Become A Member | Forum | Profiles | Personals | Classifieds | See Who's Online ...
 
View Topic
  Message Boards : Current Affairs : View Topic : 471 Posts, Page 31 of 32
  HomeNewNoticesHot TopicsPollsStatsBlogs Login / Register
 
Sean Gallagher Presidential Candidate
 
# 451 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 09:01
 
 
She is th spitting image of Alex Hedison.
Reply
 
 Recent Message Board Topics
Celebrity Big Brother 2018
Rant Thread 7
How Do You Feel Today? Part 3
Is There Anyone Out There Who Would Give A Naked Massage
Whats For Dinner Tonight? Part 4.
Brexit
Ireland's Abortion Referendum 2018
Good News Thread
 
Hey! If you enjoy shooting the breeze with like-minded people, check out
our Message Boards
• Advice • Coming Out
• Computers • Current Affairs
• Discussion • Food & Drink
• Going Out • Humour
• Health • Music
• Newbies • Sexual Issues
# 452 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 09:05
 
 
Someone said :
Is that you nature slut?

That's a Negative! His wife is from my locality!
Reply
 
# 453 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 09:05
 
 
Someone said :
She is th spitting image of Alex Hedison.

a little yeah. oh dylan
Reply
 
# 454 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 09:06
 
 
Someone said :

That's a Negative! His wife is from my locality!

lucky you!
Reply
 
# 455 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 09:17
 
 
Someone said :

lucky you!

Hows that, being Gay and all?
Reply
 
# 456 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 09:19
 
 
Someone said :
it was more defamation of character.
his wife is lovely

She sure is!
Reply
 
# 457 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 11:57
 
 
Someone said :

But it later turned out he had not received the envelope at all. He had been at the fundraiser yes but there is no impropriety involved.
[...]

He wishes.
It turned out he confusingly admitted to organizing fund raising, collecting envelops that may or may not be brown; that may or may not be full of cash up to the legal donation limit; that he may or may not have brought to the fund raising manager. He was just not sure this envelop was one of the many.

Whatever the nature of the accusation made at the time, it showed he had things to hide, that he had lied about his (very very strong) relationship to FF, and that he was up to his knees with a brown stuff smelling of the distinctive FF fund raising scent.

As I said before, many time: I never fund raised for FF or collected brown envelops. I do not need to check if asked. I know I never did it, or was never in any way associated with it.
I would have known that this envelop could not have been one of the many, because I would have had no other envelops I was trying to hide.

Someone said :

[...]
The point is that an election was decided based on a falsehood and that RTE assumed it's veracity without verifying it first. As such it represented an undue influence on voters close to the cut-off point for political-coverage by broadcasters, unfairly denying Gallagher time to set the record straight. A policy on tweets is urgently required lest this affair lend itself to repeat-performances in future elections.

No, it was decided on his reaction to that "falsehood" (if we were to admit it were).
What sunk him was his reaction to it, and his inability to offer a clear cut version of an acceptable truth.
The tweet was fake... but it exposed his own falseness as regards his strong, unsevered and unassumed connections to FF.

SF-IRA tried to trick him with a pot of green paint.
But in the end what sunk him was to be caught red-handed, in his own web of semi-truths.

SF may have circulated a lie.
But his inability to be able to disconnect this lie from his own lies made his fall.
Reply
 
# 458 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 12:21
 
 
Someone said :

He wishes.
It turned out he confusingly admitted to organizing fund raising, collecting envelops that may or may not be brown; that may or may not be full of cash up to the legal donation limit; that he may or may not have brought to the fund raising manager. He was just not sure this envelop was one of the many.

Whatever the nature of the accusation made at the time, it showed he had things to hide, that he had lied about his (very very strong) relationship to FF, and that he was up to his knees with a brown stuff smelling of the distinctive FF fund raising scent.

As I said before, many time: I never fund raised for FF or collected brown envelops. I do not need to check if asked. I know I never did it, or was never in any way associated with it.
I would have known that this envelop could not have been one of the many, because I would have had no other envelops I was trying to hide.


No, it was decided on his reaction to that "falsehood" (if we were to admit it were).
What sunk him was his reaction to it, and his inability to offer a clear cut version of an acceptable truth.
The tweet was fake... but it exposed his own falseness as regards his strong, unsevered and unassumed connections to FF.

SF-IRA tried to trick him with a pot of green paint.
But in the end what sunk him was to be caught red-handed, in his own web of semi-truths.

SF may have circulated a lie.
But his inability to be able to disconnect this lie from his own lies made his fall.

The ends do not justify the means. A precedent has been set where RTE - on the back of taxpayer's money - can cite unverified sources as if they were bona-fide. This could be used against persons very different in political, business and other respects to SG in the future, and it could be against someone you support. A dangerous precedent has been set which must be nipped in the bud.

Sir you are wrong.
ReplyWebsite
 
# 459 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 12:52
 
 
Someone said :
The ends do not justify the means. A precedent has been set where RTE - on the back of taxpayer's money - can cite unverified sources as if they were bona-fide. This could be used against persons very different in political, business and other respects to SG in the future, and it could be against someone you support. A dangerous precedent has been set which must be nipped in the bud.

