Will anyone inn Fianna Fail shout stop?

[Zapatista]

Maybe these guys will stop the madness.

"Over 100 People to Protest for Accountability"

http://www.resignmrahern.com/

[his holiness nb]

I'd be interested to see how many of the 1000 who have confirmed actually turn up.

I love how he says it will dispel the "myth" that people are sick of hearing about the Mahon tribunal. Its not a myth, I'm sick of hearing about it.

Dont get me wrong, I think he should step down. But when "Gavin" says its a "myth" that people are sick of hearing about the tribunal, I would have to say speak for yourself Gavin.

[Zapatista]

How many?

[his holiness nb]

No idea.

Depends what happens between now and then, and how well its advertised.

I was at the anti war march before the terrorist attack on Iraq, and an argument made by pro war people in repsonse to the massive crowds who turned out was that this was a small percentage of the population and that everyone who stayed at home must have supported the war. This is a stupid argument of course, but prepare for the same after this one.

[Zapatista]

I agree but the link says 100 confirmed not 1000 as you said.

[his holiness nb]

I agree but the link says 100 confirmed not 1000 as you said.

Oops   

To be honest if they only have 100 confirmed I wouldnt bother. You would need people out in their tens of thousands at the very least to even register on the radar.

[Lar Naparka]

The statement in the Indo that the Revenue have said that they are investigatiing Celia Larkin's Loan from Fianna Fail is clearly a nonsense.  The Revenue do not inform newspaper journalists or any one else of what they are doing with regard to any taxpayer.  You can't believe everything you read in the papers, Lar Naparka.

Hold on there, Onlooker, I didn't read it in the Indo.
I got it from BreakingNews.ie and I know it  was widely reported elsewhere. I wouldn't get too excited about anything I'd pick up on the Indo - but they all can't be wrong.
I cannot quote verbatim at this stage but I recall reading that a spokesman for the Revenue had confirmed that they proposed investigating the circumstances under which Ms. Larkin obtained the loan to buy a house for her elderly aunts.
I might be open to challenge here, but I feel that's the gist of what was carried in other media also.
To date, the Revenue Commissioners have not moved to rebut this claim and not a single paper or radio/TV channel has chosen to retract it.
Given the present laws of libel, I'd say no one would have published such a report unless its source could be verified.
So, what's the problem?

[Onlooker]

The only problem is that the Revenue do not issue statements about their dealings with anyone's tax affairs.  There is no way that any Revenue official would inform a journalist that they were going to investigate any taxpayer.  They may well investigate someone, but are certainly not going to make a public statement about it.   I do not believe that whoever wrote the article whether in Breaking News ot the Indo actually interviewed a Revenue spokesperson.  It would be a serious breach of confidence for a Revenue official to be discussing anyone's tax position with a journalist.

[stephenite]

The only problem is that the Revenue do not issue statements about their dealings with anyone's tax affairs.  There is no way that any Revenue official would inform a journalist that they were going to investigate any taxpayer.  They may well investigate someone, but are certainly not going to make a public statement about it.   I do not believe that whoever wrote the article whether in Breaking News ot the Indo actually interviewed a Revenue spokesperson.  It would be a serious breach of confidence for a Revenue official to be discussing anyone's tax position with a journalist.

Are you seriously suggesting that no officials employed by the revenue are capable of leaking information to any section of the media, catch a grip, it happens all the time. Of course they don't issue statements but there's more than one way to get that sort of info into the public domain.

[Son_of_Sam]

I don't like FG as a Unionist party

HOLY MOTHER OF JESUS, WHAT THE f**k DO YOU MEAN BY THAT, FINE GAEL IS A NATIONALIST PARTY. ALWAYS HAS BEEN, ALWAYS WILL.

[Donagh]

HOLY MOTHER OF JESUS, WHAT THE f**k DO YOU MEAN BY THAT, FINE GAEL IS A NATIONALIST PARTY. ALWAYS HAS BEEN, ALWAYS WILL.
[/quote]

Ach Sam, they're not exactly sound on the national question now.

[Zapatista]

The only problem is that the Revenue do not issue statements about their dealings with anyone's tax affairs.  There is no way that any Revenue official would inform a journalist that they were going to investigate any taxpayer.  They may well investigate someone, but are certainly not going to make a public statement about it.   I do not believe that whoever wrote the article whether in Breaking News ot the Indo actually interviewed a Revenue spokesperson.  It would be a serious breach of confidence for a Revenue official to be discussing anyone's tax position with a journalist.

It might of came from Larkin herself.

I don't like FG as a Unionist party

HOLY MOTHER OF JESUS, WHAT THE f**k DO YOU MEAN BY THAT, FINE GAEL IS A NATIONALIST PARTY. ALWAYS HAS BEEN, ALWAYS WILL.

They are in favour of an Irish noation in a union with Britan. Which makes them Unionists.

[deiseach]

They are in favour of an Irish noation in a union with Britan. Which makes them Unionists.

Are they 'in favour'? Or are they just not willing to fight Ulster Unionism to liberate Ulster Unionists from British tyranny? If it's the latter, they're no different than FF. Or even, these days, SF

[Zapatista]

No. They are in favour of a united Ireland within in the Union of Ireland England Scotlant and Wales. Hence - Unionists.

[Son_of_Sam]

No. They are in favour of a united Ireland within in the Union of Ireland England Scotlant and Wales. Hence - Unionists.

Thats UTTER BULLSHIT. Fine Gael are for a United Ireland, with the agreement of the Majority of the people of the Republic in one Constitutional Referendum & with the agreement of the Majority of the the people of Northern Ireland in a second Constitutional Referendum. Fine Gael Party & Voters do not believe it is correct to enforce Re-Unification against the will of either the majority of the people North or South, neither do they agree with enforcing Unionism on the majority.

Zap as you are obviously NOT a Democrat this concept will be very hard for you to understand. Not all Nationalists or Republicans share your belief in either Militant or Bullyboy Nationalism.

There will be a United Ireland it WILL HAPPEN, but Fine Gaelers & many Fianna Failers & others are willing to wait until it is the will of the people not the result of force. If we where to take it by force we would be no better than the Invader.