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

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Quote: Blaaz_

We are most morally bankrupt state in western europe



^^^^^^

Francie, show half as much interest in nonsense like that comment and you might yourself be taken a wee bit more seriously as a voice of reason. Dont be asking me nor anyone else to "both sides" anything til then.

Theres two cabals for sure, and i said as much in my post.

That i happen to rate SF lower as a political prospect vs parties of govt or that i personally see a lot more co-ordinated ambush behaviour from SF presences online doesnt mean i cant acknowledge that ff/fg posters have their own blinkers

I just pointed put that most posters now avoid both threads, well done to all involved

The difference in a lie and an opinion are completely lost on you.

Blaaz expressed an opinion and you are more than entitled to question it.

The other two posters, blanch and Crazy told outright lies about petitions and Free insurance, that have been debunked.

Of course there are different opinions on a political thread as there is in the country and the Dáil. Not much of a shock there tbh.

CrazyFather1

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Humour? Nah, it's called talking rubbish. Glad to hear you confirm it was essentially just the circle jerk I called out in the first place.

As for Pearse Doherty being in government.....no he wasn't. As for your later comment regarding it being in the Seanad...Pearse was in the Seanad from 2007 to 2010, so another swing and a miss.



You'll be delighted to know that in my case I did live in the North then so, and indeed lived there most of my life, most of my extended family still live there and I still visit it regularly.

Your strawman nonsense of trying to turn my criticism of the RUC into support for the PIRA isn't worth further comment.


Put the shovel down pal.

A lot of anger today!!!
So go on enlighten us all, what factual matters do you want to discuss on the insurance?
All I have seen so far is a lot of angry posts. Take a chill pill dude, get onto the topic

They both looked like untrue statements, yep

Ill administer raps across knuckles back at hq sher

No issue with that

What dyou think of the idea expressed above by yer own fellow traveller, seeing as i have to answer for others seemingly

Actually where is t'other fella

Changed name again?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The difference in a lie and an opinion are completely lost on you.

Blaaz expressed an opinion and you are more than entitled to question it.

The other two posters, blanch and Crazy told outright lies about petitions and Free insurance, that have been debunked.

Of course there are different opinions on a political thread as there is in the country and the Dáil. Not much of a shock there tbh.

I never mentioned any petition.

On the free insurance, if that isn't what Pearse is offering, what is the point of his grandstanding? Usually with Pearse he is promising free something or other.

Is he promising to cut payouts to those who cut their knees on a path or suffer mild whiplash in a car? He might get my vote if he did, but it would cost him a lot more.

Fionn1952

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

A lot of anger today!!!
So go on enlighten us all, what factual matters do you want to discuss on the insurance?
All I have seen so far is a lot of angry posts. Take a chill pill dude, get onto the topic

Factual matters I'd like to discuss;

1) Did Pearse Doherty create, post, mention or advertise a petition regarding the insurance sector?

2) Did Pearse Doherty at any stage promise or imply free insurance would be on the table?

3) How does Pearse Doherty acknowledging and discussing the issue on social media differ from the aforementioned Tweet from Leo Varadkar acknowledging and discussing the issue (and as a sidebar, by earlier standards does Varadkar's tweet also count as him promising free insurance?)

4) What government position has Pearse Doherty held?

5) When was Pearse Doherty last a member of the Seanad?


That would do for a start on the old factual matters.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

They both looked like untrue statements, yep

Ill administer raps across knuckles back at hq sher

No issue with that

What dyou think of the idea expressed above by yer own fellow traveller, seeing as i have to answer for others seemingly

I think anyone looking at how the government dealt with the M&B issue could come to that assessment quite easily TBH. How they treated women like Vicky Phelan, Patricia Cahill etc would factor into an assessment of their moral standing too. Lots of other things too- the circling of wagons to protect a confessed wrongdoer, the abject failures in health and housing. Loads of stuff to come to a judgement like that.

I didn't comment as it is not something the thread was setup for.
SF have 'started a petition' and 'SF are going to provide FREE insurance' are straight up lies.

Need I say any more here?

Triangle

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Ridicule SF all you want....I've pointed out that I can see a load of things they're wide open for ridicule on.

On the insurance issue, it could easily be argued that the constant huff and puff are the reason that it has stayed front and centre in the public eye and why the government has been forced to acknowledge and act on it. That sort of huffing and puffing is one of the strengths of having an opposition. I'd find it a more legitimate criticism that SF are great at being in opposition but totally unproven in government in this state.

Why make up outright lies though, that totally undermine legitimate criticism like that though? Why make such a blatant and obvious exaggeration like saying Pearse has promised free insurance?! It does nothing to advance your argument, it just allows a bunch of people who are already convinced that SF are the source of all the ills in the world to have a wee circle jerk over how clever they are.

