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

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what does that have to do with the post you quoted?

What does it matter if there is a 'council'?
We who voted for the GFA encouraged the IRA to get involved in democratic politics. They di...and people still want to exclude them.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the cap fits etc etc.

The Shinisteristcs have form in not believing what SF say Nowt personal really.

it very much was personal Francie. I thought you were better than that. I have no idea what a Shinisteristcs is but i presume you think it makes you look clever and witty to say it.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What does it matter if there is a 'council'?
We who voted for the GFA encouraged the IRA to get involved in democratic politics. They di...and people still want to exclude them.

what does that have to do with them picking the leadership of SF?

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what does that have to do with them picking the leadership of SF?

The poster asked was Mary Lou a member of this 'council'...keep up with the thread.

FrancieBrady

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The CCP membership also didn't overrule Xi Jinping at its national congress. After all, what's the point of overruling when there isn't a choice? Incidentally, What were the numbers voting in favour of Mary Lou at that special Ard fheis - seeing as you know FG numbers, surely you must also know the equivalent transparent number for SF?

FG does use an electoral college voting system; If you want to make a point about that, how about adding another about how Michael Martin is Taoiseach with FF getting only 22% of the popular vote.

Still is vastly more democratically transparent than the Chinese Communist Party system adopted by SF to designate its leaders.

I trust memberships of all parties I suppose Jimmy. I have no idea who overruled the 7000+ members of FG I trust the membership are happy that it happened. Same as SF's process.

They have their way just as FG/FF etc have theirs.
Maybe if they came up with a fancy name for it like 'electoral college' is for an over-rule facility?

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it very much was personal Francie. I thought you were better than that. I have no idea what a Shinisteristcs is but i presume you think it makes you look clever and witty to say it.

It was no more 'personal' than the last line of your post there ^.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The poster asked was Mary Lou a member of this 'council'...keep up with the thread.

Is she? You seem very rattled Francie which is very odd given you claim not to be a SF supporter.

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Is she? You seem very rattled Francie which is very odd given you claim not to be a SF supporter.

Rattled? You are the one seeing personal insults.

Not a bit rattled. And I couldn't care less if there is a 'council' or not, much less who is on it.

The IRA are not active. Fine by me.

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s mad how Gerry Adams, Mary Lou, and O’Neill were all the only nominees.

Listen, Francie, we all know the truth of it. Adams, Howell, (the late Storey), Murphy etc decide who is leader, they get nominated, and then the useful gombeens in the cumanns give a gloss coat of democracy to the entire charade.

The only question now is Mary Lou a member of the council? Was it Mary Lou who decided that Martina Anderson had to go for example, or was that a decision made by the lads?

Why would the ''lads'' want one of ''their own'' gone?


Seems like Martina & other councillor were shafted because of the poor performance in last election. I think Martina is a member of the Ard Comhairle.

guy2231

I would have no problem with the former IRA army council overseeing Sinn Fein and helping them towards taking power in Ireland which they are on the way to achieving, I have trust in what used to be the army council, I guess now it is just a council.

A couple of alleged former army council members only retired from Sinn Fein in the last couple of years.

Brendan Bendar

guy2231 wrote: »

I would have no problem with the former IRA army council overseeing Sinn Fein and helping them towards taking power in Ireland which they are on the way to achieving, I have trust in what used to be the army council, I guess now it is just a council.

A couple of alleged former army council members only retired from Sinn Fein in the last couple of years.

Wouldn’t be too sure, dude.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

The peace is being maintained by keeping them involved in the political process. Exclude them and they may become disillusioned with the process and become dissident republicans.

Ah yes, the old threat of the old republicans, be nice to us or we might blow you up.

Last century thinking.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Ah yes, the old threat of the old republicans, be nice to us or we might blow you up.

Last century thinking.

Isn't that what aircraft carriers are for when they moor off your coast?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What does it matter if there is a 'council'?
We who voted for the GFA encouraged the IRA to get involved in democratic politics. They di...and people still want to exclude them.

Ok, poster suggests that secret cabal outside this jurisdiction is controlling political party within this jurisdiction, and your reaction is "what does it matter"?

Seriously, dude?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Isn't that what aircraft carriers are for when they moor off your coast?

In this case, it is a non-State actor doing the threatening, but you are ok with it?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Ok, poster suggests that secret cabal outside this jurisdiction is controlling political party within this jurisdiction, and your reaction is "what does it matter"?

Seriously, dude?

Do I care about the skullduggery and control that goes on in other parties...no, not really.

Why should I care about what goes on in SF?

I judge the final produce, how they fulfill their roles publicly.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

In this case, it is a non-State actor doing the threatening, but you are ok with it?

What part of the 'state' of Iraq (for instance) is the UK navy?

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

Ah yes, the old threat of the old republicans, be nice to us or we might blow you up.

Last century thinking.

Just face facts Blanch - there are dissident republicans who do not support the GFA and the fewer of them there are, the better it is for all the people of Northern Ireland.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

Just face facts Blanch - there are dissident republicans who do not support the GFA and the fewer of them there are, the better it is for all the people of Northern Ireland.

