Monday, March 31, 2008
Speaking truth unto power gets awkward…
A free press is not exactly a prerequisite for a free society, but it’s absence is (or should be) extremely worrying. In all of the comment in the MSN last week, this aspect of the climbdown of the Andersonstown News after pressure was applied over an article the paper published from its erstwhile columnist/humourist, Squinter seemed largely to be missed. It’s all the more puzzling since Gerry Adams is sitting on the fourth safest majority in the House of Commons with a whopping 68.6 per cent of the popular vote. On Thursday Alex Maskey expressed the hope that the paper’s response to his party’s concerns should be an end to the matter. Over at the Guardian, I’ve argued that there that both reflects badly on his paper and raises questions about just how ready Sinn Fein is to live with the vigorous scrutiny of a courageous and free press.
Mick Fealty @ 09:17 AM
“It was also told an unlicensed AK47 and rifle were found at Mr Cleary’s home during a police search on Friday.”
There is progress for you, the sov squirt gun was apparently unlicenced, it is probably a bit like a BBC TV licence, I mean why get one?
“Incredibly he manages to get bail for possession of an AK47!!”
I have a great deal of sympathy for the view that the very last AKM ( the species is surely of that pedigree), in the entire north of our wee bog, not covered in concrete, should be preseved for future generations to gawk at.
VW Beetles have killed more people than AK 47’s apparently, (Africa doesn’t count)
Would we be hankering after a lynching if one of those was in his drive way?
I think not, we’d merely feel confused by the casual vindictiveness of it all.
We shouldn’t rush to judge.
G.
Posted by on Apr 01, 2008 @ 05:08 PM“You are preaching to the converted if you are indeed arguing(somewhere amongst your posts) that SF and GA need a shake up. “
The point of politics is to bang it home. Two legs bad, four legs good.
There is no point going forward half-believing in anything. SF have taught us that much.
G.
Posted by on Apr 01, 2008 @ 05:20 PM>>Prince
So for the sake of completeness, and knowing you may well attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill. SF did indeed receive 23,631 votes out of an electorate of 50,792. However only 34,238 valid Votes were cast. Which in anyone’s language makes a massive majority.
A “massive majority” of those who voted, but that is not what you said. You made a point of saying they had a “massive majority” of the electorate. That is quite something else, and it is not true.
Posted by willowfield on Apr 01, 2008 @ 05:57 PM<<*GROANS*
I stand by everything I have said.
Tell you what why don’t you chap on everyone’s door that never voted and take a record of who they would have voted for if they had bothered to go to the polls. better still ask around for someone to go with you as a witness. Then you can say I am wrong if all or the vast majority of those people intimate to you that they would not have voted SF.
Or, you could more productively give yirsel a kick on the arse and stop being a nuisance, a pointless pain in the rectal passage. Knowing you though I guess that you will be looking for a witness to corroborate your door chapping. best of British and all that.
*DOUBLE GROANS*
Ok Gregory, I am going to have to hold my hands up and say that I have not an effin clue what you are on about. I don’t know if it is me but most of the stuff I have read from you these past weeks bewilders me.
Posted by on Apr 01, 2008 @ 05:51 PMI stand by everything I have said.
How can you, when what you said is untrue?
Tell you what why don’t you chap on everyone’s door that never voted and take a record of who they would have voted for if they had bothered to go to the polls. better still ask around for someone to go with you as a witness. Then you can say I am wrong if all or the vast majority of those people intimate to you that they would not have voted SF.
You are wrong. You said a massive majority of the electorate voted for the Provos and that’s not true. It doesn’t matter what people might say they “would have done” - if they didn’t do it, then they didn’t do it.
You made a point of claiming that a massive majority of the ELECTORATE voted for the Provos: you didn’t say a massive majority of those voting. Just admit that you were wrong.
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 07:16 AM>>Just admit that you were wrong.<<
Naw! Go and chap some doors and prove me wrong. By any accepted reasonable standards around about 70% of votes tallied your ways is taken as a massive majority of the electorate. BTW don’t you have some kind of inner voice telling you to chuck making an arse of yirsel, or perhaps the doctors convinced you that the voices are bad and not to listen to them?
>>You said a massive majority of the electorate voted for the Provos<<
That is a lie, as someone fond of labeling people as liars on this forum you do tend to do a bit yirsel.
>>you didn’t say a massive majority of those voting.<<
Perhaps because any sensible reasonable person would have taken this as a given, yep ok, granted I guess that rules you out. We can’t all be expected to cater for your tiresome pedantry *all the time* though can we?
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 09:27 AMPrince
Naw! Go and chap some doors and prove me wrong.
I don’t need to “chap” any doors: the election result proves you wrong!
By any accepted reasonable standards around about 70% of votes tallied your ways is taken as a massive majority of the electorate.
Er, no it isn’t! It’s taken, arguably, as a massive majority of voters!
That is a lie, as someone fond of labeling people as liars on this forum you do tend to do a bit yirsel.