My issue with Pearce (and I was a fan boy when he first came on the scene)
Is that he incites hatred. He constantly attacks the big bad insurance companies, yet the SF insurance policy notes that its also legal cost and claims that drive up the price.
But he never mentions this part as it interferes with his anger message.
This is the part I felt most let down by him and now see him as a conman.


Edit: I work in a small MGA and have offered to go through the reasons with mairead farrell and allow her to see some of reasons, But she's also just interested in spreading anger.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I
SF have 'started a petition' and 'SF are going to provide FREE insurance' are straight up lies.

Ah here, Francie, straight up lies??

You know and I know the comment about free insurance was a parody of Pearse and his promises.

It is always free something for somebody with him and his silly economic policies. Your real issue is that people are refusing to take Pearse and SF seriously when it comes to economics.

Fionn1952

Triangle wrote: »

My issue with Pearce (and I was a fan boy when he first came on the scene)
Is that he incites hatred. He constantly attacks the big bad insurance companies, yet the SF insurance policy notes that its also legal cost and claims that drive up the price.
But he never mentions this part as it interferes with his anger message.
This is the part I felt most let down by him and now see him as a conman.


Edit: I work in a small MGA and have offered to go through the reasons with mairead farrell and allow her to see some of reasons, But she's also just interested in spreading anger.

I have no issue whatsoever with that, Triangle. Like I've said, I've no intention of defending SF, I just wanted to call out the downright lies that were being discussed.

Whether I agree or not (in the case of your post, I'd be closer to agreeing with you than SF on the matter), we all have a right to our own opinions, but we can't make up our own facts.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Ah here, Francie, straight up lies??

You know and I know the comment about free insurance was a parody of Pearse and his promises.

It is always free something for somebody with him and his silly economic policies. Your real issue is that people are refusing to take Pearse and SF seriously when it comes to economics.

There wasn't a single mention of free anything. So it wasn't a 'parody'.

CrazyFather1

McMurphy wrote: »

I'm not "a government expert" but I'd say even people with the most basic grasp of "current affairs" knows that:

• Pearse Doherty, wasn't a member of the 2019 Irish government.
  
• Was not a senator in 2019 either.
  
• Even if he was, a senator ≠ a member of the Irish government.

Jesus H Christ, like are you really, really going to lay your neck out on the line double down, and argue on this?

Thanks a bunch for helping me out

Sorry, I stand corrected, he got fined for not bothering to show up to Leinster House, he is hardly too concerned now with screwing over the people of Ireland when he is doing it himself?
https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-news/cork-tds-explain-failed-meet-16552027

Fionn1952

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Thanks a bunch, see my job has a lot of requirements. One of them is not really knowing the exact detail of every single TD or every single definition in the Irish public service. So thanks a bunch for helping me out

Maybe someone who admittedly has significant gaps in their knowledge regarding the details of our system of government should avoid stating things they don't know as facts?

Or that person could spend 30 seconds on Google to fact check what they are about to claim before posting it.

Just a suggestion of course...

CrazyFather1

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Maybe someone who admittedly has significant gaps in their knowledge regarding the details of our system of government should avoid stating things they don't know as facts?

Or that person could spend 30 seconds on Google to fact check what they are about to claim before posting it.

Just a suggestion of course...

It's a discussion forum. Nobody gets fired if they get something wrong, well I don't for certain anyway.
The point is to discuss topic(An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages. ), if someone gets something wrong you should explain. Not jump and them and be condescending, nobody gets any prizes at the end of the day because someone made a mistake and you attacked them.

My job doesn't mean I need to know every little details about the government so its nice when some people on here can update my knowledge. Thanks. Do you not think?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think anyone looking at how the government dealt with the M&B issue could come to that assessment quite easily TBH. How they treated women like Vicky Phelan, Patricia Cahill etc would factor into an assessment of their moral standing too. Lots of other things too- the circling of wagons to protect a confessed wrongdoer, the abject failures in health and housing. Loads of stuff to come to a judgement like that.

I didn't comment as it is not something the thread was setup for.
SF have 'started a petition' and 'SF are going to provide FREE insurance' are straight up lies.

Need I say any more here?

Amazing how the rule in the FFG thread is "you cannot discuss SF" and in this thread anything at all becomes "bu bu bu whabbout FFG!"

Id also note that a government has to deal with everything that comes up in its time, historical, imperfect, difficult decisions, doesnt matter. Has to be dealt with.

Therefore govt parties have plenty of sins and mistakes to harp on.

Doing nothing but harping on about those mistakes without a record in govt is exactly the hollow crown SF wear beautifully. Their record as credible, constructive opposition is a vacuum of nonsense contradictory policies and statements and all they are good for is barking at the failures of govt. Id want more tbh.

