26 County General Election 2020

[Snapchap]

I'm assuming that his point is that it is as relevant to a 26 county election (if not more relevant) as Paul Quinn's murder is but that it doesn't receive anywhere near the same media coverage.

Much better put. But I'm not sure anyone standing in elections in 26 had any connection to the McAnespie murder, I think the comparison is very weak.

Nobody standing in the election has ever been suggested by anybody as having been involved in the Quinn murder either.

But if it's SF as a party that you are trying to link to the murder, and if Aidan McAnespie isn't a good enough parallel for you, well then Fine Gael too were standing in the election, and that party led the cover up of the Dublin/Monaghan bombings - the single greatest loss of life of the conflict, covered up by the FG/Lab government of the day. Are they ever challenged on that by the media at any election time?

Seriously.what a load of balls hi. Sin é

What bit is balls? Are you denying that FG covered up the truth of the Dublin/Monaghan bombings? Or is it that you only believe SF should face questions about the conflict at election time?

[Snapchap]

To be fair, I don't think the question has been answered at all. The question, as far as I am reading, is why do they refuse to release the report (therefore helping to cover up state sponsored murder....)?

I don't know enough about that but it may be to avoid prejudicing a trial. Or it may be that the contents of the report might damage the chances of a trial happening in the first place?

Given the circumstances of the case, I don't for a second accept that anyone in positions of power down here wants to cover it up, any more that they'd want to cover up the Enniskillen or Omagh bombings.

How do you explain the FG/Lab Government's reaction to the Dublin/Monaghan bombings which was nothing short of a cover up?

[Rossfan]

Its not defamation to report what one of Thomas Byrnes activists put up on twitter hence putting it into the public domain.

It might well be if the allegation turns out to be false, does irrecoverable harm to Byrne's career or reputation and that harm is shown to have been magnified by a media outlet publishing it without adequate verification.

But sure you know that well.

No, IANAL and never claim to be such.

Defamation laws have never bothered them running stories about SF politicians. So why should it it they are FF or FG.

The Grace case involving Michael Noonan was swept away without a dickie bird. The allegations there are absolutely scandalous but the media have no interest in it. Why?

What stories about SF politicians?

[Angelo]

Its not defamation to report what one of Thomas Byrnes activists put up on twitter hence putting it into the public domain.

It might well be if the allegation turns out to be false, does irrecoverable harm to Byrne's career or reputation and that harm is shown to have been magnified by a media outlet publishing it without adequate verification.

But sure you know that well.

No, IANAL and never claim to be such.

Defamation laws have never bothered them running stories about SF politicians. So why should it it they are FF or FG.

The Grace case involving Michael Noonan was swept away without a dickie bird. The allegations there are absolutely scandalous but the media have no interest in it. Why?

What stories about SF politicians?

There's been tonnes of defamatory stories relating to Gerry Adams and the IRA that he could instigate legal action against at any point.

It doesn't stop them running them at any point whatsoever. I'd love to find out what sort of bubble you live in.

[Angelo]

To be fair, I don't think the question has been answered at all. The question, as far as I am reading, is why do they refuse to release the report (therefore helping to cover up state sponsored murder....)?

I don't know enough about that but it may be to avoid prejudicing a trial. Or it may be that the contents of the report might damage the chances of a trial happening in the first place?

Given the circumstances of the case, I don't for a second accept that anyone in positions of power down here wants to cover it up, any more that they'd want to cover up the Enniskillen or Omagh bombings.

How do you explain the FG/Lab Government's reaction to the Dublin/Monaghan bombings which was nothing short of a cover up?

It's not just the FG/Labour gov at that time. It is every single successive Free State government since which has shown utterly zero interest in achieving justice for the victims of the Dublin/Monaghan.

Look at all we have found out about British intelligence, the FRU, Captain Nairac, the Glennane Gang and how far and wide collusion spread in the other. All those factors have been shown to be somewhere linked to the Dublin Monaghan bombings and there is zero appetite from the successive Free State governments since then to pursue that justice.

The biggest act of terrorism in the free state's history and they have no interest in finding the answers because it leads to British state.

[five points]

To be fair, I don't think the question has been answered at all. The question, as far as I am reading, is why do they refuse to release the report (therefore helping to cover up state sponsored murder....)?

I don't know enough about that but it may be to avoid prejudicing a trial. Or it may be that the contents of the report might damage the chances of a trial happening in the first place?

Given the circumstances of the case, I don't for a second accept that anyone in positions of power down here wants to cover it up, any more that they'd want to cover up the Enniskillen or Omagh bombings.

How do you explain the FG/Lab Government's reaction to the Dublin/Monaghan bombings which was nothing short of a cover up?

You've answered your own question.

