed of yourselves.

FrancieBrady

McMurphy wrote: »

And what about it? Can you go over the same users posting history and pick out one single example of them posting anything which could come within a fanny hair of being able to be described as "homophobic"?

That's pretty low ball Bishop, in fact it's absolutely shameful that you lads are able to throw around such thinly veiled accusations around nilly willy, if it's not the homophobic insinuations it's racist accusations or the xenophobic ones.

It's a farce, and it really shows some of you up for the low levels you're willing to stoop to, personally I think you (tbf, there's a few of you in it) should all be ashamed of yourselves.

I have been accused of it too completely out of the blue by certain high profile posters here.
Despicable carry-on when arguments are weak.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have been accused of it too completely out of the blue by certain high profile posters here.
Despicable carry-on when arguments are weak.

No one here has gotten past my arguments today so far.
The fact that a poster who is clearly anti FG takes Leo's partners name as a user name and then proceeds to lambast both Leo and his party seems strange to me.
Then the same poster starts on here months ago, not just now, but when the govt was formed, a campaign to get rid of O Gorman after his appointment, without rhyme or reason, needs consideration.
Meh to the comments on that lads.
Yiz need to start looking at the politicising of the tragedies involved in the stuff yiz are posting.
If all yiz can do is try to secure political points from that it's not me that needs help I'm afraid.
Try the mirror.

Cluedo Monopoly

And we can all trust Tusla to provide personal data to the mothers and the children...

https://twitter.com/BarbaraMcMahon8/status/1320467082128089093/photo/1

Redact Redact Redact.

That's what this government does to cover up past crimes.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

No one here has gotten past my arguments today so far.
The fact that a poster who is clearly anti FG takes Leo's partners name as a user name and then proceeds to lambast both Leo and his party seems strange to me.
Then the same poster starts on here months ago, not just now, but when the govt was formed, a campaign to get rid of O Gorman after his appointment, without rhyme or reason, needs consideration.
Meh to the comments on that lads.
Yiz need to start looking at the politicising of the tragedies involved in the stuff yiz are posting.
If all yiz can do is try to secure political points from that it's not me that needs help I'm afraid.
Try the mirror.

Turns out O'Gorman seems to out of his depth. Which isn't anything to do with his sexuality. He seems to be just wholly incompetent.

We know you don't like criticism of FG and the government they are a part of, but these are political forums.

smurgen

smurgen wrote: »

For folks that go on about hearing victims voices before the election in reference to the troubles they're now asking victims of state and church abuse to share their own story now in the most cynical way. Absolutely disgusting.

It depends on your definition of a victim. A child given up willingly, wishes to contact its birth mother. The mother doesn’t want any contact. Who is the victim?

Cluedo Monopoly

The optics for this are really really bad for FF/FG and indeed the stupid Greens. It looks like they have so much to hide. I guess history will not reflect well on these 2 power parties.

The mothers and babies who want access to their personal data should be allowed to get it. Simple as that. If either side is alive and they want to initiate/have contact, then it's up to them.

Cluedo Monopoly

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

The optics for this are really really bad for FF/FG and indeed the stupid Greens. It looks like they have so much to hide. I guess history will not reflect well on these 2 power parties.

The mothers and babies who want access to their personal data should be allowed to get it. Simple as that. If either side is alive and they want to initiate/have contact, then it's up to them.

There’s nothing stopping them! That’s NOT the issue!

dundalkfc10

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Turns out O'Gorman seems to out of his depth. Which isn't anything to do with his sexuality. He seems to be just wholly incompetent.

We know you don't like criticism of FG and the government they are a part of, but these are political forums.

Watch out or you may be accused basing your opinion because of his sexuality,

smurgen

Deleted User wrote: »

There’s nothing stopping them! That’s NOT the issue!

Educate yourself.

https://twitter.com/RTEBrainstorm/status/1234405958773854209?s=19

smurgen

smurgen wrote: »

Educate yourself.

https://twitter.com/RTEBrainstorm/status/1234405958773854209?s=19

You, too. https://www.thejournal.ie/mother-and-baby-home-records-5242858-Oct2020/

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Michael D chickening out of challenging the Bill, you mean. The DPC gave him an opportunity, if he thought there was anything to it, he would have referred it.

Most likely, he thinks, as I do, that the law is more vulnerable to a challenge from someone who gave evidence and believes the anonymity they were promised has been compromised.

So anyone questioning it is an 'empty vessel' and Michel D. is a chicken for not challenging it? And then you say he's likely in agreement with you? You're all over the shop.

Bishop of hope wrote: »

A puppet leprechaun of a president.
I had to pull the trigger but it wasn't my gun type excuse.
Actually not an honourable statement to make.
But now, over to the whingers, go to court!

Do you mean victims and their public representatives? #notanormalparty

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

If there is one person only even, and that's unlikely, there are hundreds I believe, that doesn't want their story or name made public then they have been protected.
Meanwhile anyone that wants their story heard have avenues open to them to do so too.
The report will be fully public, just no names attached.
Why don't SF or other interested groups set up their own report and outline the stories of the people who want them made public?

So we don't know.
The point is there are those that do and we are capable of tackling it on a case by case. Also we could make information available to those not affiliated to those who gave evidence. It's a cover up, quite plainly.

Bowie

Bowie wrote: »

So we don't know.
The point is there are those that do and we are capable of tackling it on a case by case. Also we could make information available to those not affiliated to those who gave evidence. It's a cover up, quite plainly.

What, exactly, has been covered up?

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Jesus, one lad called himself matt Barrett for a time. Same lad wanted rid of O Gorman.

Can you quote that? I believe you are incorrect or lying.
Once again using the man's sexuality as ammunition in a political debate. Homophobic and shameful carry on. All the while making light of the Mother and babies home scandal.

