SDLP caught lying over McCartney "support"

Hydroquinone

Politicians are liars? Well, hold the phone. Knock me over with a feather.
Is that really news? Really?

Politicians of every stripe are liars and anyone who is shocked by that must haev been living in a cave and certainly not living in the same Ireland I live in.

gandalf

Trojan wrote:

Lemming, the argument that SF were happy to exploit the sisters for their own benefit is valid. The problem is that SDLP reduced themselves to liars when they covered up their own possible exploitation (it's not even that serious).

SDLP remain liars who have used the sisters to their own political ends.

Yep they are liars but on the scale of lies theirs is minuscule. I mean we don't see someone lying rotting in a grave without justice because of SDLP lies now do we.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

That is not what I am saying and as such has nothing to do with the legality or the illegality it has to do with the application of the same logic to both cases.

No you miss my point probably because I didn't expand on it.
I'd have very little time for the comparison of something that involves murder and something that involves what *could* be a simple case of helping the family get maximum publicity.
The similarity begins and ends in my view in the semantical description of it.
The value of the comparison drawn,to put it as bluntly as possible would be way up there with mother theresa and Michael Jackson in that both of them help kids...

Of course that said, those in the SDLP that thought this shouldnt have been out in the open were both silly and naive in my view in the way they went about this.

mycroft

Trojan wrote:

Lemming, the argument that SF were happy to exploit the sisters for their own benefit is valid. The problem is that SDLP reduced themselves to liars when they covered up their own possible exploitation (it's not even that serious).

SDLP remain liars who have used the sisters to their own political ends.

Once again what evidence is there that person who issued the first denial was aware of the phonecall to the travel agency?

Blub2k4

Lemming wrote:

It was badly handled most certainly and I'd expect more of the SDLP if they were indeed involved at party level.

Beyond that you are clutching at straws, and badly Blub2k4. Very poor comparisons. Extrordinarily so in fact. Add to that mix the fact that SF/IRA were quite happy to "exploit" the sisters for their own benefit at their Ard Fheis and your "logic" goes out the window.

As was rightly pointed out, one act was legal, the other was .... well ... far from it in any terms you want to try and coach it.

I dont see how I am clutching at straws when I objectively point out the similarities.
The comparisons are similar if you pare it back to principle and drop the anti-sf slant.
It comes down to
SF supporters: The IRA/SF had no foreknowledge nor did they sanction the actions of members involved in a murder/bank robbery.
Anti-SF : They are all guilty by association.

IF the same is applied to this situation then objectively the party is just as involved by their association.

I know that there is a difference of scale but drop the prejudice and there are similarities and doublethink is exposed.

Dont assume I support/vote for any person/party I am attempting to look at this whole thing in a neutral manner and the hypocrisy and double standard is amazing.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Blub2k4

Blub2k4 wrote:

I know that there is a difference of scale but drop the prejudice and there are similarities and doublethink is exposed.

If there was a consistant trend of this rather than what I see as a silly/naive lack of horse sense about what they have done or the way they should have done it,then I'd agree with yoou.
There isn't so I don't.

On the similarity issue, I'll stick with my view that its semantical in its extent only rather than premeditated or well organised-quite like the Mother Theresa/Michael Jackson both helping kids comparison.

Blub2k4

Earthman wrote:

If there was a consistant trend of this rather than what I see as a silly/naive lack of horse sense about what they have done or the way they should have done it,then I'd agree with yoou.
There isn't so I don't.

On the similarity issue, I'll stick with my view that its semantical in its extent only rather than premeditated or well organised-quite like the Mother Theresa/Michael Jackson both helping kids comparison.

Call it as you will, you and a lot of others are picking and choosing where to apply principles, not very principled really.

Villain

mycroft wrote:

Once again what evidence is there that person who issued the first denial was aware of the phonecall to the travel agency?

Working on evidence now hey?

Thats very refreshing considering what people have been accusing SF leaders of without any evidence.

Double standards :rolleyes:

mycroft

irish1 wrote:

Working on evidence now hey?

Thats very refreshing considering what people have been accusing SF leaders of without any evidence.