[Rossfan]

Its not defamation to report what one of Thomas Byrnes activists put up on twitter hence putting it into the public domain.

It might well be if the allegation turns out to be false, does irrecoverable harm to Byrne's career or reputation and that harm is shown to have been magnified by a media outlet publishing it without adequate verification.

But sure you know that well.

No, IANAL and never claim to be such.

Defamation laws have never bothered them running stories about SF politicians. So why should it it they are FF or FG.

The Grace case involving Michael Noonan was swept away without a dickie bird. The allegations there are absolutely scandalous but the media have no interest in it. Why?

What stories about SF politicians?

There's been tonnes of defamatory stories relating to Gerry Adams and the IRA that he could instigate legal action against at any point.

So why doesn't he then?

You might provide an example of say 2  such stories please?

[Angelo]

Its not defamation to report what one of Thomas Byrnes activists put up on twitter hence putting it into the public domain.

It might well be if the allegation turns out to be false, does irrecoverable harm to Byrne's career or reputation and that harm is shown to have been magnified by a media outlet publishing it without adequate verification.

But sure you know that well.

No, IANAL and never claim to be such.

Defamation laws have never bothered them running stories about SF politicians. So why should it it they are FF or FG.

The Grace case involving Michael Noonan was swept away without a dickie bird. The allegations there are absolutely scandalous but the media have no interest in it. Why?

What stories about SF politicians?

There's been tonnes of defamatory stories relating to Gerry Adams and the IRA that he could instigate legal action against at any point.

So why doesn't he then?

You might provide an example of say 2  such stories please?

He has and he can.


https://www.thejournal.ie/lmfm-apology-gerry-adams-4707944-Jul2019/

https://www.joe.ie/uncategorized/gerry-adams-claims-he-wasnt-in-the-ira-and-threatens-to-sue-the-herald-14893

He is currently in legal action against the BBC over allegations they made on Spotlight. He has taken action against the Independent and Belfast Telegraph before, among others.

You must live in a bubble.

Defamation is not the reason for the media ignoring bad news stories about the establishment parties.

The Grace case is one of the biggest scandals you could think about involving a Government minister and has been effectively buried by the media. It has been frustrated as Noonan is elderly and in poor health, they want to stall it for whatever remains of his life

[five points]

The Grace case is one of the biggest scandals you could think about involving a Government minister and has been effectively buried by the media. It has been frustrated as Noonan is elderly and in poor health, they want to stall it for whatever remains of his life

First I've heard of that and there seems to be nothing online about it.

[Itchy]

Anyway the Byrne story is on the Irish Times home page today. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/thomas-byrne-denies-being-source-of-barry-cowen-drink-driving-story-1.4303184

And ditto on the Independent. https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/minister-denies-being-source-of-revelations-about-barry-cowens-drink-driving-39363078.html

Another conspiracy theory gone to dust. Who wudda thunk it? 

Yes, by coincidence it has broken today - 5 days after the allegations were made. Now why would it have taken 5 days?

[Angelo]

The Grace case is one of the biggest scandals you could think about involving a Government minister and has been effectively buried by the media. It has been frustrated as Noonan is elderly and in poor health, they want to stall it for whatever remains of his life

First I've heard of that and there seems to be nothing online about it.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/michael-noonan-my-health-is-fine-35076409.html

[Rossfan]

So Gerry got
an apology;
a case he took thrown out and
didnt proceed with his threat to sue another paper.

That Tom Oliver case tells us a lot about what the Provos were like.

[Snapchap]

To be fair, I don't think the question has been answered at all. The question, as far as I am reading, is why do they refuse to release the report (therefore helping to cover up state sponsored murder....)?

I don't know enough about that but it may be to avoid prejudicing a trial. Or it may be that the contents of the report might damage the chances of a trial happening in the first place?

Given the circumstances of the case, I don't for a second accept that anyone in positions of power down here wants to cover it up, any more that they'd want to cover up the Enniskillen or Omagh bombings.

How do you explain the FG/Lab Government's reaction to the Dublin/Monaghan bombings which was nothing short of a cover up?

You've answered your own question.

No I haven't. You have implied/said that there couldn't be a cover up of the McAnespie Case/Enniskillen bomb/Omagh etc in the south because you can't think that there is any good reason why the southern establishment would want to be involved in a cover up.

So why do you think they covered up the Dublin/Monaghan bombings?

[Angelo]

So Gerry got
an apology;
a case he took thrown out and
didnt proceed with his threat to sue another paper.

That Tom Oliver case tells us a lot about what the Provos were like.

The Ballyseedy killings and Dunmanway massacre tells us a lot what the old IRA were like.

[Rossfan]

Whatabout.....
Ballyseedy was done by your favourites - "freestaters"