I don't want to ever live in a society where some thugs can hold a threat of violence over others. Another reason that a united Ireland is further away than many think.

Finty Lemon

guy2231 wrote: »

I would have no problem with the former IRA army council overseeing Sinn Fein and helping them towards taking power in Ireland which they are on the way to achieving, I have trust in what used to be the army council, I guess now it is just a council.

A couple of alleged former army council members only retired from Sinn Fein in the last couple of years.

How does one become a member of this council?

Dyr

blanch152 wrote: »

Ah yes, the old threat of the old republicans, be nice to us or we might blow you up.

Last century thinking.

And yet you constantly trot out the threat of loaylists blowing us up if they dont get their way as an argument against a united Ireland

Weird, eh?

blanch152

Bambi wrote: »

And yet you constantly trot out the threat of loaylists blowing us up if they dont get their way as an argument against a united Ireland

Weird, eh?

Do I? Perhaps you might link to my constant posts suggesting that.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't want to ever live in a society where some thugs can hold a threat of violence over others. Another reason that a united Ireland is further away than many think.

Your forebears saw to it (with violence by the way) that you would not have to be oppressed and threatened by an invading force and their agents.
Sadly, some of the liberated here forgot and ignored their countrymen and women in the north as they endured decades more oppression and state thuggery.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't want to ever live in a society where some thugs can hold a threat of violence over others. Another reason that a united Ireland is further away than many think.

They are not threatening violence. Official MI5/PSNI/Gardai say they are completely wedded to the GFA.


Its a pity that the former loyalists paramilitaries are not in a similar position with unionist parties.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

They are not threatening violence. Official MI5/PSNI/Gardai say they are completely wedded to the GFA.


Its a pity that the former loyalists paramilitaries are not in a similar position with unionist parties.

Why would they explicitly threaten violence when there are so many who will do so on their behalf?

jm08 wrote: »

The peace is being maintained by keeping them involved in the political process. Exclude them and they may become disillusioned with the process and become dissident republicans.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Your forebears saw to it (with violence by the way) that you would not have to be oppressed and threatened by an invading force and their agents.
Sadly, some of the liberated here forgot and ignored their countrymen and women in the north as they endured decades more oppression and state thuggery.

Oh dearie me. Let us take one issue - decriminalisation of homosexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#European_Union

1993 in Ireland.

1967 in England and Wales

1982 in Northern Ireland.

Try telling the LGBTQ population they were better living in Ireland than if the UK had continued in the South.

Ditto rights for women. Women in the South still have a repugnant clause in the Constitution about women in the home. Don't see that in the UK.

The UK has always been a more welcoming place for minorities and the oppressed than the so-called Republic in Ireland dominated for decades by exclusionary nationalism infused with a strong Catholic ethos. We have a lot to be ashamed of since we became an independent country, and in many many ways our neighbours have shown us up.

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

Oh dearie me. Let us take one issue - decriminalisation of homosexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#European_Union

1993 in Ireland.

1967 in England and Wales

1982 in Northern Ireland.

Try telling the LGBTQ population they were better living in Ireland than if the UK had continued in the South.

Ditto rights for women. Women in the South still have a repugnant clause in the Constitution about women in the home. Don't see that in the UK.

The UK has always been a more welcoming place for minorities and the oppressed than the so-called Republic in Ireland dominated for decades by exclusionary nationalism infused with a strong Catholic ethos. We have a lot to be ashamed of since we became an independent country, and in many many ways our neighbours have shown us up.

Hahaha yeah a very welcoming place for minorities, tell that to the catholics of Northern Ireland in the 1900s, even the Irish flag was illegal.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Oh dearie me. Let us take one issue - decriminalisation of homosexuality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#European_Union

1993 in Ireland.

1967 in England and Wales

1982 in Northern Ireland.

Try telling the LGBTQ population they were better living in Ireland than if the UK had continued in the South.

Ditto rights for women. Women in the South still have a repugnant clause in the Constitution about women in the home. Don't see that in the UK.

The UK has always been a more welcoming place for minorities and the oppressed than the so-called Republic in Ireland dominated for decades by exclusionary nationalism infused with a strong Catholic ethos. We have a lot to be ashamed of since we became an independent country, and in many many ways our neighbours have shown us up.

???

We know how the power swap messed up only too well. The point was about your forbears being freed from violent oppression and the threat of violence. They had to use violence to achieve that . Achieve that for you to live on the high moral ground you live on now. Eaten bread is soon forgotten as they say.

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

Why would they explicitly threaten violence when there are so many who will do so on their behalf?

You're not making any sense, anyway what kind of violence would loyalists start? Nearly all loyalist violence in the past has been directed against catholic civilians directed by MI5.

What are they going to do? Start attacking the state forces that they are begging to stay there?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

???

We know how the power swap messed up only too well. The point was about your forbears being freed from violent oppression and the threat of violence. They had to use violence to achieve that . Achieve that for you to live on the high moral ground you live on now. Eaten bread is soon forgotten as they say.

Are you actually agreeing with me that we would have been better off remaining under British rule thanks to the mess that DeValera made of running the country and the obnoxious 1937 constitution he proposed to the country?