Er, it’s not a lie ... you’ve even admitted above that you said massive majority of the electorate!
Perhaps because any sensible reasonable person would have taken this as a given
Why should anyone take as a given that when you used the word “electorate” you weren’t actually referring to the electorate??
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 09:46 AMWillow
>>PE - Naw! Go and chap some doors and prove me wrong.
Willow - I don’t need to “chap” any doors: the election result proves you wrong!<<
Around 70% is a massive majority, not to you maybe, but to any sane bastard.
>>PE - By any accepted reasonable standards around about 70% of votes tallied your ways is taken as a massive majority of the electorate.
Willo - Er, no it isn’t! It’s taken, arguably, as a massive majority of voters!<<
ARGUABLY! God in heaven give me strength.
>>Willow - You said a massive majority of the electorate voted for the Provos
PE - That is a lie, as someone fond of labeling people as liars on this forum you do tend to do a bit yirsel.
Willow - Er, it’s not a lie ... you’ve even admitted above that you said massive majority of the electorate<<
You have missed out a word there Willow, starts with P. I’ve got work to do now, so won’t be able to entertain you for a while. Take a hint though and start listening to the voices, they are right sometimes.
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 10:33 AMYou made a point of claiming that a massive majority of the ELECTORATE voted for the Provos: you didn’t say a massive majority of those voting. Just admit that you were wrong.
Posted by willowfiel
If you dont vote you arent part of the electorate and neither do you count in the results
Eoghan was is and will remain perfectly correct
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 11:11 AMIf you dont vote you arent part of the electorate
Yes you are. Check out the electoral register!
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 11:41 AMPrince
Around 70% is a massive majority, not to you maybe, but to any sane bastard.
Of voters ... But only about 60% of the electorate voted.
>>Willow - You said a massive majority of the electorate voted for the Provos
PE - That is a lie, as someone fond of labeling people as liars on this forum you do tend to do a bit yirsel.
ARGUABLY! God in heaven give me strength.
I don’t see why you need strength to accept that it could be argued that 70% wasn’t necessarily a “massive” majority. It means 3 out of 10 people oppose you. It’s certainly a very big majority.
You have missed out a word there Willow, starts with P.
You said “Sinn Féin” had a massive majority of the electorate. If you weren’t talking about the Provos, did you mean Official SF, Republican SF, or who?
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 11:45 AMThis thread has become pure pedantry, and I’m loathe to get involved. But…if the electorate is only those who vote, then when people say, for example, the turn out rate was 65%, then what was it 65% of, if not the electorate?
Having said that, I think Eoghan is essentially correct about the overwhelming support that PSF enjoys in west Belfast, and pedantry does not change that fact.
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 11:58 AMMy contribution’s a bit out of date now, but I just wanted to say that I would back up the other calls for the squinter article to be returned to both the a’twon news site and to squinter’s. Its removal is indeed a form of self-censorship, and should not have happened.
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 12:19 PMIt appears to be a little more than self-censorship. Self-censorship is something someone willingly indulges in, I feel this was purely as a result of improper political pressure being exerted.
And mores the pity. Squinter did, whether Gerry Adams likes it or not, articulate what a lot of people in West Belfast feel. What he articulated, as painful as it may be to Gerry and Pol Deeds, was supported by numerous people in the actual cortege of Baps, which I was in as it moved up the Falls and into the City Cemetary.
It also reflected the opinions of a considerable number of those who left Baps graveside at the precise moment Gerry Adams began to speak.
It might be painful but it doesn’t warrant it untrue, as the vast majority of blog entries can attest to.
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 04:09 PM“Ok Gregory, I am going to have to hold my hands up and say that I have not an effin clue what you are on about. I don’t know if it is me but most of the stuff I have read from you these past weeks bewilders me.”
Dear Prince
I have had dealings with SF over the years and they’re positively surreal, and they’re getting more Orwellian and group-thinkish by the day.
I was BTW exaggerating ever so slightly about the VW Beetles. Thimble and bucket if I can paraphrse the Deputy First Minister. The Ak47 is way ahead of the killing game.
If I did what Ruane or Adams do, I’d hire scriptwriters and a PR agency. It is nice to be able to simply make things up.
Believing 100 percent is something is good, but not if you know it is bollox, which is the SF problem.
They are group-thinkers, they’d have to vote at committee on whether the world was a sphere and if Gerry had reservations, they’d all officially (at least) have ‘global’ doubts.
Gerry is their Pope, he’s right even when he’s obviously wrong.
They’re a bit like the Vatican of the 1400s, the deal isn’t whether X is X, the issue is whether SF concede X is X.
Other people do it as well to whatever extent.
I can’t do the sort of thing the BBC do, the kind of fabricated news for a corporate ( news generating) client sort of thing. Take this sort of surreal report.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/6968317.stm
(A)
A North Wales Police spokeswoman said the pupil was not cautioned formally but received a reprimand.
(B)
A Flintshire Council spokesman said: “We are not aware of any incident of this nature in a Flintshire school.”
THe BBC still report it as a firm fact.