Their record in govt elsewhere is, astonishingly, *still* one of claiming they have nothing to do with any of it.

Their record outside of parliamentary politics speaks for itself.

The links to dodgy developers alone aint much better than FF tbh.

If i were employed to do online work for them id probably have the same strategy tbf- enough of the people they pitch to are easy enough to get onside purely by sniping. A credible, positive alternative vision? Too much like work.

Lookit there's nothing about such a foolishly broad subjective blinkered and selective statement that could even step in the door of a building labelled "fact" without setting off an alarm would you actually shtopppp

Fionn1952

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

It's a discussion forum. Nobody gets fired if they get something wrong, well I don't for certain anyway.
The point is to discuss topic(An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages. ), if someone gets something wrong you should explain. Not jump and them and be condescending, nobody gets any prizes at the end of the day because someone made a mistake and you attacked them.

My job doesn't mean I need to know every little details about the government so its nice when some people on here can update my knowledge. Thanks. Do you not think?

I did offer a correction for your mistaken assertion that Pearse Doherty was in the Seanad in 2019, informing you that he hadn't been since 2010.

That's all fair enough, but what correction do you expect about a blatant mistruth? There is nothing that can be said about your statement about the petition except to tell you that you are wrong, there is no correction to offer you, your statement was just wrong.

To complain about condescension after your insistence on doubling down on your mistakes rather than just acknowledging your mistake....I find that quite baffling.

All that aside, you're correct that it is a discussion board, and I've already said that when it comes to matters of opinion, yours is as valid as mine, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

I really don't get what the repeated references to your field of work are for, but in my field if you present something as factual and you're found to be incorrect, you'd be held liable. My job doesn't require that I know the details of how our government works.....civic responsibility would be the reason for that.

walshb

blanch152 wrote: »

Ah here, Francie, straight up lies??

You know and I know the comment about free insurance was a parody of Pearse and his promises.

.

I sure copped that..

Some here are either obtuse or deliberately misleading..

SF want free everything....

They have next to no clue how society and economics and progress work..

Their policy’s are whatever goes against the government..

Fionn1952

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We drag cervical check victims through court never admitting liability

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/seriously-ill-mother-32-settles-action-over-alleged-misinterpretation-of-cervical-smears-1.4475166?mode=amp



We apoligise for mother and baby homez
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/state-apology-taoiseach-s-full-statement-on-mother-and-baby-homes-1.4457328%3fmode=amp

While direct provison continues (the biggest scandel of all overseen and directed by ffg)
https://amp.rte.ie/amp/1197271/


And have millions to spend on apple defence to not pay tax (4.5 million i believe).....
We can spend millons on advisors and all sorts of hangerons for ffg,but people what need money/help are made jump through hoops.....moral bankruptvy,meets eire

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-53416206




At any point,yous feel any of this post,is unfactual and falls short,feel free to point out,how the above are morally acceptable

It is a fairly big jump from, 'there were some horrific injustices in our state' to describing Ireland as the most morally bankrupt state in Western Europe, Blaaz.

We could go through any modern state and find comparable injustices. I'd say most morally bankrupt is a pretty heavy stretch.

walshb

Fionn1952 wrote: »

It is a fairly big jump from, 'there were some horrific injustices in our state' to describing Ireland as the most morally bankrupt state in Western Europe, Blaaz.

We could go through any modern state and find comparable injustices. I'd say most morally bankrupt is a pretty heavy stretch.

Spot on....

CrazyFather1

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I did offer a correction for your mistaken assertion that Pearse Doherty was in the Seanad in 2019, informing you that he hadn't been since 2010.

That's all fair enough, but what correction do you expect about a blatant mistruth? There is nothing that can be said about your statement about the petition except to tell you that you are wrong, there is no correction to offer you, your statement was just wrong.

To complain about condescension after your insistence on doubling down on your mistakes rather than just acknowledging your mistake....I find that quite baffling.

All that aside, you're correct that it is a discussion board, and I've already said that when it comes to matters of opinion, yours is as valid as mine, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

I really don't get what the repeated references to your field of work are for, but in my field if you present something as factual and you're found to be incorrect, you'd be held liable. My job doesn't require that I know the details of how our government works.....civic responsibility would be the reason for that.

Thanks for the post, apart from having a go at a poster what was the point of it?

As you said you want to discuss the insurance what do you think of the video and what Pearse is proposing?

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Amazing how the rule in the FFG thread is "you cannot discuss SF" and in this thread anything at all becomes "bu bu bu whabbout FFG!"

Id also note that a government has to deal with everything that comes up in its time, historical, imperfect, difficult decisions, doesnt matter. Has to be dealt with.

