The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 3) Mod Notes and Threadbanned List in OP

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

No, you didn’t “quote” anything. You attempted to downplay the situation by claiming that ALL members had access to the Abu system.

Sometimes telling the truth is easier than defending a lie.

???

If you say 'members had access', without defining it with 'some', what are we to assume SS?

No even sure at this point what I am being accused of.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

???

If you say 'members had access', without defining it with 'some', what are we to assume SS?

No even sure at this point what I am being accused of.

You defined it as ALL to deliberately downplay the story.

I can say members of Sinn Fein are convicted murderers, criminals and child sex abusers.

However it would be wrong to state that ALL Sinn Fein members are murderers, criminals and child sex abusers. See how it works Francie?

And it would make me look foolish in the extreme to continue defending my use of ALL after it had been pointed out that this was not the case.

FrancieBrady

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Would you be able to check if B. Bendar on it Francie?

Just asking... don’t worry if you haven’t access.

Had a look, says:

B. Bendar - he mightn't like it now, but he'll learn to love it later.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You defined it as ALL to deliberately downplay the story.

I can say members of Sinn Fein are convicted murderers, criminals and child sex abusers.

However it would be wrong to state that ALL Sinn Fein members are murderers, criminals and child sex abusers. See how it works Francie?

And it would make me look foolish in the extreme to continue defending my use of ALL after it had been pointed out that this was not the case.

What are you basing 'not all members had access' on?

I genuinely took the article to mean all members had access. If you have fact to contest that...fire away with your source, no skin of my nose.

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Would you be able to check if B. Bendar on it Francie?

Just asking... don’t worry if you haven’t access.

Fired in my own request 2 weeks ago, Brendan.

Still no response from SF HQ. Not even an acknowledgment they received the email. Could be inundated with requests to be fair. You’d imagine some of those 200 employees could lend a hand to speed up the process.

The biggest problem,SF have here with Independent newspapers(or any in fact) is not their readership or those that still buy papers
Its that their search light headlines are impossible to miss on the shelf's of every corner shop and apple green in the land
Thats why they're so mad

Marine Layer

Marine Layer wrote: »

The biggest problem,SF have here with Independent newspapers(or any in fact) is not their readership or those that still buy papers
Its that their search light headlines are impossible to miss on the shelf's of every corner shop and apple green in the land
Thats why they're so mad

They really are mad. Hopping mad. Something about this story is really rattling them, especially over in the outrage pits of Twitter. Lashing out at journalists, politicians from other parties, concerned members of the public etc.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What are you basing 'not all members had access' on?

I genuinely took the article to mean all members had access. If you have fact to contest that...fire away with your source, no skin of my nose.

Not surprised you are confused when you claim to be basing your statement on quotes that don’t exist.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Not surprised you are confused when you claim to be basing your statement on quotes that don’t exist.

Bzarre...I take an article that says 'members had access' to mean just that. You dispute that it means ALL members.

When asked to back up how you know different to the article, you have nothing.

It's there in the article SS, 'members have access', it doesn't say 'some members' a 'select few'...it says 'SF members have access'. Go read it.

smurgen

Deleted User wrote: »

I like that concept that SF have of someone moving from being a voter or supporter to becoming fully ‘republicanised’.

Where someone has drank the green kool aid and ends up minimising rape, torture, and murder; denigrating journalists for doing their job; expecting a completely different set of standards for SF than everyone else, and generally acting like a member of a cult. Absolute and unwavering loyalty.

Why would you like that concept? This place is truly becoming the twilight zone.

smurgen

Looks like Philip Ryan is back and now he's simply lying. This is amazing stuff. https://twitter.com/EOBroin/status/1386291991454130176?s=19

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Bzarre...I take an article that says 'members had access' to mean just that. You dispute that it means ALL members.

When asked to back up how you know different to the article, you have nothing.

It's there in the article SS, 'members have access', it doesn't say 'some members' a 'select few'...it says 'SF members have access'. Go read it.

You said you quoted the article. You didn’t.

You know that but continue to obfuscate.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You said you quoted the article. You didn’t.

You know that but continue to obfuscate.

I did...go read it.

FrancieBrady

smurgen wrote: »

Looks like Philip Ryan is back and now he's simply lying. This is amazing stuff. https://twitter.com/EOBroin/status/1386291991454130176?s=19

Essential to the sensationalism, is SF hiding I guess. Has he written about all the disappearing websites yet?

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I did...go read it.

Why lie?

You didn’t quote the article.

FrancieBrady

Jesus!

I said the article said all members had access.

We got loads of pedantry about the word 'all' as you seemed to know different but as yet haven't backed up anything.

The article said 'members of SF have access and members of SF have been shown how to use the Abu system', that means the 'members of SF had access'. Not some members, not a select few...So I assume 'members' had access.

Now if you know different then dispute what Mr Ryan had to say, which is what I am repeating.

If you also want to believe I was spoofing, go ahead and believe that too, who cares.

blanch152

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You defined it as ALL to deliberately downplay the story.

I can say members of Sinn Fein are convicted murderers, criminals and child sex abusers.