A can’t be true without B, that’s the NEOST or IRSC guidellines,
I’ll tell you what Ruane would do, she’d go for (A) and forget about the the NEOST or IRSC aspects because it doesn’t have to be true, official, authentic, legitimate, or lawful not for Ms Ruane. She’s a SF person,
enough said.
G.
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 06:28 PMHonestly Greg the more you try to explain the less clear it becomes that last post is either messing with my dyslexia or its as nonsensical as a Dr. Seus Opera
Posted by on Apr 02, 2008 @ 06:37 PMGreg
No offence ma man! I am with Steve here, I sort of understood only about half of that. However I am still not sure how it pertains to anything I wrote earlier.
Willow
>>I don’t see why you need strength to accept that it could be argued that 70% wasn’t necessarily a “massive” majority. It means 3 out of 10 people oppose you. It’s certainly a very big majority.<<
You really need to get a life LOL!
>>You said “Sinn Féin” had a massive majority of the electorate. If you weren’t talking about the Provos, did you mean Official SF, Republican SF, or who?<<
Please could you point out where I made any claim about the Provos, except to say they weren’t standing. Perhaps we will have to call you Willow Liar?
Apologies to all for teasing the bold Willow, I sort of wanted to see just how far he would go. Boy does that fella go all the way into an alleyway of pointless dead endery.
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 08:24 AMPrince
You really need to get a life LOL!
I’ve got one, thanks.
Please could you point out where I made any claim about the Provos, except to say they weren’t standing.
In response to a reference to Sinn Féin, you said they had a massive majority of the electorate. If you weren’t talking about the Provos, which SF did you mean? Official SF, Republican SF, or who?
I take it now that you accept that they don’t have a massive majority of the electorate?
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 08:58 AMcrossmaglen arrest
further to the arrest and bail of the Crossmaglen shinner the latest developement is that a placard was erected near Crossmaglen last night stating
“FREE THE LISBEG ONE”
“UNLICENSED TO KILL”
“PLEASE RELEASE JIM CLEARY”
Is that strange beast ‘the community’ starting to take the mickey out of ‘republicans’? Surely not, first the andytown and now people in Cross.Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 09:09 AMLonglake
I would think this would be a positive signAs obviously this person does not fear retribution so the provos have gone away, and the community knows it even if the poster here and the unionists dont.
Heres a hint its past the sell by date for blaming the Provos for violence in the republican communities
And willowfield while I know its part of the psychosis of unionism, Sinn Fein and the Provisional IRA are not one and the same so again prince is perfectly accurate saying the Provos didn’t stand because they didn’t, end of.
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 11:04 AMWhat you call SF is Provisional Sinn Fein. Part of the Provisional movement. Both are accurately described as Provos. To say it is accurate for one and not the other makes no sense.
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 11:30 AM“that last post is either messing with my dyslexia or its as nonsensical as a Dr. Seus”
You’ve hit it on the head, all we need is the rhyming text and SF might become the party of Dr. Seuss. Two S in Seuss is the other bit.
G.Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 11:45 AM“Sinn Fein and the Provisional IRA are not one and the same”
Would you agree that they are two of the PRM ‘wings’ and that they are ‘governed’ by the PRM AC, Steve? I understand there’s an extensive interchange of personnel. Don’t forget the organised crime and civic justice wings ...
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 11:58 AM>>You made a point of claiming that a massive majority of the ELECTORATE voted for the Provos:<<
I made no such claim Willow. Perpetuating it by trying to get me to explain the obvious won’t work.
As you are fond of asking others to retract ‘scurrilous lies’ I would be neglectful if I didn’t insist on the same. please make my apology a massive one please!
Garibaldy
>>Both are accurately described as Provos.<<
I have never, ever in my puff hear of SF describing themselves as Provos, never, the IRA have that nickname all to themselves. When I say that SF receive massive amount of electoral support from West Belfast, all sane people know what I mean. You are treading on the Willow’s territory by claiming that I could have meant anything other.
Nevin
Shit stir away!
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 12:29 PMPE,
If you look above, comment 11 on this page, you’ll see that I agree with your statement that PSF have overwhelming support, and that that is what you meant. Nevertheless, the term Provisional applies to the entire movement. It comes from the Provos themselves in the split in the IRA in 1969, and subsequently in SF. The dissidents, political and military, giving their allegiance to the Provisional Army Council. But continue to take your experience as representative of reality in NI and in Ireland since the start of the Troubles.
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 12:39 PMGaribaldy
Look this is silly, Willow will be pissing himself laughing at what he is causing.
I made a simple statement, if we look hard enough we can find a other little inferences, imagined or not.
When I refer to SF, I mean SF. Anything else and I will specify. The Provos, have and always will be the IRA, should I mention the Provos in a conversation or in written word, no-one(willow apart) would find cause to stop me and ask for clarity, as it would be clear just what I mean. Whatever outworkings that are in the general organisation mean nothing in my simple little statement referring th SF.
Posted by on Apr 03, 2008 @ 01:08 PM