Therefore govt parties have plenty of sins and mistakes to harp on.

Doing nothing but harping on about those mistakes without a record in govt is exactly the hollow crown SF wear beautifully. Their record as credible, constructive opposition is a vacuum of nonsense contradictory policies and statements and all they are good for is barking at the failures of govt. Id want more tbh.

Their record in govt elsewhere is, astonishingly, *still* one of claiming they have nothing to do with any of it.

Their record outside of parliamentary politics speaks for itself.

The links to dodgy developers alone aint much better than FF tbh.

If i were employed to do online work for them id probably have the same strategy tbf- enough of the people they pitch to are easy enough to get onside purely by sniping. A credible, positive alternative vision? Too much like work.

Take that up with the poster who made the statement. Nothing to do with me.

I contested the 'lies' told today and passed on by many posts voicing opinions. Differing opinions for that matter.
I won't be told by you which ones to comment one, if that is ok?

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

Fact stands,that we are....we drag cervical check victims through court never admitting liability

You do realize that we cannot have cervical check if every time some woman develops cancer, that they then automatically get compensated....and cervical cancer and the sate admit liability....even if they believe that there is no liability.

Drag? It's called due process

If they do not believe they have done wrong or have liability, why should they not stand their ground?

This is a whole lot more than just about women's test results....

The whole system would collapse if every case was simply accepted....nobody would have any confidence at all.....

And there would be a lot more misery and death than what there is

Why does this seemed to be missed by so many people?

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

We are 100% in the wrong as regards that woman,and such state should accept responsibility....but under ffg its always someone elses fault....its pure wrong,what they doing here (were found liable for the morrisey case,which should have been the end of it)



How are we not liable here??

What woman?

CrazyFather1

Deleted User wrote: »

Fact stands,that we are....we drag cervical check victims through court never admitting liability

We have an absolute scandel of direct provision,while simutaneously apoligising for mother and baby homes,which we still havnt paid out compemsation on either



But we have loads of money to pay for apples defence to insure they dont have to pay tax....looks and smells like moral bankrupcy to me

Have apple ever repaid the millions irish tax payer spent on that case?

Why would Apple repay Ireland?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Take that up with the poster who made the statement. Nothing to do with me.

I contested the 'lies' told today and passed on by many posts voicing opinions. Differing opinions for that matter.
I won't be told by you which ones to comment one, if that is ok?

Fine by me francie, wouldnt dream of it


Likewise, dont point me in the direction of other peoples statements expectantly.

Id say we'll get along famously going forward in this new era.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Fine by me francie, wouldnt dream of it


Likewise, dont point me in the direction of other peoples statements expectantly.

Id say we'll get along famously going forward in this new era.

This is a fairly typical post on here. Try to lie about our initial engagement.

I didn't engage with you until you weighed in and derided me FOR NOT commenting on a post. Here's a reminder of your initial post:

Deleted User wrote:

Quote: Blaaz_

We are most morally bankrupt state in western europe



^^^^^^

Francie, show half as much interest in nonsense like that comment and you might yourself be taken a wee bit more seriously as a voice of reason. Dont be asking me nor anyone else to "both sides" anything til then.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116303299&postcount=816

We will get on famously if you comment on stuff I say and not on what you think I should be saying.

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

If your wrong/fcuk up,be an adult and admit so,accept responsibilitys its basic part of life,dont drag terminal patients through the courts

And, what if you believe that you are not wrong?

God forbid anyone use it as a political football tho

Tell me, you're an expert in the practice, policy or legality of how and what the HSE and govt should and could have done as entities with responsibility for delivering enormously complex and important systems of life and death magnitude on a daily basis including consideration of legal advice on accepting culpability in advance of verdicts with state money necessary for future treatments on the line, that much is clear and obvious.

But, granted the above, if the govt (who remember now are not the HSE and who would of course be following legal advice based on the above) had disregarded the legal/policy advice and the consequences were oh lets say another less-than-perfect set of outcomes you certainly wouldn't just be in here blowing this joe duffy level tripe about that outcome instead, right?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is a fairly typical post on here. Try to lie about our initial engagement.

I didn't engage with you until you weighed in and derided me FOR NOT commenting on a post. Here's a reminder of your initial post:



https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116303299&postcount=816

We will get on famously if you comment on stuff I say and not on what you think I should be saying.

Just went back to check and be sure

Francie ole buddy, twas you addressed me unbidden demanding i answer for the lies of two other posters.

Dont puff yer chest up at me as if i called you out of nowhere - go and link to step one if you want to retrace the discussion, not the follow up posts as suits you.

But as i said already, lets move fwd with a new understanding and a constructive discussion towards a bright tomorrow hereon