Double standards :rolleyes:

The govt says theres evidence the police decline to give the evidence as it is the subject of an ongoing investigation.

They've concluded that forensic evidence proves the cork money was robbery money.

Theres nothing in this situation thats suggests or supports the article title.

Mind you the IRA never gave any evidence that Jean Mc Conville was a dirty tout, or anyone in their trials. So whinging about the standard of proof isn't going to get you far

Mercury_Tilt

Mercury_Tilt wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Banned

Villain

mycroft wrote:

The govt says theres evidence the police decline to give the evidence as it is the subject of an ongoing investigation.

They've concluded that forensic evidence proves the cork money was robbery money.

Theres nothing in this situation thats suggests or supports the article title.

Mind you the IRA never gave any evidence that Jean Mc Conville was a dirty tout, or anyone in their trials. So whinging about the standard of proof isn't going to get you far

The leader of the state doesn't know??? Can you link to any evidence????

You accept evidence when it suits your argument, the double standards here are pretty easy to see.

Blub2k4

mycroft wrote:

Mind you the IRA never gave any evidence that Jean Mc Conville was a dirty tout, or anyone in their trials. So whinging about the standard of proof isn't going to get you far

And here's us thinking that the Shinners are the masters of "whataboutery".

Mycroft you are unable to look at these issues objectively your inherent bias always shines through, the same old circular arguments, and there is still an unreformed PSNI and still more British soldiers in NI than in Iraq. :rolleyes:

It's as if the IRA are the only ones who let the whole show down while conveniently forgetting that what brought about their existence has not changed a hell of a lot.

Theres a topic title to this thread...
I'll have a look see if I can find it ah yes there it is...

Stay on topic folks or this thread will be closed and you can all take the tit for tat elsewhere.

mycroft

irish1 wrote:

The leader of the state doesn't know??? Can you link to any evidence????

You accept evidence when it suits your argument, the double standards here are pretty easy to see.

As stated, I'll examine the source, and look at the facts.

The article offers no proof that there SDLP as a political force arranged the trip, the scant facts come from a shoddy republican biased rag. I hold this an evidence much in the same way that I'd hold the sun's report on dirty gypos being the greatest threat to middle england.

In much the same way I'm less likely to believe a conspiracy theory site about 9/11 over an established newssourcet or the jerusalism post over it's coverage of planned withdrawls from the disputed territories. Or a tabloids cover over the the hillsborough disaster.

Please guys raise your game. Presenting an article from a biased source which can't even prove the allegation that it leads with and then quibbling over facts is just desperation.

Comparing not believing this, with not believing someone getting briefing from the highest levels is just a f*cking joke.

Mycroft you are unable to look at these issues objectively your inherent bias always shines through, the same old circular arguments, and there is still an unreformed PSNI and still more British soldiers in NI than in Iraq.

My inherent bias?

Trojan

gandalf wrote:

Yep they are liars but on the scale of lies theirs is minuscule. I mean we don't see someone lying rotting in a grave without justice because of SDLP lies now do we.

Perhaps not, but next time I hear the SDLP taking SF up over a minor issue how can I be sure that they are telling the truth? And when it's not a minor issue, but a major issue?

As the now banned Brother Tilt said in the OP, "Why lie over or deny....such a simple thing?"?

They need to admit it or issue a strong denial immediately.

--

mycroft: you asked "what evidence is there that person who issued the first denial was aware of the phonecall to the travel agency?"

The fact that they have not now denied this is strong evidence that it is true. Politicians in NI do not seem to be in the habit of allowing untrue news stories continue without reply.

Also, the person in question is the deputy leader of the SDLP, as quoted here saying:

SDLP deputy leader Alasdair McDonnell denied that his party had given any money.

"The SDLP doesn't have any money to give, although I would personally give them money," McDonnell said.

Surely he'd be in a position to know either way (unless it was a breakaway Continuity SDLP faction)

In any case, this is a bit of a storm in a teacup, but as I said, SDLP remain liars who used the sisters to political gain.

Lemming

Trojan wrote:

Lemming, the argument that SF were happy to exploit the sisters for their own benefit is valid. The problem is that SDLP reduced themselves to liars when they covered up their own possible exploitation (it's not even that serious).

SDLP remain liars who have used the sisters to their own political ends.

You're right Trojan, although based upon the assumption that the SDLP party helped them out, or people helped them out in an SDLP capacity (ie. whilst representing the party).

I do think they have handled the situation badly, although I will withold the use ot eh word "liar" until I have seen proof other than innuendo to that effect.

Villain

mycroft wrote:

Comparing not believing this, with not believing someone getting briefing from the highest levels is just a f*cking joke.

Again I will state it for you the Taoiseach has seen no evidence, you have seen no evidence, you simply choose to believe it because of your anti SF stance. Yet you call for evidence here when most people would say it's obvious what the SDLP done.

Double standards mycroft and I can't believe you can't see it.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

Comparing not believing this, with not believing someone getting briefing from the highest levels is just a f*cking joke.



?

like believing Tony Blair who was getting briefings from the Highest level on the threat from Iraq its weapons of mass destruction and its ability to launch a chemical biological attack within 30 minutes

or colin powell and the Pictures he showed the UN of the Iraqi chemical weapons facilities

or George Bush and the links between Al Queda and Saddam


all briefed at the highest level thousands of employees billions of dollars spy satellites specialist agencies spies inside the Iraqi administration

ALL WRONG

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

ALL WRONG

Are you suggesting that Garda inteligence is as bad as all that?
I guess you are,which is fair enough.
On another note...
I'm getting concerned for this thread,a pm is being sent to various contributers.

cdebru

All political parties have tried to use the Mccartney sisters to further their own political ambitions

political parties from wherever should be honest and admit when they are helping them there is nothing wrong with helping them in fact IMO anyone that can should help them
in anyway they can

Lemming

Blub2k4 wrote:

I dont see how I am clutching at straws when I objectively point out the similarities.
The comparisons are similar if you pare it back to principle and drop the anti-sf slant.

The circumstances regarding the comparisons are wildly different Blub2k4. If we were complaining about one political party being corrupt, and then another preaching to the masses whilst engaged in corruption also ... then they'd be good comparisons.

This has nothing to do with anti-sf slant so come down off your f*cking martyrs cross.

Simple. Two denials surrounding quite quite illegal, criminal acts by what is a private army to all intents and purposes.

The other denial by a party regarding a phone call to a travel agency.

Orange?
Apple?
f*cking great big tractor more like .... :rolleyes:

It comes down to
SF supporters: The IRA/SF had no foreknowledge nor did they sanction the actions of members involved in a murder/bank robbery.
Anti-SF : They are all guilty by association.

SF/IRA have closed ranks and are attempting to obstruct the course of justice in a murder and a bank robbery

the SDLP initially denied and then admitted to a connection to a phone call.

I'm sorry?? What's the comparison here?

IF the same is applied to this situation then objectively the party is just as involved by their association.

Ok, and what if the SDLP are red-handed? What is your point? That they helpe the McCartney sisters present their case to gain some PR out of it?

It's no different to SF/IRA's cynical Ard Fheis stunt then.
So quite frankly I don't see why SF/IRA are trying to sling mud on this one.

I know that there is a difference of scale but drop the prejudice and there are similarities and doublethink is exposed.

Not really. It's just incredulous that SF/IRA can bleat about this considering the background to the incident .....

mycroft

Both of you, it's an absurd comparisson to believe a piece of tabloid journalism that does not even support it's only allegation, with a piece of state briefing.

yes you are right politicans lie.

But then so do newspapers.

It requires you and I to make an informed decision who we choose to believe.

Theres a growing body of evidence to support the claim that the IRA carried out the robbery, while you have, on the whole, one sentence from an article which does not support the headline of the piece.

Comparing the two is a bloody joke. And if I found some rambling anti sf conspiracy theory site and used a line from it saying

"Addams donned a balaclava and joined in on the robbery"

You'd be right to roundly dismiss the claim.

The source matters.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Are you suggesting that Garda inteligence is as bad as all that?
I guess you are,which is fair enough.
On another note...
I'm getting concerned for this thread,a pm is being sent to various contributers.

