This is like the punter who through variance has backed 6 or 7 winners in a row and now believes themselves to be invincible having solved it. What follows is inevitable.
Not true, they are 30%+ of the under 24’s, an election in even 9 months will allow more of the stupid ignorant and morally deficient youth to vote.
Do you not have even a smidgeon or respect for SF at this stage? A party that came from zero presence in the south 30 years ago to winning a FPV in a general election? While managing to take the hardliners through a peace process, etc.
Do you really think SF will get trapped into something like Labour did? Or that they’re completely incapable of driving a hard bargain with the threat of another election with a full compliment of candidates behind them?
SF are not stupid. Labour gave up the vast majority of their 2011 policy platform and allowed themselves to be front and centre of the most unpopular excesses of austerity. Do you think SF will do the same? Really?
They didn’t have a presence here because they didn’t recognize the legitimacy of the State Lloyd. It’s not like they were a grassroots movement that made a breakthrough. They denied the State had a right to exist in the form it did.
You are technically correct...the best kind of correct
World Record Holder for Long Distance Soul Reads: May 7th 2011
SF are not stupid. Labour gave up the vast majority of their 2011 policy platform and allowed themselves to be front and centre of the most unpopular excesses of austerity. Do you think SF will do the same? Really?
So you are saying there is a 0% chance they will ever go into government without an overall majority.
Because despite your crowing and hubris they have captured 1/4 of the popular vote and less than 25% of the seats and even FF are not going to let them implement a manifesto to bankrupt the country inside three years.
Ugh, Michael Lowry re-elected on the first count in Tipperary.
People of the premier county really do know how to pick 'em.
I had to ring the parents house a few years ago of one of the potential candidates who may be elected to get a poker debt paid. Not only Lowry who has a dodgy past in the constituency. Still a few debts outstanding as far as I am aware.
I do appreciate Lloyd's dropping into whats a fairly hostile environment.
Just to clarify, as the numbers are now saying there is no possibility of a government without FF you would prefer to stay in opposition and hold on for another election rather than compromise in coalition?
They didn’t have a presence here because they didn’t recognize the legitimacy of the State Lloyd. It’s not like they were a grassroots movement that made a breakthrough. They denied the State had a right to exist in the form it did.
They were exactly a grassroots organisation that have climbed the long road to the top since polling 1% in 1992. Inspite of the never ending reminders of their past like the above during that climb.
"Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
Not true, they are 30%+ of the under 24’s, an election in even 9 months will allow more of the stupid ignorant and morally deficient youth to vote.
The exit poll indicated they were the 1st preference of every age cohort up to 65 year olds. Blaming kids for this is factually incorrect along with being tired and out of touch!
"Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
I got to say mystified as I am at SF's performance Boyd Barrett's is on another level altogether.
He's the only one in the country who overcame the SF brand and there is probably something profound to be learned about that for the other parties.
Imo Shinners be crazy not to go into government with FF. They have zero chance of implementing their full list of promises. The coalition route gives them a chance to get a few in plus a foothold. Gotta do it surely.
Anyone got a link to the court case where Dessie Ellis got convicted of all those murders?
I’m bad at google and can only find something about him getting acquitted of explosives charges by an English jury
Thanks guys
So you are saying there is a 0% chance they will ever go into government without an overall majority.
Because despite your crowing and hubris they have captured 1/4 of the popular vote and less than 25% of the seats and even FF are not going to let them implement a manifesto to bankrupt the country inside three years.
Hey if Michael Martin wants to risk being the first FF leader not to be Taoiseach and wants to go back to the electorate to sort it out that’s cool. Or he can be Taoiseach with a SF / Green coalition and implement SF’s housing policy and some Green environmental policies. I think I know what he would choose and you do too...
"Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
Surely mercenary tendencies take over when met with the choice of a trashing out some sort of coalition or risking going back for another election?
Some of those new Sinn Fein TD's look like they've probably tripled their usual salaries so would really get into bed with anyone when it comes down to it.
The exit poll indicated they were the 1st preference of every age cohort up to 65 year olds. Blaming kids for this is factually incorrect along with being tired and out of touch!
The exit poll put SF on 30% of the under 24’s compared to 13% for FF from what I can remember so my point is entirely valid.
Has to be value in the 'highest first pref in the country' market so, MHR is currently 4/11. A single shinner standing in a constituency eg cullinane at 25/1 could be worth a look
Anyone got a link to the court case where Dessie Ellis got convicted of all those murders?
