Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

[Snapchap]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

But according to himself, he was weeded out.

[Louther]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

[Snapchap]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

[Applesisapples]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

Some times people are best ignored.

[Itchy]

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/i-quit-over-sinn-fein-bullying-former-councillor-31339952.html

The indo sympathy article to same man who was bullied out of SF. How thick are some of ye to be paying any heed to this rag.

[Louther]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

Forced out? They not the backbone to remove him? They save face by forcing him out and not have to confront the issue head on.

[Itchy]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

Forced out? They not the backbone to remove him? They save face by forcing him out and not have to confront the issue head on.

Confront the issue that in the future he might murder someone, how do you do that?

[Snapchap]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

Forced out? They not the backbone to remove him? They save face by forcing him out and not have to confront the issue head on.

Remove a sitting councillor for what? Rumours? Not much of a grounds for dismissal that. Wouldn't that have been another form of bullying? Certainly the likes of you would no doubt have been at great pains to insist as much.

[Louther]

He is quoted as saying it was Bullying that forced him out - not me or the Indo or the man on the street. He said it himself. Not that he'd get any sympathy as bullying was the least he deserved. And something that was on the lighter end of the scale as to what he dished out.

Not sure what point you been trying to make? Saying SF acted and forced him out but then saying that people happy to accuse SF of bullying. Are they not similar in this case?

He was a wrong one, plenty of parties attract wrong ones. Some are known and others develop that way but I don't think his was a secret prior to running. Dublin Inner city a small place and lot is known about who is who.

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

Forced out? They not the backbone to remove him? They save face by forcing him out and not have to confront the issue head on.

Remove a sitting councillor for what? Rumours? Not much of a grounds for dismissal that. Wouldn't that have been another form of bullying? Certainly the likes of you would no doubt have been at great pains to insist as much.

Ask Carol Nolan.

[Snapchap]

He is quoted as saying it was Bullying that forced him out - not me or the Indo or the man on the street. He said it himself. Not that he'd get any sympathy as bullying was the least he deserved. And something that was on the lighter end of the scale as to what he dished out.

Not sure what point you been trying to make? Saying SF acted and forced him out but then saying that people happy to accuse SF of bullying. Are they not similar in this case?

He was a wrong one, plenty of parties attract wrong ones. Some are known and others develop that way but I don't think his was a secret prior to running. Dublin Inner city a small place and lot is known about who is who.

I know he said he was bullied out. Was kinda my point. It was you that claimed he was not forced out. If bullying someone out of position isnt forcing them out, I don't know what is.

That's SF critics for you:
2015: "Sinister SF forcing the poor man out"
2021: "Why didn't SF force him out? Sinister"

And have you any evidence that he was known to be a criminal before his selection as a candidate? If it was so well known, surely there will be ample tweets criticisicing his selection for instance? Something. Anything that shows you aren't just desperately clutching at straws trying to make his former SF membership somehow relevant to todays news?

[Snapchap]

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0427/1212323-david-byrne-murder/

Welcome back Angelo. I assume you're drafting your considered response to this?
Macker, are you on holidays?
Where is everyone?

What has the story actually got to do with SF?

Reminds me of the two recently convicted fraudsters in Cork. Former FG councillors, but not one news outlet (as far as I can see) referenced their past political party affiliation in their headlines on the case. So far, seemingly every news headline that I've seen on today's story has managed to include the "former SF councillor" bit into their headline. Funny that.

Big jump from fraud to murder.

And? The point is in the relevence of the individual's previois politicalparty affiliations.

Hard to see you as being anything more than a WUM in your reaction to this story. Unless you are actually trying to argue that SF are/should be responsible for the actions of all former members.

He was a party member. He's up on a Murder charge. It's a very serious crime. It's all factual. I can see as a SF supporter you don't like the facts but here we are.

Key word being "was". Are you suggesting SF should be responsible for the activities of former members?

What if he is a former member of his local library, should that not be referenced in the headlines too?

The local Library is a not a political party looking to be in government. This is the level of scrutiny that political parties are quite rightly subject to. You are just upset it is SF. You need to get over that.

Unless Mary Lou gave the order then it's irrelevant ffs.

You are missing the point, history shows they have no capability of weeding out bad apples early on

Seems this guy had lots of rumours in his involvement in criminal activities at the time and prior to him resigning for the party. Well known in local circles but he wasn't forced out the door or asked to resign, rather was subject to rumour and took it upon himself to resign as part of his defence into those rumours.

Not much vetting going on.

Funnily enough, the circumstances surrounding his departure from SF make it seem like he was in fact forced out. In fact, at the time, SF critics (people like you) were most outraged for his plight and were accusing SF of "bullying him" out.

Forced out? They not the backbone to remove him? They save face by forcing him out and not have to confront the issue head on.

Remove a sitting councillor for what? Rumours? Not much of a grounds for dismissal that. Wouldn't that have been another form of bullying? Certainly the likes of you would no doubt have been at great pains to insist as much.

Ask Carol Nolan.

Why? Was she removed from her position by the party over rumours around her private life? Here was me thinking she left the party over her stance on abortion.

[Louther]

He is quoted as saying it was Bullying that forced him out - not me or the Indo or the man on the street. He said it himself. Not that he'd get any sympathy as bullying was the least he deserved. And something that was on the lighter end of the scale as to what he dished out.

Not sure what point you been trying to make? Saying SF acted and forced him out but then saying that people happy to accuse SF of bullying. Are they not similar in this case?

He was a wrong one, plenty of parties attract wrong ones. Some are known and others develop that way but I don't think his was a secret prior to running. Dublin Inner city a small place and lot is known about who is who.

I know he said he was bullied out. Was kinda my point. It was you that claimed he was not forced out. If bullying someone out of position isnt forcing them out, I don't know what is.

That's SF critics for you:
2015: "Sinister SF forcing the poor man out"
2021: "Why didn't SF force him out? Sinister"

And have you any evidence that he was known to be a criminal before his selection as a candidate? If it was so well known, surely there will be ample tweets criticisicing his selection for instance? Something. Anything that shows you aren't just desperately clutching at straws trying to make his former SF membership somehow relevant to todays news?

If you need to get rid of someone do you not have a procedure or disciplinary process to enforce that requires them to leave or they are removed. Or do you start a bullying campaign that forces a person out, that is totally off the books as such? You leading with second option as been ok?

As for the second part - are you really that green that you don't know who these people are locally and what they involved in? Jesus wept!

[Snapchap]

If you need to get rid of someone do you not have a procedure or disciplinary process to enforce that requires them to leave or they are removed. Or do you start a bullying campaign that forces a person out, that is totally off the books as such? You leading with second option as been ok?

I'm not making any comment on how he left the party. I'm merely shining a light on the hypocrisy of those who sympathised with him being bullied out in 2015 and who today are demanding to know why he wasn't forced out sooner. And of course there should be procedures for removing someone, but I find it shocking to believe you support the idea that it should be within acceptable procedures for someone to be forced out of office for nothing more than rumours.

As for the second part - are you really that green that you don't know who these people are locally and what they involved in? Jesus wept!

So well known was his involvement in crime that nobody, yourself included, ever made reference to it until it hit the news. Funny that. Convenient to insist today that you knew all along though, eh?