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

No one here has gotten past my arguments today so far.
The fact that a poster who is clearly anti FG takes Leo's partners name as a user name and then proceeds to lambast both Leo and his party seems strange to me.
Then the same poster starts on here months ago, not just now, but when the govt was formed, a campaign to get rid of O Gorman after his appointment, without rhyme or reason, needs consideration.
Meh to the comments on that lads.
Yiz need to start looking at the politicising of the tragedies involved in the stuff yiz are posting.
If all yiz can do is try to secure political points from that it's not me that needs help I'm afraid.
Try the mirror.

You are judging people by the standards of yourself and your fellow travelers. That's partly why you laugh off any concern for the victims of the Mother and baby homes I imagine.
You are lying. Quote this campaign.
Using Varadkar's sexuality because a discussion isn't going your way smacks of ignorance and a complete lack of civility IMO.
The quality of 'argument' was never great from you FG folk but over the last several months it has gotten downright gutter level.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

What, exactly, has been covered up?

Ask me in 30 years. I believe details on the states involvement in allowing and assisting elements of the church to treat people criminally. Steal babies and treat mothers as criminals, which we know happened.

Nobotty

Bowie wrote: »

So we don't know.
The point is there are those that do and we are capable of tackling it on a case by case. Also we could make information available to those not affiliated to those who gave evidence. It's a cover up, quite plainly.

I don’t think its a cover up unless the few heretics still with a bit of influence within the Catholic Church lobbied for this.

I think its more likely no one in this government thought of what victims might think.

Thats a huge disconnect and almighty incompetence effectively handing an open goal to their opposition

It wouldn't have happened at all if they only talked to the MOST IMPORTANT interested party to the legislation, the victims
Its crazy amateur hour stuff
Youd have to ask the question that if this is the poor level of detail this government has bothered with here,then in how many other areas that we currently aren't yet aware of,are they also performing in competently or thoughtlessly

Bowie

Bowie wrote: »

Ask me in 30 years. I believe details on the states involvement in allowing and assisting elements of the church to treat people criminally. Steal babies and treat mothers as criminals, which we know happened.

Soooo... You’re talking nonsense. Ok. Thought as much.

What is actually sealed is the evidence given by people who were guaranteed anonymity.

James Brown

Nobotty wrote: »

I don’t think its a cover up unless the few heretics still with a bit of influence within the Catholic Church lobbied for this.

I think its more likely no one in this government thought of what victims might think.

Thats a huge disconnect and almighty incompetence effectively handing an open goal to their opposition

It wouldn't have happened at all if they only talked to the MOST IMPORTANT interested party to the legislation, the victims
Its crazy amateur hour stuff
Youd have to ask the question that if this is the poor level of detail this government has bothered with here,then in how many other areas that we currently aren't yet aware of,are they also performing in competently or thoughtlessly

It's about the FF/FG reputation. They want to wait until there's so much distance they can give it the FF 'That was then' ****e.
There comes a point when 'incompetence' becomes too worn as an excuse. If we believed FF/FG were as incompetent as they seem they wouldn't be able to tie their shoes. Handy enough to take some heat if you can get away with being complicit in baby stealing and selling.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

Soooo... You’re talking nonsense. Ok. Thought as much.

What is actually sealed is the evidence given by people who were guaranteed anonymity.

What nonsense? I don't know the details in the reports, isn't that the point? So please elaborate, what nonsense?

McMurphy

Leo was chosen to lead Fine Gael over Coveney, despite Coveney receiving more than double the amount of votes Leo did within the party.

At the time, FG kept reminding us that Leo was the gay son of an immigrant, and was mixed race, one can only assume as some kind of effort to prove how far they have come as a party, and (rightly so) your sexuality or race should hold no-one back in life.

Now so, if someone points out some flaw, or some brain fart Leo's after coming up with - its become way too regular, and far too quick to pull out "racist" or "homophobic" cards.

It would seem to me that the FG brethren are the ones who are actually using Varadkars race, and his sexuality to promote how progressive they apparently are, and will constantly revert to it to try and stem any criticism of Leo, no matter what the reason, it's what they do and have been doing for a while now.

Its the same with others, critical of Roderic will bring his sexuality into it, and bringing up Harris' past as a perfectly valid reason for his unsuitability for the job he was given will have you labelled as "sectarian", "racist" or "xenophobic" FFS.

It needs called out, I don't know if feedback is the place to do it, but valid racist accusations, ditto homophobic, sectarian etc are in danger of being lost in the fog among all the spurious ones.

The people who are at it are pretty low tbh, I had typed out a rather colourful description of what I actually thought of them, but forced myself to delete it before hitting "submit" because ironically enough, had I air my thoughts on it, it would most likely be me that got sanctioned.

Ten of Swords

dundalkfc10 one week forum ban for ignoring threadban

Cluedo Monopoly

smurgen wrote: »

Educate yourself.

https://twitter.com/RTEBrainstorm/status/1234405958773854209?s=19

Fair play to that lady. Interesting video.
Despite the numerous reports the governments of the last 2 decades have been protecting the Roman church and their own legacy.

The young generation mighy finally get to the bottom of Ireland's disturbing past and give justice to the victims.

Not telling a mother whether her child is alive or dead is a crime.

Cluedo Monopoly

smurgen wrote: »

Educate yourself.

https://twitter.com/RTEBrainstorm/status/1234405958773854209?s=19

The article link is here

https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2019/0503/1047282-10-ways-institutional-abuse-details-are-still-being-kept-secret/

The State’s ever-expanding censorship of testamentary and archival evidence is unlikely to fully survive future litigation. Putting survivors through the intense stress and delays of litigating for access to basic information will be yet another incalculable failure on all of our part.