I’m bad at google and can only find something about him getting acquitted of explosives charges by an English jury
Thanks guys
I was struggling myself with the google machine yesterday to validate the claims that full decommissioning took place, I had previously read the following that made me question the legitimacy
But in July 2005 a statement said the leadership of the IRA had ordered ‘an end to the armed campaign’, with all units ordered to ‘dump arms’. These would be ‘put beyond use’, the operation to be verified by a Protestant and a Catholic cleric. In September Methodist minister Harold Good and Redemptorist priest Alex Reid confirmed that they had watched ‘minute by minute’ as the three independent international commissioners – two former senior army officers and a former ambassador – decommissioned ‘huge amounts of explosives, arms and ammunition’. No detail of the methods used emerged, nor where and at how many sites it happened, and there were none of the photographs Paisley demanded
Then I found this but given the level of proof required seems rather unattainable, it feels like a fool's errand to question, blind faith will have to do.
In 2008, sources from the Republic of Ireland’s security forces were quoted as saying that the organisation survived “in shadow form”, had recently recruited and was still able to carry out attacks. Along with McGuigan's, in the past few years other murders have occurred in which PIRA involvement, if not yet proven by the judiciary, is considered extremely likely by most observers. That is the case of the brutal killing of 21-year-old Paul Quinn, allegedly beaten to death by men in black military-style clothing as a punishment for repeatedly brawling with local IRA members.
Also the idea that the PIRA kept its promise and surrendered all of its arms is very hard to believe, because no one knows how many weapons the IRA possessed in the first place and no proper verification was ever possible. According to Jon Tonge, a professor of politics at the University of Liverpool who’s written extensively on the peace process in Northern Ireland, “no one believes that they got rid of all their weapons. That’s fantasy. […] It’s easier to prove the existence of God than it is to prove that the IRA decommissioned all its weapons.”But in 2005 everybody in Northern Ireland was eager to believe this lie.
Even if I believed for a second that the IRA still retain weapons ready for use (which I don’t) you should consider the following points Murdrum:
- they have not recruited since the GFA, meaning their youngest trained members are now ~42
- they are not training / drilling / practicing using these weapons which they may have
- they have lost the links that used to allow them to procure weapons, procure training, procure finance
If violence ever sparked up again it would not be the Provisional IRA at the forefront of it. Just like it was in 1969, young men like Adams and McGuinness would quickly move to the fore. The Provisional IRA are now old men in the main, who have been invested in democratic politics for over two decades and have lost whatever capabilities they had to wage an effective terrorist campaign. I mean consider how different the technology and state monitoring landscape is now compared to 25 years ago.
It’s a nonsense talking point really, just played in the south for votes and nothing else.
"Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
A party other than FF or FG is going to top the % vote for the first time since the 1930s. It seems the very definition of historic.
The last time it happened was in 1927, when Cumann na nGaedheal won. But Cumann na nGaedheal became Fine Gael in the 1930s. So essentially it was in 1921, the election held during the War of Independence. 99 years. Historic is definitely accurate.
Even if I believed for a second that the IRA still retain weapons ready for use (which I don’t) you should consider the following points Murdrum:
- they have not recruited since the GFA, meaning their youngest trained members are now ~42
- they are not training / drilling / practicing using these weapons which they may have
- they have lost the links that used to allow them to procure weapons, procure training, procure finance
If violence ever sparked up again it would not be the Provisional IRA at the forefront of it. Just like it was in 1969, young men like Adams and McGuinness would quickly move to the fore. The Provisional IRA are now old men in the main, who have been invested in democratic politics for over two decades and have lost whatever capabilities they had to wage an effective terrorist campaign. I mean consider how different the technology and state monitoring landscape is now compared to 25 years ago.
It’s a nonsense talking point really, just played in the south for votes and nothing else.
What would you like me to consider exactly?
1. Do you have any proof to back up the first claim because as you can read in the opening line from above:
In 2008, sources from the Republic of Ireland’s security forces were quoted as saying that the organisation survived “in shadow form”, had recently recruited and was still able to carry out attacks.
That is 10 years post GFA as you can see so perhaps recruitment was still ongoing.
2. On the second claim, you explicitly said yesterday, they were fully decommissioned so which is it?
3. I don't know if the final point is true but I suspect if they were still recruiting in 2008, the links are somewhat fresh because why bother recruiting if they weren't going to train their recruits.
I'm open to actual proof to the contrary Lloyd but you have shown little in the way of evidence thus far.
Justice / Defence would surely be non-negotiable but Micheal is not in a position to be dictating terms. He'd do well to secure the taoiseach role for the full term and fight off any suggestion of revolving taoisigh.
1. Do you have any proof to back up the first claim because as you can read in the opening line from above:
That is 10 years post GFA as you can see so perhaps recruitment was still ongoing.