What I am suggesting is that nobody should just take intelligence information at face value or as rock solid fact

whoever the intelligence comes from

maybe the Gardai are right time will tell, I will wait for the evidence

but if agencies like MI5/MI6 and the CIA can be so wrong or deliberately mislead the UN and the world to help achieve a political objective the invasion of Iraq then it is not a huge leap in logic that other agencies could do something similiar

mike65

Trojan wrote:

As Mike65 said in the OP, "Why lie over or deny....such a simple thing?"?

They need to admit it or issue a strong denial immediately.

Whoops! Thats a misquote, Mercury Tilt said that at the bottom of his first post.

Mike.

Cork

Lemming wrote:

SF/IRA have closed ranks and are attempting to obstruct the course of justice in a murder and a bank robbery

the SDLP initially denied and then admitted to a connection to a phone call.

I'm sorry?? What's the comparison here?.

It is like comparing apples and bannas - pretty useless.

A discrediting of the McCartney family was suggested on these boards number of weeks ago.

SF/IRA customers remind me of Fawley towers.

I hear nothing - I see nothing type of atitude.

But most seriously of all - the imtimidation has not gone way - you know.

Trojan

Agreed - apologies. Edited.

Slutmonkey57b

ah. I see we're still on the "SF bashers whatabout double standards" bit.

I thought I covered all that already?

1: There is no evidence that the SDLP knew about the phone call to the travel agent before issuing a denial.
2: There is no suggestion that the SDLP made any attempt to pay for the trip, fund the sisters in any way, or otherwise assist them financially.
3: The only dirt that can be dug up is that an SDLP member made a phone call telling a man who runs a travel agency that someone was applying for credit at his company. Not that the SDLP ordered the man to give the credit, or threatened him, or kidnapped his family.
4: There is no evidence that the SDLP either knew the man was making the call, asked him to make the call, gave him advice about whether or not the call was a good idea, or anything else.
5: Not even an article which is an obvious smear attempt can link the "handler" in the states to being anything other than deeply disillusioned with the SDLP, and certainly not being either a party member or anyone who was interested in what the party was doing.

And, for the hard of viewing, I'll state again:

At no time has the SDLP linked itself in any way with the McCarthy family, or attempted to get an electoral endorsement from them, or engineered a photo opportunity from them, or promoted itself off the back of anything at all that the family have done.

The only party, North or South, or in Britain, that has done any of those things is SF. And yet SF are worried about making sure that the McCarthy family are not used by some political party for their own ends?

Double standards indeed. I'm not applying double standards to the SDLP. I'm sure they'll make a statement clarifying exactly what happened here. But I have some confidence that the statement will at least be coherent and make some sort of logical sense.

monument

mycroft wrote:

Mind you the IRA never gave any evidence that Jean Mc Conville was a dirty tout, or anyone in their trials. So whinging about the standard of proof isn't going to get you far

Arguing over, or debating over stuff is what one normally does on internet boards like this, telling people they aren’t “going to get you far” and adding in another puzzling ‘it’s ok for the state because others are doing worse things” kind of statement, isn't going to get you far.

mycroft wrote:

The source matters.

Yea they do, but one should be able to debunk the claims that a source makes. If one goes about this by saying ‘the members of a party is not the party’, one would have to apply this in an "unbiased" way or one could become a unreliable source.

cdebru wrote:

but if agencies like MI5/MI6 and the CIA can be so wrong or deliberately mislead the UN and the world to help achieve a political objective the invasion of Iraq then it is not a huge leap in logic that other agencies could do something similiar

Exactly, and it’s a lesser leap if it’s affecting a lesser issue then going to war.

A Dub in Glasgo

The Andy Town News gives a local viewpoint.... Of course, this is just another one of those partial newspapers that is totally unbiased eh?

Out of the West -Andersontown News

Locally, sympathy is turning to anger

How quickly things change. It was only three weeks ago that the McCartney sisters seemed to have a Roman Emperor-like control over the destiny of Sinn Féin and nationalist Belfast looked on transfixed to see whether the thumb would go up or down. No longer.

Frankly, I’ve been a little shocked by the rapid hardening of opinion against the McCartneys, even though it was probably as predictable as it was unfortunate. Where once family spokespersons had the ability to quieten a room, today the reaction is likely to be, at best, an impatient tut; at worst, an angry expletive.

It’s not their fault. They’re ordinary people, not PR gurus. They’re not trying to win a political argument, they just want to get justice for a loved one. They weren’t to know that the only thing worse than under-exposure is over-exposure, but the crack that has opened in the hitherto solid wall of support for the family’s campaign might just be one that the killer of Robert McCartney slips through.

The unprecedented concentration on a single killing by the media was never sustainable. There are too many stories out there, too much suffering and too much hurt. It’s hardly surprising that a community that knows of many deaths that never merited an investigation by the RUC, never mind a conviction, feels angry – bitter, even – at the sight of a single family being championed by the media and taken to the bosom of three states.

This is a constituency that has its own memories, its own history, neither of which bears the slightest resemblance to the official record, or to the media orthodoxy. A vast, unheard phalanx of grieving relatives believes that the British state was responsible for the death of their loved ones, either by direct action, or by manipulating loyalist killer gangs. Out there is a deep, dark well of untested information, of untried evidence: the foot patrols that appeared then disappeared; the surveillance equipment that saw and heard nothing; the threats before the murders; the vanishing roadblocks; the magically opening peacelines. And extensive as that information and evidence is, as compelling as those stories are, put it all together and it still didn’t get a fraction of the attention given to a single pub stabbing.

The most unedifying spectacle in all of this is the SDLP’s efforts to put the boot in. Like grammar school boys dressed up as bikers for a school play, they’re enthusiastic enough, but not terribly convincing. That’s because they have precious little experience of campaigning or agitation. Any time I reported on street demos and there was a member of the SDLP there – a rare enough occurrence, let it be said – the poor bloke always looked as if he’d much rather be somewhere else. Which is perhaps why they look so uncomfortable as they get stuck in; it’s as if they’re aware that the Short Strand community might at some point wonder where they were all those other times over the past 35 years when the people hit the streets.

Martin McGuinness was excoriated for advising the family to be “very careful” not to become embroiled in the world of party politics – his words were deemed a threat, and it’s clear now that it doesn’t matter what republicans say, a negative spin will be printed regardless. But the family should indeed be very careful, because if they do allow themselves, deliberately or unwittingly, to become poster girls for one party or another, then that will inevitably lead to more anger and resentment. They’re already well on the way. The Boston Globe reported this week: “During their trip to the United States, [Robert] McCartney's sisters are expected at some social functions to bump into [Gerry] Adams, a reputed IRA chief. Adams met the McCartneys last month and reassured them he would press for witnesses to come forward, but Catherine McCartney said she probably would not shake his hand. ‘He seemed genuine when he met us, when we thought the problem was just a matter of IRA intimidation,’ she said. ‘Now we know better. It’s clear that Sinn Fein is heavily into the cover-up.’”

To refuse to shake Gerry Adams’ hand – with all the quasi-racist DUP overtones that that involves – is insulting enough, not only to him but to every single person who voted for him; to accuse him of being involved in a continuing cover-up is preposterous and inflammatory and, far from advancing the campaign for justice for their brother, does it a grave disservice. That kind of scalding language may be a sign of frustration and anger, but just six weeks into their campaign, it does not augur well for the future. If the PSNI get a straightforward murder case into court in a year or 18 months they’re doing well; there are families whose relatives have been dead for many years who haven’t seen an inquest yet because it doesn’t suit the state to hold one. Legally speaking, six weeks is the blink of an eye.

Ironically, what could well do more damage to the McCartney cause than cover-ups and threats is the bandying about of names and accusations in the media by journalists who claim to be supporting the family in its pursuit of justice. Of course, any defence lawyer worth his salt would have a field day throwing up examples of trial by media that seriously compromise the judicial process. And if a judge – in the trial or the appeal – rules that a fair trial is impossible, who will accept the blame for that?