However it would be wrong to state that ALL Sinn Fein members are murderers, criminals and child sex abusers. See how it works Francie?

And it would make me look foolish in the extreme to continue defending my use of ALL after it had been pointed out that this was not the case.

ALL members of Sinn Fein having access makes it far worse, but it seems that some of those defending Sinn Fein didn't realise this, thinking that it made it defensible that millions of people's personal information was available on a whim to SF members across the country.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jesus!

I said the article said all members had access.

We got loads of pedantry about the word 'all' as you seemed to know different but as yet haven't backed up anything.

The article said 'members of SF have access and members of SF have been shown how to use the Abu system', that means the 'members of SF had access'. Not some members, not a select few...So I assume 'members' had access.

Now if you know different then dispute what Mr Ryan had to say, which is what I am repeating.

If you also want to believe I was spoofing, go ahead and believe that too, who cares.

No Francie. You claimed you quoted the article. You didn’t. You put your own spin on it to downplay the “secret” nature of the database. When challenged you doubled down then tripled down on the claim you were quoting the article.

You didn’t quote the article. You are long enough here and pedantic enough in making demands off every other poster to know this.

Again why the need to continue untruthfully claim you quoted the article?

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

No Francie. You claimed you quoted the article. You didn’t. You put your own spin on it to downplay the “secret” nature of the database. When challenged you doubled down then tripled down on the claim you were quoting the article.

You didn’t quote the article. You are long enough here and pedantic enough in making demands off every other poster to know this.

Again why the need to continue untruthfully claim you quoted the article?

Does the article say it...yes it does.
Where did i get the info? In the article, as I said.

Can Safe surfer dispute the article, no he can't.

That is where we are at...despite the round the houses.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Does the article say it...yes it does.
Where did i get the info? In the article, as I said.

Can Safe surfer dispute the article, no he can't.

That is where we are at...despite the round the houses.

Is that a quadruple down? Must be a record.

You are still claiming you quoted the article.

Show everybody the quote from the article like a good lad.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Is that a quadruple down? Must be a record.

You are still claiming you quoted the article.

Show everybody the quote from the article like a good lad.

???

The password protected website gave party members access to a database which included the names, addresses and predicted voting intentions of millions of voters.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/tanaiste-leo-varadkar-says-sinn-fein-must-give-answers-on-voter-database-as-party-denies-data-harvesting-40318931.html


Now, that hopefully is the end of that bizarre passage.

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

???




https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/tanaiste-leo-varadkar-says-sinn-fein-must-give-answers-on-voter-database-as-party-denies-data-harvesting-40318931.html



Now, that hopefully is the end of that bizarre passage.

Surprise, surprise your “quote” doesn’t appear anywhere in the article.

FrancieBrady

Journalists sure don't like getting answered back. Didn't expect Clifford to respond so huffily to perfectly reasonable criticism.

https://twitter.com/Mickcliff/status/1386341040244858880

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Surprise, surprise your “quote” doesn’t appear anywhere in the article.

Here is what I said - I assumed that 'members of SF' meant all members as it didn't say some, or a select group. I didn't use quote tags you will notice...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116979769&postcount=4411

YOU turned it into a quote in your answer...oh dear, who looks foolish now?


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116980012&postcount=4412

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here is what I said - I assumed that 'members of SF' meant all members as it didn't say some, or a select group. I didn't use quote tags you will notice...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116979769&postcount=4411

YOU turned it into a quote in your answer...oh dear, who looks foolish now?


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116980012&postcount=4412

You do Francie. You do.

There is a huge difference etmyologically between 'members had access' and 'all members had access'
The former is limited,the latter unlimited

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

There is a huge difference etmyologically between 'members had access' and 'all members had access'
The former is limited,the latter unlimited

You cannot get upset if someone assumes that all members have access if you say 'members have access' without definition.

That is all I did, assume. Somebody has trouble accepting that.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Journalists sure don't like getting answered back. Didn't expect Clifford to respond so huffily to perfectly reasonable criticism.

https://twitter.com/Mickcliff/status/1386341040244858880

That’s 5 mainstream journalists now who have spoken up in the last week about abuse being received from SF’s online activists.

This is a situation entirely of SFs making. You lie down with dogs then you wake up with fleas.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

That’s 5 mainstream journalists now who have spoken up in the last week about abuse being received from SF’s online activists.

This is a situation entirely of SFs making. You lie down with dogs then you wake up with fleas.

He's getting huffy there with people who say they'd never vote for SF Doc. The media is right...says the media, well they aren't getting it all their own way.

SafeSurfer

Marine Layer wrote: »

There is a huge difference etmyologically between 'members had access' and 'all members had access'
The former is limited,the latter unlimited

Francie deliberately misled. Said he “quoted” something that doesn’t appear in the article.

Why?

As usual to deflect criticism of Sinn Fein.

Then he continues to insist that his “quote” is in the article and tells others they look foolish.

I’m not asking you to say that Gerry Adams was in the IRA Francie. I’m just asking you to admit that what you say is a quote from the article is not a quote from the article.

If you can’t bring yourself to admit that after 3 pages will you ever admit it?