2. On the second claim, you explicitly said yesterday, they were fully decommissioned so which is it?
3. I don't know if the final point is true but I suspect if they were still recruiting in 2008, the links are somewhat fresh because why bother recruiting if they weren't going to train their recruits.
I'm open to actual proof to the contrary Lloyd but you have shown little in the way of evidence thus far.
I draw a distinction between members who could have been fully trained and active pre GFA, and anyone who may have joined symbolically post GFA to an organisation not actively waging a terrorist campaign and instead engaged in democratic initiatives.
The idea that they are staying ready in the background to the degree required to wage war being nonsense is obvious. I can’t “prove” to you many things I know to be true to a scientific degree, nor should I need to. The United Kingdom is the most heavily monitored and surveilled state on earth (no, I don’t have a link handy on that). There have been dramatic advances in the ability of U.K. police force to counter terrorism over the past 25 years (again, no link). The idea that a bunch of lads in their 40’s and above have retained a capability to organise covertly; procure weapons and armaments; prepare terrorist plans and execute them effectively within a new landscape of weapons, explosives, etc is madness to me.
We already know all of this on the basis of the efforts of dissident groups recently. Amateurish, ineffective and the authorities all over it.
I’ll park this here, as I don’t have the time to go line by line on this today I’m afraid. You may have the last word on this, but let me just say that the effectiveness of the IRA (and people can debate to what degree they were “effective”) was based on a constant active development and refinement of terrorist techniques. Continuous recruitment and procurement. Constant diligence and refinement of how to avoid state surveillance. Constant availability of safe houses and non military support structures.
If the IRA was maintaining all of those things it would be a massive scandal and the U.K. state would be running press conferences detailing the efforts to do it. Indeed, if they were actively doing those things they would be violating the terms of the GFA imo. They wouldn’t need to fire a single shot - refining the capability to fire a shot is an act of war in of itself.
It’s over, and it’s been over for two decades. Michelle O’Neill and Arlene Foster were front and centre at a PSNI recruitment event a week or so ago. Attacking SF for staying out of power sharing in the North for years over the RHI scandal while simultaneously fear mongering about the IRA and their unsuitability to govern in the south is the worst type of speaking out of either side of the mouth politics.
"Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
Would like to poke into this a bit more as I actually think that this doesn't ring true.
I think that there is an important difference between;
A state executing someone because of a crime they commited
A state deffering / reducing sentence against someone who executes another because of a crime that they have commited (revenge killing / heat of the moment / etc in this scenario)
No need to apologise. Probably been overshadow by the election, but feel I should reply.
There is definitely a difference between the two scenarios. I said the killing in both situations is wrong, I never suggested that they were the same or equal in any way.
One scenario is the state punishing somebody. The other is the state electing to not punish somebody. Not even remotely similar.
In the first situation, we the state are taking the life of someone. Not the 'executioner', nor 'The Government', nor any 'Other'. We. We are all complict in the commission of the act of ending that person's life. We define through the creation of laws a set of crimes which we deem sufficiently heinous that we oblige the destruction of the life of the criminal upon conviction. We agree that the route to justice is through the removal of that criminal's rights to the ultimate extent
.
Yes, and we the people, have determined that it is not an acceptable punishment.
The argument for it is basically that "some people deserve it". That attitude is rooted in vengeance. And we have determined that it's not a valid purpose.
In the second situation, we the state are accepting that there can be mitigating circumstances in which a single person, acting on their own and importantly not under the orders of the state, could commit an act which otherwise could be deemed unconcsiousable. We allow the entrance of this defence into our laws as a way to add nuance to the description of the ultimate outcome (the intentional death of another). We do not proscribe it as justice, nor do we offer sanctuary to all claimants of this defence. We create no laws suggesting that vigilantism is legal and just. Instead there is an acceptance (rightfully or wrongfully) that the perpetrator of 'vigilantism' may be entitled to enter a defence against their act on grounds which may reduce the potential punishment that they ought to receive.
Correct. We can accept that mitigating circumstances are a defence for committing a crime. We accept that the emotional response creates a situation where somebody is not in their right state of mind.
However, accepting it as a defence, it's the same as saying it's acceptable! At not point is it implied that it morally right, or that its not a crime. It's simply a crime that isn't punished.
I a don't disagree with anything you've said. And I don't think anything there disagrees with my position above.
1. Do you have any proof to back up the first claim because as you can read in the opening line from above:
That is 10 years post GFA as you can see so perhaps recruitment was still ongoing.
2. On the second claim, you explicitly said yesterday, they were fully decommissioned so which is it?
3. I don't know if the final point is true but I suspect if they were still recruiting in 2008, the links are somewhat fresh because why bother recruiting if they weren't going to train their recruits.