Sir you are wrong.

I do not change my analysis depending on who I support, or whether or not I am involved.
As opposed to Father "resting-on-my-account" McLagger, I do not equate my personal interest and the "truth".

I agree that the tweet should have been read, in the context of the debate, and that a correction should have been brought once the fakeness of the tweet was revealed, during the debate. (Not so much the fakeness of the content, but of the messenger)

All I am saying is that this did not cause him to lose.

If Michael D. had been accused in the same manner, he could have clearly stood up and defended his ground: he would have known the tweet was carrying untruths (assuming it was the case... here it only seems to be that the tweet was not carrying the correct sender's name!)

This report has only done one thing: it shot at the fake messenger, but it did not clear Father Séan on the substance of the accusations.
It only said the tweet was not authentic. It did not say the tweet was a lie.
That is the only thing that allows Séan to claim it was a fabrication: the container was fabricated.
Reply
 
# 460 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 12:58
 
 
Someone said :

I do not change my analysis depending on who I support, or whether or not I am involved.
As opposed to Father "resting-on-my-account" McLagger, I do not equate my personal interest and the "truth".

I agree that the tweet should have been read, in the context of the debate, and that a correction should have been brought once the fakeness of the tweet was revealed, during the debate. (Not so much the fakeness of the content, but of the messenger)

All I am saying is that this did not cause him to lose.

If Michael D. had been accused in the same manner, he could have clearly stood up and defended his ground: he would have known the tweet was carrying untruths (assuming it was the case... here it only seems to be that the tweet was not carrying the correct sender's name!)

This report has only done one thing: it shot at the fake messenger, but it did not clear Father Séan on the substance of the accusations.
It only said the tweet was not authentic. It did not say the tweet was a lie.
That is the only thing that allows Séan to claim it was a fabrication: the container was fabricated.

He is cleared on the substance of the allegations because records show that McGuinness's dates don't add up and he had to in fact change his story afterwards. The fact that SG's accuser has past convictions, was renting Gerry Adams' election HQ to him at the time of the last election and has extremely strong ties to SF also undermines his credibility.
ReplyWebsite
 
# 461 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 13:30
 
 
The guy was a Fianna Fail crony, he had no right running in that election in the first place. And the fact so many Irish people fell for it is what gets my goat.
Reply
 
# 462 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 20:15
 
 
Someone said :
The guy was a Fianna Fail crony, he had no right running in that election in the first place. And the fact so many Irish people fell for it is what gets my goat.

+1, as they say...

Someone said :
He is cleared on the substance of the allegations because records show that McGuinness's dates don't add up and he had to in fact change his story afterwards. The fact that SG's accuser has past convictions, was renting Gerry Adams' election HQ to him at the time of the last election and has extremely strong ties to SF also undermines his credibility.

There has never been any doubt about the second part of your analysis on SF-IRA. I am no fan of them and their dirty tricks.

But even if you were to admit that all you state here is true, and that this envelop was a fabrication... if Father Séan McLagger had a clear conscience, he would have been unphased by the mud slinging.

But he knew of so many envelops and so many fund raisers that he was trying very hard to hide... that he was actually unable to clearer and definitely say that it was just not possible.
When he started on the "may" slope... all unraveled.

What finished him off was not that tweet and the story behind it.
It was the revelation of his character and shady and shameful "past" relationships with FF, who "just happened" to (just appeared to?) not support anyone else against him...
It was revealed by a lie, but it was revealed to be true.**

But guess who would have popped open the bubbly if he had been elected?
Not the Irish People.

EDIT :
**The " it " was revealed to be true... not the lie. The " it " is what finished him off... his hidden strong past associations... he was a FF crony, fan, and fund raiser.
Reply
 
# 463 : Thursday 8-3-2012 @ 21:22
 
 
Someone said :
What finished him off was not that tweet and the story behind it.
It was the revelation of his character and shady and shameful "past" relationships with FF, who "just happened" to (just appeared to?) not support anyone else against him...
It was revealed by a lie, but it was revealed to be true.**

There is nothing shady about merely fundraising for a political-party. Until we have 100% state-funding of political-parties, private-fundraising is always going to be a fact of life and if you seriously believe raffles will cut it you are deluding yourself.
ReplyWebsite
 
# 464 : Friday 9-3-2012 @ 08:55
 
 
Someone said :
There is nothing shady about merely fundraising for a political-party. Until we have 100% state-funding of political-parties, private-fundraising is always going to be a fact of life and if you seriously believe raffles will cut it you are deluding yourself.

There is nothing shady about fund raising. (Even if the brown envelop culture in FF makes it borderline).
What was shady is that he denied being involved in FF and in fund raising... as if it were shameful... and he eventually had to admit that he was (heavily) involved.

There is nothing bad about eating apples.
But if someone swears blind they never did because they do not eat fruits, and then admit they may have eaten pears in the past, and end up admitting they eat an apple a day... I would not blame them for eating apples but for lying about it!
Reply
 
# 465 : Friday 9-3-2012 @ 10:00
 
 
Delete - couldn't be arses have the same arguments over and over
Reply
 
First Prev 3132Next