I'm open to actual proof to the contrary Lloyd but you have shown little in the way of evidence thus far.
Surely the burden of proof is on you how can he possibly prove a negative?
The North is going to be a critical issue in the new world order of a SF government.
Johnson and Cummings will be licking their lips at the prospect of being able to play east west trade off against shifting their position on the border.
The North is going to be a critical issue in the new world order of a SF government.
Johnson and Cummings will be licking their lips at the prospect of being able to play east west trade off against shifting their position on the border.
Johnson and Cummings have signed up to an International Treaty. The EU will expect them to honour that. The provisions around the border and east west trade are not fungible and the reputation effects of failing to honour their commitments will be well noted by the other nations with whom “global Britain” wishes to do business.
SF being in power or not makes no difference. I also note that none of the main parties in the south diverge significantly on foreign policy or Brexit.
You know all this of course, but hey.
"Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
I draw a distinction between members who could have been fully trained and active pre GFA, and anyone who may have joined symbolically post GFA to an organisation not actively waging a terrorist campaign and instead engaged in democratic initiatives.
The idea that they are staying ready in the background to the degree required to wage war being nonsense is obvious. I can’t “prove” to you many things I know to be true to a scientific degree, nor should I need to. The United Kingdom is the most heavily monitored and surveilled state on earth (no, I don’t have a link handy on that). There have been dramatic advances in the ability of U.K. police force to counter terrorism over the past 25 years (again, no link). The idea that a bunch of lads in their 40’s and above have retained a capability to organise covertly; procure weapons and armaments; prepare terrorist plans and execute them effectively within a new landscape of weapons, explosives, etc is madness to me.
We already know all of this on the basis of the efforts of dissident groups recently. Amateurish, ineffective and the authorities all over it.
I’ll park this here, as I don’t have the time to go line by line on this today I’m afraid. You may have the last word on this, but let me just say that the effectiveness of the IRA (and people can debate to what degree they were “effective”) was based on a constant active development and refinement of terrorist techniques. Continuous recruitment and procurement. Constant diligence and refinement of how to avoid state surveillance. Constant availability of safe houses and non military support structures.
If the IRA was maintaining all of those things it would be a massive scandal and the U.K. state would be running press conferences detailing the efforts to do it. Indeed, if they were actively doing those things they would be violating the terms of the GFA imo. They wouldn’t need to fire a single shot - refining the capability to fire a shot is an act of war in of itself.
It’s over, and it’s been over for two decades. Michelle O’Neill and Arlene Foster were front and centre at a PSNI recruitment event a week or so ago. Attacking SF for staying out of power sharing in the North for years over the RHI scandal while simultaneously fear mongering about the IRA and their unsuitability to govern in the south is the worst type of speaking out of either side of the mouth politics.
Clearly I'm not asking for scientific "proof" to show that the IRA didn't recruit post GFA.
What I was asking for is anything that stretches beyond a personal opinion given I showed examples of those privy to the situation claiming that recruitment did in fact take place beyond the GFA and that the idea of fully decommission was fantasy which are two claims you have made.
You claim some distinction exists between those who joined pre GFA and post GFA, that wasn't what you originally said, I don't doubt that was your intention but unfortunately that's not something I could decipher from what you actually posted.
As you know from what I've said thus far, I am not claiming that the IRA are prepared and ready for war, I have no doubts they are not remotely the force that once existed.
What I am claiming though is that the idea of full decommission and lack of IRA connections is delusional. You have smuggled in a variety of different caveats as the conversation has developed but I was responding to your original claims which I believe at the time of my original responses were false but happy to leave it there too.
PDP next out, and their distribution should put Christy Burke ahead of Mary Fitzpatrick (which is quite funny) but no-one will be elected (Greens wont get 1100 of PDPs 2200).
Mary Fitz will be distributed then and should give Paschal enough of a boost to be safe.
PDP next out, and their distribution should put Christy Burke ahead of Mary Fitzpatrick (which is quite funny) but no-one will be elected (Greens wont get 1100 of PDPs 2200).
Mary Fitz will be distributed then and should give Paschal enough of a boost to be safe.
Still its saying something that the finest Minister for Finance we ever had struggles to get home while still in his prime and in the constituency next door that O'Doherty yoke gets a quarter the number of first preferences he does.
RDIII was close with his no greens outside Dublin pick. Guy in Limerick sneaked in on the last count.
Ó Cathasaigh in Waterford is Green too, apparently the word is Shanahan who is currently an independent may end up with FF or FG in the not too distant future.
People say I should be more humble I hope they understand, they don't listen when you mumble
Get a shiny metal Revolut card! And a free tenner! https://revolut.com/referral/jamesb8!G10D21
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment